Chamber
Plenary, 02 Mar 2000
02 Mar 2000 · S1 · Plenary
Item of business
European Convention on Human Rights
I was fascinated to gain an insight into Roseanna Cunningham's surgeries—surgeries in rural Scotland are clearly very different from those in urban Scotland.
Like Lyndsay McIntosh, I think that it will be useful to move discussion away from it being a legal debate. I do not underestimate the job that lawyers and those with legal training do when considering a motion such as this, but it is important to point out, from a lay perspective, that this is a fundamental issue, which goes beyond lawyers and is about giving rights to individuals in our society. We should not be ashamed of incorporating the ECHR or of the consequences and problems of incorporation.
It is apposite that we are debating the issue on the day on which—shamefully—the Home Secretary has allowed General Pinochet to return to Chile to escape the consequences of his actions in denying others their human rights. It is important that we put what has happened today in the context of the denial of human rights. The debate is about ensuring that people in our country are given rights that people in Chile were denied by people such as General Pinochet. I hope that the incorporation of the ECHR means that Scotland and the rest of the UK are prepared to say that such behaviour is unacceptable and that our people should have those rights enshrined in law.
I also take pride in saying that the problems that we face in Scotland, which will soon be repeated in the rest of the UK, are a consequence of devolution. I take pride in the fact that, yet again, we are leading the way and that we are prepared to face up to the consequences of devolution. Although we have taken pride in our legal system and in the way in which people in this country have been able to exercise rights that others have not been able to, we should also admit that we are not immune to change or beyond reproach.
Today we have heard speakers from various quarters admit that there is room for improvement. Although David McLetchie's tone was negative and grudging, he made some suggestions that are worthy of more detailed consideration. Gordon Jackson and Roseanna Cunningham also identified areas where they believe improvements could be made. Let us take some pride in the fact that we are facing up to our responsibilities.
Like other members, I have an open mind on whether there should be a human rights commission, but I want to be persuaded not only of the value of such a commission, but of whether it can make a valid contribution. We should not underestimate the role of this Parliament in carrying out some of the work that has been suggested. I know that the Justice and Home Affairs Committee has a heavy work load, but I do not underestimate the role that it could play in ensuring that human rights are not just embedded in our Parliament and legal system, but promoted beyond them. The Justice and Home Affairs Committee has shown what a good, hard-working committee can do, and it could do much of the work that has been suggested for a human rights commission.
Like Lyndsay McIntosh, I think that it will be useful to move discussion away from it being a legal debate. I do not underestimate the job that lawyers and those with legal training do when considering a motion such as this, but it is important to point out, from a lay perspective, that this is a fundamental issue, which goes beyond lawyers and is about giving rights to individuals in our society. We should not be ashamed of incorporating the ECHR or of the consequences and problems of incorporation.
It is apposite that we are debating the issue on the day on which—shamefully—the Home Secretary has allowed General Pinochet to return to Chile to escape the consequences of his actions in denying others their human rights. It is important that we put what has happened today in the context of the denial of human rights. The debate is about ensuring that people in our country are given rights that people in Chile were denied by people such as General Pinochet. I hope that the incorporation of the ECHR means that Scotland and the rest of the UK are prepared to say that such behaviour is unacceptable and that our people should have those rights enshrined in law.
I also take pride in saying that the problems that we face in Scotland, which will soon be repeated in the rest of the UK, are a consequence of devolution. I take pride in the fact that, yet again, we are leading the way and that we are prepared to face up to the consequences of devolution. Although we have taken pride in our legal system and in the way in which people in this country have been able to exercise rights that others have not been able to, we should also admit that we are not immune to change or beyond reproach.
Today we have heard speakers from various quarters admit that there is room for improvement. Although David McLetchie's tone was negative and grudging, he made some suggestions that are worthy of more detailed consideration. Gordon Jackson and Roseanna Cunningham also identified areas where they believe improvements could be made. Let us take some pride in the fact that we are facing up to our responsibilities.
Like other members, I have an open mind on whether there should be a human rights commission, but I want to be persuaded not only of the value of such a commission, but of whether it can make a valid contribution. We should not underestimate the role of this Parliament in carrying out some of the work that has been suggested. I know that the Justice and Home Affairs Committee has a heavy work load, but I do not underestimate the role that it could play in ensuring that human rights are not just embedded in our Parliament and legal system, but promoted beyond them. The Justice and Home Affairs Committee has shown what a good, hard-working committee can do, and it could do much of the work that has been suggested for a human rights commission.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
The first item of business is a Scottish Conservative and Unionist party debate on motion S1M-610, in the name of David McLetchie, on the European convention...
David McLetchie (Lothians) (Con):
Con
Thank you, Presiding Officer.At the outset of my speech, I wish to clarify what this debate is about and what we are seeking to achieve with our motion. It i...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD):
LD
Was not 1988 during the period of the Conservative Government, when that Government was responsible for ensuring that its legislation complied with ECHR?
David McLetchie:
Con
Robert Brown's history is correct, but I return to what I said at the outset—this debate is about mechanisms. Under the previous system, a challenge to secti...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab):
Lab
Will David McLetchie confirm that all he has outlined is a series of possible challenges and suggestions from academics that measures may be contrary to ECHR...
David McLetchie:
Con
Yes, I am prepared to accept those figures, but there could well be 340 specious charges. Lawyers are creative people when it comes to furthering the interes...
The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Justice (Mr Jim Wallace):
LD
First, I welcome this debate and thank Mr McLetchie and his party for giving the Parliament an opportunity to discuss an important and topical issue. Human r...
David McLetchie:
Con
Will the minister accept that, in the legislation on the armed forces disciplinary code, Westminster is taking action in anticipation of the need to bring ou...
Mr Wallace:
LD
I am grateful to Mr McLetchie for that question, because this is a case not of either/or but of both/and. There will be occasions where it is important—for e...
Roseanna Cunningham (Perth) (SNP):
SNP
I would like to say at the outset that the Scottish National party starts from a position of unequivocally supporting the incorporation of the European conve...
David McLetchie:
Con
On the incorporation of ECHR, we opposed the Human Rights Act 1998 because the issue is the relationship between the convention and our domestic law. The cur...
Roseanna Cunningham:
SNP
I hear what Mr McLetchie is saying, but the Conservatives' tone is one of grudging acceptance of a situation which most of us have welcomed. I sometimes wish...
Mr Jim Wallace:
LD
I hear what Roseanna Cunningham is saying. However, she mentioned that civil cases include custody and access cases. Will she accept that sheriffs principal ...
Roseanna Cunningham:
SNP
I do not doubt that sheriffs principal are doing their very best, but it is clear from the figures that, in many jurisdictions, they are doing a juggling act...
Gordon Jackson (Glasgow Govan ) (Lab):
Lab
It is all very well to say that such a change should be anticipated, but what age would Roseanna Cunningham set to ensure that it conforms to ECHR? Surely we...
Roseanna Cunningham:
SNP
It is inevitable that Gordon Jackson would ask that question. The truth is that once we decide that eight years old is not acceptable, we need to start the p...
Gordon Jackson (Glasgow Govan) (Lab):
Lab
For five minutes, I was enjoying myself, listening to Roseanna Cunningham. I was agreeing with her, and I say to David McLetchie that I share her disappointm...
David McLetchie:
Con
In relation to the certification of compatibility of ministers, does Gordon Jackson believe that a one-line certificate of compliance is sufficient for this ...
Gordon Jackson:
Lab
I understand what Mr McLetchie means, but the difficulty with having the full legal advice analysed is that two lawyers will give two opinions, three lawyers...
Roseanna Cunningham:
SNP
Does Gordon Jackson think that, if the age of criminal responsibility was set at eight, it would survive a challenge?
Gordon Jackson:
Lab
My honest opinion is that it would not have a snowball's chance in summer of surviving a challenge. However, the fact that I do not think that the proposal t...
David McLetchie:
Con
Would Gordon Jackson accept that the previous legal relationship between this country and the convention resulted in changes to our law? I am making the poin...
Gordon Jackson:
Lab
Of course that is right. It means that things are done more quickly. That is, however, far outweighed by the advantage for the citizen in having a matter res...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid):
SNP
The debate is now open. Speeches should last about four minutes; I will allow an additional minute or so for interventions.
Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh (Central Scotland) (Con):
Con
I am the first non-lawyer to speak. I do not get paid by the minute, so I will be brief.As has been said, we support the Government's aim of protecting the r...
Hugh Henry (Paisley South) (Lab):
Lab
I was fascinated to gain an insight into Roseanna Cunningham's surgeries—surgeries in rural Scotland are clearly very different from those in urban Scotland....
Mrs McIntosh:
Con
Will the member take an intervention?
Hugh Henry:
Lab
No, I am about to finish. I want to echo Jim Wallace's point that the promotion of a human rights culture in Scotland is fundamental. We must respect human r...
Michael Matheson (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
For a fleeting moment during Gordon Jackson's speech, I was of the mind that the problem is not with the ECHR, but with lawyers. We might not be having today...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD):
LD
First, I must declare an interest in respect of my membership of the Law Society of Scotland, and my legal consultancy with Ross, Harper and Murphy—not least...