 Top |
 |
 Main Menu |
|
|
Update
on Scotland’s Campaign Introduction Background “Legal protection for children to prevent the use of 'unreasonable and excessive' punishment.” (News Release 6th September 2001) Jim Wallace, the Deputy First Minister and Justice Minister announced that the proposals would be incorporated in the forthcoming Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill. He went on to stress that: "While we believe that parents should have the rights to set the grounds for the discipline of their children, we felt there was a strong need for greater clarification of the law as to what defined 'reasonable' punishment." The
proposals included: Jim Wallace is a Liberal Democrat MSP and formerly MP. He is a Q.C. by profession. He is in the Scottish Cabinet as part of the ‘Programme for Government’ deal whereby a coalition of Labour and Liberal Democrats rule Scotland as no single party has an outright majority. Labour has the biggest single number of seats. Elections to the Scottish Parliament and to local authorities take place in May 2003. In November 2001, the First Minister Henry McLeish resigned and the then Minister for Education and Young People, Jack McConnell was elected to be First Minister. A White Paper, setting out the measures to be included in a Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill, was published in December 2001. The Bill was expected to be introduced into Parliament early in 2002 and receive Royal Assent by the end of that year. The Children are unbeatable! Alliance welcomed “Making Scotland Safer: Improving the Criminal Justice System” but repeatedly stated that it was not possible for the Executive’s stated objectives to be realised by allowing adults to hit children over two years old. The Scottish Executive stated aim was to: “… reduce the level of violence in society, and it is well known that children learn their habits in later life by example. Physical punishment has its uses, but it may also teach a child that force is permissible to get your own way. By setting clear statutory limits on physical punishment, we aim to safeguard children while protecting responsible parents.” (Para. 117) The Alliance campaigned for a complete ban as the only effective and appropriate method of countering the abuse of children in the name of ‘punishment’. We cited the following shared aims contained in the White Paper: • To
bring up children within a framework of discipline which they can understand.
(Para. 105) The Alliance pointed out in its briefing to MSPs and members: “However if we are genuine about reducing the level of violence in society then stopping the hitting of two year olds will be entirely inadequate. As children get older they copy their parents more and more. As long as the State permits parents to use their own judgement when it is appropriate to hit children then that is precisely the lesson which children will learn too!” The Alliance organised a postcard campaign to encourage MSPs to ‘do the right thing’ and support a total ban on the hitting of children. 10,000 postcards were easily distributed via supporters and Strategy group members in Scotland. We urged people to copy to us the responses from MSPs. It became clear that this would be a difficult issue for MSPs and it was also clear that MSPs were not being deluged by correspondence condemning the limited proposal. The
Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill The Justice 2 Committee was delegated as the lead committee. Importantly, the Labour Committee Convener is well-known for her support in tackling domestic violence and another member Labour MSP Scott Barrie, who is a former social work team leader, has been a longstanding supporter of the Alliance. During the Stage 1 process members of the Alliance gave evidence: Susan Elsley from Save the Children, Kelly Bayes from Barnardo’s and Margaret McKay from CHILDREN 1ST. Other groups delivered supportive evidence including: COSLA Association
of Chief Police Officers in Scotland “Although
we raise the issue of the potential for practical difficulties, it is
important to emphasise that we are strongly behind any steps that can
be taken to give children added protection from being assaulted.” Association
of Directors of Social Work Women’s
Aid Equal
Opportunities Committee of the Scottish Parliament – Report to Justice
2 However the Justice 2 Committee produced its Stage 1 Report in September 2002 and rejected the idea that children under three should be protected from being hit by adults. The Alliance immediately produced a briefing to challenge the conclusion that physical punishment of babies, toddlers and small children is acceptable in Scotland in 2002. It was particularly interesting to note that the majority of the Committee chose to use the word “moderate” rather than “mild” to describe acceptable physical punishment of children. We sought an explanation of what Committee members regard as “moderate”. Immediately following publication of the Stage 1 Report the Justice Minister and the First Minister agreed to recommend to the Cabinet ‘that the age related element in the Bill should not proceed’. So the Scottish Executive amended its own Bill which had been the subject of extensive consultation including consultation with children. At the Stage 2 process which is the opportunity to have the Bill amended, the Scottish Executive brought forward an amendment which removed the ban on hitting children under three but did insert ‘age’ as a matter for the court to have regard to in determining whether it is a case of ‘justifiable assault’. Scott Barrie MSP proposed an amendment calling for a complete ban but he was the only Committee member who supported it, one MSP abstained and the rest voted against the amendment. We now await the Stage 3 process when the Bill can be amended by the full Parliament. We have also written to Sir David Steel, the Presiding Officer seeking clarification about the Scottish Parliament’s duty to enforce human rights obligations. He has responded that it is only obliged to adhere to the Human Rights Act. However we are seeking clarification as Section 29(2)(d) of the Scotland Act 1998 appears to suggest that the Parliament is not competent to pass any legislation which breeches Convention obligations. However the question remains: does the Scotland Act oblige the Scottish Parliament to pass legislation which satisfies Scotland’s obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child? Conclusion • 34%
were opposed to any physical punishment and call for a total ban; Latest opinion polls show that the tide of public opinion is changing. The Scottish Executive Survey “Research into the Use of Physical Chastisement by Parents as a Form of Discipline”, conducted by NFO System Three, demonstrates a dramatic change in views. Views elicited in 1991, when a similar poll was undertaken, show that 83% then thought it should be lawful to hit a 3 year old whereas in 2002 48% thought it should be unlawful to hit a child under 2 which rose to 51% of those with children under 5. Jim Wallace, during the Stage 1 debate, himself acknowledged the shift: “…a majority of parents support a ban on smacking children under the age of two. An even greater majority thinks that there should be no question of hitting babies under the age of one. ” (18th September 2002). We look forward to proposing amendments at Stage 3 as well as the opportunities afforded in the next Parliament by the Family Law Bill. We currently anticipate that Stage 3 will commence in mid February 2003. For over a year we have been promised a public information campaign on positive discipline, which has yet to materialise, so we will continue to lobby for action. Our membership is increasing in Scotland which currently stands at nearly 100. We plan to convene a supporters' event in early 2003. Funding the Campaign remains an issue. carole@ewartcc.com January
2003 |
Top |
|
Main Menu |
