Seòmar agus comataidhean

In the light of the evidence that the committee has received, I wonder whether the committee would consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Commissioner for Fair Access has not found any evidence to substantiate the petitioner’s concerns about funding arrangements to block access to Scotland-domiciled students or that such arrangements are leading to students pursuing higher education elsewhere in the United Kingdom. The number of non-controlled funded places available for Scotland-domiciled students increased by more than 11,000 from 2019-20 to 2024-25, and Universities Scotland has stated that, across the sector, there are sufficient university places available for suitably qualified Scotland-domiciled undergraduate students.

Good morning to the cabinet secretary and our witnesses.

The committee has heard different views on how national parks impact upon communities and rural livelihoods. Cabinet secretary, what evidence is there that the existing national parks are meeting their statutory purpose to promote sustainable economic and social development in their areas?

Considering the response that we have had, I would like to close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that the Scottish Government does not believe that there is merit in funding a separate mental health A and E for children and young people, given the existing and developing mechanisms for providing mental health care.

I genuinely do not think that the committee could take it further.

I wonder whether the committee would consider writing to the Scottish Government to seek a further response to the petition, particularly on whether it is sure that a pump storage hydro scheme would not have a significant impact on wild Atlantic salmon, and on how its policy on pump storage hydro schemes is informed by the Scottish wild salmon strategy, which recognise the impact of infrastructure and changes to water on the fish.

On the flip side, in the other evidence that we have taken, campaigners have said that national parks are not getting the basics right in things such as access to affordable housing and social housing and the pressure on infrastructure—even in respect of something as simple as litter bins. How does the Government see the involvement of national parks in such issues?

I was considering suggesting that the petition be referred to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, but, gentlemen, you have been so convincing that I would like the committee to continue with the petition. Can we write to the seven statutory regional transport partnerships, seeking their views on the ask in the petition? I wonder whether we should also consider writing to the Confederation of Passenger Transport, Bus Users Scotland and the traffic commissioner for Scotland. I would also like the committee to write to the Bee Network in Greater Manchester, the West Yorkshire Combined Authority and Transport for Wales, seeking information on their experience of developing and introducing bus franchising in their areas.

The Scottish Government says that new national parks are being pursued to help tackle the climate and nature crises. However, the committee has heard different views about the extent to which national parks have the powers to make a big difference in those areas. Can you describe what you see as their role, and can you give some examples of how national parks are tackling those twin crises?

This is the third Parliament session during which I have been involved in discussions about the Rest and be Thankful. I say to Jackie Baillie that it was a sunny day when we visited previously.

I chaired a meeting of the Public Petitions Committee there.

This has been an on-going issue for the local community and all the measures that have been put in place there so far have failed to keep the road open. I would like to invite the Cabinet Secretary for Transport to give evidence on both these petitions, and on others that focus on road transport, at a future meeting.