Meeting of the Parliament 12 June 2025
I join members in congratulating Colin Smyth on bringing this issue to the chamber once more, and I pay tribute to him for his long-standing campaigning for the Fornethy survivors. I also join members in welcoming survivors and campaigners who are watching in the gallery today, and I praise their bravery and resolve.
Since 2023, I have sat on the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee, where we considered the petition that calls for the Fornethy survivors to have access to Scotland’s redress scheme. The committee does not often come to strong united conclusions on petitions, but in this case, we have directly recommended to the Scottish Government that the redress scheme be widened to allow those who experienced abuse at Fornethy access to the scheme. We have concluded that an injustice has occurred and that current legislation is not fit for purpose in this case.
To be clear, seeking redress is not about money. No amount of money can undo what those women went through or the life-long consequences of that abuse.
In considering evidence, we heard three major reasons why Fornethy survivors would not be eligible under the redress scheme: the fact that the redress scheme covers only abuse in long-term care; the lack of detailed records available; and the claim that children were sent to Fornethy with parental consent. However, let us be clear that these children were in the care of the state. They were sent to Fornethy at the recommendation of the state, through teachers or medical staff who were employed by Glasgow Corporation. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the state to step up and offer meaningful redress to those affected. It should not matter for how long a person was abused when it comes to getting recognition of the pain that has been caused. There is no time limit for trauma.
On parental consent, submitted evidence includes allegations that children were told what to write home to their parents, and that they could not contact them freely. That is hardly informed parental consent.
On records, we heard from Redress Scotland that there is a presumption of truth, and that it works on a balance of probabilities when considering cases, which means that a lack of detailed records should not be a barrier to change.
The committee recommended the Scottish Government consult on extending redress. If we believe survivors, which I am sure all members do, we should at least consider what more we can do to support them.
I again pay tribute to the brave campaigners who are here today, who have not stopped fighting for recognition of the abuse that they endured. However, paying tribute means nothing if we do not offer redress and change to ensure that this never happens again.
13:13