Seòmar agus comataidhean

It is difficult to know what meaningful steps we can take, given the Government’s position. I also do not think that we can keep the petition open until 2032 to see whether the 110,000 homes materialise. That is, in itself, a challenging issue. Given the definitive response from the Scottish Government, I am unclear as to what more we can do.

Are members content that we close the petition on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

We move to PE1964. Apologies—I have quite a long screed to read here, but this is our final petition this morning. The petition, which was lodged by Accountability Scotland, calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to create an independent review of the SPSO in order to investigate complaints made against the SPSO; assess the quality of its work and decisions; and establish whether the current legislation governing the SPSO is fit for purpose.

The SPICe briefing outlines the role and responsibilities of the SPSO, the budget and resource challenges, the complaints process, service standards and challenges. The briefing states that, over four years, the SPSO received 369 complaints about the service that it provides. The briefing also highlights the SPSO’s request for a change to legislation to allow it to take complaints in any format and to enable it to initiate its own investigations. A note on previous related petitions is also contained in our briefing.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition states that, due to current resource constraints as well as the independent nature of the ombudsman and Parliament’s role in scrutinising the work of the ombudsman, it does not intend to take forward an independent review of the SPSO in the near future. The Scottish Government also states that it has opted not to amend the legislation in relation to the powers of the SPSO at present, due to competing demands on resources.

Members may wish to note that the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee took evidence from the ombudsman yesterday as part of its scrutiny of the SPSO’s annual report, and I understand that those considerations did not include the issues that have been raised by the petitioner.

We received several additional submissions from the petitioner and others. Those set out concerns about the complaints process and the SPSO’s consideration and handling of evidence, including the approach taken where factual errors have been identified. People’s negative experiences and the impact of the SPSO complaints handling process on complainants have also been highlighted. The issues raised include the challenges of self-investigation and the need for structural independence. The submissions also call for an independent review of the SPSO. Accountability Scotland said that it would welcome clarification from the Scottish Government as to whether it considers that there is value in an independent review.

In an interesting submission to the committee, Bob Doris MSP stated that he believes that there is clear value in reviewing the SPSO 20 years on, as there has been no meaningful or detailed analysis of the processes and systems that are currently in place. He suggested that there would be merit in exploring how effective the SPSO is, including by considering the effectiveness of the safeguards that are in place and what changes are required. He also suggested that we may wish to understand the Scottish Government’s thinking on whether such a review would be desirable.

In reading the Scottish Government’s response, it struck me that it does not necessarily deny some of the issues that are raised in the petition; the Government simply takes the view that it does not have the resource or time to explore those matters at the moment. The Government did not express a view as to whether a review would be of value, as Bob Doris suggested it would be, and said that it would consider doing one at a later date.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

Apparently, we have already established that that committee is not interested in pursuing what the petitioner raised.

That is very generous of you, Mr Stewart. I am on the corporate body and am therefore one of the people who would be in receipt of the letter that you suggest.

I am happy to take all those suggestions on board. The Parliament has not existed for much longer than the SPSO has, and we have had two or three reviews into how we function, so it seems perfectly reasonable that after a similar length of time it might be time to have a look at the way that the SPSO functions. I do not think that it can be argued that a review needs to be deferred indefinitely, because it has been deferred for long enough.

We are collectively agreed on the suggestions that have been made.

That concludes the public part of today’s meeting. We will take the rest of the agenda items in private. The committee’s next meeting will take place a week today, when we will meet with participants on the citizens panel of our public participation inquiry.

Controversies aplenty are being revealed this morning, Mr Ewing.

PE1963, which was lodged by Roger Green, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to phase in a ban on meat production in Scotland between 2030 and 2040, to coincide with anticipated changes to future food production and consumption.

Roger Green highlights an initiative being implemented by the United Nations and the World Health Organization to reach a global plant-based diet. He states that Scotland should achieve healthy dietary goals by 2030 to 2040 and, among other dietary priorities, that should include phasing out meat consumption.

The SPICe briefing provides detailed information on various aspects of meat production, including the economic impacts, the proportion of meat eaters in the UK and the environmental impacts. The briefing states that 70 per cent of people in the UK are meat eaters and the total agricultural workforce in Scotland is around 67,400 people. It also points to the UK Climate Change Committee’s recommendation to introduce policies to encourage consumers to shift their diets and reduce beef, lamb and dairy production by 20 per cent.

The Scottish Government’s response states that its vision is for Scotland to become a global leader in sustainable and regenerative farming and highlights funds to encourage adaptation to climate change in the sector. It confirms that the Scottish Government will continue to work closely with Public Health Scotland, Food Standards Scotland and other agencies on diet, health and climate impacts to inform future policy.

Do members have any comments or suggestions?

Given what we heard from David Strang and Dr Carole Hunter at last week’s meeting, what is the Scottish Government’s reaction to the Scottish Drug Deaths Taskforce’s “Changing Lives” report, which included a comprehensive suite of recommendations? Will the Scottish Government publish a plan for those recommendations? At the end of January it will be six months since the publication of the report. I recognise that there is an implementation group, but what is your reaction to the report and can you summarise how you expect to move forward?

We have strayed a little bit outwith the terms of the petition that the minister is here to discuss.

A final thought has occurred to me in relation to the availability of healthcare staff. In the wider political context, we are discussing the pressures on staffing resources. Are you aware of any data or issues with the availability of staff who can ensure that prescribed medicines are safely delivered to those who are in custody when it is appropriate?