���˿���

The next of our petitions is PE2176, lodged by Warren Mitchell, calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to introduce penalties for organisations that fail to comply with Mental Welfare Commission recommendations in relation to duty of candour.

The petitioner submitted the petition after the tragic loss of his wife. He believes that there were organisational failures surrounding the circumstances that should have been addressed. The petitioner believes that the Mental Welfare Commission lacks the necessary powers to take organisations to task when recommendations for improvement are not actioned.

The Scottish Government’s response to the petition highlights that the Scottish mental health law review recommended strengthening the commission’s powers. The suggestions included that the legislation should include a level of direct accountability to the Scottish Parliament. That would include the power to make a report to Parliament if there is a serious failure by a public body, including the Scottish Government, to follow a recommendation. The review also recommended that the MWC should have the power to initiate legal proceedings to protect the human rights of any person or group that is covered by mental health and capacity law.

The response notes that the Scottish Government previously considered whether the legislation should be amended to include sanctions or penalties against organisations that fail to comply with the law, but it concluded that legislation is already in place that would hold organisations to account, if it was deemed necessary. The Scottish Government is therefore not minded to amend the regulations or the overarching legislation to include sanctions or penalties. The submission also points out that health professionals are subject to professional standards relating to their own profession, and that they can be subjected to an investigation and disciplinary action from their own regulatory body should they be found to be in breach of their obligations.

The Scottish Government states that it will consider strengthening the powers and responsibilities of the Mental Welfare Commission within the context of a wider long-term reform to mental health law.

This is a petition that has been motivated by tragic personal circumstances, and where we can go is identified for us.

We thank the petitioner and hope that the development of the code of conduct will address the matter in hand.

The next continued petition is PE2084, which was lodged by Randall Graeme Kilgour Foggie. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to amend the Burial and Cremation (Scotland) Act 2016 to allow alkaline hydrolysis, accelerated composting and other more eco-friendly methods of disposal of human cadavers. We last considered the petition on 5 March 2025, at which point we had all of that explained to us, and we agreed to write to the Scottish Government.

The Scottish Government’s response states that an alkaline hydrolysis regulations working group has been established and that its first meeting took place on 3 March 2025. It is currently expected that draft regulations will be laid later in 2025, although the exact date is still to be decided. The eventual timeline will be informed by the considerations of the group and the development of the regulations.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

Those seem to be the asks of the petitioner. Are colleagues content that we close the petition on that basis?

Members indicated agreement.

I would only say to Mr Golden that he coined the phrase “circular economy” in the Parliament, and I hope that they are the last two words that he says before he departs the chamber in 2026.

I thank Mr Mountain.

We thank the petitioner very much for raising the issue, but there is clearly no time for us to adequately pursue the petition in the balance of the parliamentary session.

Either the code of conduct will address the issue or it will not, and the petitioner could return the issue to us. Do colleagues agree with Mr Torrance’s proposal?

Members indicated agreement.

Are we content to support Mr Torrance’s proposal?

Members indicated agreement.

The first new petition for consideration is PE2172, which has been lodged by Sarah McFadzean. A representative is in the gallery on her behalf this morning. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to amend council tax regulations to allow late banding alteration proposals in exceptional personal or compassionate circumstances such as bereavement, illness, sudden house moves or lack of rights awareness, particularly among tenants.

The SPICe briefing for the petition explains that, when someone moves into a new home, they can apply to have their council tax band changed if they think that their property is in the wrong band. This application or “proposal” must be made to the local assessor within six months of the person becoming liable for council tax on that property, which I suspect every MSP is aware of because they will have received representations on the matter. If the proposal is received outwith the statutory time limits, the assessor must deem it invalid. People have six months to make such an application, which is not necessarily properly understood.

The Scottish Government response confirms that existing regulations do not grant discretion to extend the statutory period for proposals in exceptional circumstances for personal or compassionate reasons. The Government states that, because each assessor has an on-going duty to maintain an accurate council tax valuation list, anyone could request a review, and possibly a correction, of the list itself based on potential error and without a time limit restriction.

However, as shown in the SPICe briefing, the Scottish Assessors Association suggests that the band review process

“is not a legislative option in Scotland”,

whereas the proposal process is set out in existing legislation. Additionally, evidence presented to the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee earlier this year showed that assessors are already under pressure with existing workloads.

The Scottish Government is currently conducting wider work on council tax reform in collaboration with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and based on research that was commissioned by the Institute for Fiscal Studies. The Government intends for that comprehensive work to inform a debate in the Scottish Parliament, which will shape proposals for the next Parliament to consider, in early 2026. Members might, in fact, recall that we have recently closed a different petition on that exact basis, which is that the issue will be the subject of a statement, a debate and a paper ahead of dissolution, with recommendations to follow next year. Now that I have said it, I do not know whether the Government will do all those things, but a paper will certainly be published that sets out the options.

Do colleagues have any suggestions as to how we might proceed? It is a new petition, but we have to look at it in the light of our ability to proceed.

We have run over our scheduled time quite a bit, but the discussion has been fascinating and productive. The issues arising from these petitions have been ones that the committee has been quite actively engaged with over the course of the Parliament, for a variety of reasons. They are very important, and I am very grateful for everything that you have been able to contribute this morning.

I will suspend the meeting briefly before we move on to the next item. Thank you again.