���˿���

Are members generally content with the proposals that have been made?

Members indicated agreement.

Are we all content with those suggestions?

Members indicated agreement.

You would be ripping the sod, to extend your current penchant for ripping into things. Out of interest, Mr Ewing, in your experience, is peat traditionally extracted from the crofters’ own land? Where do crofters take the peat from for domestic use?

Are members content with the suggestions that have been made?

Members indicated agreement.

PE1946, which was lodged by Sean Clerkin, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to use general taxation to pay for all charges for homeless temporary accommodation, including writing off the £33.3 million debt that is owed by homeless people for temporary accommodation to local authorities.

Since our previous consideration of the petition, the Scottish Government’s temporary accommodation task and finish group published its report on 30 March this year. The group made two recommendations about charges for temporary accommodation, and those are available in the clerk’s note. In response to our recent correspondence, the Scottish Government stated that

“provisions to prohibit local authorities from charging individuals for the provision of temporary accommodation have not been considered for inclusion”

in the housing bill, and that it has

“no plans to pay for homeless temporary accommodation nor waive the outstanding debt owed”.

Shelter Scotland’s written submission outlines a number of issues, including its view that a change in the financing of temporary accommodation is overdue. The petitioner’s recent submissions highlight concerns about the repossession of family homes resulting in record amounts of homelessness in Scotland, and his submission outlines information that has been received through a freedom of information request to Glasgow City Council. He states that the system is “unworkable and broken now” and that means that thousands of people need help immediately.

I invite colleagues to suggest any way in which we might proceed.

Not on a motorcycle, I trust. [Laughter.]

Thank you, Mr Ewing. I am sure that cups of coffee or something stronger have been raised in toast to your splendid defence.

I do not disagree with any of that. Where good practice is in place, all the positive attributes and advantages that were identified in everything that you have said apply. The issue is simply that, where that is perhaps not the case, residents find themselves in a difficult position—they are not entirely clear as to what they can do, and they find that quite a difficult atmosphere can obtain in trying to take matters forward. So, with an understanding of the very valuable work that is done, are we nonetheless content to proceed on the basis that has been recommended?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you very much. We will keep the petition open and proceed accordingly.

Agenda item 2 is consideration of continued petitions, the first of which, PE1887, was lodged by Nicola Murray and calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to create an unborn victims of violence act, creating a specific offence that enables courts to hand down longer sentences for perpetrators of domestic violence that causes miscarriage.

At our previous consideration of the petition, on 23 November 2022, we heard evidence from the petitioner, Nicola Murray, and key stakeholders. The committee agreed to recommend that the Scottish Government creates a specific statutory offence and/or aggravator for causing miscarriage through acts of domestic violence. We also recommended that, in its forthcoming report on the provisions of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018, the Scottish Government should include a review and evaluation of the effectiveness of the current legal framework in bringing forward and prosecuting charges where miscarriage is caused.

The committee also wrote to the Scottish Sentencing Council, requesting that the evidence gathered be taken into account as part of the council’s development of sentencing guidelines. We have since had confirmation from the SSC that it will consider the committee’s evidence as part of its work.

The response from the then Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans was that he would take time to fully consider the implications of any proposed changes before considering any next steps, including the potential for wider consultation. He said that officials were already exploring potential policy options and that he would welcome meeting the petitioner once that work is concluded. The cabinet secretary’s response refers to a recent report on the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018 but notes that it

“does not include a review of the effectiveness of the current framework in bringing forward and prosecuting charges where miscarriage is caused.”

A little bit of work has taken place and been forthcoming in the wake of the evidence that we took from Nicola Murray. Do members have any questions, comments or suggestions that we might consider in relation to that?

PE1971, on taking robust action to stop motorcycle theft, was lodged by Kenneth Clayton. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to prevent and reduce motorcycle theft by empowering the police to pursue and tactically engage thieves, and by reviewing sentencing policy to allow the courts to implement tougher punishment for those convicted of motorcycle theft, including the use of mandatory custodial sentences for those carrying weapons or groups who threaten individuals with violence.

We most recently considered the petition on 21 December, when we agreed to seek information from Police Scotland, the Scottish Police Authority and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. Police Scotland has provided further detail on operation Soteria, which focused on tackling motorcycle theft and related antisocial behaviour across Edinburgh. Police Scotland also shared information on the work that its prevention, interventions and partnership team, in collaboration with others, is taking forward on the issue, which members will have read with interest.

The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service noted that there is no specific common-law offence of theft of a motorcycle but that it had used its database to identify 47 charges related to motorcycle theft over the past five years. Interestingly, it also noted that 32 per cent of the relevant police reports originated from the Edinburgh area, where operation Soteria was in place.

The Scottish Police Authority’s response mentions that recent reports highlight an overall increase in vehicle crime but that that is not specifically attributed to motorcycle theft. The SPA also noted that, in the past year, more than 1,800 motorcycle riders have been stopped in order to engage, educate and encourage what are described as appropriate attitudes and behaviours on the road.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?