���˿���

I thank the petitioner for her evidence and for her courage in saying what she has said today.

You have talked about failures such as being abandoned and being let down by the whole process, and you want to see changes and a review. The Scottish Government has already put in place some measures that you are probably well aware of. We have talked about suicide prevention, and there is also the final report of the Scottish mental health law review. You have probably seen all of those things.

What else would you like to see? You have talked today about some of the experiences of individuals. As we know, men seem to make up a much larger percentage of those who experience suicide situations and circumstances. You have touched on what you would like the review to deal with. I want to go back over where you think the gaps are, and where you would want to see the review progressing.

As you have said, it has been quite a journey, but a very informative one. It is good that a reasonably large number of local authorities have come back to us to indicate where they stand and what the situation is.

It is appropriate that we now write to the Scottish Government to highlight the evidence that we have received and to set out recommendations for addressing the issues raised in the petition. I suggest that we also write to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee and the Rural Affairs, Islands and Natural Environment Committee to share the evidence and our recommendations.

Members can clarify that with the committee clerks, who can put the information together. As I said, we have all been involved in what has been a very in-depth process, and it has been really quite successful. As a committee member, I have certainly learned a lot more about the whole issue, and it is vitally important that we can now give the evidence to the Scottish Government to highlight the issues that we have found.

Yes, absolutely.

We are now at the stage that, under standing order 17.5, the petition can be closed, on the basis that NatureScot routinely issues licence refusals, and that it has stated that its approach

“is always to explain to the applicants the reasons for the refusals against the relevant legal tests”,

which can include the objectives.

Also, a conservation objective would not apply to every licensing refusal, and therefore setting a mandatory requirement for NatureScot to include that in every refusal would not be appropriate.? For those reasons, I think that the petition should be closed under standing order 17.5.

You have all identified that the victim in the process is the person who has to go through the trauma again when they go to court. They are being abused in another way, because for them the whole situation re-emerges. How that is managed and how the person is supported is another big issue that we need to think about.

You have identified that training requires to take place, but at the same time, the focus should be on making sure that the victim gets the support that she requires from the agencies that provide such support. We are hearing that, at times, women do not have confidence in what is happening with the police. They do not have that confidence because they feel that they will have to go through the trauma again, which prevents them from dealing with the situation. They then end up staying in the relationship because they feel that they cannot get out of it or because they are bound, financially, and the coercive behaviour continues.

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.

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.

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.

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.