Seòmar agus comataidhean

The next petition is PE1985, which was lodged by Darren Loftus. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to commission an independent evaluation and provide national guidance on garages to homes developments.

We last considered the petition on 6 December 2023, when we agreed to consider it at a future meeting on the basis that the petitioner had at that point requested a deferral of consideration.

The Scottish Government’s submission to the committee states that planning applications are determined in accordance with the development plan for the area unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The submission sets out that planning and building standards, although separate regulatory regimes, involve robust processes, which means that whether in the Scottish Borders or elsewhere, garages to homes developments will require planning permission.

The submission states that it would not be appropriate for the Scottish Government to comment on any proposals that have been made as planning applications to a council, or that might be made in the future, because that might prejudice the outcome of the decision-making process, should the case be notified to ministers.

The Scottish Government does not consider that there are any national implications of the garages to homes proposal in the Scottish Borders, and does not believe that a broader, independent evaluation is required, because there are long-standing processes for assessing and adjudicating on proposals of this nature.

The petitioner’s submission refutes the Scottish Government’s view that there are no national implications of the garages to homes proposal in the Borders. The petitioner states that he has evidence that the Scottish Borders Housing Association hopes that its feasibility study and pilot could be rolled out nationally.

The petitioner’s view is that an evaluation is required of garages to homes developments, as planning and building standards regulatory regimes do not allow objections on the grounds of social impact. His view is that an evaluation is required to consider issues such as social inclusion, disability rights and the proximity of amenities.

In the light of the Scottish Government’s response, would members like to make any comments or suggestions for action?

We thank Helen Plank and everybody who has contributed to what has been one of the really interesting petitions that we have considered in this session of Parliament. Certainly, the attention that we have given to it has raised awareness of the issue. That issue remains huge. I do not forget Duncan Scott asking us where the next generation of Olympic swimmers are going to come from if we do not have swimming pools for them to train in. I hope that, one way or another, the issue continues to have the profile that it deserves in the next session.

Under rule 15.7.

Are we content to close the petition?

Members indicated agreement.

I urge the petitioner to contact her MSP after the election with a view to pursuing the Government with inquiries over the national fertility group’s consideration of those options. If that does not lead to the progress that is hoped for, she could potentially submit a fresh petition to the next Parliament.

On that basis, we propose to close the petition under rule 15.7. I recall the previous discussion that we had on the petition, which raises important issues that came out of a difficult circumstance. The fact that the Government is reviewing the issue and that it has had to undertake further review illustrates the complexity of the issues involved. Are we content to close the petition at this stage on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

Would you prefer that we left this petition as one that we might consider on our shortlist of petitions to be carried forward?

Do members agree with that suggestion?

Members indicated agreement.

PE2148, which was lodged by Heather Stitt, calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to improve the transition from child and adolescent mental health services to adult mental health services by ensuring that national referral guidelines and criteria are adhered to.

We last considered the petition on 21 May, when we agreed to write to the Minister for Social Care, Mental Wellbeing and Sport. The response, from the Minister for Social Care and Mental Wellbeing, highlights the transition care plan templates, guidance and protocols, which were developed alongside CAMHS and the Scottish Youth Parliament. The plan was developed in collaboration between volunteers and members of the Scottish Youth Parliament. MSYPs, as part of a mental health steering group, worked with NHS chief executives and chief officers of integration joint boards to seek to ensure that they were aware of the transition protocols and were using them in the manner intended.

The submission states that initial feedback from NHS boards on the implementation of the plans in 2019 noted that they were being implemented to varying degrees. There was also feedback that the documents were easy to use and allowed for a clear central contact for the young people during their transition. The minister states that he will write to all boards to ask that they continue to review their work in the area and identify areas of improvement to support local needs.

Do colleagues have any suggestions for action?

Colleagues, in the light of the Government’s response and its commitment to write to health boards, and given the chances of our being able to advance the petition in the time left in this session of Parliament, are we content to support Mr Russell’s recommendation?

Members indicated agreement.