Chamber and committees

The festive season is an extremely busy period for Glasgow city centre, with people flocking from all over to enjoy our local hospitality and retail businesses. Glasgow City Council, Glasgow Bus Alliance, Glasgow Taxis, the night-time economy network, Strathclyde Partnership for Transport and ScotRail have teamed up to launch the choose public transport campaign. Does the minister welcome the campaign, and agree that choosing public transport during this busy period will free up travel routes, avoid congestion and cut down on travel frustration at what can be a very stressful time of year?

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with local authorities regarding promoting the use of public transport services throughout the festive season. (S6O-02878)

Before I make my remarks on behalf of the committee, I encourage members to reflect on the tragic news that we heard from the Bibby Stockholm this morning.

The committee’s inquiry into the human rights of asylum seekers ran from late April through to June this year, following an evidence session on race inequality that took place earlier in the year, during which organisations including the Scottish Refugee Council and the Maryhill Integration Network told us that they considered that the Scottish Government could do more with its devolved powers to support asylum seekers.

I thank and acknowledge all those who provided written and oral evidence to the committee. I thank the clerking team, the Scottish Parliament information centre and the wider team who provided excellent support to the committee during weeks of evidence taking and engagement with the draft report.

I especially thank the asylum seekers and refugees who gave us an insight into their lived experiences at our engagement events, which were held here, in the Parliament, and at the Maryhill Integration Network. The committee appreciates that it will not have been easy for those brave individuals to speak with us and for them to have had to relive some of their experiences, but we hope that our report reflects their voices and experiences and that the Scottish Government can bring forward initiatives and solutions to address the challenges that they face. I recommend that any member who has not yet visited the committee’s web page and read the notes of those engagement sessions, which really drive home the challenges that asylum seekers and refugees face, should do so.

Before I move on to the substantive content of the report, I pay tribute to and thank those organisations that do so much with limited resources to support asylum seekers and refugees to understand their rights and limited entitlements. Organisations such as the Maryhill Integration Network, Amma Birth Companions, Refuweegee, Refugees for Justice, the Scottish Refugee Council, Friends of Scottish Settlers and the Grampian Regional Equality Council helped to facilitate our engagement sessions alongside the committee clerks and the Parliament’s participation and communities team, and we are very grateful to them.

Although immigration and asylum are reserved matters, the committee heard that there are ways in which, with some innovation and radical thinking, the Scottish Government and local authorities could address some of the issues that asylum seekers face, particularly in relation to integration.

One of the keys to integration is the ability to travel, whether it is to attend general practitioner or solicitor appointments; to access advice, support and education services; or just to have the opportunity to visit other places and prevent isolation. We know that the financial burden that is associated with bus travel is an obstacle for many asylum seekers—we heard that consistently throughout our inquiry—so our report strongly supports the extension of the existing national concessionary scheme to include all asylum seekers. That would be transformative and, as Paul Sweeney noted during his members’ business debate on 26 October, there is cross-party support for it.

Jackson Carlaw, convener of the Citizens Participation and Public Petitions Committee, recently raised the proposal directly with the First Minister at a recent Conveners Group meeting. The subsequent announcement by the First Minister at the start of November that £2 million has been set aside in next year’s budget to allow the scheme to include all asylum seekers is very welcome. We look forward to next week’s budget statement, which will enable us to understand more about how that scheme will be rolled out and how the £2 million will be allocated.

The committee heard about the pilot schemes that have been running in Aberdeen and Glasgow, and we hope that those will help to inform how the scheme is extended. We note also other policies and strategies that the Scottish Government has in place, including an additional £1.6 million in funding, announced in February this year, to focus on the development of a refreshed “New Scots Refugee Integration Strategy”; the “Ending Destitution Together” strategy; and the new guardianship service for unaccompanied asylum-seeking and trafficked children.

Our report reflects the legislative context, including the Illegal Migration Act 2023 and the current asylum process. We heard strongly expressed views that the 2023 act will change the landscape for asylum seekers who are seeking legal protection in the United Kingdom. We agree with calls from the Scottish Refugee Council and the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland that, as far as possible within devolved powers, the Scottish Government should work with local authorities and other relevant bodies to maintain the integrity of the looked-after children system and to scrutinise the age-assessment regime that was set out in the Nationality and Borders Act 2022 as well as the 2023 act.

Will the member take an intervention on that point?

I commend the member’s local example. The evidence in our report suggested that ESOL provision was patchy across the country. Does the member agree to call on the Government to review its ESOL policy?

Thank you.

The four treaties are the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women; the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities; and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. As convener of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, I look forward to being part of the bill scrutiny process. Scotland now has an opportunity to show leadership in furthering human rights at home and abroad, and I ask the minister, in summing up, to update members on the Scottish Government’s work to do just that.

Earlier today, members in the chamber debated the report that my committee published on “The Human Rights of Asylum Seekers in Scotland”. The report makes it clear that there are measures that we can take, notably the Scottish Government’s commitment to free bus travel, to make better the lives of some of the most vulnerable people in society and around the world.

I look forward to contributions from colleagues to the debate, and I urge everyone to join me afterwards in the Burns room for an event that I am sponsoring with Amnesty International on the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This is a day for celebration, but also for serious consideration of what we must do better. [Applause.]

I cannot comment on that question as the committee convener but, in a personal capacity, I agree.

As our report notes,

“The Committee also strongly recommends the Scottish Government”

work

“with third sector partners and public agencies”

to develop

“trauma informed and skilled training for all those who work to support asylum seekers.”

Housing is another key area where there are many concerns. Our report notes that there is

“a lack of appropriate and affordable accommodation across Scotland and the rest of the UK”,

to which there is

“no easily identifiable solution”.

We heard a lot of evidence on the use of temporary accommodation, particularly hotels. We are concerned that the practice is being used increasingly and for longer periods of time. That is leading to its being normalised, which it should not be, as the impact on families and on the mental health and wellbeing of individuals is significant. Hotels and other forms of institutional accommodation are inappropriate and should be used only as a temporary measure when it is absolutely necessary.

We recognise the current housing crisis and the challenges that that presents to local authorities in respect of providing appropriate accommodation. Our report urgently seeks clarification of what the Scottish Government is doing, or what it intends to do, to address that situation.

Linked to that, we recognise the impact that the wider dispersal policy is likely to pose. Our report asks the Scottish Government what preparations it has in place to support local authorities to meet the challenges that that policy will have on them. We also seek a commitment from the Scottish Government that it will work with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and individual councils

“to identify issues that are unique to ... them.”

We would welcome an update, and some clarity, from the Scottish Government on funding and resource support for third sector organisations, particularly those outside Glasgow, that provide asylum-seeking individuals with advice about their rights and the services that they are entitled to access. I hope the minister might be able to address those points in her remarks.

Witnesses also raised another potential impact of the Illegal Migration Act 2023, with strongly expressed views that it will effectively end the protection for survivors of trafficked exploitation and modern slavery that was provided under the Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Scotland) Act 2015.

In our report, we urge the Scottish Government

“to develop guidance to ensure a robust and equivalent form of support”

to that which is currently provided under the 2015 act. We also ask the Government to consider the calls for a national referral mechanism as proposed by the Scottish Refugee Council.

We heard concerns about the impact on children, including unaccompanied children, and about the use of mother-and-baby units. We heard conflicting accounts about unaccompanied children living in hotels, and our report expresses the committee’s frustration at not being able to clarify whether there are unaccompanied children living in hotels. That is very concerning, and we ask the Government to investigate and clarify the position as a matter of urgency. We are also keen to understand how the Scottish Government plans to safeguard children, including unaccompanied children, in the light of the power in the Illegal Migration Act 2023 to remove them from local authority areas.

Concerns were raised over the use of mother-and-baby units and the impact that they have on women and on the early years of a child’s life. The committee has asked the Scottish Government to investigate that and to report back accordingly. It would be helpful to have an indication of how long that investigation might take.

I understand that I have completely run out of time, but I have not yet covered some areas. In my remaining few seconds, I will just say that I was going to talk about English for speakers of other languages—my colleagues may bring that into the debate—and that, on the matter of asylum seekers who have experienced trauma, we encourage a trauma-informed approach in order to reduce isolation.

I look forward to this afternoon’s debate and to hearing members’ reflections on our committee report as well as the minister’s response.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the conclusions set out in the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee’s 8th Report, 2023 (Session 6), The Human Rights of Asylum Seekers in Scotland (SP Paper 455).

The minister has made excellent remarks. Does she accept that, in that context, the situation is even worse for children? Does she have a response to the committee’s calls for investigations on unaccompanied children?

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests, as a member of Amnesty International.

Presiding Officer,

“Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won, you earn it and win it in every generation.”

Those are the words of Coretta Scott King, Martin Luther King Jr’s widow. She wrote them a year after his assassination, which was 21 years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was signed.

I am very grateful to my colleagues who signed my motion marking the 75th anniversary of the declaration and for the opportunity to secure the debate. Coretta Scott King’s words stand as a timeless reminder that rights do not exist forever of their own accord. Martin Luther King Jr was assassinated following a tireless campaign and fight for civil rights for black people in the United States through the 1960s. Treaties, agreements, declarations and even laws can be agreed and signed, but it is what we do in practice that determines the rights of people around us.

The United Nations General Assembly agreed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December 1948, ]out of the ashes of the second world war, which claimed the lives of more than 60 million people. The declaration contains 30 articles, each setting out rights and freedoms that ought to be respected and enjoyed by every person on this planet. Members in the chamber who are looking to contribute to the debate this evening may wish to delve into some of those articles in more detail, but I would like to start with article 1, which states:

“All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.”

I do not doubt that, were a declaration on universal rights to be published for the first time today, it would perhaps use slightly more inclusive language, such is the evolving nature of our lexicon, but the meaning and intention behind the words endure. Consider the simple prospect that each human is the value of each of those around them—that is, that no person can or should expect better or lesser treatment. What an aspiration and an idea to tirelessly strive for. However, we know that we are not there—we are not even nearly there. Be under no illusion about that.

We are here today to celebrate the milestone of the 75th anniversary of the declaration, which is a groundbreaking international agreement that has done so much to inform and encourage laws and movements around the world in furthering human rights. The declaration has informed serious major treaties that have protected the rights of individuals across the globe. That includes the European convention on human rights, which was adopted in 1950 and is recognised in 47 nations as the baseline for human rights across Europe. The International Covenant on the Civil and Political Rights, which was adopted in 1966, has been enshrined in law and is used to protect the rights of detainees and freedom of expression in the United Kingdom. The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was also adopted in 1966. Although that was not formally incorporated into legislation in the UK, it has informed court decisions on welfare, housing and labour rights.

In addition, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, which was adopted in 1979, ensures that women have the same legal rights as men in terms of nationality, marriage, education, employment and welfare. Finally, the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was adopted in 1989, and signed and ratified by most countries round the world, protects the rights and welfare of children.

However, celebration should not be confused with complacency; on human rights, we should be anything but complacent. Last week, the Parliament unanimously passed the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill, in its amended form, which recognises and enshrines the convention’s principles in Scots law. I am proud, as many other members are, to have been part of that moment in history.

With this age of the 24-hour news cycle and of immediate social media updates of events going on round the world, we have all witnessed human rights abuses on a scale that we have never seen before, whether it be the horror of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine or the on-going terror being unleashed in Gaza and Israel. We all hear examples of states acting with flagrant disregard for human rights, and it is a stark betrayal of their fundamental duties to safeguard and protect the dignity and freedom of all its citizens.

Eleanor Roosevelt, a key driver in developing the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, said:

“Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small places, close to home—so close and so small that they cannot be seen on any maps of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person; the neighbourhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm, or office where he works.”

We look to human rights abuses and failings abroad, but we know that there is so much to do at home to improve the lives of our own citizens, particularly those who belong to minority groups. It would be remiss of me not to mention last week’s Court of Session ruling on the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which was passed in this place—and voted for by MSPs from every single party represented in the chamber—but which has been struck down by the UK Government. It is our responsibility to improve the rights of all individuals.

While talk around Whitehall grows over abandoning the UK’s obligation with regard to human rights under in\ternational law, I am pleased to see that the Scottish Government remains committed to introducing the human rights bill to Parliament. Although it is limited to the confines of that which is devolved to this place, the bill will help incorporate a further four UN treaties into Scots law.

I am not sure whether I have a bit of leeway on time to outline them, Presiding Officer.

As convener of the committee, I want to give Meghan Gallacher the opportunity to correct that. The spokes of that web were the rights, and the flies were the threats to them. In no way was Shirley-Anne Somerville compared to a fly.