The next petition is PE1493, by Peter John Gordon, on a sunshine act for Scotland. Members have a note by the clerk and the submissions. I invite contributions from members.
I will comment before we come to a decision on action. Guidelines were issued as far back as 2003. It appears that before the matter came back to the attention of the Scottish Government the guidelines had been either completely ignored or totally forgotten.
I suggest that we write to the Scottish Government expressing strong support for the establishment of a register. In doing so, I suggest that we ask that the register be more statutory, because guidelines appear to have been ignored.
It is alarming that it was not until the Scottish Government started asking questions after the matter was brought to its attention by Mr Gordon that we found out that the guidelines had not been implemented. That is why I suggest that we write to the Scottish Government to ask that the register be made statutory rather than just provided for in guidelines.
I am happy to agree. I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate the petitioner on highlighting the issue, thereby ensuring that the Scottish Government has realised the inadequacies of the 2003 circular. I am encouraged by the response from the Scottish Government, which has initiated the review as a result of the petitioner’s work.
I would be content to close the petition on the basis that the issue is being actively taken forward by the Scottish Government, and to write to the Scottish Government expressing strong support for the establishment of a register.
Can I be a slightly dissenting voice? I remember Mr Gordon presenting the petition in September 2013; he gave an excellent presentation. I was, however, unpersuaded about the nature of the register or about putting it on a statutory footing, although I thought that he raised some important issues.
I note that the Scottish Government is undertaking a review. I am inclined to support the review and to see what conclusions arise from it, rather than to decide at the moment that we should advocate the establishment of a register or that it should be on a statutory footing. I am not sure that that is where the review will end up. Important issues have been raised, but some of my concerns—about the register and it being put on a statutory footing and the practicalities of that—remain.
I am trying to walk a middle line here in relation to what Angus MacDonald suggested, which was to congratulate the Scottish Government on holding a review and close the petition. I do not think that we can close the petition. We need to wait and find out what the Scottish Government’s review is going to contain if we are going to do justice to the petition and the issues that have been raised by the petitioner. We should keep the petition open and we should ask the Scottish Government when it intends to carry out its review and the timetable for the review being published, and we should also ask the Government to consult the petitioner regarding the review, to ensure that the issues raised in the petition are covered in the review.
Clearly, in 2003 the then Scottish Executive felt that it was relevant to have some form of register; it put its trust in the health boards to carry out that work. We are 12 years down the road and we are still trying to achieve something workable. It would be useful to find out from the Scottish Government exactly what it intends to do and what the results of the review may be. If technical issues are identified in the Scottish Government’s response in relation to information technology compatibility and other issues, let us resolve them and move things forward. I am minded to keep the petition open with the proviso that we await the Government’s review, but we should also ask the Government to include the petitioner in discussions about the review.
I welcome John Wilson’s suggestion. When we see the outcome of the review I may be persuaded to recommend the establishment of a register. However, I would like to await the review if the committee feels that that is possible.
The Government has pledged to engage with the petitioner, which is clearly very welcome. I take on board John Wilson’s points—he made a valid point about keeping the petition open while we monitor progress. My support for the petition is now on record, but I am happy to agree with colleagues to keep the petition open and to monitor proceedings.
John PentlandLabThe Convener · Motherwell and Wishaw
Okay. The consensus is that we keep the petition open and write to the Scottish Government. By way of explanation, I say that the reason why I talked about a statutory requirement was that it appears that the best models—which have been identified in France and the USA—are bound by statute.
Are members happy to move forward with the action that has been recommended?
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.