The petitioners who have come down from Oban, whose petition is due to be considered towards the end of our agenda, are anxious to get back to Oban by a reasonable time, as they have committee meetings tonight. Do we agree to consider their petition first? Members are agreed.The first petition is from Councillor Donald McIntosh, and calls on the Scottish Parliament to initiate an inquiry into geriatric provision and the continuation of local health services in the Oban area. Councillor McIntosh would like to address the committee for two or three minutes.
Official Report · Committee
New Petitions
Speakers
Choose an MSP to read only their contributions- John McAllion Lab 109
- Christine Grahame SNP 45
- Mrs Stewart 34
- Sandra White SNP 31
- Phil Gallie Con 29
- Helen Eadie Lab 26
- Mr Donald 22
- Mrs Reid 9
- Councillor McIntosh 8
- Mark Whittet 6
- Duncan Hamilton SNP 3
- Councillor Donald McIntosh 1
- Mr Alexander Donald 1
- Mrs Lydia Reid Grandparents Apart 1
- Mrs Margaret Stewart 1
The record
330 contributions · showing 1–200
Councillor Donald McIntosh
link
Convener, could I add another 183 signatures to the list of 8,000?
Thank you very much.
Councillor McIntosh
link
I am a local councillor in Oban and represent a large number of people up there. We are very concerned that we have a rural hospital that works under the Argyll and Bute NHS Trust, which includes three hospitals in Glasgow. We feel that we are not getting our fair share, because the number of people who pass through the hospital doors in Glasgow will always be far higher than the number of those who use the hospital in Oban. Ours is a very diverse rural area. We represent many islands, including Tiree, Coll, Mull, Lismore, as well as people from as far away as Campbeltown, which is 100-odd miles down the road. They all come to the hospital in Oban. Grave concerns have been raised in Oban because the local trust had twice refused a scanner, at a value of £310,000, which was donated to the hospital. Eventually, the trust decided to accept it, but there were still grave concerns about the lack of trust in the trust that ran the hospital. We still feel that there is not a long-term commitment to the hospital in the Oban area. Certain people have said that a trip to Glasgow is not a hardship. If people have already travelled 100 miles to come to a hospital in Oban, a further trip to Glasgow would be a severe hardship.We are very worried about the situation. The local acute trust has a shortfall of around £6 million, of which only £300,000 is allocated to Oban, but we have still been forced into making some very serious cuts. There has been talk about putting all the old folks out, and about closing the Nelson ward. There is even talk of the maternity services all going to Glasgow, and of closing about 100 in-patient beds in the acute trust and returning them for use by day patients. At the moment, patients are having to spend nights in hotels and they then travel home the next day instead of being offered medical treatment through the night, which many of them need and deserve.The concerns are grave. As far as the wider picture is concerned, no one in Oban wanted to join the trust in the first place—doctors, medical staff: nobody wanted to. A big meeting was held about it. Only one person wanted to go into the trust. We feel that Oban should be in the Highland Communities NHS Trust area, with Fort William and Lochaber. That is the same type of trust as ours, covering a diverse rural area. We have a lot in common with that area and we could share facilities a lot better if we were part of that trust.In Oban, we have been coming in second best with regard to facilities and the amount of money spent. Glasgow obviously has a bigger catchment area, and more people are going through the hospital doors there. We are very worried about what is happening up in Oban, and we would like the matter to be investigated further. There was a lot of unease in Oban, even after being given the scanner. We see the issue of the scanner as a short-term one, which in no way guarantees the future of the hospital.The hospital is only five years old. It cost £17.5 million to build. Five hospitals were knocked into one, and we lost beds. There is much ill feeling in the town about it, and we hope that the Public Petitions Committee might view our concerns favourably and pass the matter on to the Health and Community Care Committee to investigate further.
Thank you very much, Councillor McIntosh. We have time for brief questioning from members of the committee.I am sorry not to have already welcomed Duncan Hamilton to the committee. He is not a member, but is attending because he has an interest in this petition. Do you wish to say anything, Duncan?
I just have a few brief points. Councillor McIntosh has outlined his case clearly.To assist the Public Petitions Committee's understanding, I should mention that the Health and Community Care Committee tends to avoid addressing specific local issues. The reason that the matter raised by this petition is different is that, first, there is such a scale of concern. The petition is of a fairly impressive size. Secondly, the efforts made by the Health and Community Care Committee with regard to the inquiries into Stracathro and Stobhill illustrate the reason for those inquiries: those two cases are symptomatic of a wider problem in the health service. Therefore, it was useful for the health committee to investigate those cases.The case which this committee has heard today may be viewed in the same light. The position of Argyll and Clyde Health Board and the issues of cross-jurisdictional resource transfer that surround the matter of local authority boundaries and health board boundaries—the delivery of health care in rural Scotland as a whole—are largely encapsulated by petition PE129. I am therefore certain that the Health and Community Care Committee will want to take this matter forward.
I declare an interest, as I am shadow spokesperson for older people for the SNP, although what happens to many elderly people in care across Scotland forms part of a larger remit. You say that closure is threatened, but when will the axe fall?
Councillor McIntosh
link
The trust says that it will close the Nelson ward when the last patient is reallocated into the community. That approach does not look to the future at all, as we know that the number of older people is growing, people are living longer—
I know.
Councillor McIntosh
link
In five or 10 years' time, when it is really needed, that facility will not exist.
How many elderly people does the proposal affect?
Councillor McIntosh
link
The ward has 60 beds.
Our guidance talks about the possibility of the provision of care being transferred into the community. Have you been told about any alternative provision?
Councillor McIntosh
link
I am a local councillor and my council has no funds available to transfer these patients. There are no vacancies in any homes in our area for a start, and there is no money. I do not see where this will end. Where will the patients go?
That point was raised at a local public meeting. There was no idea—
About where people would go?
People will not be turfed out of the hospital, but in the longer term, there is no package in place to deal with the transfer of resources. In Oban, people feel that until such a package is in place, the closure must be reconsidered.
Given your comments, Councillor McIntosh, it appears that there is no chance of any provision being made. What transfer of funding has taken place between the health board and the councils?
Councillor McIntosh
link
They have just started to discuss the way forward. There is talk of £1,500 being transferred if a bed in a hospital is cleared, but that will not keep an old person in a home for a year. My council has no money at all. We have had cuts of £3.9 million this year, including cuts to our social and welfare budget.
Councillor McIntosh and Duncan Hamilton have done well to fill in the committee on the background to the petition. Once again, a quango has not carried out any consultation with local people. Councillor McIntosh says that no resources from the local council will be put into the care of elderly people in the community, which worries me. I am sure that we will pass this petition to the Health and Community Care Committee, as it is the third or fourth such petition that we have received.
Councillor McIntosh
link
It is an experiment that does not seem to be working.
This is an unfortunate situation that has come to our attention because people are concerned and health boards do not seem to be bothered about the concerns of local people. I hope that we will pass this petition to the Health and Community Care Committee, convener.
I support that view, as it would be difficult for the Public Petitions Committee to get into the nuts and bolts of the arguments involved in this petition. In my experience, when one speaks to the public, health is at the top of almost everyone's agenda. I happen to think that people do not wake up in the morning thinking only, "How do I feel today?"
The scale of the petition has been mentioned—it had 7,000 signatures and a further 123 came in.
Councillor McIntosh
link
We have more than 8,000 signatures now.
The chief executive of the trust has accepted that the consultation was inadequate thus far. Given the background of Stracathro and Stobhill, it would be appropriate for the Public Petitions Committee to pass the petition to the Health and Community Care Committee for further consideration and with a view to that committee making a recommendation about what approach the trust should take in relation to public consultation. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
Okay. We will go back to the beginning of our list of petitions. Interruption. We will wait until the members of the Oban delegation head back to the ships or wherever they are going.Petition 103 is from Mr Frank Harvey—what a surprise. His petition calls for the Scottish Parliament to introduce a law ensuring that no more than 10 per cent of a gas or electricity card can be taken for payment against outstanding debt. That issue is reserved and has already been considered by the Westminster Parliament's Public Accounts Committee. In fact, that committee's report on these issues prompted Mr Harvey's petition.It is suggested that the clerk should write to Mr Harvey, explaining that the Scottish Parliament has no powers in the area referred to in his petition. He may wish to raise the issue with his local Westminster MP—who may be George Galloway, although I am not sure about that—with the utility companies directly or with the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets, which is the regulatory body for those utilities. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
Petition 104 is also from Mr Harvey and calls on the Scottish Parliament to explain why the Aberdeen E coli testing centre is to be closed and its funding moved to Edinburgh. That decision was taken by the Scottish Executive and it is suggested that we pass the petition to the Executive, asking it to provide Mr Harvey with the information that he has requested. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
PE105 is also from Mr Harvey, calling for the Scottish Parliament to abolish poindings and warrant sales and to adopt a scheme that helps those in debt. The suggestion is that the clerk writes to Mr Harvey, informing him that the Abolition of Poindings and Warrant Sales Bill, which addresses the issues raised in his petition, is currently under consideration by the Justice and Home Affairs Committee. The stage 1 debate is scheduled for the near future. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
PE106 is also from Mr Harvey, calling for the Scottish Parliament to ban the sale of Glasgow's local authority housing stock to private landlords. It is suggested that the clerk write to Mr Harvey informing him that the issues raised in the petition are currently being considered by the Social Inclusion, Housing and Voluntary Sector Committee and that the petition will be passed to the committee for consideration. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
PE107 is not from Mr Harvey, but from the Save the Overtoun Park Campaign. It calls for the Scottish Parliament to take action to prevent the sale of part of Overtoun Park in Rutherglen, Glasgow. The petitioners have indicated that South Lanarkshire Council proposes to sell off 10 per cent of the park for private housing to match lottery funding to refurbish and maintain the rest of the park.We must be careful, because that is the kind of matter on which local authorities should take decisions. It is not necessarily for the Parliament to interfere. E-mail correspondence from South Lanarkshire Council has indicated that it would welcome the opportunity to provide the committee with background information on the matter. It is suggested that we copy the petition to the council and ask for details of the background raised in it, before the committee reaches a final decision.
I notice that the forms are now being amended to include the number of signatures on submission. It would be useful to make that part of the form.
The number of signatures on submission?
Yes. That was simply a point of information.
It was a recommendation that has been accepted.
I agree with your suggestion as regards petition 107. There will probably be many more such petitions, because local councils are selling off public land all over Scotland, particularly in Glasgow, to raise money. That is a matter of great concern.Sometimes the public finds that the only way forward is to go to the newspapers and build up a case from there. At least the Public Petitions Committee gives those people somewhere to air their concerns. I look forward to receiving the background information from South Lanarkshire Council.
That is very important. It is not just local authorities. Health trusts are also selling off land to fund services. However, I am very reluctant for the committee to be used as a means of subverting local authorities.
Heaven forfend.
We would greatly resent any interference from Westminster in our affairs and, similarly, local authorities would resent our interference in their affairs. People living in the area have recourse to the ballot box if they do not like what the local authority is doing.Sandra White is right. If there is a national problem, that is something in which we should take an interest. That is why it is important that we write back to the local authority asking for its views, before taking a decision.
I agree.
I concur. Where there is a principle or a national issue at stake, as there was with the hospitals, we would not be treading on the toes of local authorities if we took action.
The same is true for health boards. We do not want to be seen to be sucking up power.
Does the committee agree to send the petition to the council for background information and then decide what to do?Members indicated agreement.
We go back to Mr Harvey. PE108 calls for the Scottish Parliament to introduce laws to protect schoolchildren using public transport during school activities. The suggestion is that we should pass this petition to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee so that it can note the issue but take no further action unless it considers it appropriate to do so. I am sure that the issue that Mr Harvey raises is constantly under review by that committee and by the Executive.
Similar petitions to this one—to do with subways and buses—have been referred to the Transport and the Environment Committee.
It is important to stress that it is not for us to decide whether other committees should take up issues; that is for them to decide. We can only refer issues to them.
This issue should also be noted by the Transport and the Environment Committee. Safety issues are paramount to us all, especially in relation to children. I have had many letters and phone calls over the years from concerned parents about this, and it is outrageous that we often do not provide seat belts in buses or trains. The Parliament has to take that wider issue on board. As Christine said, this is a matter of principle: if we are obliged to have seat belts in cars and planes, why not in every other form of transport?
Are we agreed that both committees should receive this petition?Members indicated agreement.
The next petition, PE109, is also from Mr Harvey. It calls for"the Scottish Parliament to take urgent action on various pension payment issues arising from hospital stays."Pensions and social security benefits are reserved matters. However, the wider issue of the long-term care of elderly people is the subject of an inquiry that is being undertaken by the Health and Community Care Committee. It is suggested that we should pass this petition to that committee so that it can be noted and taken into account as part of the inquiry, if the committee feels that that would be appropriate.
I recognise that pensions are reserved, but health care is devolved. Health trusts and boards make up their own minds about the charges that they make.
That is why we are sending the petition to the Health and Community Care Committee for its consideration.
Can we send a petition to a cross-party group for its information? There is a cross-party group in the Parliament on older people and aging.
I can see no reason why we cannot do that.
I think that would be useful. If an issue comes up that we feel cross-party groups would be interested in, we should pass petitions on to them.
I have to declare an interest: I am the vice-convener of the Scottish Parliament cross-party group on older people, age and aging. I had intended to take this petition to our next meeting anyway.
Would it be helpful if we sent it officially?
Yes.
I think so.
Okay, we will do that.The next petition, PE110, is from the Greater Easterhouse Council of Voluntary Organisations. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to"ask the Minister for Communities to intervene on behalf of GECVO and insist that Greater Easterhouse Social Inclusion Partnership fully fund GECVO until the new funding regime for the Councils for Voluntary Service is fully implemented."There are gaps in the provisions made by councils for voluntary organisations and services. Jackie Baillie, the Deputy Minister for Communities, has acknowledged in a speech the differences in provision between rural and urban voluntary services. The Executive has an on-going review into the funding of voluntary groups.The suggestion is that the petition be passed to the minister, to ask her to consider the petitioner's request; and that that correspondence and a copy of the petition should be passed to the Social Inclusion, Housing and Voluntary Sector Committee for its information. Its convener is, I think, the MSP for Easterhouse; she may take a direct interest in it. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
Mr Harvey's next petition, PE111, calls for the Scottish Parliament"to order a public inquiry into road accidents involving police responding to 999 calls."Members will be aware that this is a topical issue; there was a report on it on the radio this morning. We understand that the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland is liaising with its counterparts in England and Wales on police driver standards, and that a driver review group has been set up. That group is considering a paper by ACPO called the Lind report, which deals with standards of police driver training and the feasibility of introducing standard training courses for police drivers. That is being taken forward by the traffic division of the Scottish Police College.The petition should be passed to the Justice and Home Affairs Committee and the Transport and the Environment Committee for their information, simply to note. We are not suggesting that they take any further action, unless they wish to do so. We should also pass the petition to the Executive, so that it can consider the issues that the petitioner raises.
As you have said, convener, this issue is to the forefront of our minds. Yesterday, a lady who was killed in an accident of this sort was buried. There are differences between the way in which police drivers in Scotland and their counterparts in England and Wales are trained, and we need a review right across the board. I would like to think that the Executive will respond to the petition positively and take its message on board, in conjunction with ACPOS.
If we pass the petition to the Executive, we will expect a response. We can judge that when we get it.The next petition, PE112, is from Mr Frank Harvey and relates to the proposed sell-off of Britain's air traffic control system. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to study the report of the Environment, Transport and Regional Affairs Committee of the UK Parliament on Government proposals to sell off Britain's air traffic control system. This area is, of course, reserved to the Westminster Parliament. The suggestion is that we pass the petition to the Transport and the Environment Committee of this Parliament, for its information only. It will be for that committee to decide whether it wishes to take any further action.
I hope that we can do more than ask the Transport and the Environment Committee to note the petition. I met some of the air traffic controllers last week and I was very concerned by what they had to say. I have brought a map that shows an area of northern Scotland in which there is no requirement for air traffic control. I wonder whether people in Aberdeen or Inverness know that that is the case. Whether the service is privatised or retained in the public sector is one issue, and it is being addressed at Westminster. However, the fact that there is no safety control in the northern part of Scotland is an issue for us. I hope that the Transport and the Environment Committee might look into that.The talk at national level has been all about going straight for privatisation. The sort of option that I would consider acceptable—here I would like to declare an interest, in that I am a member sponsored by the Co-operative party—has not been discussed. A scheme involving collective ownership in the public domain could be set up separately from national Government. Air traffic control could remain within the public domain, without being controlled by Government. That is how the issue has been tackled in Canada.We should send the petition to the Transport and the Environment Committee with some indication of our position on these key issues. I hope that somebody out there is listening to us when we say that we should study the options and move away from privatisation. We should consider the option of independent public control—as a co-operative, a community business or whatever. We often think of community businesses in terms of the little food Co-op around the corner. Let us be big and bold in our ambitions and go for public control in a different way. I hope that someone will study the options in a structured and controlled way, so that we can move this debate on from only being about the merits of private versus public control.
I can understand why Helen Eadie has suddenly become aware of these issues. I have lived with them for the past six or seven years. The greatest threat to air safety in the years ahead is the fact that the new air traffic control centre is not up and running or even well on the way to being up and running. Governments of various complexions have considered the options, including the public sector option. Last week, I met the management of the air traffic control centre, which wants to get this project off the ground. It ill befits the Parliament to slow down the launch of the project. The recommendation that has been given is fair. We should leave the Transport and the Environment Committee to take on board aspects that it wishes to consider, but it is the job of elected members at Westminster to resolve the issue. We should not put any spanners in the works and slow down the provision of this much-needed facility at Prestwick.
We have a rigorous Transport and the Environment Committee, which will examine all aspects of the matter. Community ownership might even be considered. The idea of community ownership is being examined elsewhere; for example, the Campaign for Borders Rail has considered community ownership of the track rather than ownership by Railtrack.
That is music to my ears.
I love these conversions. It is like the road to Damascus. I do not mention any names as I do not want to be political. This is about public safety and jobs.
I have never been converted and have always believed in safety.
I am very pleased. As Helen Eadie is a member of the Transport and the Environment Committee, I am sure that she will raise the matter there. That committee should take the issue on board. I hope that MSPs from all parties will write to their counterparts in Westminster to express views similar to those that Helen Eadie has just given. As Helen is a member of the Labour party, I am sure that she has written to the Labour MPs and the Labour Government to say that air traffic control should not be privatised.
The consensus on this is not entirely clear. We want to refer this matter to the Transport and the Environment Committee. I suggest that we refer it to that committee and leave the matter there.
Hold on, convener. I liked the recommendation in the guidance that no further action should be taken at the present time.I do not want the Scottish Parliament to interfere at this time. We need the air traffic control centre to get up and running. We can play politics with it as much as we like. An elected Government has decided on the way forward. If we can persuade it to act in a certain way, that is fair enough. However, it has examined all the options, including the option of public funding—that seems attractive on the surface, but the situation cannot be compared with that of the Post Office. The party of Helen Eadie and the convener is in government. It has made up its mind, even though before 1997 it felt strongly that this should not be the way forward. We should leave people to get on with their jobs.
Should we just leave the issue of safety to market forces?
We are in danger of debating the substance of the petition—that is not the role of the committee. If we refer this petition to the Transport and the Environment Committee—whatever wording we use—it will decide whether it wishes to pursue the matter further. Given that Helen Eadie is a prominent member of the Transport and the Environment Committee, I am sure that it will pursue the issue.
My proposal is to refer the petition to the Transport and the Environment Committee. It is up to that committee what it then decides to do.
I agree. We will refer the petition to the Transport and the Environment Committee for its consideration.Members indicated agreement.
The next petition, PE114, from Julia Clarke, is about after-school clubs. I understand that Julia Clarke cannot be here, but that Mark Whittet would like to address the committee on this issue.
Mark Whittet
link
I thank the committee for allowing me briefly to take up its time this afternoon. I am wearing a number of hats today: first, I speak on behalf of my wife, who cannot be here; secondly, I speak as a father; and, thirdly, and perhaps most significantly, I speak as the former chairman of the Mearns after-school care club in Glasgow, which is the largest private after-school care club in the country. I am no longer involved with the club because I have moved to Edinburgh. I am here to ask for the committee's help to secure a comprehensive and cohesive examination of these issues, which, I understand, cut across a number of sectors in public policy. I speak from personal experience and from the experience of my wife, whom I am representing today. In our experience, public policy is contradictory and can be self-defeating. It can certainly be frustrating and infuriating. We have tried child care in various forms, including doing it ourselves, private nurseries, nannies and being unemployed. It is difficult knitting it all together. We are fortunate, because after 10 years we are reaching the end of the period of heavy child care, but there are many others who are less fortunate, and it would be in the national interest to support them by instituting a study to investigate the cost benefits of running national after-school care clubs.
So your basic concern is that the national policy for after-school care for children is contradictory and is not working, and that it should be investigated by the Scottish Parliament.
Mark Whittet
link
Yes.
Before I was a lawyer and before I was an MSP, I was a teacher, which declares my interest. Is after-school care in primary schools done on an ad hoc basis? Are there national guidelines?
Mark Whittet
link
It is my understanding that it is done ad hoc. My experience in Eastwood in Glasgow is that care was delivered by a parents self-help group. That was a private company, but it was not a rich or successful one: it was threadbare. Only through a positive dialogue with the local authority, after it had declared that the buildings that we were renting from it were unsafe and decrepit, were we able to occupy space in the nearby high school after normal school hours. That was a solution, but it was a hand-to-mouth existence. The group allows parents who are my friends, peers and contemporaries to work and to help their children. Without that support, parents could not work.
For single parents, after-school care is essential, but my concern is that there are no standards that primary school after-school clubs have to adhere to. That might be of interest to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee.
I support the recommendation that the petition be passed to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee. I know that only a couple of months ago Sam Galbraith announced an extra £14 million for this area. He made that announcement in Fife, because Fife has one of the best reputations—as I know from personal experience—for after-school care clubs and for child care in general; the Labour-controlled council has led the way.The Scottish Co-operative development committee in Glasgow has been supportive of community businesses. I have been party to discussions in Glasgow at which a number of child care community businesses or co-operatives were established across Scotland. That can be done with grant support and with help from local authorities. This is one of the key areas in which my party has been active. Okay, Scotland is not as good as Denmark and other countries—we have a long way to go—but you are right in pushing these matters. We need to keep this high on the agenda, and you are right to bring it to the attention of MSPs.
I do not think that that was a question.
Our party is not part of the Executive, but as the Executive keeps pushing education, education, education, and has mentioned pre-school education and after-school care, it is important that this petition should go to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee. In a previous life, I was a councillor and chair of the Foxbar after-school care club, at which there were more than 100 children. It was difficult to accommodate them, because the local authority's money kept being cut. We existed to provide affordable child care after school and during school holidays. People seem to think that, during school holidays, parents can take six and eight weeks off to look after their kids. It is difficult to get your children into affordable, good child care.We should recommend that we get a reply as quickly as possible, because we are talking about training kids to be child care experts and nursery nurses. These clubs are an ideal way in which to incorporate that training in one scheme. We could be training kids in the proper environment, and opening up schools, which I have always believed should be opened up to communities anyway. At the same time, we would be helping people to go back to work. Thank you for bringing the petition before us.
Again, that was not a question. I think that Mr Whittet will sense the view of the committee from the non-questions that he has heard.The recommendation, as has been mentioned, is that we pass the petition to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee for its consideration and ask it to consult the Executive as appropriate.
Will we get a reply from the Executive?
It is the committee's role to chase up responses on every petition.The next petition, PE115, again from Julia Clarke, is on air traffic over Edinburgh. Mr Whittet will again address the committee on this petition.
Mark Whittet
link
I am sure that the discussion on this petition will be even briefer. The petition relates mostly to residents' concerns. I had hoped to be joined this afternoon by Mr Robert Armour, who is the Edinburgh airport local amenity representative on the Cramond association of which I am also a member. Unfortunately, he is unable to join me so I am wearing another two hats today. I seek the help of this committee in considering the environmental issues. The matter is not huge, but I would be much obliged if the committee could do something to bring it to the attention of the airport operators.
I have local knowledge of the flight path over Whitehouse Road. This has been a big issue in Edinburgh for years. It may be worth while to find out whether there has been an increase in flights over the past five years. I do not know how the petitioner would get that data—perhaps he could just ask for it. The issue has been aired for years and years, but I do not know whether there has been an increase in traffic.
Mark Whittet
link
That is certainly my experience as a resident.
Yes, but you would need to get the data. We should recommend that we find out what change there has been over the past five years.
I used to be a member of the Edinburgh airport advisory committee. This is the sort of issue that came up on its agenda, so we could get the information from it. The airport has tried hard to minimise the problem, but there is a difficulty. You are saying that flights should be directed away from the city, but over the water in Fife there are massive new developments—the new estate there has some 5,000 homes and Dalgety Bay has a population of almost 14,000. We should get the information about the increase in traffic and pass this petition to the Transport and the Environment Committee.
Seriously, I sympathise with Helen Eadie's comments, although opportunistically I suggest that the traffic should be taken away from Edinburgh and sent to Prestwick. That would solve the problem.
Mark Whittet
link
Thank you for that suggestion, Mr Gallie. I assure Helen Eadie that I am not arguing this from a NIMBY point of view. I am not against planes or commerce. However, I am aware that there might be some room for manoeuvre over the Forth estuary.
Thank you, Mr Whittet, we will now discuss the evidence that you have given to the committee.One of the problems with this petition is that rerouting aircraft is a reserved matter for the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions at Westminster. I was not aware of the Edinburgh airport advisory committee. As well as referring this petition directly to the DETR, we should ask that committee about the increase in the number of flights. We could consider its response along with the response from the DETR and further consider this petition once we have received those responses. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
Petition PE116 is from James Strang. We have had petitions about Scots law from Mr Strang before. This one is about the compatibility of Scots law with the European convention on human rights, which, as everyone knows, has been causing the Parliament considerable trouble. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to introduce appropriate provisions to ensure that aspects of Scots law—including parole boards, it seems—are compatible with the obligations under article 6.1 of the European convention on human rights.
Mr Strang's point is that everything should have been sorted out before incorporation. The fact that it has not been is a political matter that is seen as a disgrace in some quarters. The recommendation is that the petition be passed to the Justice and Home Affairs Committee. Given the seriousness of the matter and the fact that the issues must be addressed quickly, I think that it should be sent directly to the Minister for Justice in the first instance.
Does anyone disagree with that?
I am becoming something of an expert on the ECHR. I have been landed with it in my party—although perhaps I should not put it that way—and we have often aired the continuing problems with legislation. The ECHR has a huge impact on Scots law and I believe that it is a matter for Jim Wallace. I agree that we should send the petition to him in the first instance rather than to the Justice and Home Affairs Committee.
There is nothing to stop us sending it both to the minister and to the Justice and Home Affairs Committee. Is that agreed?
Members
link
Yes.
Petition PE117 is from Mr Alexander Donald and concerns ice-cream van safety. I understand that Mr Donald is here today and would like to address the committee.
Mr Alexander Donald
link
This is very emotional for me and I am quite upset.
I understand that. Just take your time.
Mr Donald
link
I do not know whether members have copies of my petition.
Everyone has a copy of your petition and the background papers, and we have all read them. Take two or three minutes to summarise what you would like the committee to do.
Mr Donald
link
Well, I am being knocked about from pillar to post. The letters that I have received from the Scottish Executive tell me that ministers are fully aware of the points that I have raised but that a meeting would serve no purpose. In other words, they are not prepared to sit down and discuss what I am asking for. The kids mentioned in my petition have all been killed. If I had been driving past those ice-cream vans, those kids would have been alive today, because my speed would have been right down and I would have been prepared to stop. Some of the drivers involved were not really going very fast. They might even have been going as slowly as 20 miles per hour, but that is too fast because, at that speed, one child in 10 is killed.In 1986, a wee boy was killed and I wrote to the department of transport about it, but the parents felt that they did not want to highlight the case so I let it go. I did not know about the wee boy who was killed in 1990, but I heard about the wee girl who was killed in 1991. Later on, in 1994, I wrote a petition and the man who had lost his wee boy said that he would like to sign it. He felt that, if the driver had been going a wee bit slower, his boy might have been alive today.
Would you like a glass of water, Mr Donald?
Mr Donald
link
I am all right, but this is very emotional.
We can understand that. Just take your time; there is no rush.
Mr Donald
link
I do not know whether you will remember Ian Campbell.
Members
link
Yes, we do.
Mr Donald
link
Ian dealt with the matter, and a wee film called "The Ice-Cream Girl" was made and shown nationwide on Scottish television. I have a copy of it with me, which I shall leave in case members would like to see it. There is also a copy of a film that was made when I wrote to Scottish Television after a horse was killed.Ian Campbell took the matter up. A wee filler film was made, called "Horse Traffic", but this wee filler —they all have wee names—was called "The Ice-Cream Girl".Bus drivers are permitted to use their hazard warning lights when they stop to pick up or drop off children. I have been campaigning for ice- cream van drivers to be permitted to do that as well, just as a warning that a kiddie may run out. That would have had to be dealt with down in London, and I understood that the Conservative Government was the only one that could deal with it. To cut a long story short, I organised a petition—with 8,000 signatures—claiming that no child should be killed while waiting at an ice- cream van. I took it down to London. I could have done more if I had had the funds. I have been using my own transport all these years.Another point was that drivers should reduce their speed if they are overtaking an ice-cream van, and that they should be prepared to stop. No child would be killed by a vehicle that was travelling between 5 mph and 10 mph. The other point was—what was it, now? I think I have it here.
A new film, was it?
Mr Donald
link
Pardon?
You wanted someone to make a new film on ice-cream safety?
Mr Donald
link
A wee filler film, aye. It should be updated. I have the old one here, as you know. There are other wee bits added on.
It would be helpful if you left that with the committee. We could then pass it on.
Mr Donald
link
As long as you put it in one of those padded envelopes.
We will return it to you safely.
Mr Donald
link
When I showed it to the people in London, they put it in an ordinary brown envelope and the case was broken. I could go on and on, but you have the film there.
We have it here, Mr Donald.
Mr Donald
link
Perhaps you could organise a meeting to highlight the issue. I could come to that meeting better composed.I have some photos with me of the kiddies who have been killed. This wee girl was killed in 1998, and her father collapsed and died nine months after. That is a wee girl from Drumchapel. That is a wee girl from Clydebank. That is a wee boy whose father came over and said, "I'll sign the petition." He came from Dumbarton. He said, "If the driver had been going a wee bit slower, my wee boy might not have been killed." Interruption. I am sorry that I am getting emotional.
I understand. It is a very emotional subject. Thank you very much, Mr Donald.
Mr Donald
link
Can I leave it at that?
Please wait for a moment, in case members of the committee have questions to ask you.
It is very distressing. Children flock to ice-cream vans and they are happy. It is dreadful when such accidents happen—for the ice-cream van driver as well.I am not sure, but I think that road traffic legislation is reserved. The highway code is part of that.
I am told that road safety is an issue for the Scottish Parliament.
Road safety is another matter. Is the highway code part of road traffic legislation?
Mr Donald
link
No—I am sorry to interrupt—it is not.
I am advised that the highway code is a reserved matter.
The highway code is reserved?
Yes, but road safety issues are not reserved.
The Education, Culture and Sport Committee might be interested in this matter from the perspective of the need to remind children in primary schools about the dangers on their streets. Road safety education is a subject that we must return to with each generation of children.
Members should remember that we are asking Mr Donald questions at this stage. We will have a debate afterwards.
This is not so much a question as a suggestion. I would have thought that it would be useful for Mr Donald's petition to go to not only the Transport and the Environment Committee, but the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, so that it can be followed up with school children in primary schools. The Education, Culture and Sport Committee could also consider the other matters in Mr Donald's petition that the Parliament might want to address, such as hazard warning lights and so on.
Mr Donald
link
I went to the Scottish Road Safety Campaign in Edinburgh, but that was just after the wee girl was killed in 1991. I did not know about the wee boy who was killed in 1990. I met a committee and highlighted the issues, but I did not get much satisfaction. Since all the other kids have been killed, I have not been back.
Thank you for bringing this petition before us, for being so vigilant and for pushing the matter forward. I am sure that the Scottish Parliament will be able to deal with the petition to your satisfaction. I agree with the three points on the petition. I hope that a new film can be produced and shown in primary schools. Perhaps we could add a fourth point, to advise drivers—I do not think that we could tell them by law—to check before they drive off that there are no children round the ice-cream van. Part of your petition mentions a wee boy who bent down to pick up 20p; the driver reversed and, sadly, the young boy was killed. We have all seen incidents where that could have happened. We have all told kids to get off the road. I hope that the committee will agree to add that point.
It is not the role of the committee to alter petitions.
Perhaps Mr Donald would like to alter his petition.
Mr Donald
link
It could be added in.
Drivers of ice-cream vans must be made aware of the fact that kids tend to sit on the pavement if it is a nice day, or that a kid's money or sweetie might roll under the van. It is common sense, but perhaps we need a law that requires drivers to get out of their cab and check round the ice-cream van before they drive off to ensure that there are no kids in the way. That is just a suggestion.
Mr Donald
link
When people are driving past at 20 mph, they feel safe enough, but when they look back they probably say to themselves that if they had been going a lot slower, the wee boy or girl might not have been killed.
I agree with the points in your petition.
First, Mr Donald, congratulations. You have pursued this issue since the 1970s, which shows great resilience. You say that you would like the Scottish Parliament to allow ice- cream vans to use their hazard warning lights when stopped. Is not the law at present such that ice-cream van drivers can use their discretion and apply their hazard warning lights if they consider that they are creating a hazard? If so, could not the committee simply give out the message, as it is doing now, that it would be a good idea for ice- cream vans to use their hazard warning lights?
Mr Donald
link
The driver of the ice-cream van might stop in a place where he does not think that he is causing a hazard and might not use his hazard warning lights, because he thinks that he is not really supposed to use them if he is not causing a hazard. That is how the law lays it down. That is why I said that the use of hazard warning lights could not be mandatory, but could be advisory. The advice would need to come from Parliament for drivers to take it. I do not think that ice-cream van drivers would be keen to use their hazard warning lights just because they were asked to. If it were simply a case of asking, I would not be running around looking for Tom, Dick and Harry.I would be quite pleased if the police asked van drivers whether they had had their hazard warning lights on when there has been an accident. That would make it up to the ice-cream van driver. I would be really satisfied if drivers were permitted to use their hazard warning lights.
So, you want a bit more than for drivers to be allowed to use their hazard warning lights? You want us actively to tell van drivers to put on their lights. That answers my question.
Mr Donald
link
I do not know whether you know this, but I was arrested in January—
No, I did not know that.
Mr Donald
link
I was down at the Scottish Executive at Victoria Quay with my two big placards. I may be arrested again.
It is okay—nobody will arrest you in here.
Mr Donald
link
You have to practise what you preach. Sometimes I feel that some people do not like it when you are speaking the truth. I have been driving, and teaching people to drive, for a long time. I told the Scottish Office, and John Major's civil servants down south: "Prove me wrong and I will stop." I would be glad to stop if they could prove me wrong, but they have not done that. I have here all the replies that I have received. They say, "We are fully aware of the points you raise and consider that a meeting would serve no useful purpose." Well, that is really sad.
I accept that. Thank you; your contribution was very helpful. We will now have a short discussion on your petition before deciding what to do.
Mr Donald
link
Can I leave you my video?
That would be helpful. We will ensure that it is sent back in a padded envelope.
Mr Donald
link
By the way, I have got this new book—"Tomorrow's Roads—Safer for Everyone".
We will get copies of it in the Parliament.
Mr Donald
link
But there is nothing in it about ice- cream vans.
Thank you—you have made your point very well.Everyone knows what the petition is about, and the suggestion is that we should pass it to the Transport and the Environment Committee. I was concerned to discover that the Executive was not prepared to meet Mr Donald. We should strongly recommend that the Transport and the Environment Committee should consider seeking the Executive's views. We should ask the committee also to consider whether any of the suggestions in the petition could be incorporated into future road safety campaigns.
May I suggest that we also send it to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee. Road safety is also an education issue.
I agree.
I agree with Christine. Educating children on road safety is paramount. I do not know what is in Mr Donald's video, but if we can get videos made that help to increase awareness of road safety then so much the better. Like every member here, I commend Mr Donald for sticking with it and being so tenacious.I agree with the convener that it would be nice if someone from the Scottish Executive would meet Mr Donald, who is clearly very upset by the issue and has stuck with it for a long time.
The petition will be passed to the Transport and the Environment Committee, with a recommendation that it seek the Executive's views, and a specific suggestion that it consider whether any of the points in the petition could be incorporated in future road safety campaigns. The petition will also be passed to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee for consideration for inclusion in road safety teaching in primary schools. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
PE118 is from Dr Ronald Crawford. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to reverse the decision to increase North of Scotland Water Authority charges to domestic customers by 3 per cent in 2000-01 and 12 per cent in 2001-02, and to restrict increases to 10 per cent in each of the next four financial years.On the surface, that is an issue for NOSWA. We should refer the petition to the authority and ask for its response. However, the Minister for Transport and the Environment approves the charging system, and has in fact made a statement to Parliament on the matter, so it may be as well to copy the petition to her to ask for her response. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
Does that mean that we do not want to refer it to the Transport and the Environment Committee?
I forgot to say that. We will copy the petition to the Transport and the Environment Committee for information.Members indicated agreement.
The clerk has asked whether we would like NOSWA and the minister to respond to us or to the petitioner.
To the petitioner, with a copy to us.Members indicated agreement.
Petition PE119 is from Mr C Ogg, who calls for the Scottish Parliament to take immediate action to ensure that suitable allotments are provided, according to statute.As members will see from the letter from Perth and Kinross Council, the problem is that even the council is not certain about what requirements are placed on it by law to provide allotments and is checking that. We can either ask the clerks to investigate, or we can refer the petition to the Local Government Committee and ask it to do the burrowing to find out the legal situation. I think that the clerks would rather that we sent it straight to the Local Government Committee.
Come, come.I have a great deal of sympathy with this issue. I am a keen gardener and I think that allotments are a valuable resource for towns. I would like to know the legal position, but I will defer to the clerk and his colleagues.Is there a way to get this information from someone in the Executive? It has the resources.
If the committee wants, we can write to the Executive to ask about the legal position. Are we agreed?Members indicated agreement.
PE120 is, again, from Mr Harvey. The petition calls for the Scottish Parliament to ban, for safety reasons, all schoolchildren from visiting farms in Scotland. Mr Harvey's fear concerns the warning of the E coli expert, Professor Pennington, about the danger of children contracting the disease on farms.I suggest that we pass the petition to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee for noting. We should suggest that that committee take no further action, unless it feels that it is appropriate to do so.
We should also send it to the Rural Affairs Committee. I met farmers the other week—I have farms in my constituency, Phil—and heard their concerns.
Are we agreed to send the petition to those two committees?Members indicated agreement.
PE121 is also from Mr Harvey. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to raise the issue of safety at nuclear power stations with the Minister for Energy and Competitiveness in Europe and to request inspections of all nuclear establishments. The petition concerns a reserved matter and the suggestion is that we send the petition to the minister concerned, Helen Liddell, and ask her to respond to the points raised. Alternatively, we could agree to take no action.
There was an article on this subject in the Sunday Herald. Environment matters are devolved, but nuclear safety is reserved to Westminster. It would be helpful to get clarification on how the matter is developing. The article dealt with a matter of conflict and I was concerned about what I was reading.
The petition is not specifically about the issues that were dealt with in the Sunday Herald article. However, I think that Helen Liddell should be asked to respond to the petition.
Having read both the petitioner's letter and the article, I think that the article was relevant. I think that a clarification from the minister would be helpful.
Are we agreed that we should refer the petition to the minister, asking her to clarify the position in relation to the responsibilities of the Scottish Parliament?
What is our position with regard to referring petitions to UK ministers? What is their obligation to the committee?
They are under no legal obligation to respond, but they would be mad not to.
I like that; it is even better than a statutory obligation.
We have always had a rapid response from UK ministers.
We should seek the views of the local safety advisory committees that sit on the doorsteps of every nuclear installation in Scotland.
Is there such a committee for Dounreay?
I would guess so. There is for Torness and Hunterston. However, Dounreay is no longer a nuclear power station.
The petition refers to Sellafield, which is not even in Scotland.I suggest that we accept Helen Eadie's advice. We should refer the petition to the UK Minister of State for Energy and Competitiveness in Europe and ask her to clarify in her response to the petitioner where the responsibilities lie between the Scottish Parliament and the Westminster Parliament on these issues. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
PE122 from St Mary's Episcopal Primary School is about grant-aided status for the school. The school has been refused permission to remain a grant-aided school and wishes to take up the issue through the Scottish Parliament. In particular, the school draws a comparison between itself and Jordanhill School in Glasgow, which remains a grant-aided school. The petition asks the Scottish Parliament to investigate and clarify the issue.I understand that there are differences between St Mary's and Jordanhill. St Mary's opted out under the relevant legislation, which was passed by the Tory Government. Jordanhill has always been a grant-aided school and was never part of the local authority system. In fact, I think that Glasgow City Council turned Jordanhill down when it applied to come under local authority control.However, we are not here to debate the issues. We should pass the petition to the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, and ask it to take the petition into account when it considers the Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Bill and the evidence that it is taking. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
PE123 is from the Scottish warm homes campaign against fuel poverty. The petition calls for the Scottish Parliament to identify, discuss and seek to implement measures that would eradicate fuel poverty as a matter of urgency.I know that the Social Inclusion, Housing and the Voluntary Sector Committee is considering that. It is suggested that we refer the petition to that committee, so that it can be included in the committee's consideration of how the Parliament should tackle fuel poverty. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
It is also suggested that the Transport and the Environment Committee should be consulted.
It might be useful to send the petition to the cross-party group on the elderly; that would keep that group informed about this issue, in which it would be interested.
The cross-party group on the elderly—
The correct name is the cross-party group for older people, age and aging. You and I could be included in that, John.
Yes, I reluctantly accept that I am in that category now.PE124 is from Grandparents Apart self-help group, which is petitioning the Parliament on changes to the Children (Scotland) Act 1995.I understand that Mrs Lydia Reid from the group is here. Welcome to the Public Petitions Committee, Mrs Reid. Please address the committee for a few minutes and I will then open up the discussion for questions.
Mrs Lydia Reid
Grandparents Apart
link
We hear about the grandparents' side of the problem when they phone our helpline. When we listen to those people, or when they write to us or meet us in the street, we hear really heartbreaking, horrendous stories of grandparents who have been separated from their grandchildren for a range of different reasons. I have given quite a lot of background in our report.Those people have tried, but failed, to contact their grandchildren. Perhaps they could not afford to go to court, or did not have the courage to do so, and so have lost contact with their grandchildren. Sometimes, having never seen their grandchild, they have never had that contact. The common thread that runs through those stories is that children are losing their families and families are being split up and losing contact with grandparents.We would be the first to agree that there are some grandparents who, through different types of abuse, would not be suitable companions for their grandchildren. However, grandparents feel that there is a much higher percentage who are good, loving, reasonable people who simply love their grandchildren. Grandparents can offer a great deal to their grandchildren, such as a link to the past, with stories being handed down from generation to generation, and can keep grandchildren in touch with their ancestry. They can offer a great deal of common sense to grandchildren, as well as just plain love—what child would not benefit from that? Grandparents often face problems in their lives and have gained experience of life, and grandchildren can benefit from that. At present, too many obstacles seem to be in the way of grandparents who care about the welfare of their grandchildren and who try to contact them. Grandparents feel that the system must be simplified and provide more guarantees. Grandparents want to be named in the Children (Scotland) Act in recognition of the interdependence that exists between the generations.We do not wish to put a child in any kind of danger, but why should grandparents who are good and loving suffer because a few are not? Surely there should be some system for sorting out contact when a case comes to court, with grandparents being given some sort of precedence over other people who go to court in order to be able to see a child.
Would amending the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 so that it included grandparents unlock all kinds of rights for grandparents, including access rights? Would that make it easier to go to the courts?
Mrs Reid
link
Yes. That would make it easier for grandparents. If a court were to judge grandparents in general as simply good people for the children to be spending time with, that would make contact easier. It would make residential contact easier, when a grandparent applies for it.
It would give the grandparents basic rights in law?
Mrs Reid
link
Yes. That is what we are looking for.
In this meeting
Everything on 14 Mar 2000 →- Scottish Parliament Public Petitions Committee Tuesday 14 March 2000 (Afternoon) Petitions · 1
- Electronic Petitions Petitions · 24
- New Petitions Petitions · 330
- Current Petitions Petitions · 18
- Convener's Report Procedure · 10
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.