Seòmar agus comataidhean

Considering that the Scottish Government has recently published new guidelines setting out what schools may wish to consider when developing policy on mobile phone usage and engaging with parents, carers and the wider school community, and the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills has stated that the Scottish Government cannot unilaterally ban mobile phones in schools as that is a policy decision resting with headteachers and local authorities, I wonder whether the committee would consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders.

As somebody who uses forestry car parks quite a lot in Aviemore and other places, I know that there are additional pressures as a result of the numbers of people who are turning up to the beautiful locations and trails. We know that £5.8 million is spent on repairing or restoring the car parks, but they bring in only £1 million in revenue.

I think that we should close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that car parking charges have been in place at popular Forestry and Land Scotland sites for more than 20 years. The decision to increase the number of Forestry and Land Scotland sites where car parking charges apply followed the Scottish Government’s challenge to public bodies to actively seek to increase income from visitors in order to offset the increasing costs of managing visitor pressures. Abolishing parking charges at Forestry and Land Scotland sites would have a substantial impact on its finances. Forestry and Land Scotland highlights that the cost of managing trails and car parks is considerably more than the income that it receives from parking charges and that two thirds of its car parks will remain free for use by the public.

I will break with tradition here: I think that the issue is one that the committee could take forward. It is a very important issue. Defibrillators save lives. I am surprised that not every school in Scotland has them. Therefore, I suggest that the committee considers writing to the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health to highlight the UK Government’s provision of defibrillators to all schools in England and to ask whether the Scottish Government will provide direct funding for primary and secondary schools to purchase and install defibrillators.

In light of the evidence and the collaboration between Glasgow City Council and the taxi trade, the committee should close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government outlined a number of funding options available to support drivers in the taxi trade; that grace periods where the LEZ restrictions are in place but penalties are not applied have been implemented in Glasgow and could be applied by other local authorities if they wish to do so; that Glasgow City Council has developed a mechanism for eligible taxi operators to receive a temporary exemption to the LEZ in order to provide more time to comply; and that Transport Scotland has been engaging with Unite the union to discuss issues pertaining to the taxi trade, particularly in relation to the LEZ.

Given the Scottish Government’s response, it is, as you said, pretty clear that it does not intend to legislate in this area. Therefore, will the committee consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government has no intention of legislating to include the sustainable cultural use of natural resources under section 16 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and because NatureScot provides detailed licensing guidance that includes specific guidance on the interpretation of the “no other satisfactory solution” test and which takes into consideration European Court of Justice case law?

Considering the evidence that the committee has received, I think that we should consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that Food Standards Scotland intends to build further evidence on and knowledge of the practicalities and costs before developing potential options for Braille food labelling. As part of that work, it will discuss issues on a UK basis through the common framework for food composition, standards and labelling.

In closing the petition, we could highlight to the petitioner that they can bring back a petition in a year’s time if they are not happy with the results. Given that there is a UK-wide approach to food labelling, the petitioner might wish to consider raising the issue through the UK Parliament’s petition system.

Considering the Government’s response and the commitment to a Promise bill before the end of the parliamentary session, I wonder whether the committee could close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government is currently consulting on the change required to ensure that young people leaving care and moving into adulthood have the right scaffolding support available to meet their needs; and that it has committed to introducing a Promise bill before the end of the current parliamentary session. In closing the petition, the committee could highlight to the petitioner that, if that is not achieved by the end of the parliamentary session, they can bring a new petition in the next parliamentary session.

To what extent is there currently a link between fair work and ethical commissioning? If you do not believe that there is a link, should there be one? If so, what should it look like?

On that point about the amendments on fair work, are they strong enough for private sector employers to ensure that a minimum standard is set and that there is a set of standards for employees?

Good morning. My question is around the national care service principles and fair work. To what extent do the witnesses think that the amended principle relating to fair work better reflects and provides greater reassurance as to how fair work should be embedded in national care service services?