Chamber and committees

Under the circumstances, I think that it would be better if we referred the petition to the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee, because it will have more opportunity than this committee will to look into and investigate the matter, which might result in more information. Therefore, under rule 15.6 of standing orders, I suggest that we hand the petition to that committee and ask it to take further action on it.

It is important that we write to the Scottish Government seeking a summary of responses that it has had to date to its consultation and an update on when the delivery plan and timescale for phasing out horticultural peat will be developed and produced, in light of the consultation responses. We should also seek information on whether the Government supports a legal ban on the import, sale and use of horticultural peat and the commercial extraction of peat for burning, with the exception of crofters’ traditional and cultural use.

You make a valid point, convener. As you identified, there are areas that we are already aware of, but there are other organisations that participate or that may be involved that we do not have information from. It would be useful to see what is there when it comes to the factor side and whether there are other areas that we could incorporate.

Our constituents continue to suffer in relation to this problem. It is about trying to find out who is in control and who has the rights, and, as you indicated, the process can become very costly for everybody. We should try to find out whether there is any other process that we can tap into.

We got information from some councils, which was useful. In that correspondence, the committee might also want to highlight the responses that we received from West Lothian Council and Fife Council, because they had an impact. I am content with David Torrance’s suggestion.

I think, Laura, that is what you have already said and are trying to say again here today.

We could take the opportunity to write to Universities Scotland and the National Union of Students Scotland to seek their views on the issue raised in the petition, specifically on the question whether they support a review of the complaints procedure for higher education institutions and the SPSO’s remit in relation to these processes. That would be my recommendation, convener.

Those organisations are all very important, but I think that we also need to talk to the Scottish Trans Alliance, because it has a role to play in all of this. We can get some views from the National Parent Forum of Scotland and from Connect—formerly the Scottish Parent Teacher Council—as well.

It might also be useful for us to write to the Equality and Human Rights Commission to seek information on the review of the technical guidance for schools in Scotland. As you identified, convener, the situation is not the same south of the border and we need to look at what we are doing here in Scotland itself, so that would be useful.

I concur with Fergus Ewing that we should continue to seek clarity. We now have a new transport minister in the form of Kevin Stewart, and it would be useful to highlight the key findings of the economic impact report and the issues that our colleagues Emma Harper and Finlay Carson have identified in their submissions and seek a response from the Government on how things should be managed. That is something that we could do to get clarity and move things forward.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations and the conversation so far. It has become evident from where we are, from what the witnesses have said and from what we have already heard, including information that I heard at last night’s meeting, that the individuals that we are discussing are vulnerable people who are sometimes at a crossroads in their lives. In some instances, although not all, they are being failed, and some of them are being failed so seriously that they eventually choose to take their own lives because of the situations and circumstances that they have found themselves in.

I acknowledge that we have capacity issues and workforce issues, but it is very evident to me from hearing about the lived experiences of some individuals last night that some have struggled and that they continue to struggle even in the present day due to the experiences that they went through.

I acknowledge that you are all doing your bit in the process. However, the third sector is also doing a huge amount of work in this area, and it seems to be what is providing the safety net for some of these vulnerable individuals, rather than the authorities or the statutory groups that have been set up by Government to protect and support them.

I suggest that the whole area requires a root-and-branch review to ensure that progress is made. Jasmin-Kasaya Pilling’s petition has identified some of the areas that we need to consider seriously if we are to get this right. At the moment, we are not getting it right for many individuals.

You have talked about things being patchy, but many organisations are facing that in the current circumstances. You have a protective and supervisory role to manage and look after vulnerable individuals, but we are failing these individuals and failing in some of these communities. The legislation that has been talked about this morning is very important, but there needs to be a realisation by all your organisations of what you can achieve and what you might achieve going forward.

It would be useful to get a flavour of whether you think that what I have said is correct. Do you see that as being where the sector is at the moment? Do we have a crisis in some of these areas? If so, what would the response be, or what should it be? If we are putting forward such a thing as the Promise, can we actually fulfil it? Can we achieve it? My view, from what I am seeing and have heard over the past few days and today, is that we are failing some of these young people, which is not acceptable in any way, shape, or form.

I would like all the witnesses to say a little on that.