Hansard

I, too, express my thanks and appreciation for all those who allowed us to do our job in support of the Justice Committee in considering the bill, with a particular focus on the national confidential forum.

It must be said that the process was not without challenges, because people did not see the split in responsibilities. It is worth noting that the justice aspects of the forum posed some difficulties as we took evidence. On one hand, our committee’s focus was clearly on health and wellbeing. On the other, a number of witnesses suggested to us that the absence of accountability itself proved detrimental to the health and wellbeing of some survivors. There was a difficulty in that.

We did not ignore the justice-related issues as we heard and listened to them, but we had to make it clear to the witnesses that we were not considering in depth issues such as the time bar and consultation. We heard, listened to and recorded their evidence on them and we respectfully suggest that, if those matters need to be dealt with, that should be done by the Justice Committee.

Therefore, I will concentrate my remarks on the Health and Sport Committee’s work, with a particular focus on the national confidential forum.

Sorry is the hardest word and even more difficult than saying the word is acting upon it. Nine years ago, Jack McConnell stood where the cabinet secretary is sitting and offered a full apology to adult survivors of childhood abuse. The then First Minister said:

“we in the Parliament, on behalf of the people of Scotland, recognise that they were wronged and that we will do more to support them in the future than we have ever done in the past.”—[Official Report, 1 December 2004; c 12389.]

The national confidential forum will provide a voice to some who, until now, have been denied the right to have their say. One participant in the time to be heard pilot forum told of their experience of abuse in a children’s home in the 1940s. They had to shoulder that burden alone for 70 years. It is unimaginable.

The forum will certainly meet the needs of some people but it will not satisfy everyone. The expectations of the survivor community are high and anyone who has spent time with survivors, as we did in our engagement, can tell members that they place great value on trust. However, their trust is fragile. People have been promised help in the past, only to be let down.

Therefore, we were pleased to hear that the Scottish Government is contributing to the interaction process. There is also activity on the civil litigation time bar and other justice-related issues. I am sure that we all agree that that momentum must be maintained if the interests of all survivors are to be served.

The committee heard evidence at stage 1 from individuals, survivors groups, children’s organisations, care providers, regulators and human rights experts. One witness told us:

“Survivors will judge the process, the bill, the act and the national confidential forum on the personal outcomes for them.”—[Official Report, Health and Sport Committee, 23 April 2013; c 3640.]

For those who choose to participate in the forum, it is crucial—we heard it time and again—that support be provided before they take part so that they know what to expect out of it and what the process will be. An element of support is also needed during and, indeed, after the process because, as we heard, there is a real risk of retraumatisation as a result of it.

Another issue on which we took evidence was the exclusion of those who had been in foster care. We would like that part of the eligibility criteria to be given further consideration. Kathleen Marshall, who was involved in the time to be heard pilot and was formerly Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People, told us that it was an area from which there was most to learn, and learning lessons was something of a theme in what we heard.

The Care Leavers Association said that measures and outcomes were all fine and well, but that

“A life in care and beyond care is much bigger than that ... this debate brings in the emotional side—the love, care and support that are seriously lacking in our current care system”.—[Official Report, Health and Sport Committee, 23 April 2013; c 3659.]

How the work of the national confidential forum will inform in practice that care system now and in the future is not entirely clear from the bill. The centre for excellence for looked after children in Scotland asked for more detail; perhaps the minister will be able to elaborate later. The Church of Scotland raised the point about exploring links between the forum and the care providers, and we took other evidence on that, so I hope that that point is taken up.

We acknowledge the wider approach that is being taken by the Scottish Government via its survivors strategy. We recognise that access to counselling, support, mental health services and advocacy is crucial. From the evidence that we took, we saw the need for a choice of accessible services, long-term support and a skilled mental health workforce. The Health and Sport Committee welcomes the therapeutic value that the national confidential forum will bring. We recall that apology from the First Minister in 2004 and pledge to do more to help those who were abused as children in the care of the state. There is a moral imperative here. A tailored choice of therapeutic supports and other remedies should be available to survivors.