���˿���

Mr Ewing has a final quick follow-up question.

That is a fair point and I am happy that we seek to accommodate that. That was not the suggestion that I had expected from Mr Torrance.

PE1916, lodged by Councillors Douglas Philand and Donald Kelly, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to instigate a public inquiry regarding the political and financial management of the A83 Rest and Be Thankful project, which is due to provide a permanent solution for the route.

We last considered the petition on 17 May 2023, after which we wrote to the Minister for Transport. However, since our previous considerations, Transport Scotland has announced the preferred route for a long-term solution. The then minister, who is now Cabinet Secretary for Transport, provided details of the preferred route in her response. The response also notes that the proposed medium-term solution is a temporary solution that is intended to add resilience and operational benefits while the permanent solution is constructed.

We have also received a submission from the petitioner raising concerns about whether the preferred route option is the right choice, and how the solution will be funded, particularly if a new government has different spending priorities.

There will always be a view as to what the right choice would be. The important thing here is that we now have a preferred option for both temporary and long-term solutions. I wonder how we might take the matter forward. Do colleagues have any suggestions?

Thank you very much. That was an interesting petition. We will keep it open and we will undertake the inquiries that we have just set out.

PE2058, on requiring all dog boarding kennels to install smoke detectors, smoke alarms and sprinkler systems, was lodged by Julie Louden. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to improve fire safety in dog boarding kennels by mandating the installation of smoke detectors, smoke alarms and sprinkler systems.

The SPICe briefing explains that animal boarding establishments in Scotland must be licensed by local authorities under the Animal Boarding Establishments Act 1963. That act requires that, in determining whether to grant a licence, a local authority shall have regard to the need for securing that appropriate steps will be taken for the protection of the animals in case of fire or another emergency. Conditions set at a local authority level can include more detailed requirements. However, I very much doubt that sprinkler systems were too widely applied or even available in 1963.

The Scottish Government recently consulted on proposals to revoke the Animal Boarding Establishments Act 1963 and instead regulate animal boarding under the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (Scotland) Regulations 2021. Its response to the petition states that that approach is being considered and that it could provide a more cohesive and robust framework for ensuring the wellbeing of animals that are being cared for.

The issue and the petition are important.

Those suggestions seem to be very worth while.

PE2059, on ensuring that pedestrian crossings cannot be disabled without an equivalent safety measure being in place, was lodged by Lachlan McDowall. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce legislation that requires that, during road works or at any other point where a pedestrian crossing is disabled or otherwise bypassed, measures to allow alternative pedestrian traffic flow are put in place, and any broken-down or otherwise disabled crossing is rectified or has an alternative in place within 24 hours of being reported. The petition was prompted by experience of a pedestrian crossing on a busy road outside a primary school being deactivated.

The SPICe briefing and the Scottish Government’s response note that “Safety at Street Works and Road Works: A Code of Practice” requires anyone who is undertaking works that require a pedestrian crossing to be suspended to agree with the roads authority what, if any, alternative arrangements will be provided for users of the crossing prior to its suspension. It is also noted that those who are undertaking works are required to take specific consideration of the needs of pedestrians, particularly the needs of those with small children and pushchairs and those with reduced mobility. That includes visually impaired people and people who use wheelchairs or mobility scooters.

Do members have any suggestions?

Do members agree to that approach?

Members indicated agreement.

Agenda item 2 is consideration of continued petitions, the first of which is PE1947, which was lodged by Alex O’Kane, on addressing Scotland’s culture of youth violence. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to address the disturbing culture of youth violence in Scotland.

When we last considered this petition, we took evidence from Dr Fern Gillon and Dr Susan Batchelor, and the committee has had a meeting with an Edinburgh-based youth group, 6VT, which is just off the Grassmarket. We also visited Milton in Glasgow, where we met the petitioner with our parliamentary colleague Bob Doris in attendance. At that meeting, we heard from families—not necessarily from the Milton area; there were people from Fife present—who had had direct experience of the issues raised in the petition, and some of their evidence, which was given anonymously, was, for committee members, very harrowing to hear. However, we were extraordinarily impressed with the courage of the individuals and their families and the candour of their evidence, and I would like to thank all those who were prepared to meet us.

I am delighted to welcome our witnesses to the committee this morning: Emily Beever—[Interruption.] I have suddenly noticed that my notes were missing—they were on a different page. We have with us Emily Beever, senior development officer, No Knives, Better Lives and Will Linden, deputy head and head of analysis, Scottish Violence Reduction Unit, and I am also delighted to welcome Jonathan Watters, community policing inspector, Police Scotland. Welcome, all, and thank you for being present.

Our questions probably arise out of the different evidence sessions that we have held. I know that you are not a conglomerate, so if you have a particular view that you would like to express, just let me know that you want to come in and I will invite you to do so.

What does the available evidence tell us about the level of involvement of children and young people as perpetrators of violent behaviour? Obviously we have heard examples, but our academics did not think that it was a significant issue, particularly in relation to young people. If these perpetrators are there, are they teenagers, or younger or older than that? Secondly, is there some easily identified universal relevant factor that you can point to as the source of such behaviour, or is it much more complicated than that and not something that can be summarised simplistically by saying that it is to do with, say, deprivation, family or whatever? I would be interested in knowing that.

Who would like to kick off? It is quite a general introductory question—a starter for three, perhaps.

I want to illustrate that point with the evidence from one of those young people from whom we heard. She was a 12-year-old girl who was vulnerable. She was befriended on social media and invited to meet the individual by whom she had been befriended. She found that, in fact, she had been invited to an appointment where there was a crowd of people. She was then physically assaulted. The incident was filmed. She was left unconscious. She was hospitalised. Her parents did not recognise her when they saw her in hospital. The video of the assault was posted, not anonymously but with the names of all those involved attached. They did that because, in their minds, if you are under 25 the procurator will not take forward any action against you. Therefore, they felt that they could do that with impunity. By thinking that way and by promoting that view, they are encouraging others to do the same.

I accept that, in that case, social media is a tool that is being used by people who are disposed towards that kind of violence, but it struck me that the more that there is a belief, rightly or wrongly, that that process as it was described is accurate, the more it will encourage more of the same, because the people perpetuating the violence felt empowered. However appalling it might be, they felt that it made them untouchable and gave them status within their peer group. That is an example of what you and David Torrance are talking about that we heard about directly. It was very difficult not to be profoundly struck by it.