rs it allows badges to be cancelled and confiscated in certain circumstances it provides increased security features which should reduce forgeries and other forms of abuse the bill makes it a criminal offence to display a badge that is not valid it may have expired or it may not be used be being used properly for example nipping out to the shops as denis mentioned on behalf of the badge holder does not entitle you to use the badge nor in fact is nipping into the shops when the badge holder is in the car the purpose is to provide the badge holder with the access no one else the badge holder the bill will allow badges being improperly used to be confiscated this provoked a little bit of controversy and evidence as it could inconvenience the badge holder as a result of the actions of somebody else we were however reassured that if confiscated it would be returned to the badge holder promptly thus minimising their time without the badge i could go on further about this but i think denis robertson has given the Parliament a fair show at that day we heard some interesting evidence from civilian enforcement officers about the problems they face and the way they undertake their jobs and indeed as a result of that evidence i understand that discussions are now taking place to allow the police access to the existing national database of blue badges that alone could make a significant difference in tackling abuse and making the task of detecting abusers more efficient the bill also puts in place the requirement for all local authorities to have in place a review system to consider appeals from persons who apply for and who are refused a blue badge that provision provoked suggestions from the law society of scotland in their written evidence that the provisions were not compliant with human human rights legislation the law society want an appeal to be the sheriff as an independent tribunal the committee discussed this in oral evidence and the law society conceded their main concern was with the costs of judicially reviewing the decision of the local authority they accepted the existence of judicial review and this made the provision compliant with human rights curiously perhaps the law society was more concerned with the legalistic propositions than convenience and speed for the individual the committee were content that the proposal on the bill provided for an independent review minimised costs all round while satisfying the european convention final minute thank you it was clear to the committee that at least some misuse of blue badges was inadvertent i've earlier given a couple of examples which could fall into this category we asked witnesses how this could be reduced and how badge holders could be better informed of the do's and don'ts of using their badges all blue badge holders receive a booklet but many perhaps either don't read it or don't understand it or it may not be in a format that is best for them there is a multi agency working group looking at this and we consider there is much that could be done to make it easier for badge holders to comply with the law Presiding Officer the committee unanimously backed the bill we commend the general principles to the parliament and we look forward to future consideration of the small but eminently worthy measure thank you Presiding Officer many thanks and now calling Keith Brown minister maximum seven minutes thank you Presiding Officer and to say at the start of a good that i'm very pleased to be able to contribute to today's debate and also as Kevin Stewart has just done to commend Dennis Robertson for the work that he's done so far and reiterate the point that the government supports Dennis Robertson and this bill the bill falls on from a period of earlier reform and modernisation of the blue badge scheme which amongst other changes has seen the introduction of the blue badge database which again Dennis Robertson mentioned that holds information on blue badge holders in Scotland England and Wales and in addition a new badge design makes forgery and replication of badges much more difficult adding to that Dennis Robertson's bill will provide more powers for detection of forged or fraudulently used badges and that can only be a good thing for badge holders who often have their days ruined when they can't get about their business due to disabled parking spaces being used by those who are misusing badges and I think during this process I think as Kevin Stewart has said we have to bear in mind what are the interests of those who are most important in this and that's the blue badge users certainly I will Liam McArthur grateful in reference to the the database one of the concerns that's been raised by blue badge holders in my own constituency is their other onerous hoops they need to go through in terms of applying for the blue badge when it's clearly evident that their eligibility is not in question is there anything that the database will allow to be streamline that process for those whether there's no question about eligibility minister I think that may be the concern I've heard expressed by other individuals as well but often it turns out to be the case that's because of changes which have been made to welfare reform that require these as you put it hoops to go through and that's why the form can be somewhat complex we have looked from time to time but whether it can be made more straightforward and in particular what we've tried to concentrate on is maximising the number of people who currently have a blue badge will be passported straight through to entitlement in future but I do think it's important that we have that form there because that does help to drive out force or misuse of the of the badge or force badges but we'll keep that under review as we have them up till now. Can I also thank the local government and regeneration committee and endorse the point that Kevin Stewart made about the effectiveness of giving evidence of the committee at the same time as the proposer of the bill Dennis Robertson and also thank the finance committee and the delegated powers and law reform committee for their consideration of the bill. I'll leave much of the detail as we've heard already of the bill to Dennis Robertson but I'd like to draw on some of the conclusions that I could from the reports of the local government and regeneration committee. One of these was the difficulty of identifying the level of misuse and I know that's not been easy for Dennis Robertson in the development of the proposals to establish a baseline of evidence for the scale of misuse of the blue badge scheme in Scotland and in that context I think thanks have to go to both Glasgow city council and the city of Edinburgh council who have been able to provide information based on snapshots of blue badge use and misuse in their areas. I'll just underline the point I think again made by Kevin Stewart. If you're very determined in this regard you can save yourself upwards of £6,000 a year by misusing a blue badge and also just to reiterate the point this is not a victimless crime but it won't be when it becomes a criminal offence as has been mentioned this deprives people who are entitled to these spaces from getting them when a badge is misused but research findings from Scotland on the use and value of the blue badge and the extrapolation of data from England also contributed to trying to identify as closely as possible the scale of misuse and I think paragraph 22 of the stage 1 report from the local government and regeneration committee gets the crux of the matter and I would quote that to our report. While it is unclear how accurate these figures are or indeed whether they refer to overall abuse rates it's clear from the evidence we the committee received that there is a substantial problem which impacts adversely on people's lives and the bill aims to address this by improving the ability of the enforcement authorities to take action in a number of ways and I wholeheartedly agree with that conclusion and that's why it's important that local authorities have the powers to act in cases where it is apparent that a blue badge is not being used in the way it should be or by the person it's intended to assist. I would also like to acknowledge the commitment given by Police Scotland to enforce the blue badge scheme and I'd want to confirm as mentioned in the stage 1 report that transport Scotland officials are currently consulting with the blue badge improvement service to facilitate direct access by Police Scotland to the blue badge database and that will give Police Scotland immediate and accurate information on badges issued by local authorities. The bill, although it's an improvement on what went before and we have had further improvements just more recently in the last two years I think with the review of the scheme, will not provide a quick fixed addressing the misuse of badges. Research on the use and the value of the blue badge scheme highlights gaps in people's understanding of the scheme and that was echoed in the responses to Dennis Robertson's consultation on the bill and in the evidence to the local government and regeneration committee. As has been mentioned already, Transport Scotland is working with Dennis Robertson and the multi-agency working group, set up to help inform the policy behind the legislation and to consider wider issues, to consider for example how the role and purpose of the blue badge scheme is better highlighted to badge holders as well as enforcement officers and the wider public. The old cliché is true that one size will not fit at all, will not fit everybody. We need to get the relevant information to the right people. Firstly, to do that the guidance will be disseminated to local authorities and to Police Scotland on the changes being introduced by this bill. Local authorities will be able to include this in their existing training arrangements for enforcement officers and appropriate guidance will also be arranged for use by Police Scotland. Secondly, we will review the current information to badge holders with the aim of providing more concise messages on the use and care of the blue badge. We heard from Kevin Stewart about the fact that some of the guidance that is currently issued is not used because it is perhaps a bit unwieldy. As discussed during my evidence, the committee work is under way through the multi-agency working group to develop a top 10 tips for the use of the blue badge. The aim of that is to make it easy to read and durable and hopefully something that can be kept with the blue badge as a constant reminder about the correct way to use the badge. Thirdly, and lastly, publicity will be developed to deter abuse and make people aware of the devastating impact on blue badge holders caused by abuse of the scheme. The bill is a combination of a range of measures that have been put in place over the last few years to ensure those who haul blue badges can benefit from the on-street parking concession that the blue badge scheme provides. I again like to thank the local government and regeneration committee for its work and in particular considering the range of written and oral evidence and exploring the issues that the evidence has raised. I want to add that the government will continue to support Dennis Robertson as the bill progresses. Thank you. Many thanks. I now call in Mark Griffin, maximum five minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome the opportunity we have to speak on the disabled persons parking badges bill today at stage one and again add my congratulations to Dennis Robertson on the progress that has made so far. We are supportive of the general principles of the bill and will be voting yes at decision time tonight. We welcome the bill's main objective to protect the rights of blue badge holders and recognise that misuse of blue badges has to be tackled because it can lead to blue badge holders not being able to access a parking space when they need it. However, we seek reassurances from the Scottish Government that will work with its multi-agency group to ensure that blue badge holders are properly educated on how their badges can be used so that disabled people who inadvertently misuse their badges are not penalised by the bill's provision and welcome the minister's comments on more concise information being provided to users. We also look for reassurance that local government in Scotland will be properly supported and financial aid resource to implement the bill's provision, in particular around enforcement and review provisions. The bill follows on from Jackie Baillie's bill, which prevented disabled persons parking places being occupied by those who were not entitled to use them by making those bases enforceable and making sure that enforcement action could be taken against those who are using them without a blue badge. The bill is also followed quickly by Sandra White's proposal on responsible parking, which aims to allow freedom of movement for all pedestrians by restricting parking at dropped kerbs and pavements in double parking. That affects disabled people as they could find it difficult to negotiate the way around pavements or across roads if that is blocked by a parked car. To me, those separate pieces of legislation complement each other and combined will go a long way towards making our towns and cities much more accessible to people who have a disability. The proposed powers on the bill will be a welcome addition to local authorities in tackling blue badge misuse and the impact that it has on genuine users as long as they are financially supported to enforce the powers. In particular, the power to cancel a badge gives local authorities the power to cancel that badge that is no longer held to the person that was issued to. The power to confiscate a badge, given constables and enforcement officers and the power to keep a badge that they have checked and appear not to be issued under that or has been cancelled or should have been returned or has been misused, making it a fence to use that cancelled badge, meaning that it will be a criminal offence for someone to drive a vehicle while displaying a badge that has been cancelled or should have been returned. Those are the powers that I think will be most effective at carbon misuse of the blue badge. Although we are supportive of the legislation at this stage, we seek those assurances that there will be that education campaign to help to inform genuine blue badge users of what exactly they can and can't do using their blue badges. Other issues are not covered here, which we might want to think about in the future. Blue badge holders can sometimes park on single or double yellow lines, but they are not allowed to do so if there are additional markings on the kerb. Sometimes it is possible to park there, but you cannot find the road sign, which lists the priority times. Someone has to walk a long distance to find that plate on the road. Every time, someone will have to stand in the street to check what those restrictions are. There appear to be more and more of those restricted areas, and it would be worthwhile if they managed to look into those upsurge restrictions. I will close as I began by saying that we support the principles that we will be supporting at the vote tonight with the caveats that I have been given earlier, the assurance over resourcing and education, and I look forward to the bill progressing. I should start by declaring an interest as a blue badge holder, as you will know when I stagger in here with my two sticks, so I have a great interest in it. As a blue badge holder, as well as a fellow MST, I would like to add my congratulations to Dennis Robinson for bringing this legislation forward, as I too have suffered personally from some of these problems. From the contributions that have already been made and from the evidence, we know that there is a need for the reform of the blue badge scheme, and indeed that reform is definitely overdue. From the evidence presented at the committee, there is an overwhelming sense of resentment on the part of the blue badge holders, or blue badge users, rather, for the lack of respect shown to the scheme, and subsequently wide-scale abuse that goes on. There are calls for greater awareness and investment in education due to the number of blue badges that are being misused unintentionally by family members, for example, as we have heard. As Graham Lawson of the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland noted in evidence to his committee, the number of people who take time to read the booklet on their rights and responsibilities under the scheme is very small, and we have touched on this because the booklet is actually a little complicated and needs to be simplified and cut down because people just don't read these things. But the staggering scale of intentional or calculated fraud that goes on with the scheme points to a far greater problem, which this legislation itself cannot actually fully address. Fundamentally, the problem is that too many people just don't understand how valuable the scheme is to those who has mobility problems, as indeed I didn't. How much it restricts and prevents those with a disability from going about everyday tasks when they do not have access to designated disabled parking bays. I believe that if people understood what a lifeline these bays were to people, their attitude to the abuse that goes on would be very different. Hence the fact I welcome a bit more education on this side because I think that's very key. The fact of the matter is people know that it's wrong to use a disabled parking bay. They also tend to think it's okay to use it if they're running late for an appointment, as we've heard from Dennis Robertson, or just nipping into the supermarket for something quickly. Well it isn't, and we must make it clear to people that why it isn't, and the challenge that this notion is that somehow it is acceptable to abuse these schemes in the right circumstances. We blue badge holders have a critical role in that drive for greater awareness. We should be aware of our rights and responsibilities as the likes of Helen Dolphin, a disabled motoring UK, argued in her evidence. One of the biggest misunderstandings occurs when a friend or relative borrows our blue badge to run an errand on our behalf. This is a definite misuse, although many people do not regard it as such. It is only valid in theory when the badge hold is actually in the vehicle concerned, but whether they're getting out of the vehicle or not, I'm not sure of, because sometimes I've been caught that way. So raising awareness and challenging false perceptions is an important part of tackling this problem. However, improving the enforcement is also a critical element, which has long been missing, and that for me is the strength of Dennis Robertson's bill. The new laws are passed when in reality better enforcement of existing legislation will be just as effective. If not more so, in this instance the bill has remained focused on how we improve the workings of the blue badge scheme and central to that enforcement. Most telling of all was about the fact that so many witnesses to the committee stated time and time again the reason rates of misuse were so high, particularly from an estimate between 52 and 70% in the case of Edinburgh, was because those committing the offence were confident they wouldn't be caught. Indeed, the contributions of local authority officers was interesting and there was a broad agreement that blue badge fraud was in many cases viewed simply as a cheap alternative to car parking charges. Yes, we've heard that there were only 30 recorded cases of common law fraud in relation to blue badges. Accordingly we must prosecute those who abuse the system routinely, more readily and deter those people who see the abuse of the blue badge scheme as an easy option. I also am a bit worried about the confiscation of badges and this is a particular point of mind because if you confiscate a badge you deprive somebody and it has to, we have to ensure in some way that when they are confiscated they're brought quickly back to the actual holder if the holder he or she is not guilty. I think this is crucial. In this respect the new criminal offence the bill proposes the powers of confiscation are welcome but that isn't really an end to the process and is obvious from our evidence gathering that there is a need to work to be done on data sharing and the design of the badge. I also therefore support this bill. Many thanks. We now turn to the open debate. If members keep two maximum four minutes we should be able to call everyone who's indicated they wish to speak. Sandra White, followed by Liam McArthur. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to take the opportunity to congratulate my colleague Dennis Robertson on having brought forward this legislation. I fully agree with the policy objectives of the bill to protect the rights of badge holders and strengthen the existing framework of the scheme. I also agree that without the blue badge many disabled people would be confined to their homes and I think other members have mentioned that as well. For me this is really central to the objectives of the bill and resonates well with my own member's bill proposal namely the responsible parking bill, whose policy objectives are to allow freedom of movement for all pedestrians by restricting parking at dropcares, pavements and double parking. It seems to me that these two bills and as Mark Griffin has already mentioned, a previous bill by Jackie Baillie really complement one another. When you talk about irresponsible parking it also affects people's ability, especially the disabled, the elderly, those with visual impairments from getting around, accessing local services and, otherwise, enjoying the freedom of movement that many of us take for granted. Unfortunately, unlike the member bringing this legislation forward, my proposal appears to have fallen foul of parliamentary process and has not moved forward with the same speed as the member's, even though it was lodged some months earlier. It is something that I am obviously frustrated with and many members of the public from across the country are also clearly frustrated by as well. Judging by the correspondence that I have received in regard to the proposed bill, perhaps the member could give me some sage advice on the best way to move the proposed responsible parking bill forward in our chat with, hopefully, Dennis, after that. I note that, in the committee's report, it states that on-street parking enforcement is the responsibility of the police and local authorities. The police are responsible where parking remains criminalised and Police Scotland uses police officers or police traffic wardens to enforce parking restrictions. Local authorities are responsible in areas where parking has been decriminalised. In giving evidence to Chief Constable Wayne Mawson stated that Police Scotland are changing the way that it conducts parking enforcement by reducing the traffic warden or removing the traffic warden role. However, we are committed to tackling dangerous or obstructed parking and the misuse of blue badges, including parking in Disabled's Bay. That commitment will remain after the traffic warden services. I welcome that. His colleague Superintendent Nailer would want to say some of the paper that has been put together mentions that people have said that it is very hard to get in touch with a police officer to deal with such abuses, although, obviously, there is a 101 to contact the police. They are saying that this is a good way to go about it. However, in the case of parking offences, many of my constituents, and I presume others as well, tell me that this is not the case and that they are informed that many parking offences are under the control of local authorities, whether that is clearly not the case. I believe that we need information and clarity on this issue. It has been stated by others that the police do have the responsibility for this, so I would like some clarity perhaps on that, and perhaps I should write to them myself. In the submission of COSLA, it also highlighted its concerns in terms of enforcement. However, I agree with Kevin Stewart, the minister and Mark Griffin that we need multi-agency working, more information and more education to ensure that people know exactly who is responsible. There is much confusion over who is responsible for what, when you can and can't park. Obviously, the yellow line, as Mark Griffin mentioned, and I would welcome the opportunity to look at the issues and concerned around parking and enforcement with a view to adopting a consistent approach to what and how we wish to achieve those aims. In conclusion, I want to echo Dennis Robertson that this is not just about parking, it is about enabling people to have a life and a fully support this bill. Thank you very much. Many thanks. I call Liam McArthur to be followed by John Wilson. Thank you very much, everybody. I join others in warmly congratulating Dennis Robertson on the progress that he has made with the bill so far. I think that all I have been right in pointing out that this may be a small bill, but its significance should not be underestimated. I also thank the local government committee for their work to date. Mark Griffin was right in setting the bill in a wider context. I understand Sandra White's frustrations in relation to her own bill. I know that a precursor to that was brought forward by my colleague Ross Finney. That has been in the pipeline for some time. Jackie Baillie's efforts in relation to the misuse of parking bays are worth noting in the context of the debate. I was not involved in the committee deliberations, but I welcome the chance to participate in the debate from two perspectives. One is with a personal interest. I am the brother of a wheelchair user and blue badge holder. I recognise the frustrations that Cameron Buchanan, Dennis Robertson and others outlined about the abuse that takes place and the impact that that has on the individual blue badge holder. I also know from the case work of my constituency about the issues that can arise, the malfunctioning of the system as it stands and the need for the sorts of improvements that Dennis Robertson is bringing forward in his bill, as well as the proposals that Sandra White has under review. I was very grateful to the minister for his response to the earlier issue that I raised about the administration of the current system. The 20-page form and the possible half-hour assessment that can be involved in securing the blue badge has been a concern to a number of constituents. I was approached by one on behalf of her parents, who are over 80, and she made clear that it is hugely stressful to get through all those procedures so much so that they would rather forfeit their badge than go through all of this. She goes on to ask whether not a more streamlined process might be possible in those instances where eligibility is obviously not in question, supported in some cases by GPs and nurses. I put on record my gratitude to Orkney Islands Council for the way in which it responded in light of the concerns that I raised, but there seems to be perhaps a case for a degree more discretion or a fast-track process to be possible in some instances. In terms of the enforcement provisions that others have referred to, I note the evidence that COSLA put forward. Obviously, I have concerns in my area about the withdrawal of traffic wardens and the implications that that might have on already stretched police resources. Therefore, I think that that is probably something that we will have to be looked at in more detail at stage 2. Likewise, in relation to the confiscation of badges, I entirely recognise that there is a balance to be struck here in terms of trying to bear down on fraud, but if we are at risk of creating additional problems for those who are very heavily on those blue badges, we might need to look again at that. I note the comments that have been made about the speed of redress where mistakes have been made, but I think that that is probably something in light of inclusion Scotland's evidence that more work needs to be done on. In conclusion, as I say, I think that this is a small bill, but a hugely significant bill for those who rely on blue badges, which are themselves an enabler for a more independent life. I welcome the progress that has been made. I wish Dennis Robertson all the luck in the world as this bill proceeds through stage 2 and stage 3 and confirms that Liberal Democrats will be supporting this bill at decision time. Many thanks and the final open debate speaker is John Wilson. I come to this debate as a member of the local government and regeneration committee, but also in the previous session as a member of the local government and communities committee in the last session, which examined Jackie Baillie's disabled persons parking places bill and carried that through. I have some knowledge of the issues that have been presented by Dennis Robertson and his bill. While legislation already exists in many parts of this area, anyone, even with some basic knowledge, knows that there has been an ongoing problem with the blue badge scheme, and in particular it is abuse. It is worth observing that the proposed legislation by Dennis Robertson seeks to enhance the rights of blue badge holders. We have got to recognise what this legislation is about. The local government and regeneration committee stage 1 report that was published this month was supportive in principle of the bill as proposed and its general intentions. That is not to say that the evidence presented to the committee that organisations did not have some concerns about the bill. We heard some concerns from the Law Society of Scotland and also Inclusion Scotland who raised issues about the implementation of the bill, but that aside, the blue badge scheme in essence is about assisting disabled people to live independent lifestyles. During the committee evidence sessions, it was suggested that the blue badge abuse tended to occur most frequently with car parks normally associated with supermarkets, an area in which we do not have any legislation on, and people must be aware that private car parks and supermarket car parks are not covered by this legislation, and it is something that we need to examine further. The committee heard the evidence about the levels of abuse of blue badges with detailed figures from Gordon Cachliff of the City of Edinburgh Council, who stated that anything up to 52 to 70 per cent of blue badges on display in Edinburgh City at any one time were being misused. We must recognise that even disabled people can hold down jobs and depend on the blue badge scheme to get to and from work, so some of those badges that are on display may belong to genuine blue badge holders who are carrying out full-time or employment to their benefit. That leads me to the area of enforcement on street parking, which is the responsibility of place or local authorities that other members have indicated. We have hopefully resolved that issue in terms of the evidence that we received at the committee, and there are clear guidance on who is responsible for enforcing the misuse or abuse of blue badges. Presiding Officer, both the member in charge of the bill, Dennis Robertson, MSP and the minister, indicated that a lot of disability organisations did not share the concerns expressed that were put forward by Inclusion Scotland. That is to be welcomed because the debate that takes place within the disability movement is to be welcomed by everyone, so we are clear about how we move forward. I would like to thank Dennis Robertson for bringing forward this bill. I would like to thank the evidence that we heard as a committee because what I am hoping that we, as a Parliament, will achieve is legislation that helps disabled people to fulfil their lives and participate as fully as possible in the activities that they want to engage in. We have to ensure and get a message out to those people who misuse or abuse the blue badge scheme that action will be taken. That is a message that we have to be quite clear about in Scotland. I congratulate Dennis Robertson on getting to this stage and look forward to the bill being passed as an act at a later date. Many thanks. We now turn to the closing speeches. I remind members who have participated that they should be in the chamber for closing speeches. I call on Cameron Buchanan. Maximum four minutes, please. Well, Presiding Officer, it seems only a minute ago or maybe it was four since there was last opening. Still, with what the debate lacked in long activity, more than made up in terms of succinct, constructive and supportive tone in favour of Dennis Robertson's bill, in my opening remarks I outlined why I supported this legislation, bringing, as it does, much-needed improvement in the administration of the blue badge scheme. However, I am aware that there are still some concerns over some of the final details. For instance, there was a range of view over the issue of non-uniformed enforcement officers, which I am a bit wary of. The crux of this issue is that the striking of balance over the most effective way of enforcing the legislation was at the same time showing an appropriate level of sensitivity to blue badge holders and their personal circumstances. Very quickly, we sent it on how officers will be identified where this will bring assurances to the likes of Inclusion Scotland. So, clearly, there is some need for some further discussion on this point at later stages, probably in stage two. We also wanted to mention the fact that, as Liam McArthur said, going through the hoops in order to get a blue badge, it's really difficult and it wasn't covered with this bill, but it is a very complicated process. Having gone through it, I sent them a picture of me limping along a pavement, because I couldn't show them that I was actually disabled. The Law Society of Scotland highlighted its concerns over this inclusion of strict criminal liability for using a badge once it had been cancelled. There was other evidence given at the committee about the potential for inadvertent offences or even vulnerable badge holders who were aware of abuse, but had limited options due to their reliance on others around them. Along with the previous issue that I have highlighted, it shows one very important aspect about the enforcement of this legislation. It will require local authority officers and police where appropriate to exercise their duties with a good deal of care and sensitivity. Whilst we have agreed that the clear-cut cases of fraud we expect the perpetrator to be prosecuted, I think that we would all expect a certain flexibility and discretion to be shown in the more complex areas that would undoubtedly be. We don't want to see genuine stakes met with punitive fines. Moreover, Deputy Presiding Officer, if we would have a well-trained enforcement officers on the ground, then we will need the money to fund them, which brings us to the vexed issues of funding resources. Happily, a number of local authorities have officers in place who are unable to tackle this matter at present. However, we will have to monitor the workings of this bill in practice. Maybe this could be also dealt with in stage 2. We heard that there was anecdotal evidence of unofficial amnestys on expired blue badge holders being in place, where councils had a backlog in the administrative processing of appeals. Accordingly, this system has to be properly funded if it is to work. Of course, greater funding will be required for the decision review process. In areas where police are responsible for the enforcement of legislation, there will of course have to be resources put in place. I was pleased to hear the insurances given at the committee, though again we must monitor it in that regard. However, I'm sure that all of those can be highlighted in stage 2. We mustn't lose sight of the fact that, at its core, this bill gives local authorities and police sensible powers, powers that they have long sought to challenge the widespread abuse of the blue badge scheme. I also support this bill. As a member of the local government and regeneration committee, I have had the opportunity to consider in some detail the proposal contained within the bill and its likely effects. I would like to thank Dennis Robertson MSP for bringing this important issue to the attention of the Scottish Parliament. I commend his efforts in raising awareness of the very real consequences of blue badge misuse in towns and cities across Scotland. I would like to confirm that I fully support the broad aims of the member's bill and acknowledge that it can often be challenging for disabled people to find accessible parking spaces and that blue badges go some way towards addressing the difficulties that badge holders experience in reaching their destination safely. I was initially surprised to learn that over half of the blue badge holders believe that misuse of badges is a major problem, despite realising that disabled parking badges were too often open to misuse. I hadn't appreciated the scale of the problem that local authorities are facing and distinguishing between genuine and fraudulent badge holders. I feel strongly that the Scottish Government should seek to work with the key stakeholders to ensure that all blue badge holders are properly educated on how their badges can be used. I appreciate the minister for mentioning earlier of what seems to be an excellent idea—the top 10 tips for people to easily understand. That would provide reassurance that disabled people who inadvertently misuse their badge are not penalised by the provisions of the bill. I recognise concerns raised by the Law Society of Scotland that the introduction of new criminal offences of driving a motor vehicle whilst displaying a cancelled badge and wrongful use of a blue badge are simply duplications of existing common law offence of fraud. However, I believe that the incorporation of those offences in statutory form will raise awareness of the seriousness of blue badge misuse and will send a genuine clear message that those who deprive genuinely disabled people of accessible parking spaces will be punished. However, I share the concern that the bill does not contain a right of appeal to an impartial body after a blue badge application has been reviewed and rejected by a local authority. I believe that there should be an external appeals process that is resourced to review the rejection of applications by our local authorities and that that external process should have the power to overturn the original decision if there was evidence to justify that. I also believe that local authorities should be fully resourced—I know that it was something that Cameron Buchanan had mentioned in his closing speech there—to implement the provisions of the bill, including both the enforcement and the review elements of the blue badge application process. Notwithstanding those observations, I am delighted to confirm my support for the aims of the proposed legislation, and I look forward to considering that issue with my constituents in greater detail as the bill progresses. Many thanks, and I now call on Keith Brown. Minister, six minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We are just trying to cover some of the points that have been raised and provide a response to those. First of all, we have mentioned the issue by John Wilson of enforcement of private car parks. John Wilson, of course, is quite right to say that that does not fall within our jurisdiction, but I have written previously to the Scottish Retail Consortium to highlight the importance and the need for disabled people to have close access to shops. I hope that the bill itself and the passing of the bill, if that is what the Parliament decides, will raise the awareness of retailers to the importance of managing disabled bays in shopping centres. If necessary, I am more than happy to write again to the consortium once the legislation is commenced. On the issue that I just mentioned just now by Amic Taggerup to raise by the Law Society about the offence of a blue badge, whether it is duplication or not, it is already an offence to misuse a blue badge. By introducing an offence of using a cancelled badge, section 4 of the bill is amending the existing law to include provision that is also an offence to drive or park a vehicle displaying a badge that has been cancelled or should have been returned to the issuing authority. I think that it is true across law that we do have a general presumption in law against theft, but there are many aspects of theft that we do prescribe in law as being an offence, and I think that that is, to my mind, similar. Just to come back to the point that is quite rightly made by Cymru, we cannot be sensitive in those things. We would not, for example, expect action to be taken if a person has previously reported their badge as having been lost and then finds it and inadvertently uses it again instead of the replacement. The same situation, I think, would have to apply to a carer who transports a badge holder, and it is unlikely to be aware that the badge holder is using a cancelled badge. I think that it is quite right to say that we should be sensitive in those things, and every case should be treated on its own merits, and that is why we are working with the agencies involved, including the Crown Office and the Fiscal Service, and the police to ensure that guidance to local authorities is in place, which allows agencies to take a pragmatic approach to enforcement. It is mentioned made about the application for blue badges, which is not really part of the bill but of the application for blue badges. I should say that local authorities should and do provide assistance to those going through that process. It is also true to say that the Court of Practice gives guidance to local authorities on the application process, and it recommends that, if a person is clearly eligible and the condition is unlikely to change, the blue badge improvement service database can be noted, so no independent mobility assessment is required in the future when reapplying for a badge, which I think is helpful to people in those circumstances. Many local authorities operate in this way. Even in the case, going back to the point about being sensitive about those things in terms of the law, even in the event that a case was referred to the Procurator Fiscal, it is its role on receipt of reports about crimes on the police and other reporting agencies to decide what action to take. There is that further check, if you like. Kevin Stewart. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I noticed that the Minister and I are wearing twin ties today for Enable Scotland. Apart from that, can I ask him in terms of changes to welfare, which he mentioned in his response to Liam McArthur earlier? The move from DLA to PIP may cause some difficulties. Can we ensure that the expert groups that you have set up will do everything that they possibly can to iron out those difficulties to make sure that folks who need blue badges will get blue badges without any difficulties? It is a very good point. I noticed that Kenneth Gibson was wearing the same tie, which is from Enable Scotland. This is an enabling bill, and it is for those with disabilities, so it is quite appropriate. On the point about welfare reform, our guiding approach so far is to maximise the number of people who will passport automatically who previously did by being eligible. We have tried to minimise the change that will take effect in Scotland by trying to keep an eye on those who currently have blue badges and making it as straightforward as possible for them to continue to use them where they are eligible. That will be the approach that will continue to take in future. Enforcement officers and the question of legal recompense to local authorities was mentioned. I should say that what the bill does is to confer powers, not duties. It is up to local authorities as to how they would want to use those powers. Of course, they can help fund additional officers, if that is what they choose to do, by the money that they can take in from the bill. If I mentioned Dela Ron in Edinburgh and Glasgow, it can be up to £6,000 a year that somebody wrongly using a blue badge can gain. That is money that is lost to the local authorities. If they can get that money back in, that can help to pay for the enforcement services, but that will be the choice of local authorities. The one place where there will be additional costs in relation to the review process. I note the point that Anne McTaggart raised about an independent external review process. We looked at that, not afraid to look at it again in the future, but we have taken local authorities at the word to say that they can manage, as they do in many other respects, an internal review process. Of course, out with that, you have a course to the ombudsman, and as we have heard earlier on, through legal process as well. We believe that there are adequate means of redress for people there. In a related point about the idea of the process to go through to get the blue badge, there is a good reason why it can be quite complex. That is to protect the interests of blue badge holders. It is right across the UK—it is not the Scottish Government alone that is doing this—right across the UK, whether it is a database or the new processes. That is to minimise those who should not have a badge. It is very important to people, because there is a limited number of spaces that will protect the interests of those who need it most. That is one reason why the form is quite complex. I have mentioned the process that will put in place the review process that builds on the introduction of the independent mobility assessments carried out by occupational therapists no longer. As was suggested by Liam McArthur for personal GPs or nurses, it will be independent mobility assessments. That is what the review that was carried out across the UK came back with. The existing legislation is quite clear about the assessment that has been carried out by an independent health professional, with the correct skills and experience to determine a person's functional mobility, which is the crucial criteria for being awarded a blue badge. The implementation of the IMA's independent mobility assessments has been closely monitored, particularly in light of the recent welfare changes. To close, the Scottish Government is very pleased with the report from the local government and regeneration committee. The provisions provide local authorities with powers that they can use as part of their existing arrangements for parking enforcement and apply them as they consider necessary. Importantly, the bill responds to the views of badge holders. Once again, I congratulate Dennis Robertson for the work that he has done so far. Thank you very much, minister. I now call on Dennis Robertson to wind up the debate. Mr Robertson, you have just around eight minutes, which should take us to 5.30pm. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First, I will begin by thanking the members this afternoon for taking part in the debate. To the minister for responding to some of the issues that were raised from members, can I perhaps offer some degree of reassurance when it comes to the sensitivity aspect or the confiscation aspect? That is one thing that we have discussed quite a lot with the review groups. I have been giving the reassurances that training already exists within the local authorities in terms of disability awareness training, but again in terms of aspects of engaging with the public in areas of conflict. I am content with the training that is there at present. With regard to confiscation of any blue badge, that will be done only and only at a last resort. I think that whether it be the police or indeed an enforcement officer is absolutely sure that this badge is either a badge that is being tampered with, is being used fraudulently or is in the possession of someone that should not have that badge. It was also raised, Presiding Officer, the aspect of training and information for blue badge holders. Cameron Buchanan is absolutely right in terms of the booklet that goes with the blue badge. I think that the majority of people when they have that blue badge look at the blue badge and put the leaflet or the information booklet in the drawer. I am not really aware of all the aspects and responsibilities that they have as a blue badge holder. It is their responsibility that we need to ensure that they are fully aware of. The top 10 tips that we are looking at at producing is indeed going to be done with the enforcement and review groups that we are working with. I started on this journey about 18 months ago. I thank Mr Robertson for giving way. It was suggested during evidence taking that it may be an idea to actually get folk to sign and say that they have understood the guidance. Are the review group going to look at that to see if that is possible or not and whether that would actually work? I think that Mr Stewart has made a valid contribution there. It is certainly something that the review group would be looking at. It is perhaps one aspect of trying to ensure that the badge holder is aware of its actual responsibilities. I started on this journey about 18 months ago. During this time, I have been around various parts of the country, engaging with various groups of people with disabilities and COSLA representatives. It is the people themselves with the disabilities who are badge holders that are saying that they require that they need a change in the current legislation. They are, to some extent, content, I believe, with what has been put forward, Presiding Officer, because the current enforcement powers are not sufficient. At the moment, whether it is a traffic warden or an enforcement officer, they can approach someone and say that they can have a look at the badge, but if they believe that that badge is being used fraudulently, they cannot confiscate it. They would actually have to wait for a police officer, by which time the driver can drive off. Surely, Presiding Officer, that is wrong. We need, I think, the new powers to ensure that badges that we know are being misused, which we absolutely are convinced that are being misused, can actually be withdrawn. With regard to the non-uniformed officers, Cameron Buchanan said that he was maybe slightly concerned about the aspects of identification. I actually do not believe that that in itself presents a problem. I sometimes think that maybe being approached by someone in uniform can maybe raise greater anxiety among some of the public when they are being approached. I think that someone in uniform can provide the appropriate identification. I think that if the person is concerned, they can ask perhaps for further identification. As far as I am aware, most enforcement officers, etc., would have their radios, and they can probably actually call a central centre for confirmation of identification. Presiding Officer, I believe that the steps within the bill are proportionate and appropriate. I believe that the review process, which has been mentioned again, is the right thing to do. At the moment, there is no provision for a review, although the majority of local authorities, since we started on this journey, have introduced a review process. I think that if a person has been reviewed and denied a badge, they can appeal. Appealing to the same local authority does not give me room for concern, because it will go to someone else—perhaps that person's line manager—or someone else within that local authority. It is based on criteria and guidance. If the person does not meet the criteria for having a blue badge, then their application will be denied. We need to ensure that those who can be passported into the system know that they can passported into the blue badge system. Presiding Officer, there are many stories of misuse, but I think that the one that probably angers me more than any is that a person who had a blue badge was a housebound, was never out, and that badge was being used by family members themselves without ever taking the badge holder out at any time. That might be an extreme case, but what we need to do is to ensure that the badges are used appropriately. Third-party misuse is not acceptable. I think that we should be just saying that it is not acceptable to misuse a blue badge. I think that we can mention just nipping out to the shop and inadvertently leaving a blue badge on the dashboard. What we have with the central database system is a method of recording the incidents that take place. If there is persistent misuse, the enforcement officer or police officer will have that information to hand. Presiding Officer, I believe that the Parliament does want to see this bill progress. It has been my absolute pleasure this afternoon in bringing this debate to the chamber. I thank the team from Transport Scotland, local government committee and the minister. I move the disabled persons parking bills Scotland bill in my name. That concludes the debate on the disabled persons parking badge. Scotland bill, we move to decision time. There are three questions to be put. The first question is at motion number 10079 in the name of John Swinney. On the revenue Scotland and tax powers bill, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed to. The next question is at motion number 9142 in the name of John Swinney. The financial resolution for the revenue Scotland and tax powers bill, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed to. The next question is at motion number 10076 in the name of Dennis Robertson, the disabled persons parking badge. Scotland bill, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed to. That concludes decision time. We now move to members' business. Members leaving the chamber should leave so quickly and quietly.