We have five current petitions to consider this afternoon, the first of which is PE504, by Mr and Mrs James Watson, calling for the Scottish Parliament to take the necessary steps to prevent convicted murderers or members of their families from profiting from their crimes by selling accounts of their crimes for publication. One of the additional committee papers is relevant to the petition. Can you please bring it to the attention of members, Fergus?
Yes. The paper is a copy of an article from the BBC news website yesterday, announcing that the Scottish Government has published its consultation paper on defamation. The fact that the Scottish Government was going to consult was flagged up to the committee on previous occasions on which it considered the petition. That was something to draw to your attention.
The news that the clerk has just announced is good news and the Scottish Government is to be congratulated on moving on the issue. Is this the oldest petition that is still before the committee? In its different incarnations, it has been going for more than eight years. Given the news that there is to be a consultation, I think that the committee has taken the petition as far as it can. The consultation on the defamation of homicide victims is to be welcomed. The Scottish Government has also given the committee a commitment and assurance that it will notify the petitioner about the consultation. In other words, the lines of communication have been opened up.I think that, having taken the petition as far as we can, we should now close it. If we are agreed, we should also pay tribute to the tenacity and dedication of the petitioners in raising awareness of convicted murderers selling accounts of their crimes to gain financial profit. We should also invite the Scottish Government to keep the petitioners fully involved as the consultation exercise develops over the coming weeks and months. I think that our part in the process is now done, after eight years.
I agree with Bill Butler and I, too, want to pay tribute to the petitioners. It is important that we do that, because they have been through an absolutely horrific situation with their daughter being murdered and then their son dying. All that they are left with is the ability to campaign and make things better for anyone else who finds themselves in the circumstances in which someone profits from writing about such a crime.The petitioners have come to so many of the committee meetings, knowing that they are here not to give evidence but just to listen, and they have always kept in touch. They have had meetings with the Government and the Crown Office, and they have put so much into the petition. It is important that we pay full tribute to their work.
Absolutely. The committee presumably agrees with that. We have a long-running petition that, due to the work of the petitioners, seems to be having the desired effect. Does the committee agree to close the petition and, specifically, to contact the petitioners in those terms?Members indicated agreement.
The type of each item (debate, statement, questions, members’ business and so on) and the times shown are worked out by this site from headings, the chair’s opening words and the Official Report’s running timestamps. They are not the Parliament’s own classification. Text: the Scottish Parliament Official Report.