Seòmar agus comataidhean

This petition has been running for more than seven years. I was there at the beginning of session 4, and I saw it through session 5 and then session 6. We have received more than 100 written, and several oral, submissions. As the convener said, we have also had debates in the Parliament and lots of questions about the issue.

I put on record a big thank you to the petitioners and to all the women who have turned up. It is probably some of the most emotional evidence that I have ever had to take in my time sitting on any committee. I thank the petitioners very much for their perseverance, because we have got a result. Although it has taken a lot of years and perhaps a lot longer than the petitioners would have liked, we have, finally, got a result. I thank them and everybody who has supported them.

I would like to close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders.

Good morning, cabinet secretary.

In session 5, the Health and Sport Committee reported on the creation of a national digital platform and problems around data sharing. There has been a huge increase in use of technology. Before the pandemic, there were around 1,200 Near Me and video consultations per month; there are now 12,000 per week. What progress is being made on use of a single digital platform and on the problems around data sharing?

Earlier, you talked to Gillian Mackay about face-to-face consultations with GPs. Is there a guarantee that any individual who wants a face-to-face consultation with any part of the NHS can get one?

On use of new technologies and platforms, what safeguards have been put in place to protect patient data?

Bill Kidd has raised a relevant point. If a legal framework and process for overriding the measures already exist, we have no option but to close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders. I have to say, though, that I am very sympathetic to the petition.

Considering that the Scottish Government plans to lodge secondary legislation and given the work that the Criminal Justice Committee is already doing on a previous petition, we should close the petition under rule 15.7 of the standing orders. If the petitioners are not happy with the outcome, they could bring the petition back in a year’s time.

I agree that we should keep the petition open. The issue affects rural communities more than any other. Before we do anything else on the petition, we will need to wait and see what is in the national planning framework when it is published. In the meantime, I would like us to write to all the relevant stakeholders to find their views on the petition. There is a whole list of stakeholders here: Heads of Planning Scotland, the Royal Town Planning Institute, Scottish Renewables, Planning Democracy and Planning Aid for Scotland.

I think that we should act on the recommendation of the Scottish Government and write to the petitioner, asking whether she can bring a specific case forward.

I think that we should write to the Scottish Government, asking whether it is possible for a non-CalMac fleet vessel to provide an all-year-round service from Campbeltown to Ardrossan.

I agree with my colleague Bill Kidd. Given the work that the Scottish Government and the third sector have done and the accessibility of face masks when people go to train stations, shops or any public buildings, I think that the aims of the petitioner have been met. I would be happy to close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders.