Seòmar agus comataidhean

It has been an excellent session. You have been candid about where you are in each of your organisations and how you feel. We have discussed long-term finances from local government, which is probably still the most significant funder of many aspects of the culture sector in Scotland, and you have talked about managing decline and fighting for survival. I had the opportunity to spend 18 years in local government—from 1999 to 2017—and during that time I said similar things when I was in that sector and was trying to manage where we were. Since I came here in 2016, the Scottish Government has come forward with action plans, strategies and working groups. I am sure that you have all participated in those, but it would be interesting to hear whether you feel that you have been listened to.

What is the future? From today’s meeting, it sounds quite bleak, in reality, but do your organisations see a way forward that you want to and can achieve? You have talked about other parts of the globe and things that are done differently. It has been said that we punch above our weight. I think that Liam Sinclair said that Scotland gets it and understands when it comes to culture, but there is obviously still a massive gap that we need to fill. How can we manage to fill that gap and continue to be world leading? There is no question but that we are world leading in many sectors. We are proud of that and our culture is a strong part of our identity in Scotland, but we need to see the future.

What is the future? Do you believe that you are actually being listened to and given opportunities among all the strategies, plans and working groups?

In the report, you talk about the actions of Governments across the nations when it comes to food that has a high fat, sugar and salt content, and the divergence that there might be in that regard in future. That might well create real difficulties for certain businesses and certain manufacturing or supply bases, which might have to deal with different processes in different locations. Is that simply a possibility, or is it a real issue that will become much more apparent as time progresses?

I have none, either, but I am delighted to return to the committee. I sat on its predecessor committee for three years in the previous session, so I look forward to our work, convener.

I will ask a supplementary question. You have talked about data, which is vitally important. Trade associations and federations might collect data for their sectors. How well do you manage with that? Some sectors are very proactive in ensuring that they have data for their sector, but others do not seem to have that robustness. It is about trying to manage that so that there is much better understanding. As you have identified, in different parts of the country, some federations and organisations are much more robust at putting that together.

The possibility of different things happening in different locations might become a real issue for the market and for suppliers and consumers, depending on the approach that is taken and how that is planned. It will be interesting to see what data you collate on that in the future.

There is a lot more work to be done. It is quite evident that the numbers are stark for the accessible and adapted properties that are out there in the market for people who use wheelchairs or have mobility issues.

We should write to the Scottish Government, highlighting the stakeholder submissions that we have received and urging it to review the existing wheelchair accessible housing target guidance. It is important to ask whether it can consider national planning obligations on house builders and private developers for a minimum number of wheelchair accessible homes and whether it accepts the case for a national definition of a wheelchair accessible home. We can ask questions on and look into those areas to attempt to unravel the issue.

There is obviously a massive gap in the market and those people are not being catered for as they perhaps should be by housing developers and organisations that look after housing processes.

We could seek more information on fertility treatment for single women. I suggest that we write to the Fertility Network Scotland, the British Fertility Society and Fertility Scotland to seek their views on the action that the petition calls for. We also have the opportunity to write to the national fertility group to seek an update on the work to understand the capacity implications of any future expansion of access to NHS IVF treatment for single women, as you suggested in your opening remarks, convener.

It would be useful for us to write to Road Safety Scotland, IAM Road Smart, the RAC Foundation, the Road Safety Foundation and the road safety charity Brake to seek their views on how effective Transport Scotland’s road safety improvement schemes and road safety campaigns are likely to be in reducing road casualties, and whether measures should be put in place during the period before dualling work is completed. They will all have views and opinions on that, and it would be useful for us to clarify those.

I was impressed by the presentation that we had from the petitioner and others, and this is a major issue that continues to receive a huge amount of publicity, almost weekly. There is much more that the committee can do to progress the aims of the petitioner and the community.

We have had an extensive response. I think that we should close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders. The Scottish Government considers both matters that are raised in the petition to be operational matters, which in itself creates issues. The SCTS provides an overview of the most commonly used court procedures and rules on its website, and staff provide assistance to people engaging in such actions. The SCTS has adopted the Scottish Public Service Ombudsman’s model complaints handling procedure and provides general information on the procedures on its website.

In reality, the SCTS is already doing a number of things to try to manage the situation, and I do not believe that there is any further action that we can take with reference to the petition at this time.

I thank Tess White for her evidence, which has highlighted some areas of real concern. I think that we could further investigate some areas. I suggest that we write to the Scottish Government requesting an update on how it is progressing recommendation 26 of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee’s report, which Tess White spoke about. We should also ask whether the Scottish Government plans to amend section 24 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 and request that its report and options appraisal to expand mother and baby unit capacity be shared with the committee when they are published in autumn 2023. I think that that would give us much more information about where we are and would help to progress the petition.