Seòmar agus comataidhean

Would the committee consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy has indicated that work to update existing good practice guidance is under way; that the reporter who is in charge of examining applications that are objected to by planning authorities may decide to hear representations from any person as appropriate; and that the committee has raised relevant issues as part of its thematic evidence session with the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy?

I also suggest highlighting to the petitioner that, if they do not feel that significant progress is made, they can submit a new petition in the next session of the Parliament.

If the policy is not published in autumn 2027, a petitioner could quickly bring a fresh petition to the committee.

In light of the evidence that the committee has collected, will the committee consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standard orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government’s position is that powers to mandate community benefits and shared ownership are reserved to the UK Government?

The Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy has indicated her engagement with the UK Government on mandating community benefits and facilitating shared ownership. The Scottish Government has highlighted a number of initiatives to encourage developers to offer shared ownership opportunities, and the committee has raised relevant issues as part of a thematic evidence session with the cabinet secretary.

In light of the evidence that the committee has taken, I wonder if we would consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government has undertaken research to establish case studies illustrating how local authorities resolve issues relating to defective or dangerous listed buildings as a direct result of the petition; that research has found that structural engineers possess the necessary expertise and experience to provide robust and reliable assessments; that the Scottish Government will expand the building standards enforcement handbook and the procedural handbook to reflect the recommended best practices, as indicated by the research findings; that the Scottish Government will not recommend using only conservation-accredited engineers to support decision makers, because there are insufficient numbers to meet the need across Scotland; and that the cabinet secretary does not consider that legislative review is required at this time.

In the light of the Scottish Government’s stance, I wonder whether we could consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government will not take forward the development of guidance on the interaction between child contact dispute processes and the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018; that it plans to make regulations to give the courts the power to make an order in relation to a person who has behaved in a vexatious manner in civil proceedings to require them to obtain permission from the court before raising further specified actions; and that it is preparing a policy paper for the Scottish Civil Justice Council to propose court rule changes to ensure that the civil courts receive information on domestic abuse at the outset of the case.

In light of that evidence, and the evidence from the cabinet secretary, I wonder whether the committee might consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government is currently consulting on increasing the 50MW threshold that determines who should decide on applications for onshore electricity generating stations and because the reporter in charge of examining applications that are objected to by planning authorities may decide to hear representations from any persons, as appropriate. Also, the Cabinet Secretary for Climate Action and Energy has indicated that work to update existing good practice guidance is under way and the committee has raised the relevant issues as part of its thematic evidence session with the cabinet secretary.

In closing the petition, we could advise the petitioner that she could bring a fresh petition to the next session of Parliament if sufficient progress is not made.

In the light of the evidence that is before us, I do not think that the committee has any other option but to close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that the Children (Scotland) Act 2020, once in force, will require the court to consider whether any delay in proceedings would negatively affect a child’s welfare. Cases can vary significantly, and a standardised timetable would not recognise the different complexities in individual cases. There are case management rules in place in respect of family actions, and one of the key aims is greater judicial case management resulting in cases being resolved more quickly. The Scottish Government does not consider the ask of the petition to be practical or achievable.

Good morning. What impact could the bill have on vacancy gaps in areas such as rural Scotland, where places are hard to fill?

Good morning. To what extent are health boards addressing the need to reduce the use of single-use plastics in personal protective equipment, and what are you doing to promote and facilitate any cultural change and education required in both clinical and procurement practices?

Thank you for that. In addition to the green theatre programme, which you have just touched on, what specialties are being considered for action by the centre for sustainable delivery? Secondly—and this is really important—how are you engaging with clinicians on being innovative in reducing emissions, and what challenges are you facing in that respect?