Seòmar agus comataidhean

I understand. Essentially, you feel that Evusheld should be the subject of the same emergency provisions as applied at the height of the pandemic, in order to accelerate consideration.

That does help. I think that we agree to write to various organisations, in the first instance. That wee synopsis is good context for us when we consider the issue as we proceed. Are members content to proceed on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

That brings us to PE1982, which has been lodged by Gary McKay. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review the funding that is provided to the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland to enable more places to be made available to Scottish students pursuing ballet at that level.

The Scottish Parliament information centre briefing states that higher education institutions are autonomous bodies, although they receive significant funding from the Scottish Government. It notes that the Scottish Government does not direct how many funded places individual universities make available, and that it is unable to intervene in internal institutional matters. In 2021, funding was provided to the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland that provided 30 places for Scotland-domiciled students studying dance. The response from the Scottish Government reiterates the technical points and notes that universities are able to offer as many places to international students as they wish.

We have received a submission from the petitioner that highlights the issue of opportunity for Scottish dancers to continue in further ballet education. He shares his view that the current set-up provides a means for increased business turnover and focus on financial interests. The petitioner raises concerns about the financial burden that is faced by students who might have no choice but to study outside Scotland as a result of limited places at the Royal Conservatoire.

Do members have any comments? I appreciate the general point that the petitioner is making about international students absorbing many available places.

We move to petition PE1981, which is on ensuring that perpetrators of domestic abuse who have been excluded from the matrimonial home cannot force sale of the property. The petition has been lodged by Caroline Gourlay, and calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to strengthen legislation to stop perpetrators of domestic abuse, who have been excluded from the matrimonial home by a court order, being able to cause further trauma and distress to their victims by trying to force the sale of the property.

Caroline Gourlay highlights a potential loophole in existing legislation that enables perpetrators of domestic abuse to contact their victims through a third party to force the sale of a property. In responding to the petition, the Scottish Government notes that section 4 of the Matrimonial Homes (Family Protection) (Scotland) Act 1981 provides protection to a spouse or children who are at risk of physical or mental injury because of the other spouse’s conduct. That is achieved by applying to the court for an exclusion order. The Scottish Government also notes that, where a court action has been raised in relation to the division and sale of the matrimonial home, the 1981 act also includes provisions for the court to refuse to grant the decree or to postpone its being done for a period that it considers to be reasonable. The court may also grant a decree subject to conditions.

Although the Scottish Government has indicated that it has, at present, no plans to reform the 1981 act or equivalent provisions for civil partners, it is expected that phase 2 of the Scottish Law Commission’s review of aspects of family law will focus on civil remedies for domestic abuse. Following the Scottish Government’s response, we have also received a submission from the petitioner, which highlights that being contacted by a third party, such as a solicitor, can be a distressing and traumatic experience for victims, even where exclusion orders and interdicts are in place.

It is for that reason that Caroline Gourlay believes that individuals who are subject to interdict and exclusion orders should not be permitted to contact their victim directly or indirectly while the court order remains in place. It is a technical legal thing. Are there any suggestions?

Thank you. That might not have felt like a long period of consideration, but I hope that the petitioners see that we are taking practical steps forward.

Yes. I suspect that in some ways this is the tip of the iceberg, because the current funding model, particularly for specialised disciplines, is leading to this situation. I would be quite interested to open, in as constructive a way as possible, a discussion with the Royal Conservatoire about the challenges that it thinks it faces and what its application and award of places model is. I would like to find out the extent to which it wants to be candid about allocation of places, based on the fact that some allocation creates an additional financial revenue stream, and the extent to which it accepts or acknowledges the difficulties that that might be placing on the ability of Scotland-domiciled residents to access courses at the Royal Conservatoire.

Ultimately, there is a reputational issue for the Royal Conservatoire. It enjoys a tremendous amount of public goodwill; I know that to be so. That is the case very much because it is the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland and people will imagine that talented people here in Scotland have a fair and equal opportunity to access courses in the disciplines in which it specialises.

Although I accept that that argument could be made in relation to access to other further education institutions, we are considering a petition in relation to a particular matter, so it would be reasonable for us—using the official hat of the Scottish Parliament—to seek slightly more information from the conservatoire, at least.

Our second petition, for which we will be joined by witnesses remotely, is PE1950, on ensuring that immunosuppressed people in Scotland can access the Evusheld antibody treatment. The petition, which was lodged by Alex Marshall, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to enable access, via the national health service, to the Evusheld prophylactic treatment for people who have a zero or weak response to the Covid-19 vaccines.

We previously considered the petition at our meeting on 9 November, when we agreed to write to various organisations and to invite the petitioner and representatives from the patient campaign group, Evusheld for the UK, to provide evidence to the committee. Members will have noted in our papers for today’s meeting that the petitioner, Alex Marshall, has declined the opportunity to provide evidence or pursue the petition further, as he feels that the emergence of new Covid-19 variants has rendered the Evusheld treatment ineffective.

I note that the committee has now received responses from the Scottish Medicines Consortium, Immunodeficiency UK, Blood Cancer UK and Kidney Research UK.

Despite the unusual circumstances in which we find ourselves and the fact that the pandemic has moved on, there are issues that the committee wishes to explore. I am pleased to welcome Mark Oakley and Nikola Brigden, who are from Evusheld for the UK. Good morning to you both.

We move straight to questions. Please raise a hand or put an R in the chat function—that is the usual way. The clerks are monitoring that and will ensure that we know when you would like to come in and contribute. I move straight to my colleague David Torrance.

I assume that that is to suggest that they are hard copies, but I do not like to presume. If you could pass the photographs to the clerks, that would be helpful. We had a recent inquiry into natural woodlands, and photographs were very helpful to the committee in understanding the issue. Of course, sadly, we have all from time to time had to visit cemeteries, so we are from our own experience, aware of some of the issues.

I will ask a question to try to set the discussion in context. As I said, in the past few years we will all probably have had occasion to visit a cemetery, and not necessarily one with which we would be familiar. That said, I am familiar with the cemetery with which you are concerned. The natural question that occurred to me in visiting it on my own account is this: has this started to happen recently? I presume that maintenance of cemeteries and graveyards will historically have been an issue that has had to be handled and progressed. Is it the case that the golden age of established upright headstones was so long ago that the infrastructure of those headstones is now showing its age, and the headstones are sinking or falling? What do you think has happened, in this context, to make the issue of greater public concern now than it has been?

Are those steel rods?

I thank both witnesses very much for taking the time to join us this morning. Your evidence has been very helpful for our consideration of the petition. I also thank Paul O’Kane for joining us.