Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have probably said enough already this morning, convener.

Motion moved,

That the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee recommends that the Pavement Parking Prohibition (Exemption Orders Procedure) (Scotland) Regulations 2022 [draft] be approved.

No, I understand your point. However, I think that the position is different because, as I have said, certain local authorities are further down the line, while others have not yet started the process. We do not expect there to be exemptions to the national parking ban across vast swathes of the country. As I have mentioned, officials will continue to work with local authorities through the working group to monitor those costs.

Mr Kerr asked whether the £2.4 million-worth of funding is for marketing. The funding is to help local authorities with signing and lining, and changes to the procedure locally. There are a vast number of ways in which that funding is helping to support local authorities. Some will need that more than others, such as those that are looking to have exemptions or those that might have more streets that require exemptions. That gives us a mixed picture nationally in terms of the implementation of policy.

I am more than happy to continue to monitor the implementation of the procedure in relation to the assessment that local authorities will now be undertaking in the next 12 months and to give the committee interim updates as we progress towards the full ban coming into force at the end of 2023, if that would be helpful.

That is quite important with regard to the opportunities that are available to island residents.

Absolutely. I recognise that we can do more in this space in relation to training and supporting the development of the skills and expertise that are required for such appointments. Fran Pacitti might want to say more on why that is so important, but I recognise that there are challenges in that respect.

Before I came to give evidence, I was not aware that the committee was all male. I look at it and wonder whether there might be more that all parties could do on female representation in the Parliament. There is a challenge for the Government in delivering that, and there is always a challenge for political parties in matters of representation. Fran may wish to say more about skills and expertise and about the current expectation of how the bodies would engage with and support the development of skills in the future.

We are advertising on the vessels, too, are we not?

I am prepared to be wrong about this, but my reading of the petition is that HIAL is being used as an example of lifeline services to island communities and that the petition is not focused only on HIAL.

I think that, in relation to lifeline services to island communities, we are really talking about three boards: CMAL, David MacBrayne and HIAL. HIAL’s board has six members, I think—not eight. If we were to add three members to it, its composition would alter significantly. I am not saying that I am against the proposal—I am sympathetic to it—but Fergus Ewing is right to say that I would like to speak directly to HIAL about it. It is a relatively small board. In fact, the membership of all the boards is relatively small. Some of the challenge therefore relates to how we can recruit people with the skills and expertise that Alexander Stewart was asking about while, at the same time, assuring islander representation.

I am happy to write to HIAL on the point that Fergus Ewing has addressed. I am not sure that I agree with the petitioners that three members of that board should come from island communities, given that it currently has only six members. However, we can do more to formalise islanders’ voices on the boards, to ensure that they are properly heard and that their views are taken account of.

Fran Pacitti may want to say more about that, as she met HIAL last week.

I am happy to allow Fran Pacitti to talk you through the process. As the minister, I will need to sign off some of those appointments, but it might be best if Fran talks you through the technical detail of the requirements of the application process itself—for example, how candidates are sifted.

That is a fair observation from David Torrance. As he highlighted, there are a range of different ways in which islanders can get involved in some of the board activity more generally, without necessarily sitting on the boards of the public bodies themselves. A good example of that is the CalMac ferries community board, which is chaired by Angus Campbell, who is one of the petitioners. Since January, I have worked closely with Angus on a number of issues with the Clyde and Hebrides ferries network. That board is a good example of how islanders’ views can be taken into account, and there is not just the communities board for ferry services; a plethora of different boards exist in our island communities, particularly in relation to ferry services.

The committee might be aware that, in my update to Parliament on 8 September in relation to project Neptune, I outlined an alternative approach to resilience in relation to ferry breakdowns on the network, which looks to engage with a wide range of organisations as and when there are prolonged periods of disruption on the Clyde and Hebrides network. Members will be aware of some of the challenges that have occurred in recent months.

For example, over the recess, I convened a resilience meeting. That considered engaging a number of different representative boards on the relevant island communities—not just people who work in CalMac and CMAL, but people who live in our island communities. As the minister, I hold a responsibility to engage with island communities when there are sustained periods of disruption.

There are other forums in which islanders can have their views taken into account. One is the ferries community board, which I mentioned, but other boards and mechanisms exist in island communities.

There is a requirement for us to consider what more can be done. There are upcoming appointments to the David MacBrayne board—I discussed that with Fran Pacitti prior to the committee—and the process for those appointments will be shared with me later today. I am keen to safeguard the capacity to make progress in the future. I have given examples of two recent appointments that have evidenced progress in the past year, but it is important that we continue to drive that progress as a Government. I look forward to receiving further information on those new appointments later today, and I would be more than happy to share with the committee further detail of what that process looks like.

No. I am content to move on.

I do not think that I have seen the quotation in context, and I would be grateful if the committee could share it with me. However, I recognise the need to do more in relation to islander representation on boards, in particular. The matter obviously predates my time in office but has affected island communities in recent months. In a number of my interactions with island communities on different matters, predominantly in relation to ferry services, it has been raised consistently.

I should make the committee aware that one of the petitioners, Angus Campbell, has been asked to lead the consultation work in relation to project Neptune, so he is involved in some of the wider work to consult island communities on the governance and provision of ferry services. Some of that work might examine directly the issue that the petition is considering. However, on the principle of the member’s question, I agree that there is more that we need to do in that respect.

In addition, last month, I updated the Parliament on two different appointments. Morag McNeill has been appointed as the chair of Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd. Murdo MacLellan has been appointed as a non-executive director on the CMAL board, and he is an islander. That is progress, but I recognise that more needs to be done, and I am committed to working with Angus Campbell and others on how the Government delivers that.