���˿���

We would much prefer that to a cut and paste from the internet.

PE2020, which was lodged by Anne-Marie Morrison, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to provide the same fertility treatment to single women as is offered to couples on the national health service for the chance to have a family. We last considered the petition at our meeting on 28 June 2023—several petitions have come back from that date—when we agreed to write to the Fertility Network Scotland, the British Fertility Society, Fertility Scotland and the national fertility group.

The national fertility group responded to the committee in October, informing us that, at its most recent meeting, which took place in late August 2023, it received an update from Public Health Scotland on the modelling work that it is carrying out to help the group better understand the capacity implications of any future expansion of NHS in vitro fertilisation treatment for single people. At the time of the group’s submission, specific timetables could not be given for the completion of that modelling work or subsequent consideration.

The petitioner has provided a written submission, in which she highlights the support for petitions like hers across the UK. She describes the inability of a single person to access fertility treatment on the NHS in Scotland as biased and discriminatory.

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

That brings us to the consideration of new petitions. I realise that there might be people who have tuned in to watch our proceedings for the first time to hear how their petition might proceed or who are with us in the gallery for the first time. Therefore, as always, I will say that, in advance of considering a petition, we take two immediate actions. One is to seek from the Scottish Government an indicative initial response to the petition. The second is to seek a briefing on the issues that were raised by the petition from the Parliament’s independent research body, SPICe.

As a veteran of the committee in previous parliamentary sessions, I can tell you that, before we opted to take those actions, we would meet to consider a new petition?and those actions would be the first two things that we recommended we then did. All that that did was delay our consideration.

Are members content with that course of action?

Members indicated agreement.

Our next petition is PE2075, which was lodged by Stewart Noble, on behalf of Helensburgh community council. Stewart joins us in the gallery—welcome. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to prioritise local participation in planning decisions that affect the local area by providing a clear and unambiguous definition of the word “local”, in so far as it applies to planning legislation; giving community councils decision-making powers for planning applications in their local areas; and ensuring that the way in which decisions and planning applications are taken is compatible with the provisions and ethos of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015.

In the background information on the petition, Helensburgh community council highlights the example of planning applications that affected Helensburgh being approved despite opposition from the community council and a majority of local ward councillors on the planning committee. The SPICe briefing, to which I referred a moment ago, sets out the process for determining planning applications, which includes the requirement for planning authorities to provide community councils with a weekly list of applications for developments in their areas. A planning authority must also consult community councils on proposed developments that are likely to affect the amenity of their area.

In its response to the petition, the Scottish Government notes the consultation that has taken place on “Effective Community Engagement in Local Development Planning Guidance”, as well as the recent amendments that were made by the Planning (Scotland) Act 2019 to increase the opportunities for individuals and community bodies to engage in the planning process, including by preparing local place plans for their own areas.

In addition, the Scottish Government has suggested that extending powers to determine planning applications to community councils would require comprehensive revisions to existing legislation, and that the Government is not minded to consider such a fundamental change to the planning system at this time.

We have received a submission from the petitioner in response to the Scottish Government’s response, in which the community council expresses concern that the “engagement” and “participation” that are referred to are simply part of a box-ticking exercise. The petitioner has also clarified that his proposal for providing community councils with decision-making powers on planning decisions would involve a number of community councillors becoming members of local authority planning committees, with full voting powers, to assist in determining planning applications in their area.

We are joined by Jackie Baillie, as we are again considering a petition that is of interest to her community and constituents. I am happy to invite her to address the committee.

We have suggestions there. Are committee members agreed?

Members indicated agreement.

We thank the petitioner for raising the issue, and I hope that they have drawn some comfort from the response from the Government.

Are members content with that suggested action?

Members indicated agreement.

That was in London. At this point, we have had no suggestion to that effect.

We now move into private session.

Agenda item 2 is consideration of continued petitions. The first of those is PE1975, which is on reforming the law relating to strategic lawsuits against public participation—commonly referred to as SLAPPs. The petition was lodged by Roger Mullin and it calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to review and amend the law to prevent the use of strategic lawsuits against public participation.

We last considered the petition at our meeting on 17 April 2024. At that point, we heard evidence from Professor Justin Borg-Barthet, Graeme Johnston, Roger Mullin and Ahsan Mustafa. I again thank our witnesses from that session for their evidence.

This morning, after our various considerations, I am pleased to welcome Siobhian Brown MSP, who is the Minister for Victims and Community Safety; Martin Brown, who is a solicitor with the Scottish Government’s legal directorate; and Michael Paparakis, who is the policy and bill programme manager at the Scottish Government’s private law unit.

I understand that, before we move to questions, the minister wants to make a short statement.