Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not know whether we have written hand signals into the record before, but we will acknowledge Mr Ewing’s belief that suitable hand signals were conveyed to the committee in relation to that.

We will keep the petition open and take forward the suggestions that Mr Ewing and others have made. Is the committee content to proceed on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

PE2075, on prioritising local participation in planning decisions, was lodged by Stuart Noble on behalf of Helensburgh community council, the members of which are with us again in the gallery this morning.

The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to prioritise local participation and planning decisions affecting their area by providing a clear and unambiguous definition of the word “local” in so far as it applies to planning decisions, giving decision-making powers to community councils for planning applications in their local areas and ensuring that how decisions on planning applications are taken is compatible with the provisions and ethos of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015.

We are joined once again for our consideration of the petition by our colleague Jackie Baillie. Good morning, Ms Baillie. We have missed you on a couple of occasions when we very much hoped that you were going to be with us, but other parliamentary business intervened. It is nice to have you back with us.

Thank you, Mr Golden. Is the committee content with that suggestion? Do you seek to contribute, Mr Ewing?

I take Mr Golden’s point. In some urban areas, I imagine that a cemetery is the nearest thing there is to a green space in the local community. It is about the way in which such things are managed or handled. It would be useful for us to find out what local authorities’ view of all this is and whether any enforcement is taking place. Mr Choudhury, do you have any thoughts?

I was looking for ways in which we might be able to do that, so I am content with that suggestion. Are colleagues content that we proceed on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

We thank the petitioner. In view of the responses received, that is the committee’s conclusion. However, should those reviews not lead to any improvement, a fresh petition could be raised in the next session of Parliament.

That brings us to the last of this morning’s new petitions. PE2136, on making non-fatal strangulation a stand-alone criminal offence in Scotland, has been lodged by Fiona Drouet.

We are joined in our consideration of this petition by our MSP colleague Tess White. Good morning, Ms White. I believe that you have been accompanied to the committee this morning by the petitioner, who is also in the gallery. Good morning. You will forgive me, but my eyesight is so bad that I have to assume that the petitioner is in the gallery.

The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to make non-fatal strangulation a stand-alone criminal offence in Scotland. The SPICe briefing notes that in 2023, a publication on the prevalence of strangulation and suffocation found that one in four women accessing community and refuge services reported they had experienced strangulation or suffocation.

Other jurisdictions have introduced a stand-alone offence for non-fatal strangulation in recent years. England and Wales created a stand-alone offence of strangulation or suffocation, which came into force in June 2022. Northern Ireland created a new offence of non-fatal strangulation or asphyxiation, which came into force on 26 June 2023. Ireland created the stand-alone offence of non-fatal strangulation or non-fatal suffocation, which commenced on 1 November 2023.

The reason for introducing the stand-alone offence in all those countries has been noted as ensuring that perpetrators could be charged and prosecuted with a sufficiently serious offence, even in the absence of physical injuries.

The petitioner’s submission argues that Scotland must keep pace with those changes by introducing non-fatal strangulation as a stand-alone criminal offence. The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs has responded to the petition. Her submission states that the Scottish Government

“will give serious consideration to the Petition”,

and emphasises the importance of understanding how any new law would interact with the offence of domestic abuse. Scottish Government officials will continue to progress considerations in the area, including through discussions with operational partners.

The petitioner’s written submission states that the act of non-fatal strangulation

“can cause brain damage, organ failure, long-term physical and mental health problems and increases the risk of strokes and neurological disorders.”

The petitioner argues that establishing non-fatal strangulation as a stand-alone offence in Scotland

“will signal zero tolerance for such acts, ensure appropriate consequences for perpetrators, and enhance victim protection. It will also deter future harm and reinforce Scotland’s commitment to addressing domestic abuse.”

Colleagues may have seen a degree of press reporting over the weekend on issues similar to those raised by the petition.

Before I ask committee members for comments on what we might now do, I ask Tess White to offer her thoughts to the committee.

Exactly. Are we content to keep the petition open and to take forward its aims as suggested?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you, Tess White. Having read through the papers and the detail that we received, I have to say that this was a practice of which I, too, was largely unaware. As you have said, when one is confronted with the detail, it seems that there really is a requirement for the Parliament to be proactive and for the Government to take a legislative lead, particularly in light of the fact that other Parliaments across these islands have already taken that step. It does not seem really adequate that Scotland should be trying to find difficulties where clear direction is required and, indeed, has been given by legislative moves and the legal framework elsewhere in the United Kingdom.

I do not know whether you feel similarly, colleagues, but are there any views as to how we might proceed? I think that we really need to be very direct in our questions to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, because I do not think that we will want to allow this to languish. Are there any suggestions as to what we might seek to clarify with the cabinet secretary?

So what would you like us to ask COSLA?