The second item on our agenda is consideration of new petitions, the first of which is PE1818, lodged by Stacey Clarke, calling on the Scottish Government to implement regulations on ownership and use of residential trampolines.
Members will recall that the committee agreed to seek views from the Scottish Government on all new petitions in advance of their formal consideration. Despite repeated requests for the information, the Scottish Government has not been forthcoming with its views on this petition.
We will move to our consideration of the petition. I am not sure about other members’ experience, but I have had instances of people complaining about neighbours using trampolines at inappropriate times and other cases where trampolines have been a source of tension. Although we recognise that the area might be a focus of neighbour disputes, the question is whether the solution that the petition suggests is credible and would actually be enforced. It perhaps follows more along the line of how we deal with neighbour disputes, which is obviously a challenging issue in itself.
It is an interesting petition, which I think comes under the category of general neighbour behaviour—trampolines are just a particular instance of that issue. I have had similar complaints about people using lawnmowers, carrying out do-it-yourself activity or just generally making noise. Quite often, complaints come in about excessive noise from kids in gardens.
We need additional information from local government to progress the petition. We should also ask trampoline sports associations—I do not know their names, but there must be organisations that look after the sport of trampolining. It would be a mistake to unnecessarily kill off the development of trampolining at the grass-roots level. We need more information from the Government and from associations that represent trampolining activity.
We need more information. It would be a local authority issue if trampoline use were to be enforced as antisocial behaviour, so we should write to the Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning to find out his views.
I can see both sides of the issue. As you mentioned in your opening remarks, convener, trampolines can be the cause of neighbour disputes. A lot of the correspondence that I have received has certainly pointed to that. I am less sure whether the planning process is a suitable way in which to deal with the issue. Our briefing tells us that licensing is used for issues such as tattooists and taxis. I think that the most recent issue on which licensing was introduced was air weapons, which was done for safety reasons.
If the petitioner had included a safety aspect in terms of trampolines not being tied down in gardens during storms when they can cause damage, that might be considered, but it just seems to be an antisocial factor and we hope that such things are sorted out between neighbours. I have no qualms about writing to the minister. Champions of the future have to start somewhere, so I am quite happy to write to a UK gymnastics body or whatever it might be, as Tom Mason suggested.
There appears to be recognition that there might be an general issue here about neighbour disputes, but the solution that is presented in the petition would be costly and not necessarily effective. It feels like over-regulation. We want to encourage younger people to go out and do healthy things, take physical exercise and so on. I am not sure that we can legislate for the management of such neighbour disputes, which often involve a lot of diplomacy from local agencies. There is an evident tension between people living side-by-side who share communal spaces, and young people taking exercise—which of course we want them to do.
This is a good example of why we would quite like the Scottish Government to respond to the committee before we discuss a petition, because we now have to write to the Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning for information that would have helped to inform our first thinking. However, we will write to the minister.
Perhaps the clerks could look for a national body for trampolining; there must be one. It might be that this is the sort of issue that has been flagged up to that body previously and it might have solutions. I think, however, that I am reflecting the views of the committee if I say that, although we recognise that there can be issues about how neighbours manage these disputes, we are not sure that the solution that the petition has flagged up is credible.
Think about how many of us had slides and other play equipment in our gardens for our kids. We need to be careful not to legislate to have everything pinned down in the garden, or what have you. The convener is absolutely right that we should be cautious.
On the point about health and safety, there is an issue if the trampoline does not have the proper netting around it that stops kids from falling from the side of the trampoline; that is a cause for concern.
I think that the committee suggests the right course, but we should be cautious about other kids’ equipment in a garden and whether that will or will not be covered. We do not want to ruin the party.
We agree to write to the Minister for Local Government, Housing and Planning to seek his views on the action being called for in the petition. Additionally, if the clerks can establish whether there is an appropriate trampolining body, we could find out whether there is a broader issue in our communities; that would be useful.
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.
