���˿���

I suggest that we write to stakeholders, seeking their views on the actions asked for in the petition. The committee could write to the Brain Charity, Chest Heart & Stroke Scotland, PoTS UK, Professor Alan Carson and NHS National Services Scotland. We could also write to the petitioner, alerting them to the funding schemes that are available through the chief scientist office.

I suggest that we write to the Scottish Government to ask how it intends to engage with stakeholders in its delivery of the commitment to explore options for the development of an accredited qualification and registration programme for additional support needs assistants, and how the petitioner can engage with the pupil support staff working group.

We could also write to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, seeking a view on the issues that are raised in the petition and requesting information on the frequency and cost of equal pay claims that have been lodged in relation to education support staff roles. In addition, we could write to the Scottish Social Services Council, seeking a view on the issues that are raised in the petition and requesting information on the requirements for and processes of registration.

Once again, this petition deals with a very live situation and set of circumstances. In its responses, the Scottish Government has indicated what it is trying to achieve, but it would be useful to get some further detail on the anticipated timescales for expanding early learning and childcare provision to one and two-year-olds. That will give us more clarity on where we stand and an idea of how to progress matters in the future.

Thank you, gentlemen, for your comprehensive comments. You have identified—there is no question about it—that the industry is in crisis and that, without the proper support mechanisms in place, we will see the demise of some of it. We have already seen reductions as a result of the pandemic, and you talked eloquently about the demographics and the age profile situation.

The Scottish Government has to give you support mechanisms. We have touched on some of the grants and the areas in which proposals have been made. However, do you believe that there is room for more incentives to ensure that the sector can be supported? If those grants are not sufficient or not equivalent to what is happening elsewhere, you will be at a disadvantage in comparison with other locations across the United Kingdom. The Scottish Government has a role and responsibility to act to support you.

It would be good to hear, therefore, what more you think could be done by the Scottish Government and what it should be looking at, perhaps thinking outside the box, to try to support you and do what is required.

As I said earlier, and as you identified, if that does not take place sooner rather than later, there will be sections of the community that no longer have the support mechanisms for taxis that have been enjoyed in the past.

I am content to support Mr Torrance’s calls, convener. As you indicated in your opening remarks, there is no doubt that the cost of living crisis will have a knock-on effect on all of this, and there might well be a need to clarify what will be developed in the housing bill so that we can make progress. Without that, the situation could spiral into a much larger issue for many local authorities and individuals.

Thank you.

Minister, in your written evidence, you talk about individuals needing the “skills, knowledge and experience” to ensure that a board does its work. However, that might limit the number of individuals who are able to participate in the process to those from a specific circle or a specific location. That causes some difficulty. Is there an opportunity for training to influence that process, so that individuals can be given extra support that gives them the chance? Otherwise, you will exclude individuals from the pool when it might be advantageous for them to get the chance to participate.

This is a very important petition. I know that it talks primarily about Glasgow, but there are other locations across Scotland where people are suffering from the blight of violence and where young people who find it difficult to assimilate what they should or want to do choose to go out and be involved in antisocial behaviour and vandalism, which can sometimes lead to violence. The petitioner has given us some strong examples of what is taking place and has highlighted how social media is being used to publicise and promote some of these things. That, too, is a dangerous development.

I suggest that, as a first step, the committee might wish to seek evidence from those with lived experience across the board, because that will give us an opportunity to have further discussions with individuals about the details of the situation and to hear about certain circumstances. There is also a role for community safety, the police and other authorities to play in all of this, so it would be very useful for some of those people to be involved and to participate, too.

I agree. The federation makes some strong and valid points in the petition. It would be more appropriate for the petition to be considered by the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee, given that that committee is already looking into inshore fisheries issues. That is the right place for it, because that committee will look at the issue in much more depth and with the appropriate precision.

This is an area that requires to be looked at in a little bit more depth in order to get more clarity, so I suggest that we write to the JCVI to ask whether it has any plans to review the need for, and the value of, the catch-up immunisation programme for males aged 25 and younger. I also suggest that we write to the Teenage Cancer Trust, Jo’s Cervical Cancer Trust, Young Scot and the Men’s Health Forum to seek their views on the issues raised by the petition. All of that would be of interest to us in clarifying things and seeing what would be required in future.