Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 6 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 3461 contributions

|

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

My colleague Foysol Choudhury has a supplementary question.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

Yes, thank you for that. In the written evidence that we received, the Royal College of Pathologists put up what the committee felt was almost a smokescreen—I do not think that that is too strong a word to use—in discussing the issue, by saying that a decision would have to be made that the tissues were no longer of use; that if the tissues were to be buried or cremated, that would delay the process; that if the tissues were not to be buried or cremated with the body, the options would need to be explained and understood; and that the process would be very complicated, which could lead to delays and to the family not properly understanding matters. You mentioned the Home Office; here, matters would be referred to the procurator fiscal. That would be a completely different type of event.

From what you have articulated, it seems as though an operational practice has been established where you are that has not led to a massive increase in cost and which has worked perfectly satisfactorily for all those concerned. That is quite an important piece of counter-evidence.

I am sorry—in summing things up, I hope that I have not editorialised anything that you said.

Ms Edwards mentioned brains. I want to come back to a couple of general issues that arose out of the petition that have not been covered in the commentary that we have had to date. In her petition, the petitioner asks that all post mortems

“can only be carried out with permission of the next of kin”

and that post mortems

“do not routinely remove brains”.

What is your view on those two propositions?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

Please do.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

Thank you. Like you, I hope that our guests in the public gallery who are directly concerned with the issues have appreciated the evidence session that we have held this morning, which will certainly help to inform the committee. It seemed that, in a number of areas, there is clear opportunity for progress; in others, it might be more complicated.

In summation, colleagues, we will clearly want to further reflect on the evidence at a future meeting. We might anticipate that, following that consideration, we would then want to have the opportunity to put questions to the minister in relation to some of the issues that have been raised. Do members agree that we should seek to secure a session with the minister, and that, before then, we should have the opportunity to reflect further on the evidence that we have heard?

Members indicated agreement.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

Thank you, Ms Baillie. Indeed, you pointed out to us on a previous occasion that we have a reputation for liking to get out and about from Holyrood and, in our response, we said that we might even manage to come and visit at some point. It is a little early to admonish us for not having managed to do that already. However, the recommendation about the STAG report is significant. Do members want to comment or make any recommendations on that?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

Thank you. Are we agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

I am happy with that. Are colleagues content to proceed on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

I think that the evidence that we received talked about an expectation that the Scottish Government would conduct such a review. As much as anything, we need to establish that such a review is in prospect.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

That will give us further information, and we will consider the petition again in due course. Thank you, Mr Marra, for joining us for your first appearance at the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 17 May 2023

Jackson Carlaw

We are agreed. We can all see the substance of the issue at hand, but I am struck by the Scottish Government’s suggestion that local authorities look at innovative ways to reduce allotment waiting lists. I am struggling to think of what an innovative way of dealing with an allotment waiting list would be but, notwithstanding my puzzlement with that concept, I am afraid that I am reluctantly of the same view.

The very clear advice from the Scottish Government is that the matter is for local authorities to deal with and, as SPICe points out, the petition seeks to give an entitlement to several hundreds of thousands of people, which is impractical.

I think that we are agreed that although we understand the substance of the issue, we will close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders. Is that the view of the committee?

Members indicated agreement.