Parliament Workbench
Data: Official Report to 12 Nov 2026

Official Report · Committee

Current Petitions

Employment Opportunities for Disabled People (PE1036 and PE1069)

Tuesday 15 January 2008 Public Petitions Committee Petitions 10 contributions · 6 speakers

Speakers

Choose an MSP to read only their contributions

The record

10 contributions
Frank McAveety Lab The Convener · Glasgow Shettleston
link

Next, we have two petitions, PE1036 and PE1069. PE1036, from John Moist, on behalf of the Remploy consortium of trade unions, calls on the Parliament to urge the Government, in partnership with Remploy and other sheltered workshop employers, to promote employment opportunities for disabled people by reserving local authority contracts to supported businesses, as permitted by article 19 of the EU public procurement directive. PE1069, from Clive McGrory, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Government to encourage employers to provide homeworking opportunities for people with disabilities that prevent them from accessing the workplace. Papers have been circulated to members. Do members have any views?

Nanette Milne Con North East Scotland
link

The Equal Opportunities Committee in the previous session of Parliament carried out a detailed inquiry into disability. That was fairly recently. The petitions could be referred to the Equal Opportunities Committee to be considered as part of any follow-up work that it might do on that inquiry.

Frank McAveety Lab The Convener · Glasgow Shettleston
link

Another issue is that most of the framework in relation to Remploy is in UK employment legislation and the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, but the implications for services, support and employment for disabled people are within the powers of the Scottish Parliament and Government—it is another one of those crossover issues. I know that there has been a lot of controversy about Remploy and that the UK Government has made its final decision on that. Do members have any views about how to deal with the specific point about how to encourage take-up in employment for individuals with disabilities? There is a question about what competence we have to ask our Government to deal with the issue, given its role in relation to Remploy.

Nigel Don SNP North East Scotland
link

The issue is a crossover one. I speak as a long-standing fan of Remploy, which is a business with which I used to do business. Perhaps we should simply ask the Government, particularly in light of recent disputes and possible resolutions, where it stands on the issue and what is within its competence. Perhaps we can ask the Government to clarify what it thinks it is responsible for and what its scope of action is.

John Wilson SNP Central Scotland
link

I am conscious that COSLA and the local authorities also have a role. I am minded of Glasgow City Council's contracts with Blindcraft and the preferential treatment in awarding contracts under European legislation that Glasgow uses for that procurement. The Remploy issue is confounded by the fact that it is a UK Government decision, but we should be getting the local authorities to consider all the possibilities when they award procurement contracts. We could consider the wider situation rather than just the Remploy issue.

Rhoda Grant Lab Highlands and Islands
link

A fair amount of work was done on public procurement and how social enterprise could work with the public sector. We perhaps need to ask the Government where that is and what guidance has gone out to local authorities and Government agencies. If the Government made it easier for social enterprise and organisations such as Remploy to bid for work when it procured services, that would create a bit of stability for them.

Nigel Don SNP North East Scotland
link

In the papers for the petition, there is a letter from Hilary Third, the head of the disability equality team in the Scottish Government. I do not want to be disparaging about the response, but it is a statement of what the law vaguely is. I would hope for a positive statement from the Government on what it thinks that it can and cannot do rather than a bland statement of the law, which takes us nowhere.

Frank McAveety Lab The Convener · Glasgow Shettleston
link

So, Fergus, with your eternal wisdom, can you distil those views into a coherent strategy for action?

Fergus Cochrane
link

I think so.

Frank McAveety Lab The Convener · Glasgow Shettleston
link

Okay, so will we accept the recommendations that members have made?Members indicated agreement.

In this meeting

Everything on 15 Jan 2008 →
  1. Scottish Parliament Public Petitions Committee Tuesday 15 January 2008 Petitions · 1
  2. New Petitions Petitions · 49
  3. New Petitions Petitions · 30
  4. New Petitions Petitions · 79
  5. New Petitions Petitions · 10
  6. New Petitions Petitions · 6
  7. New Petitions Petitions · 5
  8. Current Petitions Petitions · 5
  9. Current Petitions Petitions · 7
  10. Current Petitions Petitions · 8
  11. Current Petitions Petitions · 1
  12. Current Petitions Petitions · 1
  13. Current Petitions Petitions · 20
  14. Current Petitions Petitions · 5
  15. Current Petitions Petitions · 11
  16. Current Petitions Petitions · 6
  17. Current Petitions Petitions · 10
  18. Current Petitions Petitions · 5
  19. Current Petitions Petitions · 3
  20. Current Petitions Petitions · 3
  21. Current Petitions Petitions · 8
  22. New Petitions (Notification) Petitions · 3

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.