PE1838/N - Regulation of non-statutory child advocacy services
Thank you for your letter of 10 September about this public petition. You asked whether the Scottish Government will undertake a consultation and other work necessary to introduce legislation to regulate non-statutory child advocacy services.
I think there is general agreement that if regulation were introduced it should be limited in its application to those who offer a child advocacy service to the public at large or to a section of the public as opposed to, for example, regulating a trusted family member who fulfils the role on an informal basis.
I have considered carefully the points made by the petitioners, the Committee and those who provided written information. There would be a number of issues to consider in relation to the regulation of non-statutory child advocacy services. These issues include enforcement; ensuring the independence of child advocacy services; and costs.
On enforcement, one option might be to provide that in child contact and residence cases, the courts should only take account of non-statutory child advocacy services if they are regulated. However, many of the services provided by child advocates may not actually be seen by the courts: the advocacy services may just be informing the child about what to expect and providing support and counselling. Another option might be to lay down standards for advocacy services with an independent regulator checking those standards are met and taking action if they are not. There might then need to be a criminal offence to capture any child advocacy services which operated without being regulated. Consideration would need to be given as to whether that would be proportionate.
On independence, a regulator could not tell the advocacy service what to do or recommend in a specific case. Instead, the regulator’s role might be to ensure that only individuals who meet and maintain set standards, on matters such as training, are authorised to provide a child advocacy service and to run a complaints procedure.
On costs, there could be costs for child advocacy services in relation to meeting standards. In addition, an independent regulator would have to be funded either by government or through fees charged to child advocacy services or through a combination of these methods.
I am not in a position at this stage to commit to a consultation on the regulation of non statutory child advocacy services.
However, there is, of course, a need to ensure that all services provided to children and young people, including advocacy services, are of high quality. As the Committee is aware, section 21 of the Children (Scotland) Act 2020 adds a new section 100A to the Children (Scotland) Act 1995. The new section provides that the Scottish Ministers must make such provision as they consider necessary and sufficient to ensure that all children concerned in proceedings in which the court is considering making an order under section 11 of the 1995 Act [on matters such as child contact and residence] have access to appropriate child advocacy services.
Before implementing section 100A, I would propose to carry out a full public consultation, with Impact Assessments, which would be open to all to respond to, in line with usual practice for Scottish Government consultations.
I would propose to issue this consultation in 2023. This will give us sufficient time to gather evidence; prepare Impact Assessments; draft a consultation and proceed with other work needed to implement other aspects of the 2020 Act.