Seòmar agus comataidhean

That brings us to the final continued petition this morning, PE2209, which was lodged by Joanna Kerr, as was the previous petition that we considered. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to make CCTV mandatory in all taxis and private hire vehicles.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition states that, although the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament have responsibility for the overarching legislation, the day-to-day administration of the licensing regime is devolved to independent licensing authorities. The submission states that the licensing authorities—in this case, the 32 local authorities—have discretion to determine appropriate licensing arrangements for vehicles according to local needs and their own legal advice. That includes decisions in relation to the installation of CCTV in vehicles as a requirement of licensing. Therefore, the Scottish Government’s position is that that is a matter more appropriately for individual licensing authorities to consider.

The submission notes that a task force on civic licensing is reviewing a range of licensing provisions, including provisions in relation to general taxi and private hire car licensing. It is expected that a report setting out recommendations will be presented to the Scottish ministers by spring 2026. Although the focus of the group is not specifically on CCTV, that issue might arise as part of its considerations.

Obviously, the issue is a matter for local licensing bodies, which are the local authorities. Do colleagues have any suggestions for action?

As there are no suggestions, I propose that we close the petition under rule 15.7 of the standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government’s view is that it is more appropriately a matter for individual licensing authorities to consider. In any event, the committee has limited time ahead of it to consider the issue further.

Are colleagues content with that proposal?

Members indicated agreement.

That concludes today’s meeting.

Meeting closed at 11:08.

Mr Ewing, the long and winding road, as ever, leads us to your door. Thank you for your contribution on the petition. Are you making a formal proposal to close the petition and to establish in practice the criteria that we might indicate as the basis for its closure?

Do colleagues agree to close the petition on that basis and to note and accept Mr Ewing’s suggestion that we, within our competences, have a posthumous letter on our recommendation ready for the next Presiding Officer of the Parliament, if only to ensure that the issue does not recur as a running sore thereafter and that there is an opportunity for our recommendation to be factored into the proper scrutiny of the project by the colleagues who will have the responsibility to monitor it in the next parliamentary session?

Members indicated agreement.

The first new petition for consideration is PE2191, lodged by Robin Pettigrew, which calls on the Scottish Parliament to review the legislation concerning the Scottish outdoor access code in order to explicitly prohibit camping in a vehicle outside designated camping zones, and to make the provisions of the code legally enforceable by introducing dedicated enforcement teams and fines for code violations.

The right of responsible access to land was introduced by the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 and is guided by the SOAC, which is a voluntary code of conduct. Currently, access rights apply only to non-motorised vehicle access.

The Government recognises the potential challenges that are posed by the behaviour of some road users. It states that infringements of the SOAC are a matter for local authorities, roads authorities and Police Scotland to manage. The Scottish Government considers that the creation of a new team with enforcement powers might create confusion over roles and, it implies, a less effective response to SOAC infringements.

On illegal or antisocial behaviours that fall outwith the scope of the code, the Government’s response suggests that a range of mechanisms are available to tackle those behaviours and that reviewing Scotland’s system of non-motorised access rights would not make a substantial difference to the enforcement of any such actions.

I read all that from the Government and thought that it was rubbish, to be frank. A serious issue has been raised in the context of the petition, but I am sorry to say that this is one of the petitions that I have identified for which we would need to initiate considerable work. If the committee proposes to close the petition, I hope that the petitioner will raise the issue in the new session of the Parliament when it convenes in May.

Do colleagues have any suggestions or thoughts?

Are there any other comments or thoughts? If not, are colleagues content to support Mr Golden’s recommendation?

Members indicated agreement.

We will therefore hold the petition open and act on that basis. I thank Jackie Baillie for her contribution and the people in the gallery for being with us this morning.

Thank you, Mr Golden. Are colleagues content to close the petition?

The next petition is PE2198, lodged by Wilson Chowdhry, on establishing a standardised and fair public participation process for all Scottish councils. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge to Scottish Government to introduce new legislation or amend existing legislation to require all local authorities in Scotland to adopt, within a specified timeframe, a set of minimum standards for public participation processes—questions, deputations and petitions—that will ensure that such processes are accessible, transparent, fair, inclusive and consistent across Scotland. It also calls on the Scottish Government to designate a new or existing body to oversee and monitor compliance with such standards and either take or recommend action when those are not met.

The SPICe briefing explains that

“each local authority publishes its standing orders on its website. These may set out how deputations, questions and petitions are handled”

and that

“It is up to councils themselves to develop, publish and update their standing orders, in line with relevant legislation”.

The Scottish Government suggests that the first ask of the petition could be feasible, but states that it

“does not have any current data to assess whether this would be practical or desirable to mandate across all local authorities.”

The Government points to a number of existing good practice frameworks for community engagement across Scotland, including guidance on participation requests for public service authorities and community councils, which is regulated under the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015. As the SPICe briefing clarifies, it is up to local authorities to interpret the 2015 act and ensure compliance with the guidance.

10:15

The Scottish Government believes that the petitioner’s second ask may also be achievable but that it is dependent on identifying appropriate resource and budget. The Government highlights that its open Government team is considering how it could develop a national strategy for public participation as part of Scotland’s next open Government action plan in 2026-30.

The committee has had an interest in issues relating to public participation. It has always been a case of heightening awareness and extending pilots, and seeing what arises from that. That process has led to recommendations that Parliament has embraced and will be adding to its way of operating in the next parliamentary session, with people’s panels to be a fixture of interrogation.

Mr Torrance, you and I are the only two survivors from when the committee began in this parliamentary session. There are issues that the Government seems willing to explore, but I do not think that there is much more that the committee can do at this stage. It is not clear whether participation will be in the new committee’s remit, because it was an addition to the responsibilities that the petitions committee had in previous parliamentary sessions.

Do members have any thoughts?

Our next petition is PE2200, lodged by Melanie Jane Stuart on behalf of the Educational Institute of Scotland Further Education Lecturers Association—EIS-FELA—and Unison at Dundee and Angus College. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to develop, publish and adopt a multiyear—for example, three to five years—funding settlement for Scotland’s colleges, to avoid the reliance on annual decisions; to commit to funding that, at minimum, rises in line with inflation, in order to prevent real-terms erosion of college budgets; to deliver a substantive, above-inflation funding settlement within the 2026-27 Scottish budget that places all colleges in a financially secure position; to provide safety-net baselines for the provision for additional support needs, core student support services and regional or local community access programmes; and to require the Scottish Funding Council to give colleges clearer forward figures and simpler in-year rules, to allow planning flexibility for staffing, curriculum, capital investment and community partnership activities above the three baselines that are set out above.

Members will be aware that this has been a prominent issue in the Parliament’s chamber in the light of the reports from Audit Scotland and the Scottish Funding Council regarding significant financial challenges in the college and university sector. Furthermore, the Education, Children and Young People Committee recently completed substantive work on the long-term sustainability of funding for colleges and universities, that having been the focus of that committee’s pre-budget scrutiny for the budget that we have just received for 2026-27.

In its response to the petition, the Scottish Government has confirmed that the SFC is engaging with Colleges Scotland and the wider college sector on a fundamental review of the funding allocation model. Since responding to the motion, the Government has announced that its 2026-27 draft budget for education and skills reverses some of the previous considerable and damaging cuts in college funding, with an increase of £70 million in resource and capital funding to colleges. In addition, the 2026 Scottish spending review indicates that Scotland’s colleges will see £146 million of additional resource funding allocated by 2039-40.

Do colleagues have any comments or suggestions for action?