Chamber
Plenary, 23 Sep 2009
23 Sep 2009 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Petitions Process Inquiry
As a relatively new member of the Public Petitions Committee, I have pleasure in taking part in today's debate and in commending our excellent and hard-working team of clerks. Nigel Don is right to say that we would be quite lost without them.
As John Farquhar Munro mentioned, petition PE1065 was the catalyst for the inquiry. The remit of the inquiry was to
"identify and implement measures to improve … the public petitions process"
so that it meets the needs of petitioners, the committee, the Parliament and public bodies in Scotland. In other words, the committee's goals for the inquiry were first, to increase people's awareness of the public petitions process, and secondly, to improve not only petitioners' participation in that process but what the committee does with petitions when it receives them.
Although increasing the number of petitions must always be balanced against the committee's core responsibility to each petitioner—namely, properly to investigate their petition—I believe that the committee is correct to take the view that is stated in paragraph 42:
"An increase in the number of petitions lodged must not be at the expense of proper and effective scrutiny".
I acknowledge Nigel Don's suggestion, although there is some danger in it. However, it is worth while and could be explored.
The number of petitions has dropped from its high point during the first two years of the Parliament, although it must be stressed that
"the fluctuation is not drastic."
That is a charming phrase, which I believe was inserted by the clerks. However, members expressed concern that, predominantly, petitions are still drawn from too narrow a cross-section of Scottish society. That is a problem.
However, research has revealed reasons to be optimistic if not complacent. For example, the research survey that was conducted on behalf of the committee showed that
"petitioning was seen as the most likely method of policy engagement with 89% of … respondents saying they would sign a petition."
Indeed, 78 per cent of respondents viewed petitioning
"as a positive way of getting something done and making their voices heard."
Surely that is the object. Nevertheless, a considerable challenge faces the committee and, indeed, the Parliament in raising awareness of the public petitions process at Holyrood and in encouraging much wider participation in it by all sections of our nation.
We know that the petitions system has had considerable successes down the years since 1999. For example, petition PE223 called on the Parliament to ensure that multiple sclerosis sufferers in Lothian were not denied the opportunity to be prescribed beta interferon, which led the Scottish Executive to announce that the drug would be available to all MS sufferers across Scotland. The success of petition PE1108, by Tina McGeever, on behalf of Mike Gray, guaranteed that cancer sufferers would be treated equitably across Scotland. I had the privilege of listening to Mike Gray make the case for others who, like him, were suffering from terminal illness. I will never forget his humility, dignity and courage, and his commitment to advancing the cause of his fellow citizens. None of those of us who were present will.
Those, and many others, are signal successes of our public petitions system, but although Scotland can be justly proud of them, we as parliamentarians must do more to allow more citizens across our country to make use of that democratic mechanism. A section of the population that has not, as yet, made significant use of public petitions is the young citizens of Scotland. However, there are exceptions. In petition PE1259, one of my constituents, Ryan McLaughlin of Drumchapel, highlights his shine on Scotland campaign, which calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to produce new guidelines on vitamin D supplementation for children and pregnant women, and to run an awareness campaign highlighting the benefits of vitamin D in combating MS. Ryan's hard work and inventiveness in promoting the petition, with the support of his family, has made an extremely positive impression on many young and not-so-young people across Scotland—I include my good friend Bill Kidd, along with myself, among the not so young. I am hopeful that the Scottish Government will continue to be receptive to the issues that the petition raises, and I look forward to discussing how we can assist with its advancement at our meeting on 4 November.
Despite that fine example of a young school student highlighting an issue of national importance, such instances are still too few and far between. That is why I am certain that the committee's decision to hold
"a further series of external meetings"
in 2010 is correct. As well as allowing parliamentarians to bring the work of the committee to rural and isolated parts of our country, it will—because of our policy of deliberately holding those meetings in local comprehensive schools—offer a better chance to involve young people.
I believe that that strategy is beginning to work. The two external meetings that I have been able to attend, at Fraserburgh academy and Alness academy—where this week's meeting was held—have been successful. The attendance and participation have been first class. I especially mention the petitions by young school students that have been heard at those events, which covered subjects as diverse as international aid and rural transport. That is evidence that if we make the effort to engage with citizens young and old in their communities, we will get a positive response.
However, we must acknowledge that there is much more to do if we are to achieve maximum accessibility to the process for all the people of Scotland. We must recognise that to reach that objective, we must use modern technology, when that is appropriate.
As John Farquhar Munro mentioned, petition PE1065 was the catalyst for the inquiry. The remit of the inquiry was to
"identify and implement measures to improve … the public petitions process"
so that it meets the needs of petitioners, the committee, the Parliament and public bodies in Scotland. In other words, the committee's goals for the inquiry were first, to increase people's awareness of the public petitions process, and secondly, to improve not only petitioners' participation in that process but what the committee does with petitions when it receives them.
Although increasing the number of petitions must always be balanced against the committee's core responsibility to each petitioner—namely, properly to investigate their petition—I believe that the committee is correct to take the view that is stated in paragraph 42:
"An increase in the number of petitions lodged must not be at the expense of proper and effective scrutiny".
I acknowledge Nigel Don's suggestion, although there is some danger in it. However, it is worth while and could be explored.
The number of petitions has dropped from its high point during the first two years of the Parliament, although it must be stressed that
"the fluctuation is not drastic."
That is a charming phrase, which I believe was inserted by the clerks. However, members expressed concern that, predominantly, petitions are still drawn from too narrow a cross-section of Scottish society. That is a problem.
However, research has revealed reasons to be optimistic if not complacent. For example, the research survey that was conducted on behalf of the committee showed that
"petitioning was seen as the most likely method of policy engagement with 89% of … respondents saying they would sign a petition."
Indeed, 78 per cent of respondents viewed petitioning
"as a positive way of getting something done and making their voices heard."
Surely that is the object. Nevertheless, a considerable challenge faces the committee and, indeed, the Parliament in raising awareness of the public petitions process at Holyrood and in encouraging much wider participation in it by all sections of our nation.
We know that the petitions system has had considerable successes down the years since 1999. For example, petition PE223 called on the Parliament to ensure that multiple sclerosis sufferers in Lothian were not denied the opportunity to be prescribed beta interferon, which led the Scottish Executive to announce that the drug would be available to all MS sufferers across Scotland. The success of petition PE1108, by Tina McGeever, on behalf of Mike Gray, guaranteed that cancer sufferers would be treated equitably across Scotland. I had the privilege of listening to Mike Gray make the case for others who, like him, were suffering from terminal illness. I will never forget his humility, dignity and courage, and his commitment to advancing the cause of his fellow citizens. None of those of us who were present will.
Those, and many others, are signal successes of our public petitions system, but although Scotland can be justly proud of them, we as parliamentarians must do more to allow more citizens across our country to make use of that democratic mechanism. A section of the population that has not, as yet, made significant use of public petitions is the young citizens of Scotland. However, there are exceptions. In petition PE1259, one of my constituents, Ryan McLaughlin of Drumchapel, highlights his shine on Scotland campaign, which calls on the Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to produce new guidelines on vitamin D supplementation for children and pregnant women, and to run an awareness campaign highlighting the benefits of vitamin D in combating MS. Ryan's hard work and inventiveness in promoting the petition, with the support of his family, has made an extremely positive impression on many young and not-so-young people across Scotland—I include my good friend Bill Kidd, along with myself, among the not so young. I am hopeful that the Scottish Government will continue to be receptive to the issues that the petition raises, and I look forward to discussing how we can assist with its advancement at our meeting on 4 November.
Despite that fine example of a young school student highlighting an issue of national importance, such instances are still too few and far between. That is why I am certain that the committee's decision to hold
"a further series of external meetings"
in 2010 is correct. As well as allowing parliamentarians to bring the work of the committee to rural and isolated parts of our country, it will—because of our policy of deliberately holding those meetings in local comprehensive schools—offer a better chance to involve young people.
I believe that that strategy is beginning to work. The two external meetings that I have been able to attend, at Fraserburgh academy and Alness academy—where this week's meeting was held—have been successful. The attendance and participation have been first class. I especially mention the petitions by young school students that have been heard at those events, which covered subjects as diverse as international aid and rural transport. That is evidence that if we make the effort to engage with citizens young and old in their communities, we will get a positive response.
However, we must acknowledge that there is much more to do if we are to achieve maximum accessibility to the process for all the people of Scotland. We must recognise that to reach that objective, we must use modern technology, when that is appropriate.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson):
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-4770, in the name of Frank McAveety, on the Public Petitions Committee's inquiry into the public petition...
John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD):
LD
It is with enormous pleasure that I open this afternoon's debate, on behalf of the Public Petitions Committee, on the report on our year-long inquiry into th...
That the Parliament notes the conclusions contained in the Public Petitions Committee’s 3rd Report, 2009 (Session 3):
Inquiry into the public petitions process (SP Paper 300).
The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Bruce Crawford):
SNP
The Government welcomes the Public Petitions Committee report on its inquiry into the petitions process. On behalf of the Government, I acknowledge the hard ...
Michael McMahon (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab):
Lab
I thank the Public Petitions Committee for providing us with this opportunity, through producing its report, to consider how far the public petitions system ...
Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con):
Con
The report that we are discussing is the culmination of a significant amount of work by the Public Petitions Committee to encourage more people throughout Sc...
Jim Hume (South of Scotland) (LD):
LD
I congratulate the Public Petitions Committee members and clerks on their hard work. Indeed, I congratulate all those who have participated in the work of th...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
I call Tricia Marwick, who will speak on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body.
Tricia Marwick (Central Fife) (SNP):
SNP
The Public Petitions Committee has done the Parliament a great service by holding its thorough inquiry into the workings of the committee and the petitions s...
Marlyn Glen (North East Scotland) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the opportunity to take part in this debate on the report on the public petitions process. The year-long inquiry has been an important piece of wor...
Nigel Don (North East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
As I expected, other members have considered the processes of engaging with the public. In the brief moments that I will have this afternoon—my speech might ...
Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab):
Lab
As a relatively new member of the Public Petitions Committee, I have pleasure in taking part in today's debate and in commending our excellent and hard-worki...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
You should be finishing now, Mr Butler.
Bill Butler:
Lab
We must all become, especially if we are to succeed in engaging our young citizens, "digital natives", as one witness said. George Reid, a former Presiding O...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
I am sorry, but you will have to finish now.
Bill Butler:
Lab
I was just about to praise George Reid, but if you do not want me to do that, I understand.
John Wilson (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
As a member of the Public Petitions Committee—I should say a voluntary member of it—it gives me pleasure to speak in this debate. I served on the committee b...
Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab):
Lab
What I like about the report is the fact that it asks over and over again what we can do better. That shows an openness and willingness to change and respond...
Anne McLaughlin (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
The founding principles of the Public Petitions Committee are centred on transparency, openness and integrity. That is why the committee has a worldwide repu...
Jim Hume:
LD
The debate has highlighted the importance of openness, transparency and accountability in the Scottish Parliament, and the need for people to hold organisati...
Jamie McGrigor (Highlands and Islands) (Con):
Con
I am pleased to sum up for the Scottish Conservatives. Like others, I pay tribute to the committee members, the clerks and other committee support staff, all...
Michael McMahon:
Lab
We have had a good debate, which has demonstrated how highly MSPs value the public petitions process. It has also demonstrated that, in debates on issues on ...
Bruce Crawford:
SNP
Since everybody else has been handing out thanks, perhaps I should start by offering thanks to the committee convener before he even gets to his feet. I look...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
The minister should conclude now.
Bruce Crawford:
SNP
I am very grateful for the opportunity to contribute to this fine debate and I very much look forward to hearing now from Frank McAveety.
Mr Frank McAveety (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab):
Lab
It is always nice to get such sweet inviting words from the Minister for Parliamentary Business.On behalf of the committee members, I thank the clerks to the...