Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee 18 June 2025
I would support that, but in doing so I would point to the fact that the petitioner, who has another petition live before this Parliament, is not in any way losing anything today. There is no door being shut on the petitioner. The petitioner is already in the room with the other petition, which is directly considering the RAAC issues.
Moreover, as you have indicated, convener, as well as the members’ business debate, there is virtually constant accountability through members raising questions about RAAC every week. The Government’s response has been inadequate by any stretch of the imagination, and that has been covered in the chamber time and again.
I stress that there is no need for the petitioner to feels that today is a disappointment because RAAC is very much a live issue before Parliament. Whatever view one takes about the performance of the Government, that is undoubtedly true.
Another brief point is that, if there were to be another regulator—another quango—it would make not a blind bit of difference to the problems that face us at the moment. By definition, any such new quango could not impact things that have happened before its existence and establishment. You cannot apply judgment retrospectively in that regard, nor do I think that a new public body would really make the kind of difference that most people want to see. I simply do not think that it is the right solution to an admittedly very serious problem. That is just a personal view, and it could be right or wrong, but it is not the main point. The main point is that the petitioner has done extremely well in raising this in Parliament, and has done so successfully, with members of all parties pursuing it vigorously and continuing to do so between now and next May.