Seòmar agus comataidhean

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

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.

You have just identified that, if you had a wish list, you would do certain things. At the same time, you do not want to be curtailed in what you are trying to achieve as an organisation, which is ensuring that information is transmitted.

I still think that there might well be a requirement for you to seek support to achieve some of the goals that you have set yourself. Otherwise, you might be setting yourself up to fail. I appreciate that you want to make progress, but, at the same time, we do not want you to come back in a year and say, “Okay, we tried, but it didn’t quite work, and we’ve now found ourselves in a slightly bigger situation.” It would be good to get a flavour of how you will try to manage that, because that could—potentially but not necessarily—happen, depending on where you find yourselves.

In your opening statement, you talked about capacity. I think that we all acknowledge the capacity issue that you have had to endure. However, managing that capacity involves dealing with the staffing and resources that you have. You have identified that, to do the job, you will try to manage within those resources. Do you have an objective of looking at whether more are required? You are aware of where you have been, but achieving where you want to be might not be possible without more staff and resource. Your casework and the backlog have been identified, and you are managing that, but you are probably being asked to do more with less, and you might need a little more to achieve what you want to achieve. Is that where you think you will go?

You have identified the pinch points, which is good, because that will give you a flavour as to where you might be.

The other issue that I want to touch on is awareness—that is, your ability to make sure that people are aware of what services you offer and how you will deal with matters. The situation with regard to information is more acute than ever, so it would be interesting to get a flavour of what your approach to awareness is and whether you have plans for communication. You have mentioned your website, but are there other aspects that you can encapsulate that will support you to increase awareness of what you do, which will make it much easier for the public to understand FOI and also make it easier for you, as a management organisation, to cope with the work?

As you identified, convener, at this stage in the proceedings, we do not have many options, so I suggest that, under rule 15.7 of standing orders, we close the petition.

As you identified, clinical trials will be carried out with a view to building an evidence base that is connected with CBPMs. Unlicensed products are not routinely available on the NHS, and licensing is the only way to ensure safety, quality and efficacy. Pending results from the clinical trials, there is no further action that the committee can take.

In closing the petition, the committee could write to the petitioner to highlight the eligibility of Scottish patients for the upcoming clinical trials and the information provided by the interim chief pharmaceutical officer about the process. That would be useful. However, there is not much further action that we, as a committee, can take at this stage. As you identified, the petition could come back in some other format.

Once again, I think that this petition has probably come to its conclusion and that we need to close it under rule 15.7 of standing orders. As you have identified, the feedback from local authorities to the Scottish Government suggests that the vast majority of idling drivers switch off their engines when requested to do so. The SPICe briefing indicated that fixed penalty notices are rarely issued. The Scottish Government has stated that it considers the current approach to enforcement to be fit for purpose and appropriate.

As you indicated, convener, COSLA said that local authorities do not have the resources to manage a statutory duty to enforce the engine idling ban and that, because of the additional resources and staff capacity that would be required, local authorities would not be able to manage that process.

For all those reasons, rule 15.7 of standing orders should come into effect and the petition should be closed.