The second of the two inadmissible petitions before us this week is from Mr Joseph Rowan, who is calling for the Scottish Parliament to annul the House of Lords' jurisdiction over Scottish matters, which will allow the Court of Session to become the supreme civil court in Scotland. The petitioner believes that the Court of Session should be the highest civil court in Scotland, and is therefore looking for the removal of the right of appeal to the House of Lords regarding civil matters.The Parliament's legal office has confirmed that the responsibility for any changes to the respective functions of the House of Lords or the Court of Session is reserved to the UK Parliament and is therefore outwith the competence of the Scottish Parliament. On that basis, it is recommended that the committee should agree that the petition is inadmissible. The committee may wish to suggest to the petitioner that he could pursue the matter further with the relevant UK Government minister, perhaps via his local member of Parliament. Is that agreed?Members indicated agreement.
Official Report · Committee
Inadmissible Petitions
House of Lords (Jurisdiction) (IP37)
Speakers
Choose an MSP to read only their contributions- John McAllion Lab 6
- Phil Gallie Con 4
The record
11 contributionsThat concludes today's business—thankfully. Is there any other competent business?
Yes. I suspect that this information might be contained in the Parliament's annual report, but I would like to know how many petitions that have come in are still in limbo somewhere along the line.
There are 159 petitions in the system that have not been concluded—101 with us and 58 with other committees of the Parliament.
How do reports on petitions normally pan out? We have reports here, but none of them is concluded as yet.
All committees have been asked, if possible, to conclude as many petitions as they can before the end of March and the dissolution of this Parliament. If petitions are not concluded, they will be continued into the next Parliament and dealt with by the next Public Petitions Committee—they will be on the new committee's agenda when it convenes after the election.
I gave Steve Farrell notice of this point, but I raised a question with him about PE417 a week or two ago. He kindly produced a list of all the actions that had been taken on it. The number of actions is horrendous, but we have still not concluded it.
The full paper that sets out the position on every petition is available to any member who wants it, but it is a bulky document and it would be difficult to circulate it to every member at every meeting. However, if members want to see it they should consult Steve Farrell, and they will be able to check on any petition at any stage in the Parliament.
Okay, thank you.
I thank members for their attendance. That concludes the meeting.
Meeting closed at 12:41.
In this meeting
Everything on 14 Jan 2003 →- Scottish Parliament Public Petitions Committee Tuesday 14 January 2003 (Morning) Petitions · 2
- Convener's Report Procedure · 5
- New Petitions Petitions · 1
- New Petitions Petitions · 58
- New Petitions Petitions · 62
- New Petitions Petitions · 53
- New Petitions Petitions · 29
- New Petitions Petitions · 1
- New Petitions Petitions · 3
- Current Petitions Petitions · 1
- Current Petitions Petitions · 5
- Current Petitions Petitions · 9
- Current Petitions Petitions · 12
- Current Petitions Petitions · 1
- Current Petitions Petitions · 1
- Current Petitions Petitions · 8
- Inadmissible Petitions Petitions · 1
- Inadmissible Petitions Petitions · 11
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.