Seòmar agus comataidhean

I turn to Mr Baird, then I will come back to Paul Sweeney, who posed the question.

Thank you. We are very short of time now, although we are grateful for the time that you have given us. I invite Alexander Stewart and Paul Sweeney to ask their supplementary questions, and then the minister can round up the discussion with any final comments in response.

We now bring together, in one session, four petitions that the committee has been considering. PE1845, which was lodged by Gordon Baird, calls for an agency to advocate for the healthcare needs of rural Scotland. PE1890, which was lodged by Maria Aitken on behalf of Caithness health action team, is on finding solutions to recruitment and training challenges for rural healthcare in Scotland. PE1915, which was lodged by Billy Sinclair, is on reinstating Caithness community council and Caithness NHS board. PE1924, which was lodged by Rebecca Wymer, calls for the completion of an emergency in-depth review of women’s health services in Caithness and Sutherland.

Maria Aitken and Rebecca Wymer are joining us as we consider those petitions—good morning to you both. We also have with us Gordon Baird and Billy Sinclair, who are online, I believe—these screens are very helpful if you have good eyesight but not so helpful from a distance. It is good to understand who you both are. I welcome you all.

We also have with us a number of interested colleagues from the Scottish Parliament. I welcome Rhoda Grant MSP, as I seem to do at every meeting—it is nice to have you with us again, Rhoda. I also welcome Emma Harper MSP and Colin Smyth MSP, who both have rural healthcare interests in their constituencies. We will return to our parliamentary colleagues when we have heard from our petitioners, as I know that they are keen to speak in favour of the petitions.

Committee members have a number of questions that they would like to explore, so we will move to the first of those if the panel is happy to do so. I should explain to those petitioners who are joining us virtually that, if you would like to come in at any point, you can put an R in the chat box, or, if you put up your hand, I will probably see that—I can now see you both on the screen in front of me—and I will be happy to bring you in.

For our petitioners in the room, if you can catch their eye, one of the clerks will ensure that I know that you are keen to intervene in response to one of the questions. I should say that there is absolutely no obligation on any of you to feel that you have to jump in and answer questions; you may be content to hear the evidence that is given and to understand how we will proceed.

We move to questions in relation to the petitions. I invite Fergus Ewing to lead off.

The next continued petition is PE1875, which was lodged by Jordon Anderson. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to order a public inquiry into the Scottish Qualifications Authority. Do colleagues have any comments to make?

I agree that, in some measure, the objectives of the petition have been reached. Are colleagues content that we close the petition on the basis outlined by Mr Torrance?

Members indicated agreement.

The next continued petition is PE1897, which was lodged by Richard Anderson. It calls on the Scottish Government to reform certain procedures for the collection of council tax.

The Minister for Public Finance, Planning and Community Wealth reiterated that council tax is a local tax that is set and collected by each local authority, with every council being financially and administratively accountable to its electorate. He states that the Scottish Government has no plans, at this stage, to review the processes that are set out for council tax regulations. We have also heard from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities that it has nothing further to add to its previous submissions.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

I think that the evolution of that exchange and how shared decision making has materially progressed are great. Such a process was historically meant to be in place, but we discovered, in exploring the transvaginal mesh issue, that it was not really in place. If that change has happened, it is a very positive development.

I should say, Mr O’Kelly, that we have a very good video feed for you, so if at any time you feel that you would like to say something, you can just raise a hand and I will know immediately that you are trying to come in. You should not feel that you have to do anything more—I can see you well.

Minister, on the last occasion we met, you said that it would be very difficult to quantify the extent to which there was a valid underpinning for the petitioners’ concerns, because there was no basis for evidence gathering that would allow for a material judgment to be made about the extent to which any experience was real. Has any thought been given to undertaking some sort of limited sampling or anything like that, just to get an understanding of how many people may be experiencing genuine post-hernia mesh complications?

Rebecca, would you like to make a final comment?

Before we hear from Gordon Baird, we will hear from Maria Aitken, who is now back with us after we unfortunately lost her connection.

Yes.