Chamber and committees

As someone who has spent almost their entire life dedicated to children, I am delighted to see the bill return with amendments for its reconsideration stage. Today, on my birthday, I feel genuinely blessed that we, in this place, will pass the legislation and enshrine children’s rights in Scots law. My colleagues have that power in them today, and our children and young people are watching with open hearts, as am I.

The general principles of the UNCRC are non-discrimination; the best interests of the child; the right not only to survival but to development; and the right to be heard. As we look to the future, the old expression that children should be seen and not heard must finally be consigned to the dustbin. Educator and author Jess Lair put it that

“Children are not things to be molded, but are people to be unfolded.”

As convener of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, I was fortunate to be involved in the scrutiny of the amended bill. We heard compelling evidence directly from children and young people, some of whom are in the gallery now. I welcome representatives from Together (Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights), the Children’s Parliament and the Scottish Youth Parliament, and many other tireless campaigners. We must not forget that today is not about us but about each and every one of them. The children and campaigners who once sat where those campaigners sit now will finally see life breathed into the rights that they fought so hard for. It is my privilege to have played even a tiny part in that journey.

Juliet Harris from Together (Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights), who is with us today, used an analogy on the day that she appeared in front of the committee. It was Halloween and the children wanted to make it fun for us. Juliet told the committee that the legislation is, indeed, like a spider’s web: the threads of that web represent the legislative protections and the flies are the threat. The children wanted to explain, through Juliet:

“With no web, flies might fly everywhere—they might think that they can do as they please.”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 31 October 2023; c 5.]

However, with this legislation, we build up a layer of protection and build our own spider’s web. It might not be perfect, the children said, but the fact that it exists at all will be enough to scare off the many troublesome flies. The web will only get stronger as it continues to grow.

For many of us, including me, this process has taken longer than we would have liked or anticipated. Nevertheless, I am hopeful that the Parliament can, once again, pass the bill unanimously, albeit in an amended form.

I note that, if passed, the legislation will be subject to wider consultation once it receives royal assent. I would be grateful if the cabinet secretary would comment on the length of the consultation and who will be consulted.

I welcome the UNCRC innovation fund to assist eight local authorities to develop a children’s rights approach. Will that fund be extended to all local authorities over time?

On the funding of a Scottish Public Services Ombudsman complaints process for children, will the cabinet secretary offer more information on how that model will be shared more widely and with whom it will be shared?

Presiding Officer, once a teacher, always a teacher. In true primary school teacher style, I have penned and dedicated a wee poem for the children who are here today or listening elsewhere.

Laws are like rules that keep things right,
But they’re sometimes slow to take flight.
We say with our voices loud,
To make sure rights reach every crowd.

New plans will come to make things good,
In every home and neighbourhood.
It’s people that make our country tick,
And empowering children will do the trick.

We owe children so much, but, most of all, we owe them a childhood, and that is what the bill helps to enshrine in the very law of our land.

We hear dire warnings from UN officials on the ground in Gaza about the scale of the humanitarian disaster that is unfolding. Does the minister agree that, in order to prevent further deaths, it remains urgent that the international community works together to press for an urgent ceasefire? Can she provide any further update on the Scottish Government’s latest engagement with the UK Government in that regard?

We agree. Thank you. We will write to the Scottish Government to that effect.

That concludes consideration of the UK statutory instrument. I thank the minister and her officials for their attendance. We will now suspend briefly to allow a changeover of supporting officials for our next agenda item. Thank you.

Our second agenda item is our final evidence session on the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill.

I again welcome to the meeting Siobhian Brown, the Minister for Victims and Community Safety. I also welcome her supporting officials from the Scottish Government: Jamie Wilhelm is legal services regulation reform manager in the justice directorate, and Leanna MacLarty is a solicitor in the legal directorate. Thank you for joining us this morning. I refer members to papers 2 and 3. I invite the minister to make a brief opening statement.

Good morning and welcome to the 26th meeting of 2023 of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. We have received no apologies this morning.

Our first agenda item is consideration of a type 1 consent notification for the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments (Saving Provision) Regulations 2023. This is a proposed United Kingdom statutory instrument on which the UK Government is seeking the Scottish Government’s consent to legislate in an area of devolved competence. On 9 November 2023, the Minister for Victims and Community Safety notified the committee of the UK SI. The committee’s role is to decide whether it agrees with the Scottish Government’s proposal to consent to the UK Government in the manner that it has indicated.

I welcome to the meeting Siobhian Brown, who is the Minister for Victims and Community Safety, and her supporting officials. Simon Stockwell is head of family law policy and Stephanie Smith is a senior policy adviser on courts and tribunals. Both are from the Scottish Government’s justice directorate. Good morning and thank you for joining us.

I refer members to paper 1 and I invite the minister to make a brief opening statement.

Meghan, did you want to come in on this issue?

We will pause that for now. I will bring you back in after Meghan Gallacher.

Thank you for answering that rather cheeky question, minister. We are all well aware that the initial stages of the bill did not happen on your watch, as it were. Thank you for taking that question regardless.

I think that we all understand that reform is difficult for any organisation. As I sit here, I have been imagining the uproar that would probably be caused among members, let alone anyone else, if there was a bill to reform the Scottish Parliament, and we have only a couple of decades of history. I understand that change and reform are difficult, especially when they are applied to a highly regarded legal profession that has been there for hundreds and hundreds of years.

I am grateful that you have taken the time to give evidence today and that you have written to us. I will take you up on your offer to communicate with us fully, because we wish to do our job correctly and make sure that the reforms are robust and proportionate. In the light of that, I will also take you up on the offer you made in your opening remarks when you mentioned your letter to me. You said that you could go through the sections in the annex and offer a bit more information on them. That would be helpful for our scrutiny, so could you do that, minister?

I am sorry to interrupt you, minister, but we have that documentation in front of us. In the interest of time, I will stop you, as that letter has been published and it is available to the public. I simply wanted to give you the opportunity to add anything further that you wanted to say.

I just indicated to Maggie Chapman that I wanted to come in on the complaints issue as well, to get a bit more information.

We heard evidence from the SL—I can never remember initials and I do not think that they are a good thing, as they exclude people—from the SLCC regarding the powers that it has. On the one hand it welcomed the changes, but it also argued for more powers. What consideration was given to giving the SLCC more powers?