Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 22 March 2011
22 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Forced Marriage etc (Protection and Jurisdiction) (Scotland) Bill
Having served on the Equal Opportunities Committee since 1999, I am pleased that the last debate of the parliamentary session in which I will participate concerns a bill that was subject to scrutiny by that committee.
Before I address forced marriages, I pay tribute to the work that my friend and comrade Marlyn Glen has carried out in her role as deputy convener. She has been on the committee since being elected and her contribution has been invaluable over the years, particularly on the bill. Marlyn is off to pursue new challenges. Knowing her ability, work ethic and commitment to her values, I am sure that she will succeed at whatever she does next. I wish her all the best.
The Scottish Government accepted Marlyn Glen’s stage 2 amendments. Sadly, it did not accept mine—I note that the minister did not mention that in his opening speech. At stage 2, I put the case for replacing the term “equitable jurisdiction” with “nobile officium”. That suggestion came from the Law Society, whose reason for wishing to replace the term used in the bill was that it was not a recognised term in Scots law. What is meant by equitable jurisdiction in the context of the bill is the extraordinary equitable power to do justice where ordinary procedure would provide no remedy, which in Scotland is called the nobile officium of the higher courts. However, the Scottish Government believed and argued that equitable jurisdiction includes the nobile officium. Therefore, I did not bring the amendment back at stage 3, as it seemed we would just have the same disagreement.
Overall, the Law Society was not entirely convinced that section 12 is necessary, so I helpfully suggest that it be subject to post-legislative scrutiny at a future date, which adds to the comments that Johann Lamont made about the need for such scrutiny.
Aside from that minor disagreement, the committee was pleased to recommend support at stage 1 for the general principles of the bill, which is an important piece of legislation, and its suggested amendments were accepted at stage 2. There was certainly no disagreement about the need for the bill or the principle that everyone should be able to enter into a marriage or civil partnership without being forced or coerced to do so. When the bill is passed later today, it will bring us into line with other parts of the UK with similar legislation; indeed, I think that our legislation will be better.
We in the Labour Party are clear that the bill is needed to try to stop the horrendous practice of forcing anyone into marriage, whether male or female. However, we know that it is mostly young women and girls who are likely to be in that situation and that forced marriage is part of the continuum of violence against women and is completely unacceptable. As Marlyn Glen pointed out, it is linked with horrendous acts of violence, rape and domestic abuse. We need to be clear that forced marriage is not a cultural phenomenon but is abuse.
Sadly, the people in victims’ families who should protect them are often the perpetrators, as Anne McLaughlin pointed out. When the bill was first proposed, it was welcomed by a victim, who chose to remain anonymous, in a statement that was provided through Shakti Women’s Aid. The victim described the experience of forced marriage as surreal and immensely traumatic. She added:
“We often rely on our families for support but when that family subjects you to marry unwillingly you feel it is impossible to escape.”
It is up to us as a society to protect vulnerable people, and we have a duty as lawmakers to ensure that appropriate legislation is in place to help to do that. We also need to raise awareness about the issue of forced marriage and ensure that victims know what support is available to them, as other members have said. If the number of victims coming forward increases, we may need to consider the resources for support agencies.
I thank all the witnesses who helped the committee with the work of scrutinising the bill and I acknowledge that all committee members worked together in a non-partisan fashion to ensure that the bill would be the best legislation possible. I note the consensual way in which the Government accepted most of the amendments that were proposed to improve the bill, which meant that there was no need for a great deal of amendments at stage 3 today. Last but not least, I thank the clerking team who, with the Scottish Parliament information centre, helped to draw information together for the committee.
The bill is not a major piece of legislation in parliamentary terms, but it will have a major impact. It will not affect vast numbers of people but, for those whom it helps, its impact will be substantial. With the passing of the bill later, the Parliament will send out a clear message that forced marriages are completely unacceptable, are part of the spectrum of violence against women and girls and will not be tolerated in Scotland.
10:02
Before I address forced marriages, I pay tribute to the work that my friend and comrade Marlyn Glen has carried out in her role as deputy convener. She has been on the committee since being elected and her contribution has been invaluable over the years, particularly on the bill. Marlyn is off to pursue new challenges. Knowing her ability, work ethic and commitment to her values, I am sure that she will succeed at whatever she does next. I wish her all the best.
The Scottish Government accepted Marlyn Glen’s stage 2 amendments. Sadly, it did not accept mine—I note that the minister did not mention that in his opening speech. At stage 2, I put the case for replacing the term “equitable jurisdiction” with “nobile officium”. That suggestion came from the Law Society, whose reason for wishing to replace the term used in the bill was that it was not a recognised term in Scots law. What is meant by equitable jurisdiction in the context of the bill is the extraordinary equitable power to do justice where ordinary procedure would provide no remedy, which in Scotland is called the nobile officium of the higher courts. However, the Scottish Government believed and argued that equitable jurisdiction includes the nobile officium. Therefore, I did not bring the amendment back at stage 3, as it seemed we would just have the same disagreement.
Overall, the Law Society was not entirely convinced that section 12 is necessary, so I helpfully suggest that it be subject to post-legislative scrutiny at a future date, which adds to the comments that Johann Lamont made about the need for such scrutiny.
Aside from that minor disagreement, the committee was pleased to recommend support at stage 1 for the general principles of the bill, which is an important piece of legislation, and its suggested amendments were accepted at stage 2. There was certainly no disagreement about the need for the bill or the principle that everyone should be able to enter into a marriage or civil partnership without being forced or coerced to do so. When the bill is passed later today, it will bring us into line with other parts of the UK with similar legislation; indeed, I think that our legislation will be better.
We in the Labour Party are clear that the bill is needed to try to stop the horrendous practice of forcing anyone into marriage, whether male or female. However, we know that it is mostly young women and girls who are likely to be in that situation and that forced marriage is part of the continuum of violence against women and is completely unacceptable. As Marlyn Glen pointed out, it is linked with horrendous acts of violence, rape and domestic abuse. We need to be clear that forced marriage is not a cultural phenomenon but is abuse.
Sadly, the people in victims’ families who should protect them are often the perpetrators, as Anne McLaughlin pointed out. When the bill was first proposed, it was welcomed by a victim, who chose to remain anonymous, in a statement that was provided through Shakti Women’s Aid. The victim described the experience of forced marriage as surreal and immensely traumatic. She added:
“We often rely on our families for support but when that family subjects you to marry unwillingly you feel it is impossible to escape.”
It is up to us as a society to protect vulnerable people, and we have a duty as lawmakers to ensure that appropriate legislation is in place to help to do that. We also need to raise awareness about the issue of forced marriage and ensure that victims know what support is available to them, as other members have said. If the number of victims coming forward increases, we may need to consider the resources for support agencies.
I thank all the witnesses who helped the committee with the work of scrutinising the bill and I acknowledge that all committee members worked together in a non-partisan fashion to ensure that the bill would be the best legislation possible. I note the consensual way in which the Government accepted most of the amendments that were proposed to improve the bill, which meant that there was no need for a great deal of amendments at stage 3 today. Last but not least, I thank the clerking team who, with the Scottish Parliament information centre, helped to draw information together for the committee.
The bill is not a major piece of legislation in parliamentary terms, but it will have a major impact. It will not affect vast numbers of people but, for those whom it helps, its impact will be substantial. With the passing of the bill later, the Parliament will send out a clear message that forced marriages are completely unacceptable, are part of the spectrum of violence against women and girls and will not be tolerated in Scotland.
10:02
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson)
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-8157, in the name of Alex Neil, on the Forced Marriage etc (Protection and Jurisdiction) (Scotland) Bill....
The Minister for Housing and Communities (Alex Neil)
SNP
I thank the members of the Equal Opportunities Committee, its convener, Margaret Mitchell, and the committee clerks for their work on the bill. I thank also ...
Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
Lab
Will the minister take an intervention?
Alex Neil
SNP
I am afraid that I am just finishing my speech.We expect the bill to result in more victims seeking help because—for the first time in Scotland—a focus will ...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
I call Johann Lamont, who has about six minutes.09:31
Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab)
Lab
For once, I might not use my full quota of minutes, but that does not mean that the bill is not significant. It is relatively straightforward and short, and ...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con)
Con
The Forced Marriage etc (Protection and Jurisdiction) (Scotland) Bill is important legislation that the Equal Opportunities Committee had the opportunity to ...
Hugh O’Donnell (Central Scotland) (LD)
LD
There is an oxymoron at the heart of the debate—it is “forced marriage”. If something is forced, there cannot be a marriage. The evidence that we took on the...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
We have a little time in hand, so there is a bit of flexibility, if anyone needs it.09:44
Anne McLaughlin (Glasgow) (SNP)
SNP
This will be my final speech as an MSP. I have decided to set myself a challenge. Instead of having the speech written out in front of me in 16-point bold, w...
Marlyn Glen (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I am pleased to make my final contribution in the Parliament during this important debate on forced marriages. The Forced Marriage etc (Protection and Jurisd...
Christina McKelvie (Central Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I am pleased to speak in the debate on the second-last bill that we will pass in this session of the Scottish Parliament—the first session in which I have ha...
Hugh O’Donnell
LD
Perhaps they are someone else’s.
Christina McKelvie
SNP
Perhaps they are.When the Parliament was established, human rights and equality were written into its proceedings from the outset. The Parliament was establi...
Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
Lab
Having served on the Equal Opportunities Committee since 1999, I am pleased that the last debate of the parliamentary session in which I will participate con...
Hugh O’Donnell
LD
This has been a short and sweet, consensual debate. However, I suspect that another event later this morning, commonly known as First Minister’s questions, i...
Jamie McGrigor (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Con
I, too, thank Marlyn Glen for everything that she has done in the Parliament and wish her happiness and success in the future.It is a pleasure to close for t...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
I call Johann Lamont to close on behalf of the Scottish Labour Party. You have quite an amount of flexibility, Ms Lamont.10:07
Johann Lamont
Lab
Hugh O’Donnell described this as a short and sweet debate. Neither the minister nor I often contribute to short and sweet debates, so we should cherish the m...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
We come to the minister to wind up the debate. Minister, I can offer you your second 15-minute slot in a row. You have until 10.30 should you choose to use t...
Alex Neil
SNP
Johann Lamont started by saying that it is not often she and I do short and sweet. I disagree. We do short and sweet all the time: she does the short, and I ...
Elaine Smith
Lab
Will the minister join me in thanking Jean McFadden for my knowledge of Latin? She taught me at St Patrick’s high school in Coatbridge.
Alex Neil
SNP
The Minister for Community Safety has just intimated to me that the correct pronunciation is “nobil-ay” officium. I am sure that the minister knows all about...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
I was going to make that point to the minister.
Alex Neil
SNP
Another lawyer—they are all around me this morning. I put on record the fact that Robert Brown, who nearly made an intervention, has made an enormous contrib...