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 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 23 October 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 3627 contributions

|

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 23 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

Are we generally agreed, then?

Members indicated agreement.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 23 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

Are members content to proceed on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 23 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

The petition will stay open. We will write as suggested by Mr Stewart and consider the petition again in due course.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

New Petitions

Meeting date: 23 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

I am grateful for that exposition. It seems like a commendable action that we could take in relation to the Scottish Government.

Is there also a way forward for us on Mr Sweeney’s suggestion? Would it involve our writing to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and finding out what enforcement takes place? I know from wearing a different hat in relation to showpeople that councils’ approaches to this matter can be highly individual and variable in the extreme. I do not know whether there would be a common response, but it might be interesting to find out how those matters are being approached and dealt with.

Does the committee agree to keep the petition open, move forward on those two streams and see what further information comes to us?

Members indicated agreement.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

Have charges led to successful convictions in Northern Ireland and England under the specific provisions of those acts?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

Paul Sweeney, who is online, will ask a couple of questions.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

As a committee, we might be ready to agree that we will keep the petition open until, at the very least, we have a preferred route identified and some understanding of the timetable and financial underpinning of the recommended solution. Are members content to do that, and to follow up on Mr Stewart’s suggestion?

Members indicated agreement.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

I thank the petitioner for raising the issue. I am only sorry that I do not know whether, ultimately, we got the satisfaction that he might have hoped to get. However, we have NatureScot’s assurances on record. Obviously, it is open to individuals who feel that the provisions are not being honoured to lodge another petition in future.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

PE1895, which was lodged by Gary Wall, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to make it mandatory for NatureScot to explain its conservation objectives in decision making within the framework of the “Scottish Regulators’ Strategic Code of Practice” and the Scottish Government’s guidance “Right First Time: A practical guide for public authorities in Scotland to decision-making and the law”.

We last considered the petition on 18 May, at which point we agreed to write to NatureScot to ask how it ensures that the process for licensing refusals and reasons for refusal are clear and consistent. Its response states that the approach is

“in accordance with legislation following internal policy and procedures”,

and that a record of all assessments is kept. NatureScot says that, in cases of refusal, a discussion takes place with the licensing manager and the unit manager is informed. It states that the applicants are

“clearly informed in writing of the reasons for refusal.”

The petitioner’s recent submission to the committee reiterates his experience of a licence refusal where a conservation objective was not stated in the refusal explanation. He also states his view that the complaints procedure is not impartial, as it is conducted by NatureScot staff.

Do members have any comments or suggestions?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 9 November 2022

Jackson Carlaw

I am sorry—I do not mean to quantify it in this way—but I am interested in whether the practice in England and Wales comes down to a compensation order in the same way that we have here.