���˿���

I agree.

I wonder whether the committee would consider writing to the Scottish Government to ask for its views on the petitioner’s request to abolish absolute discharge in cases of rape or sexual assault and to introduce a statutory minimum sentence for those offences.

Yes. I also wonder whether the committee would consider writing to Victim Support Scotland and Rape Crisis seeking their views on the action called for in the petition. As Mr MacGregor has already highlighted, I would like to inform the petitioner about the Scottish Sentencing Council’s consultation on the draft sentencing guidelines on rape—although I have no doubt that the petitioner is already engaged with that process.

As a member of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee, I can confirm that we are already looking into and reviewing gender identity services for children and young people. I wonder whether the committee would consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee is currently taking evidence on the independent review of gender identity services for children and young people, including hearing evidence from the chief medical officer at the end of October.

I bow to Mr Golden’s suggestion but, in that case, I wonder whether we could also write to the teaching unions to get their views on the matter. It is their members who will be engaging with it.

Considering that the Scottish Government has recently published new guidelines setting out what schools may wish to consider when developing policy on mobile phone usage and engaging with parents, carers and the wider school community, and the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills has stated that the Scottish Government cannot unilaterally ban mobile phones in schools as that is a policy decision resting with headteachers and local authorities, I wonder whether the committee would consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders.

As somebody who uses forestry car parks quite a lot in Aviemore and other places, I know that there are additional pressures as a result of the numbers of people who are turning up to the beautiful locations and trails. We know that £5.8 million is spent on repairing or restoring the car parks, but they bring in only £1 million in revenue.

I think that we should close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders on the basis that car parking charges have been in place at popular Forestry and Land Scotland sites for more than 20 years. The decision to increase the number of Forestry and Land Scotland sites where car parking charges apply followed the Scottish Government’s challenge to public bodies to actively seek to increase income from visitors in order to offset the increasing costs of managing visitor pressures. Abolishing parking charges at Forestry and Land Scotland sites would have a substantial impact on its finances. Forestry and Land Scotland highlights that the cost of managing trails and car parks is considerably more than the income that it receives from parking charges and that two thirds of its car parks will remain free for use by the public.

I will break with tradition here: I think that the issue is one that the committee could take forward. It is a very important issue. Defibrillators save lives. I am surprised that not every school in Scotland has them. Therefore, I suggest that the committee considers writing to the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health to highlight the UK Government’s provision of defibrillators to all schools in England and to ask whether the Scottish Government will provide direct funding for primary and secondary schools to purchase and install defibrillators.

In light of the evidence and the collaboration between Glasgow City Council and the taxi trade, the committee should close the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government outlined a number of funding options available to support drivers in the taxi trade; that grace periods where the LEZ restrictions are in place but penalties are not applied have been implemented in Glasgow and could be applied by other local authorities if they wish to do so; that Glasgow City Council has developed a mechanism for eligible taxi operators to receive a temporary exemption to the LEZ in order to provide more time to comply; and that Transport Scotland has been engaging with Unite the union to discuss issues pertaining to the taxi trade, particularly in relation to the LEZ.

Given the Scottish Government’s response, it is, as you said, pretty clear that it does not intend to legislate in this area. Therefore, will the committee consider closing the petition under rule 15.7 of standing orders, on the basis that the Scottish Government has no intention of legislating to include the sustainable cultural use of natural resources under section 16 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and because NatureScot provides detailed licensing guidance that includes specific guidance on the interpretation of the “no other satisfactory solution” test and which takes into consideration European Court of Justice case law?