The next petition is PE1687, which was lodged by Jane Erskine in March 2018, on the regulation of fireworks displays in Scotland. The petition is set in the context of rural locations in particular and takes an animal welfare perspective.
We last considered the petition in October 2018. In response to correspondence that was issued following that meeting, the Scottish Government advised that it was due to launch a consultation on the use and regulation of fireworks early this year. The clerk’s note confirms that the consultation was launched on 3 February and closes on 13 May and says that it includes a section on animal welfare and asks for examples of local practice.
Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?
I think that we should defer consideration of the petition until the Scottish Government publishes the results of the consultation. That should give us a better idea of where things are going.
I think that it is a great petition, but the Scottish Government is now looking at the issue. I have to say that I am not sure that I agree with David Torrance, because I think that we might be in a position to close the petition. We have to weigh up the benefits of the consultation and whether the Scottish Government will take it forward in a way that Jane Erskine would be happy with.
We have two options: hold on to the petition, while recognising that there is a consultation and waiting to see the responses to it; or encourage the petitioner to engage with the consultation in the recognition that if, at the end of that process, the Scottish Government did not respond in a way that she might have hoped or expected, particularly on the issue of animal welfare in rural areas, she would be free to submit a further petition with a focus on the bit that the Scottish Government had failed to address. There is a much broader question about the use of fireworks not just in rural areas but in urban areas, but the choice before us is between the two options that have been identified. I wonder whether Brian Whittle or Angus MacDonald has a view.
The petition has had a positive effect, in that the Scottish Government is now looking at the issue. The petition is quite broad, but my feeling is that it has probably achieved what it looked to achieve at the outset and, as the convener has said, the petitioner has an opportunity to come back with a more targeted petition, should the Government investigation not be to her satisfaction. I feel that we could close the petition just now, with the prospect of another coming down the line.
I agree with Rachael Hamilton and Brian Whittle. I think that we have an opportunity to close the petition, given that the petitioner can come back with another petition in future if she feels that the Government has not addressed an issue. She has to wait a year to do that but, as we have seen with consultations in the past, the Government could take an inordinate length of time to release the results and take further action. Obviously, we will have to wait and see but, in the meantime, we can close the petition and advise the petitioner that she can come back with another petition at a later date.
I think that there is a recognition that, whatever we do, we recognise the importance of the petition and that it has secured some movement. We hope that the petitioner and others engage with the consultation, which has been publicised. I would hope that the Scottish Government, as a consequence of the interest in the issue and a recognition that the issue is quite important, would ensure that the consultation does not just drift. However, as has been said, if the petitioner feels that the consultation does not lead to the action that she is looking for, she has an opportunity to come back to the committee on that basis.
Do we agree to close the petition, recognising what it has achieved and thanking the petitioner for bringing the issue to our attention and engaging with the committee?
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.
