Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
14
Parties on record
2,095,827
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,095,827 contributions in session S6, 11 May 2026 – 10 Jun 2026. Latest 30 days: 2,655. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 09 Jun 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 28 May 2019

28 May 2019 · S5 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Maguire, Ruth SNP Cunninghame South Watch on SPTV

I am proud to speak in this debate on behalf of the Equalities and Human Rights Committee. I give my heartfelt thanks to our diligent and professional clerking team, who are an example to us all.

The bill has dominated our work programme for the past few months. It is an important bill for children and families and could affect a huge number of people in Scotland. We knew that, as a committee, we needed to hear directly from those affected, so we set out an ambitious programme of engagement. We went to meet parents and grandparents in Pollokshields, Sighthill and Midlothian. We visited young people in Kirkcaldy at the YMCA juniors club. To reach the parents and children we could not get to, we developed a meeting in a box, so that community groups could send us their views. We received responses covering more than 300 individuals. Finally, we held an external meeting and a fact-finding day in Portree on Skye.

We could not have heard from all those people without the help of a number of teams from around the Parliament. On behalf of the committee, I thank our outreach team and the engagement unit for helping us to hear from so many voices. Our thanks also go to the members of staff—official report, media, web and social media—who travelled to Portree with us, particularly our security staff, who travelled through a snowstorm to support our meeting. We appreciated having them there.

Of course, our biggest thanks go to those who informed our scrutiny. More than 450 people, many of them individuals, took the time to write to us with their views. I know that many of them have concerns about the bill and its possible effect on family life. I say to them that the committee has heard their concerns. We met people who shared with us their fears about the bill, and we listened to their views. However, we also heard that many parents today do not smack their children and that Scottish society is moving that way in any event, but that we need legislation and support to help parents to find alternative approaches to discipline.

We also heard from children and young people, who told us their thoughts. Our particular thanks go to the children of Portree high school and bun-sgoil Ghàidhlig Phort Rìgh, who shared their opinions intelligently and freely. The preparation that they put in ahead of our visit was most impressive. Tapadh leibh airson fàilte cho cridheil a chur oirnn ann am Port Rìgh.

Since the extension of its remit in 2016, the committee has, wherever possible, taken a human rights-based approach to its work. That approach informs our work with children and young people. A human rights approach recognises that children have the right to participate, to be listened to and to have their views recognised and respected. That has been central to our work on the bill, which, after all, has children at its core.

The bill is about rights; it is about the right that children have to be free from violence in every setting, including the home. Home should be a place of safety and comfort where a child is nurtured. Therefore, it is extraordinary that the home is the one place where children are allowed to be hit—and it is only children who are allowed to be hit, not partners or pets.

All of us have the right to have our private and family life respected. Much of the evidence that we heard questioned whether there was a conflict between the right of a child to be free from violence and the right of parents to raise children as they believe best. We were reassured by the many witnesses who told us that the right to family life does not include a right to use physical punishment. The Scottish Human Rights Commission said that the European Court of Human Rights has determined several times that the right to family life is not interfered with by prohibiting physical punishment of a child. It went on to say that physical punishment clearly interferes with a child’s right to dignity.

Because of their physical and mental immaturity, children are entitled to and require more, not less, protection from violence than adults do, and we, as adults and parliamentarians, have a duty to uphold the rights of all vulnerable people.

On our visits and as part of our engagement, we met parents who told us that they had been smacked and were fine, or that they smacked their children with no ill effect. We heard that there is a marked difference between violence against children and a “loving smack”. Nevertheless, the evidence that we heard from experts and academics is that physical punishment has negative effects, which range from depression and mental health issues to an increased tendency on the part of those who are punished in that way to use violence themselves. As Jane Callaghan, professor of child wellbeing and protection at the University of Stirling, told us, it makes no difference whether those smacks were administered in love or in anger: the effect is the same.

In the course of our evidence taking, we heard many times that parents need to smack children in certain situations—the child might be reaching for something hot, or they might be about to run into the road—but Dr Louise Hill from the centre for excellence for looked-after children in Scotland put it best when she told us:

“as a parent of young children, if they run into traffic, my immediate response is to hold them. I get hold of my children and I keep them safe.”—[Official Report, Equalities and Human Rights Committee, 28 February 2019; c 34.]

That is what the bill attempts to do—it shows children and young people that, as a society and as a Parliament, we want to keep them safe. It puts their rights at the centre of our policy making, and it aims to support families in doing so.

The majority of the Equalities and Human Rights Committee supports the general principles of the Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) Bill.

14:33  

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Linda Fabiani) SNP
The next item of business is a debate on motion S5M-17342, in the name of John Finnie, on stage 1 of the Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) ...
John Finnie (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Green
I am delighted to be opening the debate on the general principles of the Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) Bill. I give thanks to the conve...
Ruth Maguire (Cunninghame South) (SNP) SNP
I am proud to speak in this debate on behalf of the Equalities and Human Rights Committee. I give my heartfelt thanks to our diligent and professional clerki...
The Minister for Children and Young People (Maree Todd) SNP
I am pleased to speak for the Scottish Government on the Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) Bill. As the Minister for Children and Young Peo...
Liz Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Con
I am listening carefully to what the minister is saying. If we are listening, has the minister given any consideration to the strong views of the majority of...
Maree Todd SNP
When parents were asked, more than 90 per cent of respondents said that they believe that children should have the same protection against assault as adults ...
Oliver Mundell (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Con
Can the minister set out how many people in Scotland thought it is appropriate to criminalise parents for such activities? Once the defence is removed, under...
Maree Todd SNP
I will happily tackle that point in my summing up. We have been over that at committee: Oliver Mundell is regurgitating the same arguments. By removing the ...
Oliver Mundell Con
If the minister wants to talk about clarity, is she able to give just one example in which a person would be criminalised for an action that would currently ...
Maree Todd SNP
Let me be clear. The change in legislation does not create a new offence. The offence already exists: the offence is assault and there is currently a defence...
Liz Smith Con
Will the minister give way?
Maree Todd SNP
This is the last intervention that I will take.
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
I can allow you a little extra time, minister.
Liz Smith Con
Can the minister explain with clarity, as I think is her role, why she believes that the current law is bad law?
Maree Todd SNP
I make it absolutely clear that the Scottish Government thinks that it is not acceptable to use physical punishment on children. We believe that children sho...
Oliver Mundell (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Con
When I was elected in 2016, I did not imagine that I would be standing up in the chamber to oppose a bill that calls for equal protection of children from as...
John Finnie Green
Has Oliver Mundell read what the explanatory notes say about the public interest test? Does he understand that that is not changing? He was present when poli...
Oliver Mundell Con
I look forward to the Lord Advocate coming to the committee on 6 June to explain why, in its supplementary written evidence, the Crown Office and Procurator ...
Alex Cole-Hamilton (Edinburgh Western) (LD) LD
Will the member take an intervention?
Oliver Mundell Con
I will not. As legislators, our first duty must be to ensure that legislation is workable. My concern is this. I asked the Scottish Government’s legal team ...
John Finnie Green
I say again that Oliver Mundell is implying that there will be some new change of regime regarding investigation and prosecution. Absolutely nothing is chang...
Oliver Mundell Con
That comment is, quite frankly, insulting. It makes a fundamental error on a point of law, which is that, in this country, where a defence exists, it is cons...
Gail Ross (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Rona Mackay (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
The Deputy Presiding Officer SNP
The member is in his final minute.
Oliver Mundell Con
Assault can include a gesture that places a person in a state of fear, even if there is no physical contact. That seems to be a very broad category of behavi...
Mary Fee (West Scotland) (Lab) Lab
I welcome the opportunity to participate in the stage 1 debate on the Children (Equal Protection from Assault) (Scotland) Bill. Let me say at the outset that...
Oliver Mundell Con
Can the member give a guarantee, then, that no parents will be prosecuted after the law changes?
Mary Fee Lab
I think that the minister more than adequately covered that point when Oliver Mundell intervened during her speech. I say to Oliver Mundell that I have stru...
Liz Smith Con
I could not agree more with Mary Fee’s point, but does she recognise that there is a fundamental difference in law between the terms “assault” and “reasonabl...