New Petitions

We have received other petitions on a similar, if not exactly the same, issue. For example, PE553, which has been submitted by John Carracher on behalf of the Scottish tenants a real choice campaign, calls on the Parliament to examine the detail and nature of the Glasgow housing stock transfer ballot and to urge the Scottish Executive not to consent to a transfer based on minority opinion.John Carracher wanted to give oral evidence to the committee. However, when it became clear that he could not do so, he provided substantial additional material that is contained in the members' briefing paper. I will read out his views, because it is important to put them on record.Mr Carracher's additional material provides further details of the background to the petitioners' concerns. They question the mechanism used to gather the opinions of tenants on housing stock transfer proposals and consider that the Parliament should investigate and clarify the system and reach agreement on the most appropriate method to be used. They also argue that the procedures followed in relation to recent housing stock transfer ballots are flawed and were put in place in advance of the implementation of the Executive's national strategy on tenant participation or the code of practice on housing stock transfers. Moreover, they are concerned that outcomes are being assessed in a way that ignores the provisions of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 and the Housing (Scotland) Act 1988.The petitioners have further concerns that tenants are not involved in setting and agreeing the methods to be used in conducting surveys. In particular, they feel that the Scottish Ministers have assessed the outcomes of recent surveys only against the number of tenants participating in ballots, rather than against the number of tenants in all of the properties involved, which they believe is a requirement of the relevant housing acts.Again, the impending court action does not apply to this petition, because we do not yet know whether any court action is impending. As a result, we should leave that aspect of the suggested action on the petition. We should seek the Executive's response to all the points that the petitioners have raised, and especially to the points that I have just read out, which are of particular concern.

I think that the petitioners have asked for them to be kept separate. However, we could send all the petitions to the Executive with a covering letter that sets out all the points that we want to raise. Do members agree to that course of action?Members indicated agreement.