Seòmar agus comataidhean

Are we content to support Mr Torrance’s proposal?

Members indicated agreement.

The first new petition for consideration is PE2172, which has been lodged by Sarah McFadzean. A representative is in the gallery on her behalf this morning. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to amend council tax regulations to allow late banding alteration proposals in exceptional personal or compassionate circumstances such as bereavement, illness, sudden house moves or lack of rights awareness, particularly among tenants.

The SPICe briefing for the petition explains that, when someone moves into a new home, they can apply to have their council tax band changed if they think that their property is in the wrong band. This application or “proposal” must be made to the local assessor within six months of the person becoming liable for council tax on that property, which I suspect every MSP is aware of because they will have received representations on the matter. If the proposal is received outwith the statutory time limits, the assessor must deem it invalid. People have six months to make such an application, which is not necessarily properly understood.

The Scottish Government response confirms that existing regulations do not grant discretion to extend the statutory period for proposals in exceptional circumstances for personal or compassionate reasons. The Government states that, because each assessor has an on-going duty to maintain an accurate council tax valuation list, anyone could request a review, and possibly a correction, of the list itself based on potential error and without a time limit restriction.

However, as shown in the SPICe briefing, the Scottish Assessors Association suggests that the band review process

“is not a legislative option in Scotland”,

whereas the proposal process is set out in existing legislation. Additionally, evidence presented to the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee earlier this year showed that assessors are already under pressure with existing workloads.

The Scottish Government is currently conducting wider work on council tax reform in collaboration with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and based on research that was commissioned by the Institute for Fiscal Studies. The Government intends for that comprehensive work to inform a debate in the Scottish Parliament, which will shape proposals for the next Parliament to consider, in early 2026. Members might, in fact, recall that we have recently closed a different petition on that exact basis, which is that the issue will be the subject of a statement, a debate and a paper ahead of dissolution, with recommendations to follow next year. Now that I have said it, I do not know whether the Government will do all those things, but a paper will certainly be published that sets out the options.

Do colleagues have any suggestions as to how we might proceed? It is a new petition, but we have to look at it in the light of our ability to proceed.

We have run over our scheduled time quite a bit, but the discussion has been fascinating and productive. The issues arising from these petitions have been ones that the committee has been quite actively engaged with over the course of the Parliament, for a variety of reasons. They are very important, and I am very grateful for everything that you have been able to contribute this morning.

I will suspend the meeting briefly before we move on to the next item. Thank you again.

I will suspend consideration of item 1 for a while as we move to item 2, which is the consideration of new petitions.

I highlight to those who are following today’s proceedings that a considerable amount of work is done in advance of the consideration of each petition. We invariably invite the independent research service in the Scottish Parliament—the Scottish Parliament information centre—to offer a briefing in relation to the issues that are raised by each petition, and we get an initial view from the Scottish Government. We do both those things because it has historically been the case that the committee would initiate them as its first actions upon the first consideration of a petition, so we simply get to the point of being better informed at an earlier stage.

I am sure that when you said “you” would be putting people in ambulances, you were using “you” in the most general sense.

Our final new petition for consideration today is PE2173, which was lodged by Lauren Houstoun. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ban the use of ultra-processed food in school meals across Scotland in order to give our children healthier options.

The SPICe briefing explains that there is no single, universally agreed definition for “ultra-processed food”. Examples of ultra-processed foods might include sweetened breakfast cereals, carbonated soft drinks or confectionery. They might also include low-fat spreads or some flavoured yogurts.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition states that all food and drink that is served in education authority and grant-aided schools in Scotland are under a statutory duty to comply with the Nutritional Requirements for Food and Drink in Schools (Scotland) Regulations 2020. Compliance with the regulations is monitored by Education Scotland’s health and nutrition inspectors as part of the school inspection programme.

The Scottish Government’s response also states that current scientific evidence does not support a change to dietary advice in relation to the consumption of ultra-processed foods and notes that the evidence base remains of insufficient quality to propose changes at this time. The submission highlights that not all ultra-processed foods are unhealthy, with many playing an important part in ensuring food safety and standards. The issue of processed and ultra-processed foods is kept under review by the scientific advisory committee on nutrition.

The Government’s submission notes that an outright ban of ultra-processed products would mean that products such as bread, yoghurts and breakfast cereals would no longer be provided in schools. That could have a significant impact on the nutritional content of school meals, including fibre, calcium and vitamins, some of which would be difficult to get in sufficient quantities from other food sources that are available. As such, the Scottish Government does not currently consider that a ban on ultra-processed products in schools would be in the best interests of child nutrition in the light of current scientific evidence and dietary advice.

We will keep the petition open and seek information from the Scottish Government, as expressed by Mr Golden.

That brings us to the end of our consideration of new petitions today and to the end today’s proceedings. We will meet again on Wednesday 29 October.

Are colleagues content with the proposal to close the petition on the basis that Mr Russell has suggested?

Members indicated agreement.

Are colleagues content to close the petition?

Members indicated agreement.

Are colleagues content to close the petition on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.