Plenary,

Meeting date: Thursday, May 26, 2005

Official Report 679KB pdf

---

Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3

For the first part of the stage 3 proceedings, members should have the bill, the marshalled list and the groupings. The usual rules will apply to voting times. We will go straight to the amendments as soon as I can find them in the great heap of papers I have for this afternoon.

Section 1—Offence of female genital mutilation

Group 1 is on the meaning of "action" in the offence of female genital mutilation. Amendment 1, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 3 to 9 and 11 to 14.

The amendments in the group will allow Scottish ministers to amend by instruments that are subject to the affirmative procedure certain aspects of the offence of female genital mutilation, and the circumstances in which no offence is committed. The Equal Opportunities Committee proposed those powers at stage 2 and I promised to return to the issue today.

Amendment 7 will insert the order-making power that will allow Scottish ministers to add, amend or delete the procedures, as listed in section 1(1), that are unlawful if performed on female genitalia. It will also allow ministers to add to the list of procedures that are not offences under the bill and to add to the list of approved persons who may carry out such procedures. Ministers will be able to amend or remove any new procedures or approved persons that are added to the lists.

Amendment 9 seeks to ensure that actions that amount to the offence of female genital mutilation and actions of self-mutilation that it is an offence to aid and abet will always be the same. The other amendments in the group are technical amendments that will be needed as a consequence of the order-making power.

I lodged the amendments because there are a number of factors that we expect might change in the future, so I want to ensure that we can modify the offence of FGM to take account of such changes. We want to be able to take account of future developments in elective genital procedures. Some forms of genital surgery can be similar to some forms of FGM, which is why the bill contains specific exclusions that will make sure that operations that are required for physical and mental health are not offences. We are satisfied that the bill deals with those issues effectively and we believe that it will not make therapeutic surgery, cosmetic surgery, piercing or tattooing unlawful. However, genital cosmetic surgery is developing quickly. Further regulation of such procedures might be introduced and we might need to modify the legislation as a result.

The World Health Organisation plans to change its definition of FGM to reflect changing practices. That new definition might include procedures that are not currently offences under the bill, so the powers that I seek will allow us to ensure that such procedures are unlawful, if that is considered appropriate at the time.

I have written to the Subordinate Legislation Committee to explain the procedures. The number of women and girls who are either at risk of FGM or who choose to have elective genital procedures is very small and it could be difficult to find parliamentary time to introduce and debate primary legislation on the issue. As a result, I believe that, as the Equal Opportunities Committee suggested, the use of instruments that are subject to the affirmative procedure is the right way forward in this respect.

I move amendment 1.

On amendment 3, I should explain that, on behalf of the Equal Opportunities Committee, I moved at stage 2 an amendment on reinfibulation, but withdrew it to allow further discussions on the matter. The Scottish Executive has made it clear that the term "infibulation" in amendment 3 covers reinfibulation, which means that the action will be unlawful. I and, I believe, the rest of the committee accept that.

I am also pleased that the Executive has lodged amendment 8, which will allow any necessary changes to be made to the actions that are defined in the bill.

As the minister said, he sent a very useful letter to the Subordinate Legislation Committee, on whose behalf I am speaking. In the letter, he made it clear that new powers were needed to take account of any future development in, and regulation of, elective general surgery, piercing or tattooing and the future revision of the WHO's definition of FGM. The provisions in amendment 8 will give the minister flexibility to make any changes that are needed, and the committee considers it appropriate that the affirmative procedure will be used to make such changes. Indeed, without amendment 8, any change to section 1 would require primary legislation, which would be difficult to arrange in the parliamentary timetable. As a result, we feel that the amendment represents a perfectly acceptable way of addressing the matter.

I welcome Sylvia Jackson's comments. It is unusual to request that provisions be introduced through instruments that are subject to the affirmative procedure. However, we all know that the definition of FGM might well change, so the Equal Opportunities Committee was keen for the minister to have the opportunity to bring such matters back to Parliament for discussion if necessary. As a result, I welcome amendment 8.

I welcome the amendments, particularly amendment 8, which seeks to allow modifications to be made to section 1. That issue was much debated during the Equal Opportunities Committee's consideration of the bill. I welcome the fact that the minister has written to the Subordinate Legislation Committee on the matter and that he has taken on board the committee's suggestion that the affirmative procedure be used in respect of any changes that might be brought before Parliament. After all, the definition in the bill might well change if the WHO revises its own definition of FGM.

I call the minister to respond to the discussion.

I have nothing further to add, Presiding Officer.

Amendment 1 agreed to.

Group 2 is on the nature of the offence of female genital mutilation. Amendment 2, in the name of Hugh Henry, is grouped with amendment 10.

I welcome the Equal Opportunities Committee's strenuous efforts at stage 2 to ensure that every type of FGM would be made an offence under the bill. Amendments 2 and 10 seek to clarify the amendments that were passed at that stage and which added the prepuce to the list of genitalia that are covered by the offence of FGM. We acknowledged that the reference to the prepuce could be interpreted as making male circumcision unlawful. At stage 2, I undertook to remove that ambiguity at stage 3, and the amendments will ensure that only mutilation of the prepuce of the clitoris will be an offence under the eventual act.

I move amendment 2.

As the minister said, amendments 2 and 10 seek to ensure that there is no ambiguity by clarifying that the term "prepuce"—which was inserted in the bill by a committee amendment that I moved at stage 2—refers to the female clitoral hood. I am pleased that the Executive has, as it promised at stage 2, lodged the amendments and I very much welcome them.

Amendment 2 agreed to.

Amendments 3 to 14 in the name of the minister have previously been debated. I invite the minister to move the amendments en bloc.

Amendments 3 to 14 moved—[Hugh Henry].

Does any member object to a single question being put on amendments 3 to 14?

Members indicated disagreement.

Amendments 3 to 7 agreed to.

After section 1

Amendment 8 agreed to.

Section 2—Aiding and abetting female genital mutilation

Amendments 9 to 12 agreed to.

Section 3—Extension of sections 1 and 2 to extra-territorial acts

Amendments 13 and 14 agreed to.

That ends stage 3.