Seòmar agus comataidhean

That is a significant sum of money.

Although the Government has said that it has no plans to address the issue that has been raised in the way that is suggested, it is one that we have all had experience of with those people who have found themselves in this situation. It is an important issue, but it will have to be addressed differently. I suspect that, given the position that we are in, we have no further course of action open to us.

Thank you. I see that you have paws all over the petition.

I quite liked the phrase “long past time”, which Ms Wishart used. I think that after 20 years without a sensible funding model, “long past time” is a perfectly reasonable description for the fact that we have not resolved the issue. I agree that we cannot hypothecate the funding, but I cannot imagine that a funding model would cost us more than £554,000. Clearly, proceeds are being raised and it ought to be possible.

Ms Wishart, is there anything further that you would like to say to the committee?

We could reasonably point that out in the closing letter to the petitioners. As colleagues have suggested, there has been substantial movement and we have proposals to close the petition on that basis. The proof of the pudding will be in the eating, however. By the time the next session convenes, it may be that there is scope for something further if the petitioner seeks to come back.

Are we content to proceed on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

PE1993, lodged by David Grimm and Lucy Challoner, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that social work students have access to adequate funding and financial support during their studies, by providing bursaries to all third and fourth-year undergraduate social work students on placements, reforming the assessment criteria for bursaries for postgraduate social work students on work placements and adequately funding those bursaries.

The petition was last considered on 30 October 2024, after which we wrote to the Minister for Higher and Further Education about the Social Work Education Partnership’s report on practice learning funding. The minister’s response states that the report recommended improvements to the system of disbursing financial support and to the oversight and quality assurance of practice learning. The research for the report also expanded to consider the wider support packages for undergraduate and postgraduate social work students.

The minister’s response also outlines recent changes to the support made available for social work students. From the academic year 2024-25, the Scottish Government is providing all eligible undergraduate and postgraduate social work students in an assessed placement with a £750 grant. The grant is intended to provide support for costs incurred while undertaking mandatory placements.

The submission also highlights that up to £2,000 can be claimed by those with exceptional travel costs related to placements in, or students being resident in, remote and rural locations.

For postgraduate students, the earnings threshold for bursary eligibility has been increased and the various discretionary allowances have been streamlined.

The petitioners’ recent written submission welcomes the steps taken by the Scottish Government. However, the petitioners remain concerned that the changes do not resolve the fundamental inequality between social work and other studies, such as nursing, midwifery and paramedicine.

Do we have any suggestions?

Mr Torrance has made appropriate suggestions. Are there any other suggestions?

We come to the last of today’s continued petitions. PE2039, lodged by Amy Lee, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to pay student nurses for their placement hours. We last considered the petition on 30 October 2024. At that time, we agreed to write to the Scottish Government to ask what consideration has been given to the Royal College of Nursing’s report on nursing student finance. The Scottish Government’s response states that the former chief nursing officer met students at a round-table event to discuss the themes in the report’s recommendations. A short-life working group was then set up to review the clinical placement expenses guidance in order to respond to student concerns and the Royal College of Nursing’s recommendations.

The submission highlights that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care is committed to carrying out a review of the financial support package for nursing, midwifery and paramedicine students. The views of stakeholders, including students, are being considered as part of that programme and review.

Do colleagues have any suggestions or ideas as to how we might proceed?

We thank the petitioner, to whom we will write, explaining our reasonings.

Thank you, Mr Ewing. I hear echoing in my ear my late colleague David McLetchie, who similarly was a conveyancing lawyer of some experience. I recall his views on the legislation on home reports, as introduced in the 2007 Parliament—I remember those debates vividly. I think that there is an interesting potential future petition to be made to this Parliament, following up on the Scottish Government identifying the limitations of the home report. If home reports are under review, it would be very interesting to know how those limitations have been addressed and what the future value of the home report is, because it seems to me to mitigate expense in only a very few cases. People now find that they have to incur the very same expense over and above the fact that a home report has been commissioned. However, I think that we have agreed to close the petition at this stage. Do members agree?

Members indicated agreement.

PE2154, lodged by Jasmine Bissett, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review and update planning policies to make it mandatory for new urban developments to give consideration to equestrian usage and ensure that suitable access and signage is included as part of that consideration.

The SPICe briefing for the petition explains that, in general, decisions on planning applications must be made in accordance with the development plan. The development plan for the given area in Scotland consists of the fourth national planning framework—NPF4—and the relevant local development plan, with which all colleagues will feel familiar. NPF4 requires planning authorities to consider the need to safeguard access rights when developing LDPs.

However, under the Land Reform (Scotland Act) 2003, local authorities and national park authorities have a legal duty to protect routes for responsible public access to land in the countryside, and the Scottish outdoor access code stipulates that access rights extend to horse riding. In its response to the petition, the Scottish Government states that it expects the issue of

“horse-related infrastructure in urban developments”—

what a sentence—to be considered at a local level, including in terms of signage, to ensure suitability to location and use.

In an additional submission, the petitioner expresses the view that local authorities tend to prioritise more popular modes of transport to the detriment of the needs of equestrians. Additionally, the petitioner highlights that the response received from the Scottish Government acknowledged that Scotland’s great trails were designed solely for pedestrian usage and that catch-up has been needed to open suitable areas of the trails for other uses.

I have equestrian users in my constituency, so I am aware that sometimes there is a lack of access or thought given to routes for equestrian users. Notwithstanding that, and in the light of the Scottish Government’s response, do members have any suggestions as to how we might proceed?