Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 16 Apr 2026 – 16 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 19 January 2016

19 Jan 2016 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Public Petitions Process Review

I am pleased to close the debate on behalf of the committee. The importance of the petitions process is accepted across the chamber. It is a core part of meeting our founding principles, and interest in our process extends across the world. A willingness to learn from our experience of the operation of the process will keep that process at the forefront of good practice. The insights that we gain through reviewing the system will ensure that we do not lose sight of the wider picture and the value of the process to the public in Scotland.

The Public Petitions Committee is unique in the Parliament in terms of the variety of subjects that it considers and because those subjects are determined by members of the public. The reasons for petitions being brought forward are similarly varied. What each petition and petitioner have in common is an interest in the design or delivery of public services in Scotland.

Petitions can stem from the most tragic of circumstances. People are willing to come forward with sometimes deeply personal stories and a commitment to ensure that others do not face the same difficulties that they have faced. We must have an equal commitment to hearing those stories and carrying out the scrutiny that can help to find solutions.

Petitioners who were interviewed for the review’s research were asked for their view of the purpose of the petitions process. One petitioner, Beth Morrison, said that she thought it was

“To give the ordinary person a voice … to me this has given me, my child, and the other families that I represent, a voice, a legitimate voice, because it’s out there in the Parliament, it’s out there, it’s public information. It’s given me an outlet, and, hopefully, it will bring about real change.”

The research notes that

“as long as people are treated fairly, or perceive that they have been treated fairly, the more trust they will have for political institutions, such as the Scottish Parliament, and the more willing they will be to accept political decisions, including those of the Committee.”

It is important to recognise that point, because the petitions process cannot guarantee the outcomes that petitioners may desire, and it would be misleading to suggest otherwise. What we can guarantee is that every petition that is lodged will be given consideration by the Parliament, petitioners’ views will be taken into account at every stage of consideration and petitioners will be informed of progress throughout the process.

The report recognises the areas where we can do more. Actions that can be taken include better promotion of the process so that people know that it is there for them to use and that the Parliament will listen when they do.

Looking to the future, the collection and use of high-quality data will help us to maintain a robust process, demonstrate fairness and know that all voices are being heard. There is a range of options for doing that and our successor committee will have to adopt and test new practices. If the experience and knowledge that we have gained in this session can be shared and used, I am confident that we will have an even stronger process in the years to come.

Speaking for the current committee, I am grateful to members for their contributions to the debate and glad that they have taken the opportunity to debate and discuss the matter in a meaningful way, to enable us to take forward their recommendations into the next session of Parliament.

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott) Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-15343, in the name of Michael McMahon, on a review of the public petitions process. I call Michael McMaho...
Michael McMahon (Uddingston and Bellshill) (Lab) Lab
I am pleased to open this debate on the review of the petitions process. This is the fourth debate that we have had on the Parliament’s petitions process sin...
The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Joe FitzPatrick) SNP
It is right and proper that the Parliament regularly reviews its procedures. That allows the Parliament to examine what has worked well and what it can do be...
David Stewart (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Lab
I am pleased to speak today as one of the Public Petitions Committee’s ex-conveners. I spent a very happy four years there, and I see familiar faces in the c...
Jackson Carlaw (West Scotland) (Con) Con
I am very happy to contribute to the debate, and I do so as an unreserved fan of the Scottish Parliament’s petitions process. Towards the end of my first se...
Nigel Don (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) SNP
I cannot help reflecting that all that I have heard so far suggests that that has been the case in this session. I confirm that exactly the same prevailed in...
Jackson Carlaw Con
I am happy to agree on the golden age of Nigel Don on petitions, equally as much as I am on the golden age of petitions with David Stewart. I accept that tha...
Kenny MacAskill (Edinburgh Eastern) (SNP) SNP
I heartily endorse the comments that were made initially by the current committee convener, which have been endorsed by every member across the chamber who h...
Hanzala Malik (Glasgow) (Lab) Lab
It is a pleasure to speak on the review of the public petitions process in the Scottish Parliament. The public petitions system and the Public Petitions Comm...
Angus MacDonald (Falkirk East) (SNP) SNP
I am pleased to contribute to the debate, especially as there has been some negative coverage of the Public Petitions Committee in the media in recent months...
John Wilson (Central Scotland) (Ind) Ind
I, too, take great pleasure in speaking in the debate. I think that I am currently the longest-serving member of the Public Petitions Committee, with almost ...
Michael McMahon Lab
I want to clarify what Mr Wilson just said. It did not require an FOI request to get that information. There was a simple request by someone who had an inter...
John Wilson Ind
Mr McMahon was not a member of the committee at the time when the issue was raised. The committee discussed the matter at the time and surprise was expressed...
Stewart Stevenson (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) SNP
I congratulate the minister on his brevity, which allows much more time for the backbenchers to express their views on a committee that is, in essence, a cre...
Jackson Carlaw Con
I would like to develop the point that I made in my earlier contribution about the way in which we might more effectively advertise the parliamentary petitio...
David Stewart Lab
This has been an excellent debate with lots of consensus. I am grateful for Jackson Carlaw’s update on Lord Gill. I had missed the fact that he came before t...
The Deputy Presiding Officer Con
You still have a minute and a half, if you want.
David Stewart Lab
This has been an interesting debate. I endorse the conclusions of the independent review of the petitions process. The committee is excellent and should keep...
The Deputy Presiding Officer Con
Given that I sat on the first Public Petitions Committee, it is important for me to remember the spirit of John McAllion, who was its convener. His pioneerin...
David Torrance (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) SNP
I am pleased to close the debate on behalf of the committee. The importance of the petitions process is accepted across the chamber. It is a core part of mee...
Hanzala Malik Lab
I want to run something past Mr Torrance, because he has more experience than I have. What about the petitioners who have been unsuccessful? Is there room fo...
David Torrance SNP
I agree with Hanzala Malik on that point. Petitioners who have brought petitions forward to the committee that have not been successful should have another r...