Seòmar agus comataidhean

I would go directly to David for a response to that specific question.

I would in the first instance say that we operate to indices that have been agreed by Parliament and to which we have adhered since we decoupled our members’ salary costs from those at Westminster some years ago. At that point, we agreed to adhere to the ASHE index, which, last year, would have produced a 5.1 per cent increase in MSPs’ salaries. Given the circumstances in that year, the corporate body took the view that it would suspend the arrangement and cancel the increase.

With regard to staff cost provision, again, that relates to the index that we have established. Of course, what salary increases are passed on to members of staff are a matter for each MSP, but the move protects the integrity of the sum that it was agreed was necessary for MSPs to be able to fulfil their function and to have the complement of staff at their disposal to achieve that aim. It would be wrong to remove ourselves from those two indices without very careful consideration.

Thank you, convener. I would ordinarily have made an opening statement. Were you expecting me to do that?

The next petition, PE1866, which was lodged by Daryl Cooper, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation so that wheelchair users are able to face frontwards when travelling on a bus. The petition was previously considered at our meeting on 8 September—I am pleased that we have moved on from our meeting on 1 September.

At that meeting, we decided to write to the Scottish Government to seek clarification on whether a requirement to provide forward-facing wheelchair-accessible spaces on buses could be addressed via non-legislative means. The Scottish Government had previously stated that the matter is reserved and, in its response, the Government reiterates that the Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000 are reserved legislation. The UK Government has committed to a review of the regulations by the end of 2023.

The Scottish Government notes that the provisions in the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019

“operate in such a way as to place the setting of any service standards for local bus services within the competence of local transport authorities”,

and that

“Whilst there is no provision for Ministers to intervene directly, we would expect local transport authorities and bus operators to work closely together to ensure that the required service standards meet the needs of local communities including people with disabilities.”

In the light of what we have heard, do members have any comments or suggestions for actions?

The next continued petition is PE1870, which was lodged by Edward Fowler. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation that requires teachers of autistic pupils to be appropriately qualified, in order to improve educational outcomes. The petitioner states that he

“would like the education authority only to employ teachers with an appropriate autism qualification to teach pupils with autism.”

The petition was last considered at our meeting of 22 September. At that meeting, we decided to write to the Scottish Government to seek an update on progress that has been made against the “Additional Support for Learning Action Plan” and to write to key stakeholders to seek their views.

Since the petition was last considered, we have received a number of stakeholder submissions, which are summarised in the committee papers and make a number of suggestions for how teaching provision for children with autism could be improved.

Scottish Autism notes that

“There is currently a lack of alternatives for young people who cannot thrive in mainstream school”

and that

“inclusivity can only be achieved with a sound understanding of autism, comprehensive individual profiling, flexible teaching practice and low-stress environments.”

The National Autistic Society Scotland highlights a survey of over 1,400 parents, of whom 72 per cent suggested that

“staff having a better understanding of how their child’s autism affects them, including their communication needs, would have made a difference to their child.”

The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills has provided a written submission that notes many of the developments that have taken place—or are planned—in relation to the petition’s aims. That includes new content for initial teacher education on autism. Earlier this month, the cabinet secretary shared with the committee a copy of an updated “Additional Support for Learning Action Plan” and progress report, and noted that the action plan is next due to be updated in spring 2022.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for actions?

Thank you. The clerks have noted those comments. Do members agree to keep the petition open and write as colleagues have suggested?

Members indicated agreement.

Good morning and welcome to the eighth meeting in 2021 of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. I have received apologies from our deputy convener, David Torrance, who is unwell. If you are watching, David, we wish you a speedy recovery, because we need you back. However, I am delighted to welcome in his place Marie McNair. As this is her first meeting as substitute, I have to ask whether she has any relevant interests to declare.

Does that meet with colleagues’ approval?

Members indicated agreement.

That is reasonable. We could ask that question and raise the issue of the circumstances in which those falconers might be likely to face prosecution. It would be reasonable to try to understand that issue. It is not the principle that is the issue but the practice of asking the bird to differentiate. I do not know whether the response would be that the falconer should be able to differentiate, but a bird of prey in the air sighting prey on the ground is not necessarily under the control of the falconer—it is hunting.

We will invite the petitioner to give evidence. I wonder whether there is any information that we might obtain from the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse in England and Wales on how it has determined the scope of its inquiry and is going about exercising its powers, as well as what additional complications have arisen for it in the light of that. We could notify the Scottish Government that we are inviting the petitioner to give evidence and let it know when that takes place, so that it is aware, and we could indicate that we might be minded to invite the Deputy First Minister to give evidence subsequent to the petitioner.

Members indicated agreement.