Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee 05 March 2025
We move to petition PE2131, which was lodged by Professor Louise Welsh and Jude Barber on behalf of the Empire Cafe. I wonder whether our remaining guests in the public gallery might, in fact, be them—it seems that they might well be. I am tempted to remind myself where the Empire Cafe is, because I have a feeling that I know. However, I shall not.
The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to grant the River Clyde—and, potentially, other rivers in Scotland—the legal right to personhood by adopting the universal declaration on the rights of rivers; appointing a nature director to act as a guardian of the River Clyde, with responsibility for upholding its river rights; and considering whether an alternative mechanism should be established to act for the rights of the river, its inhabitants—both human and non-human—and society at large.
For our consideration of the petition, we are joined by our MSP colleague and former member of the committee, Paul Sweeney. Mr Sweeney joins us remotely, just by way of a change—he must have got fed up coming in for the proceedings on a season-ticket basis. Good morning, Mr Sweeney—it is always a pleasure to have you with us.
10:30As the SPICe briefing highlights, granting legal personhood to rivers is part of the wider rights-to-nature movement, which is an emerging area of conservation law and practice. Although legal personhood is used for other non-human entities, such as companies, and has been granted to rivers in New Zealand, Bangladesh and Canada, the design of rights-to-nature designation varies markedly.
In its response to the petition, the Scottish Government states that it does not support the proposals of the petition and notes that there would be a need to balance the rights of rivers with the rights of existing natural persons and existing non-natural persons. The Scottish Government considers that there are well-developed policy mechanisms in place that balance the interests of nature, society and the economy, including legislation to protect and improve Scotland’s water environment.
The Government’s response also draws our attention to the designation of the Clyde mission programme as a national development in the most recent iteration of the national planning framework, NPF4. For those reasons, the Government’s view is that granting rivers legal personhood is unnecessary and would have unpredictable results.
We have also received a submission from the petitioners, which welcomes the approach in NPF4 in respect of the Clyde mission. However, the petitioners remain of the view that
“There are insufficient governance and stewardship mechanisms in place to implement and safeguard the River Clyde and its potential”,
and they note that, although the Clyde is central to the broad remit of the Clyde mission,
“the river itself is not represented as an entity.”
Before we consider what further action we might take, I ask Paul Sweeney whether there is anything that he would like to say to the committee.