Seòmar agus comataidhean

Good morning, cabinet secretary and others on the panel.

Last week, the committee heard from witnesses that they felt some frustration about the fact that it has taken more than two years for the amendments to come back to Parliament and for discussions on the UNCRC to restart. Why did it take that length of time to bring the bill back for reconsideration? What processes took place during that time, before the amendments were lodged?

I have a question about the concerns that you just raised, Professor Mayson, in relation to the role that the Lord President of the Court of Session would have with the Government if the bill was enacted as it stands. My concern from my first reading of the bill was that it could draw the two of them into a sort of collaborative administration. What would the impact of that be?

In section 20, the phrase,

“Measures open to the Scottish Ministers”,

concerns me, because of the performance targets that could be set and the potential for penalties to be imposed. Is that your understanding? What would the implications be?

Thank you. Perhaps I can throw the same question out to our other witnesses.

Thank you. I appreciate that time is precious, convener.

Is there a risk of overpromising and underdelivering for young people? I think that the issue is huge for young people. They have been calling for it—goodness!—since I was at school. That is how long it has been going on so, once it is over the line, we need to make sure that we are careful that we do not overpromise and underdeliver, because at the end of the day it is our young people who it will directly impact.

Thank you. I will move on to other parts of our discussion.

Dr Tickell, in your opening remarks you touched on young people understanding the rights that they will have once the bill gets over the line, if the amendments are accepted. How should we ensure that young people understand their rights? We had an excellent example of that earlier when a witness on our first panel gave us a demonstration. Do the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament need to get better at that, to ensure that we reach people across a span of ages? We are really good at talking to ourselves, but we are not necessarily good at talking to people who are outside the room.

I wonder whether Dr Tickell would like to add to that.

Thank you. It is useful to know that that communication is now happening between the cabinet secretary and young people, because that is vitally important, particularly as we move—we hope—towards getting the bill over the line. That is the crucial point and is why we are discussing the issue again.

I want to pick up on the points that Paul O’Kane raised about COSLA and Social Work Scotland. Juliet Harris, you also briefly mentioned redress. COSLA raised the concern that children might find it difficult to identify when they can seek redress for UNCRC incompatibilities using the powers in the bill. What are your thoughts on how the Scottish Government can ensure that all children who are deserving of redress receive it?

Good morning, panel. There has been a lot to unpick already, just in the answers to the first couple of questions. Your evidence has painted a different landscape to that of the previous panel. That is good, because it means that we are getting into the nitty-gritty of the legislation. My questions will stray a little from what I had planned to ask, because of how our discussions so far have gone.

I will start with a question for Derek Frew. It concerns the age of a child, which is an important concept when we consider legislation that impacts children and young people directly. In Scotland, we have an anomaly whereby people can legally do different things at different ages, because they either are, or are not, considered a child at certain points in their lives. We already have the UNCRC bill, but the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill is now going through Parliament as well. Does the Government need to be stricter on age or to define when a person goes from being a child to an adult? I am certainly wrestling with that and I know that other members are, too, in the context of legislation, because it just seems to be a minefield. In the justice system, someone can be of an age at some point, but in another context the age will be completely different.

What are your thoughts on that? I invite Dr Tickell to come in on that, too.

I offer a warm welcome to the panel. I will start with a reflective question. It has been almost two years since the Supreme Court ruling and it has taken that length of time for the Scottish Government to bring the bill back to the Scottish Parliament for reconsideration. In relation to the feedback that you have had from children and young people and, indeed, your own feedback, are you disappointed with the length of time that it has taken for the amended bill to come to Parliament to be reconsidered?