Seòmar agus comataidhean

PE2127, which was lodged by John Robert Erskine—who was formerly media officer to this committee—calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to develop a new digital connectivity plan for the Highlands and Islands with the aims of addressing digital infrastructure gaps, improving mobile internet coverage, establishing public-private partnerships and supporting economic growth, education and healthcare.

We last considered the petition on 19 February, when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government. The response that we received says that the Government has no plans to develop a distinct digital connectivity plan for the Highlands and Islands. It explains that there is substantial on-going activity to improve connectivity across the region but that it is not apparent that developing a separate approach for the Highlands and Islands in isolation would add any immediate value.

The response points out that the Scottish Government will be publishing a refreshed digital strategy, taking into account connectivity priorities and a new national islands plan, that will integrate digital connectivity with other key priorities, making a separate connectivity plan unnecessary.

Do colleagues have any suggestions for action?

The first new petition is PE2159, which was lodged by David Mackay on behalf of Innes community council. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to place a moratorium on the production of hydrogen from fresh water until scientific studies are undertaken to understand the impact on the environment, local economies and society.

The SPICe briefing explains that all hydrogen production technologies require water as an input. Green hydrogen production is the process of separating the hydrogen atoms from the oxygen atom in water via electrolysis. Blue hydrogen production involves steam methane reformation and, thus, also includes H₂O as a fundamental part of the process. The briefing notes that there are different conclusions about how much water is required for different methods of hydrogen production, meaning that there is no single view on which method has the lower water footprint.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition states that regulations are already in place for any activity that may affect Scotland’s water environment including the use of water for hydrogen developments, which require authorisation from SEPA. The submission also highlights the mechanisms in the planning process, stating that it will be for the relevant authority to interpret and implement relevant planning legislation and guidance in each case as it deems appropriate.

The petitioner’s written submission notes that SEPA is reporting that there are longer, hotter and drier periods in Scotland. The petitioner believes that it will take longer and more rain will be required for groundwater levels to recover. He states:

“any process that abstracts additional groundwater will exacerbate the situation and will have major impacts on the ecology, the environment and the economy.”

The submission goes on to say that the Scottish Government’s response demonstrates a lack of understanding and knowledge of the production requirements for hydrogen and that neither the Government nor the hydrogen industry has calculated the total volume of water that will be required to produce the hydrogen that will be needed for domestic and export markets, nor how groundwater will be replenished.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action? Mr Mountain is waving at me. I did not know that he had an interest in the petition, but in for a penny, in for a pound.

If you can do that adroitly, it would be helpful.

So, you did not ask 1,000 times.

Thank you, Mr Lumsden. You asked how long the Government needs to reflect on the matter. If you had been with us earlier, during our session with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care, you would have heard that we have been reflecting on private ambulance regulation since 2012, so two and a half years might not seem so long after all. However, you have raised important issues. Do members have suggestions on how to proceed?

It is certainly looking a lot busier.

Thank you, Mr Lumsden.

PE2163, which was lodged by Alistair Scott, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to work with partners to develop guidance on the interaction between child contact dispute processes and the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition indicates that it did not understand the main ask of the petition, stating that it is not clear towards whom such guidance would be directed, nor what it would be intended to achieve. The submission then details the routes that can be taken during child contact disputes.

The petitioner has provided a written submission outlining the concerns that led him to lodge the petition. He points out that mediation is not suitable for abusive relationships, stating that the parent seeking contact is then left with no other option but to progress matters through the courts. He also explains that contact dispute cases can be used to further abuse those parents.

The petitioner acknowledges that family courts will always be concerned with protecting a child from abuse, or possible abuse, from the person seeking contact. However, he believes that that results in a disregard of the impact that false and malicious allegations have on the parent seeking contact, and he shares the view that false and malicious allegations have a profound impact on the mental health of the abused parent.

Do members have any suggestions as to how we might proceed?

That seems a sensible recommendation, in light of the petitioner’s further explanation of his concerns. Are colleagues content with that suggestion?

Members indicated agreement.

PE2164, which was lodged by Tabitha Fletcher, calls for a ban on all non-essential single-use plastics. The SPICe briefing on the petition explains that single-use plastic products are used once, or for a short period of time, before being thrown away, and highlights the scale of the issue and its negative impact on the environment and on health, quoting the OECD’s description of it as one of

“the great environmental challenges of”

this

“century”.

In summarising the Government’s actions to date, the briefing mentions that some new product restrictions might require either a United Kingdom-wide approach or an agreed exclusion from the principles of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020.

The Scottish Government points to past and on-going action that it has taken on many of the asks within the petition’s broad scope. For example, the circular economy and waste route map sets out actions for accelerating progress towards a circular economy, including on problematic single-use items. As for more targeted approaches, the Government points to legislation to ban plastic-stemmed cotton buds; the proposal for a minimum charge on single-use cups; minimising plastic pellets in the environment; and the ban on single-use vapes. It also refers to the four-nation work that is under way on tackling packaging waste, plastic wet wipes and aquaculture gear, while reiterating its commitment to the deposit return scheme.

The Government also states that further detailed evidence gathering, consultation and impact assessments would be required to assess the petition’s asks on any actions not yet being taken. In an additional submission, the petitioner, too, acknowledges the complexity of the action being called for, while underlining that the existing pieces of legislation that target specific items only go to show the petition’s viability.

Do members have any suggestions as to how we might proceed?