Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you, Ruth. That is a very comprehensive series of recommendations, which I am happy to endorse. I wonder whether the committee is. Would any other member like to comment or add further recommendations? I see that they do not, so we are content to proceed on that basis. We will keep the petition open and write as suggested by Ruth Maguire to the various bodies concerned.

Are members content with those suggestions?

I am keen to bring in other committee members now.

Are members content to add those recommendations to our actions?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you. I think that we could combine your recommendation with the closure of the petition. We can write to make that suggestion. Are you content with that?

The next continued petition is PE1901, on replacing the voting system for the Scottish Parliament with a more proportional alternative. The petition, lodged by Richard Wood, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to replace the broadly proportional additional member system that is used for electing MSPs with a more proportional alternative.

In our previous consideration of the petition, we agreed to write to the Electoral Commission, which has responded that it holds “no view” on the issue.

By way of reminder, the petition states that the additional member system is “not fully proportional”. The Scottish Government has indicated that it has no ambition to review the system at the present time.

I interrupted you, but thank you for that helpful clarification.

You met Ruth Maguire a few years ago. I know that you have met many politicians in the period since then, and you will have raised your concerns directly with Scottish Government ministers. Everybody will have been very sympathetic but, of course, you are looking for outcomes as much as anything else. Am I right to say that the key outcome that we can take from our discussion this morning is on the issue of mandatory reporting? Does that sit above or on the same level as your desire for the scope of the current Scottish Government inquiry to be expanded, or are the two things parallel and equally important to you?

What age were you when you sought to pursue these matters through the congregational process?

PE1893, on introducing legislation to protect Scotland’s war memorials, was lodged by James Watson on behalf of the friends of Dennistoun war memorial. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation that recognises desecration or vandalism of war memorials as a specific criminal offence.

At our most recent consideration of the petition, the committee agreed to write to the Commonwealth War Graves Commission. We have received a detailed submission from the commission, which concludes by making clear that it does not believe that it has the authority to consider action in respect of the petition, because that would fall outside its scope, given the war memorials that are directly within its responsibility.

Members might recall that the Scottish Government said in its submission that it is content that

“there is legislation currently in place to deal with the vandalism and desecration of statutes and memorials, including war memorials ... Scottish Government has no current plans to introduce new legislation for the specific purpose requested in the petition.”

Do members want to recommend a route, given what we have heard from the Commonwealth War Graves Commission and the Scottish Government?