Seòmar agus comataidhean

She stole my thunder there.

As with the previous petition, I wonder if we could get the correct minister in and take some evidence. It is quite important. Community ownership of wind farms is vital to small communities. I have several examples in my constituency where it has been beneficial. To me, it is important that we take the petition forward and get the relevant minister or cabinet secretary to come in and give evidence.

Considering the Scottish Government’s submission and that it will review the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, we could close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, but in closing the petition, we could write to the Scottish Government highlighting the evidence from Polmont veterinary clinic.

The petition has been on-going for quite a while—since last session—and we have not been updated by the petitioner for a long time. I am sure that, like me, committee members have a number of questions that they would like to ask the petitioner and HIAL management. I would like to bring in the petitioner and HIAL management to give evidence so that we can ask those questions.

Good morning. In relation to local living, do you expect 20-minute neighbourhoods to have a significant positive impact on health and wellbeing? If so, in what ways?

We have heard about partnership working in evidence from the panel members who have highlighted several examples. In the area of deprivation and the barriers that it creates for children and young people’s health and wellbeing, what role should public services play in bringing together key partners and creating strong networks in deprived communities? How can that be achieved? I ask Kevin Kane first because of his positive comments about Kirkcaldy high school and Scouts Scotland.

I have a small supplementary. How will the benefits of 20-minute neighbourhoods be realised in remote and rural areas? How can we ensure that those benefits are achieved? I put that question to Matt Lowther.

We dealt with these issues when we considered PE1786 last year. As I see no difference between that petition and this one, I recommend that we close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders. Moreover, the issues that it raises fall within the scope of the work of the Scottish mental health law review, from which we have had a really in-depth submission. As I cannot see the committee taking the matter anywhere else, I am happy to close the petition.

Like Alexander Stewart, I doubt that we could take forward an inquiry, because I do not think that the Government would agree to one. If we include the previous Public Petitions Committee, we have taken evidence on the issue over more than six years. The convener and I have been on site visits and seen how difficult the environment and terrain are. There is no easy fix and Transport Scotland has worked tirelessly and engaged with the local community to try to find solutions, but it is a difficult task to make the road stable and ensure that landslides do not continue in the area. Measures have been put in place to catch a lot of the debris that comes down. The old military road is an alternative.

Transport Scotland is trying to find solutions and work with the community. There is no place for the petition to go, so I am happy to close it under rule 15.7 of standing orders.

I would like us to keep the petition open, based on the evidence from the University of Dundee and the success of the treatment there. I would like us to write to the Scottish Government to highlight that success of the MRgFUS treatment in essential tremor patients and to ask for clarification as to when the pause on NSSC applications is likely to be removed. I would also like us to ask the Scottish Government whether it intends to provide funding for the MRgFUS treatment to be made available to more essential tremor patients in Scotland, and how it will raise awareness of the treatment among the profession.