Meeting of the Parliament 29 January 2026 [Draft]
::I will start my remarks where the public conversation on the bill started, which is with the parents and the carers who have had to live through something that we should never normalise in any school setting—not for any child, and not in any part of Scotland. I pay tribute to campaigners Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger for their strength and determination, to Daniel Johnson for believing in them and in their plight, and to the Education, Children and Young People Committee for its measured and thorough report.
Restraint and seclusion should only ever be used as a last resort, to prevent injury. That is the Government’s position, which I support. Use should be rooted in children’s rights, safety and basic human dignity. For too many families, harm has been caused not just by an incident itself but by what comes afterwards—the uncertainty, the delay in getting answers, the lack of clarity and, sometimes, the feeling that they are being kept at arm’s length from information about their own child. That is why parents and carers have pushed for consistency, transparency and change that are real, and not just well meaning.
I come to this debate not just as an MSP but as a parent of children with additional support needs. I have witnessed restraint and seclusion being used on my own children in primary school. Even now, that memory causes frustration. I send my whole-hearted support to parents, children and young people affected by this issue. I share their frustration, and I understand.
The petition that was lodged in the Parliament back in 2015, and another lodged with the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland in 2018, highlighted inconsistent practice across local authorities and a lack of monitoring. Those are not small issues. If practice is inconsistent, rights are inconsistent. If monitoring is weak, learning and trust are weak—and trust is what families need most.
I therefore welcome the Scottish Government’s guidance that was published in November 2024, which is built around relationships and rights, prevention, de-escalation and post-incident support. That guidance matters, and it was developed with the engagement of stakeholders, including parents, education staff, local government and unions, which is really important. I am glad to see that the one-year review is now under way, with a final report expected in March 2026.
I do not see this as an either/or situation. The bill would put key expectations on a statutory footing. I note that the Government will support the general principles of the bill at stage 1, while being honest about the amendments that might be required. I think that that is a responsible approach, because it respects the complexity of the matter while giving us the chance to get the detail right at stage 2.
What I hear from parents and carers is not a desire to punish staff; it is a desire to be treated as a partner, to be informed promptly, to have an accurate record, to know that there is clear national expectation, and to ensure that children’s rights are not optional or dependent on a postcode.
I also note and understand that schools are operating in really tough conditions. Distressed behaviour has increased, workloads are heavy and staff safety matters, too. That is exactly why we must get our approach right for everyone involved. I believe that we can both protect children’s rights and support staff with clear, workable expectations, training and a culture that learns rather than blames. We must refine definitions to avoid ambiguity and we must ensure that the practical operation strengthens relationships rather than weakens them.
I support the motion to agree to the bill’s general principles at stage 1, with parents and carers at the very forefront of my mind and with a clear expectation that definitions can be tightened at stage 2. Families deserve consistency, children deserve dignity, and staff deserve a system that supports them in keeping everyone safe.