���˿���

That brings us to PE2068, which was lodged by John Dare, and calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to commission an independent review of public sector salaries of more than £100,000 per annum and to introduce an appropriate cap.

We last considered the petition at our meeting on 20 March 2024, when we agreed to write to the Scottish Government seeking a fuller response to the issues that are raised in the petition. The Government response reiterates that pay restraint for the highest paid, and targeted uplifts for the lowest paid, have been key principles of the Scottish Government’s approach to public sector pay for many years and states that many public sector staff earning more than £100,000 are highly qualified and experienced.

The Scottish Government’s review of the chief executive framework was published in October 2024 and states that the framework will be updated with the review’s recommendations. The review found that pay restraint for higher-paid employees has been achieved and recommends that restraint should continue on a looser basis. The Scottish Government is of the view that undertaking an independent review of all senior pay of more than £100,000 across the public sector would, it itself, come at a significant cost and therefore does not feel that conducting an independent review would be a good use of public money at this time.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

In the light of that, are we content to close the petition?

That is a fair and reasonable point. The same situation has occurred previously. The committee is not expressing a view about the merits or otherwise of the petition, with which we might be very sympathetic; the issue is whether, in light of the information that we have been able to gather, we feel that there is a route forward for the committee to advance the petition’s aims. Mr Torrance’s conclusion, which Mr Ewing supports, is that the blunt fact is that the Scottish Government is not minded to do anything on the issue. Therefore, there is nothing more that the committee can do, however much we may have direct sympathy with the petition’s aims and regret having to close it.

Mr Golden has made some suggestions. Do colleagues have any other suggestions? Are we content to proceed on the basis that Mr Golden has identified?

Members indicated agreement.

Agenda item 3 is consideration of new petitions. Mr Ruskell has been sitting very patiently with us, so I will go straight to the second of the two new petitions, so that he can be released from the meeting to attend to other business.

As I always do, I say to anyone who might be tuning in to the committee because their petition is being considered for the first time, that, in advance of consideration, the committee invites the Scottish Parliament’s independent research unit, the Scottish Parliament information centre, to give us an understanding of the issues that have been raised. We also invite the Scottish Government to give us a preliminary view on the issues that have been raised, which may or may not influence the committee’s conclusions. We do both those things because, historically, when the committee considered a petition for the first time, those were the two things that we said that we would do and that delayed our consideration. So, for those who are watching, those actions have already taken place.

Are members content?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms White.

Are we agreed on the wider set of suggestions, colleagues?

Members indicated agreement.

We thank the petitioner very much, but, in the light of the Government’s response, we will move to close the petition.

Our next petition is PE2017, which was lodged by Margaret Reid. It calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to amend section 24 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 to extend maternal health support beyond one year; to introduce a family liaison function at adult mental health units across all health board areas; to introduce specialised perinatal community teams that meet perinatal quality network standard type 1 across all health board areas; and to establish a mother and baby unit in the north-east of Scotland.

We are joined for our consideration of the petition by our colleague Tess White. Good morning, Tess.

We most recently considered the petition at our meeting on 17 April, when we agreed to write to the Minister for Social Care, Mental Wellbeing and Sport. We requested an update on publication of the options appraisal report, and the minister stated that it would be published in due course. However, we understand that, notwithstanding what the minister said, no report has yet been published.

The minister’s response also highlights that development of a draft service specification for perinatal mental health services has been identified as a priority area. The minister states her intention to provide £85,000 “in this financial year”—the clerks have confirmed that that means the financial year that we are currently in—to support the first phase of work to develop intensive treatment services for perinatal women, their infants and their families in the north of Scotland.

Before I ask colleagues for their comments, I invite Tess White to address the committee.