Seòmar agus comataidhean

Considering the responses that we have received and, as you mentioned, the progress that we have made, would the committee consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the uptake of BSL awards at SCQF level 3 to 6 is increasing; the number of primary schools providing BSL as an L3 language is also increasing; the Scottish Government does not believe that the steps that the petition seeks are required; and it has consulted on the British Sign Language national plan for 2023 to 2029?

Thank you, convener—

Good morning, minister and panel members. Is the Scottish Government considering amending section 66 of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 to remove the need for a young person to still be in care on their 16th birthday to access support and to remove the age limit of 26 for accessing aftercare?

Given the Scottish Government’s stance, yes. I wonder whether the committee would consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government has no plans to write off previous student loans for those who commenced their paramedic science degree before the introduction of the bursary in 2021.

In light of the evidence that we have, the committee could close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government has committed to reviewing the law on abortion to ensure that it is, first and foremost, a healthcare matter rather than one of criminal law, and that it intends to publish proposals for reform before the end of the current parliamentary session in 2026. If that approach is agreed, I would remind the petitioner that they are entitled to bring the petition back to the committee if the Scottish Government does not do that.

Thank you. I will probably get the same answer for this question, as well. Will the Scottish Government consider amending regulations to increase eligibility for continued care beyond 21 years?

I have one final question. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that the provisions of the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014 are fully implemented in practice, as well as in law?

In the light of the evidence that we have, we should consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the RSHP.scot resource, which can be used to support relationships, sexual health and parenthood lessons, was quality assured and peer reviewed by partners from educators, health professions and third sector organisations. It was informed by feedback over the 2018-19 academic year. It was tested in draft format with educators, parents and carers before the final content was published in September 2019. It was informed by more than 1,000 primary and secondary teachers and piloted in 38 schools in Scotland.

In light of the evidence that is before us, will the committee consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the JCVI has no plans to review the need for and value of an HPV vaccination catch-up programme for boys because of the indirect protection that is offered through herd immunity? The Scottish Government’s policy is in line with JCVI advice, with the Government having opted to define eligibility for teenage vaccinations by academic year in Scotland rather than by date of birth.

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 education material that is linked to the ask of the petition already exists, including a relationship, sexual health and parenthood resource, which was developed by a partnership of local authorities and health boards, with advice from Education Scotland and the Scottish Government. Also, the flexibility that the curriculum for excellence affords means that there is no mechanism that could compel all schools to use any specific material.