���˿���

It is good to have that on the record.

Yes, that aspect is at the heart of the petition.

Mr Borg-Barthet, I want to understand—you alluded to this—the extent to which the issue is a problem about legal threats rather than about court action. Is that where the centre of gravity is in this matter?

Good morning and welcome to the fourth meeting in 2024 of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee. Our first agenda item is a formal decision simply to agree to take in private agenda items 4 and 5. Item 4 relates to a request concerning an anonymous submission and item 5 is to consider the evidence that we are shortly to hear. Are colleagues content to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

You have lived all your life with the species being part of our natural habitat and you obviously have a passion for them. What characterises the appeal of the lapwing, the curlew and the capercaillie for you?

People in Teesdale will be aware of what is happening in Scotland in comparison. What observations have they made about the impact that see in Scotland? What concerns do they have as a consequence?

Is there anything further that you would like to say to us, Mr Hogg?

Thank you for taking the trouble to come in and join us. On behalf of the committee, I thank you for your service to the countryside and the species that inhabit it. Your passion is evident from your petition and we are all grateful for that.

I will suspend the meeting briefly.

Our next continued petition is PE1900, on access to prescribed medication for detainees in police custody. The petition, which was lodged by Kevin John Lawson, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that all detainees in police custody can access their prescribed medication, including methadone, in line with existing relevant operational procedures and guidance.

Colleagues will remember that this is an important petition that we last considered at our meeting on 31 May 2023. Members will recall that concerns were raised about NHS Grampian and an inspection of police custody units in NHS Lanarkshire. The then Minister for Drugs and Alcohol Policy committed to conducting a rapid review of each health board to ascertain the extent of issues relating to controlled drug licences across Scotland.

We have since received an update on the outcome of that review, which revealed that Grampian, Lanarkshire, Western Isles, Dumfries and Galloway, Orkney and Shetland national health service boards did not have controlled drug licences. NHS Western Isles and NHS Dumfries and Galloway confirmed that they have existing practices to prescribe medication that do not require a controlled drug licence. NHS Grampian was striving to submit an application by the end of May 2023. NHS Highland submitted an application and was awaiting a Home Office inspection. NHS Lanarkshire was in the process of seeking a licence, as the custody suites in Motherwell and Coatbridge did not have a licence.

NHS Orkney and NHS Shetland have planned a review of the supply of medications in custody facilities, which will help to inform whether they require a licence. That review was due to conclude six months from the time of writing. The response also revealed that NHS Orkney and NHS Shetland could not confirm that they had written policies and effective practices in place to ensure that every detainee has access to their prescribed medication. NHS Western Isles stated that it would create a pathway for prescribing controlled drugs to patients in custody.

We understand from the clerks that an update on each health board has been shared directly with the petitioner—not very recently, but more recently than the update that the committee received—and the petitioner has since provided us with a further written submission. Colleagues will recall that the petition led to an admission by the Scottish Government that we could not demonstrate that prisoners in detention were receiving the medication to which they were entitled and that this had led to a tragic outcome in one case.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

I think that I am right in saying that the update that the petitioner received was in his capacity as a constituent of a minister. It would be useful—essential, in fact—for the committee to have as up to date a position as possible on the petition, which we have identified as important.

Are we agreed on Mr Torrance’s recommendation?

Members indicated agreement.

PE1947, which was lodged by Alex O’Kane, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to address the disturbing culture of youth violence in Scotland. We last considered the petition at our meeting on 21 February 2024.

To date, the committee has gathered a range of evidence on the petition from youth group 6VT, the petitioner, families with direct experience of youth violence, and the academics Dr Gillon and Dr Batchelor. At the most recent evidence session, we heard from Police Scotland, No Knives, Better Lives and the Scottish Violence Reduction Unit. I thank all those who have contributed to date.

Those who have contributed to previous sessions have been watching our round-table and evidence sessions, and we have received a further submission from the petitioner challenging the evidence that he heard from the academics that violence is stable and low. The petitioner’s submission points to issues with reporting and states his view that it is

“more difficult than ever to report a crime”.

We have had an opportunity to reflect on the evidence that we heard. I am sure that we want to keep the petition open and pursue the issues. Do colleagues have any comments or suggestions as to what we might do?