{"links":{"self":"https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions.json?page=26&state=closed","first":"https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions.json?state=closed","last":"https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions.json?page=26&state=closed","next":null,"prev":"https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions.json?page=25&state=closed"},"data":[{"type":"petition","pe_number":"PE1858","links":{"self":"https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions/PE1858.json"},"attributes":{"title":"Provide free face masks for everyone in Scotland","summary":"Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to to provide free face masks for everyone in Scotland during the COVID-19 pandemic.\r\n","background_information":"As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic there are thousands of people losing their jobs who can't afford to make ends meet. They are having to choose between feeding their families or paying the electricity and gas. They cannot afford to pay for even cheap masks such as those priced at 10 for £5.\r\n\r\nThis is also an issue for the homeless. In city centres and towns these poor souls can't afford a cup of tea never mind face masks. I also know a great deal off people on benefits that can't afford face masks.\r\n\r\nAccording to scientists, disposable face masks are no longer effective after wearing for around 35 minutes, or until wet.\r\n\r\nI'm calling on the Scottish government to have a bit off empathy and make these masks free. It is in the public interest to eradicate this virus. We must all play our part but this is not possible when you have to pay for a face covering.\r\n\r\nI think the Scottish Government should show the rest of the world what we can do for the poorest in society. Please make these masks free for everyone in Scotland. This will stop the spread of this fatal virus.\r\n","petitioner":"Alex Wallace","status":"closed","signature_count":26,"created_at":"2021-02-18T08:57:00.000Z","updated_at":"2021-09-07T15:41:49.150Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-02-18T14:15:00.000Z","under_consideration_at":"2021-02-18T14:15:00.000Z","closed_at":"2021-09-07T15:41:49.149Z","archived_at":null,"submitted_on_paper":false,"submitted_on":null,"creator_name":"Alex Wallace","rejection":null,"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","pe_number":"PE1852","links":{"self":"https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions/PE1852.json"},"attributes":{"title":"Increase planning protection for Scottish battlefields","summary":"Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to designate historic battlefields with a heritage status and implement a stricter planning framework to protect them.\r\n","background_information":"Since the planning application at Viewhill, near Culloden, was approved, there has been an increase of applications for holiday resorts and residential proposals that, if granted, would see a huge increase in the footprint of development at Culloden Moor. We are aware from our contact with other groups that this is not an issue unique to Culloden Moor battlefield. Other areas of historical significance are under threat from developers across Scotland.\r\n\r\nWe do not believe that current planning law/regulations safeguards sites of historic significance. We believe planning applications for such sites should be considered out-with the routine planning considerations, and that a more stringent procedure be established, in order to preserve them for future generations. \r\n\r\nThere is usually no shortage of other, much more suitable land in the area around battlefields that could be developed without historical detriment. Therefore, we do not believe that awarding battlefields special protection would adversely impact local economies. In fact, we believe it could benefit local economies, in terms of tourism.\r\n\r\nIt is our view that Historic Environment Scotland, who are charged with protecting Scotland's heritage, has not followed its own guidance as, in many cases, it has not actively sought to limit or prevent development on or at the edge of our battlefields. We therefore believe that it is failing to protect battlefields from the ever-increasing threat of being subsumed by inappropriate development.\r\n\r\nWe have raised two petitions on these issues using change.org\r\n\r\n* change.org/p/stop-no-housing-development-at-culloden-battlefield Original petition with 113,186 signatures \r\n\r\n* change.org/p/the-scottish-government-meaningful-planning-protection-for-scottish-battlefields \r\n\r\nYou can find out more about our group at on our website https://stopcullodendevelopment.weebly.com) \r\n\r\nWe also have a Facebook page \r\nfacebook.com/groups/817550814926691 \r\n","petitioner":"GEORGE KEMPIK on behalf of Group to Stop the development at Culloden","status":"closed","signature_count":21205,"created_at":"2020-12-23T09:46:00.000Z","updated_at":"2021-10-07T14:38:33.883Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-02-02T21:00:00.000Z","under_consideration_at":"2021-02-02T21:00:00.000Z","closed_at":"2021-09-07T15:41:26.750Z","archived_at":null,"submitted_on_paper":false,"submitted_on":null,"creator_name":"GEORGE KEMPIK on behalf of Group to Stop the development at Culloden","rejection":null,"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","pe_number":"PE1851","links":{"self":"https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions/PE1851.json"},"attributes":{"title":"Justice for the public in the legal system","summary":"Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to urgently review and reform the Scottish legal system, including an update of the systems and practices to ensure bodies, authorities and institutions are fit for purpose.\r\n","background_information":"MSP’s throughout Scotland must be aware of the complaints constituents present regarding their treatment under the SLCC. We have submitted two petitions on this subject previously. We believe these were inappropriately handled by the petitions department and Committee. We allege that potential collusion as to how the petitions should be handled took place and coincidence or not the allegation furnished matched the treatment the petitions received. This process will not allow us to request an external investigation.\r\n\r\nThe Scottish Legal Complaints Commission (SLCC) has been in operation, at some financial cost to the tax payer, for twelve years and we would submit that there has been no improvement in the servicing of complaints as opposed to the old system through the Law Society. We would go so far as to suggest that the system is not fit for purpose and negatively impacts on the Scottish public. We believe every unfair dismissal of a complaint witnesses a member of the public paying a legal invoice for a sub-standard service.\r\n\r\nThis includes the SLCC approving a solicitor setting up agreements with the opposing party without reference to their client, assessing “one of their own” and exonerating them despite the actions of that solicitor. We believe these actions risk serious detriment for the client.\r\n\r\nThey rarely or will not entertain criticism or an appeal pertaining to their judgements, they will not give the complainant the right to reply and if too many questions are asked they disconnect communication. \r\n\r\nThe SLCC are allowed to select the cases they wish to “investigate” and we believe this is open to major abuse. It is alleged they can take cognisance of the Member Solicitors of the Law Society and sanitize the data as to ensure membership fees are not being paid as well as lost invoice revenue.\r\n\r\nThe task of a complaint about an investigation should be carried out by an independent body responsible to Government Ministers which would enable complainants to take the matter forward. Self-policing simply does not work and by its very nature is bias.\r\n\r\nIt is our understanding that in one case the SLCC automatically took the word of a solicitor and not the member of the public. The complainant was allegedly informed that this decision was made by Committee, which appears not to be their normal decision making route and the majority of the Committee wished to uphold the complaint with one not supporting the motion. The situation is clear to me that the minority rules the majority and we hold the opinion, if so, that such behaviour is simply iniquitous. We believe this situation forced the complainant to pay a considerable amount for legal “services” that could have been extremely detrimental to the client. \r\n\r\nThe SLCC has created this shell as there is no “Body” that can or is willing to address this situation. After a complainant has lodged their complaint, the complainant is not allowed to obtain a copy of the solicitor’s response. If the complainant has no right to see a response then it seems the solicitor can change fact to fiction. \r\n\r\nThe Law Society seems to have no interest in the activities of the SLCC. They appear not to have a great deal of interest in any form of complaint review whether managed by the SLCC or themselves.\r\n\r\nIn my experience the Law Society refuses to become involved with SLCC practices and decisions. Involvement by the Law Society has been dismissed even when approaching their President. They have allegedly tinkered with the SLCC but none of this has been efficacious or improvement worthy.\r\n\r\nWe believe attempts are made to cut genuine complaints off at the pass by interjecting with their impatient desire to set up an internal review. This is simply another term for self-policing and keeping the matter low key within the control of the powers that be.\r\n\r\nPossibly a prime example of this is the recent Roberton Report which we feel is simply inadequate as it was written not adhering to the full brief, rejected offered contributions from the public, introduced no public input and wrote this with contributions from “in-house” contributors including at least one mentioned within complaints.\r\n\r\nOne assumes that the purpose of such a report was to improve the efficacy of the legal system within Scotland yet not to ask those experiencing the system first hand i.e. the public, is simply woeful. This is merely an exercise in academia without actually encompassing the reality required.\r\n\r\nUntil complaints are handled and adjudicated on properly the standard of practice within the Law will never improve and continue to deteriorate year on year. It is contented this includes Solicitors and the Judiciary. Brief reference was made as to examples of poor Solicitor behaviour and there are many examples across the legal sphere. A Register of interest should be mandated and put in place immediately. The World Bank looked at just over one hundred countries that considered introducing a register and of that sum ninety nine adopted that policy. Not only was the register found to be helpful but co-related with this was the fact the corruption within the legal world reduced. If the argument is that corruption does not exist within the Scottish legal professional then a register is no threat.\r\n\r\nThe aspiration of this Petition is many fold;\r\n\r\n- Review with the Law Society and other Bodies the level of efficiency of the law practice that the public receives and the value for money;\r\n\r\n- Address any and all misgivings within the core of the Scottish judiciary taking action to replace and introduce more transparency;\r\n\r\n- To review the levels of corruption, if any, within all sectors of Scottish law, with public input;\r\n\r\n- Establish a register of interests for the judiciary and solicitors;\r\n\r\n- Create a new Body to replace the SLCC that is transparent and can be reviewed independently;\r\n\r\n- Introduce a new process for SLCC investigations including allowing the complainant to refute a solicitor’s response to any complaint;\r\n\r\n- Create a more precise administrative conduct and require that clients must agree and sign any new actions;\r\n\r\n- Introduce an easier route for the public to appeal other than the Court of Sessions.\r\n\r\nThe foregoing sets out a blue print for real reform which is very likely going to meet serious resistance as have the two previous Petitions we have previously submitted. Until someone stands up to the system the public in Scotland receive legal disservice on a daily basis.\r\n\r\nAlthough the article to which you are being directed is specific to one case we ask that you read it and assess for yourself the potential legal morass. We suggest this is not alone. Within some of those standing beside us their treatment appears to reveal some formulaic process to “attack” them. We simply say, “IT IS TIME”.\r\n\r\npetercherbi.blogspot.com/2020/04/cash-advocate-9k-consultations-75k.html","petitioner":"William Tait","status":"closed","signature_count":34,"created_at":"2021-01-21T12:28:00.000Z","updated_at":"2021-10-07T12:59:53.707Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-01-21T10:45:00.000Z","under_consideration_at":"2021-01-21T10:45:00.000Z","closed_at":"2021-09-07T15:41:15.845Z","archived_at":null,"submitted_on_paper":false,"submitted_on":null,"creator_name":"William Tait","rejection":null,"topics":[]}},{"type":"petition","pe_number":"PE1850","links":{"self":"https://petitions.parliament.scot/petitions/PE1850.json"},"attributes":{"title":"Natural flood prevention on grouse moors","summary":"Calling on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to make the use of natural flood prevention methods a condition for obtaining a grouse moor licence.\r\n","background_information":"More than 10% of Scotland consists of grouse moors which are predominantly in upland areas where much of our rain falls. Flood prevention strategies are inadequate if they do not involve changes in the way our uplands are managed. The intended licencing scheme for grouse moors provides an excellent opportunity to begin this process. Keeping homes dry should never have been compromised to shoot more grouse. Flood reduction work will also reduce the fire risk and speed of fire on grouse moors through creating firebreaks, a much-needed relief for our emergency services.\r\n\r\nI believe that in order for grouse moor owners to be granted a grouse moor license, they must be able to demonstrate that they are using natural flood prevention methods to slow the flow of water from their land in order to reduce the flood risk to homes, businesses and farms on lower land. The measures to be taken include reduced muirburn, blocking drainage, peat restoration, targeted contour and riparian tree planting to reduce the speed of flow into watercourses, insertion of woody material into watercourses to create 'leaky' dams to hold water back during high rainfall and the eventual return of the beaver whose dams are increasingly being recognised as a major contributor to flood prevention. These measures are vital to combat the massive financial and human cost of flooding.\r\n\r\nI attach some further reading which might be useful:\r\n\r\n[Targeted tree planting for reducing flood risk](https://www.woodlandtrust.org.uk/media/4808/pontbren-project-sustainable-uplands-management.pdf)\r\n\r\nThe role of beavers in reducing floods \r\n\r\nbbc.co.uk/newsround/51528733\r\n\r\nHow trees reduce floods: \r\n\r\nbing.com/videos/search?q=wild+trout+trust+videos&docid=608043816226718102&mid=F50EE655F4F677EE2F63F50EE655F4F677EE2F63&view=detail&FORM=VIRE\r\n\r\n[Role of leaky dams](https://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/hardcastle-crags/features/natural-flood-management)\r\n","petitioner":"Les Wallace","status":"closed","signature_count":874,"created_at":"2021-01-21T12:28:00.000Z","updated_at":"2021-09-07T15:40:22.205Z","rejected_at":null,"opened_at":"2021-01-21T10:30:00.000Z","under_consideration_at":"2021-01-21T10:30:00.000Z","closed_at":"2021-09-07T15:40:22.204Z","archived_at":null,"submitted_on_paper":false,"submitted_on":null,"creator_name":"Les Wallace","rejection":null,"topics":[]}}]}