Hansard

It might have taken all of four years, but with less than a week to go before dissolution I am pleased to conclude the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee’s work, and its final bill, on a consensual rather than acrimonious note. As members will acknowledge, there is no point in pretending that we have been the most united of committees, but I am genuinely pleased that we have been able to come together and reach broad agreement on the Public Records (Scotland) Bill and that our last debate will not be marked by our spitting unpleasantries at each other across the chamber. Given the imminent election, I suspect that my enjoyment of this moment is unlikely to last long but, in the same spirit of appreciation, I thank the minister and her team; the keeper of the records of Scotland, Mr George MacKenzie; and all those whose work and efforts have brought us to this point.

The purpose of the bill is to improve public record keeping in Scotland. It will place an obligation on certain public authorities to produce a records management plan, which will be approved by the keeper of the records of Scotland. The keeper will publish a model RMP as part of best practice advice to authorities, and the bill will give the keeper the power to carry out a review of the implementation of RMPs. It is hoped that the duties in the bill will not be particularly onerous or costly, but the keeper will be able to issue warning notices and publicise the names of any authorities that are found to be in breach of the provisions.

In our earlier discussions about the bill, genuine worries were expressed about the impact of the proposals, and perhaps there were concerns about where the discussions and dialogue were heading. The willingness of the Executive and the bill team to meet those concerns and engage with stakeholders has assuaged most, if not all, of those anxieties, and I thank them for that.

I thank the committee clerks and the drafting team. I do not think that the bill has been the most difficult to work on, but I occasionally worry about how difficult we have been as a committee—or how demanding I have been. [Interruption.] I hear Margaret Smith saying, “Hear, hear!” I formally note my gratitude for and appreciation of the patience and thoughtfulness that our clerks have shown.

My list of thanks is reaching Oscar proportions, although so far it has been given without the histrionics.

I pay tribute to the contributions of all the witnesses, including those from COSLA and the voluntary sector, particularly the children’s organisations. There is no doubting the alarm with which some in the public sector and the voluntary sector initially viewed the bill. They expressed the fear that additional burdens and unwanted bureaucracy might be added at a time when service levels are under threat. I am not sure that that anxiety has entirely gone away, but the amendments that were agreed to at stage 2 certainly addressed some of the outstanding issues. The bill’s tone and language have changed and it is now recognised that the approach to good record keeping needs partnership rather than diktat from above. The principle of proportionality or balance of risk has also been accepted and written into the bill, although, of course, as with all such measures, we will need to see how that works in practice. Most of us in the Parliament are aware of the hard work and thought that voluntary sector groups and organisations such as COSLA put into legislation, but it is worth putting on the record how much that effort matters and the difference that it makes to the legislative process.

Finally, I thank those whose work lay behind the bill originally, and whose evidence in support of the proposals was ultimately convincing.

The systemic review of historical abuse in residential schools and children’s homes in Scotland, which was led by Tom Shaw, revealed the extent and failings of public record keeping. There is no doubt that the suffering and damage to young lives that former residents experienced have been compounded by their inability to access accurate, factual information about their upbringing. As an experience, that is perhaps not on a par with the trauma that is suffered by survivors of child abuse, but the importance and impact of good record keeping have been captured many times by the “Who Do You Think You Are?” BBC series. Even a character as sure of himself and as confident of his own identity as Jeremy Paxman broke down when he was confronted with documented evidence that his Scottish great-grandmother lost her poor relief because she had an illegitimate child. I could be wrong, but I think that he was already feeling emotionally vulnerable because of the evidence that proved that he is half Scottish. The point that I am making—which our committee witnesses put rather better—is that good record keeping is not just a bureaucratic necessity; it can be invaluable to many individuals’ lives. It is a moral obligation, and it will be a legal obligation on our public authorities.

I recommend that members support the passage of the bill.

11:43