Hansard

I thank Colin Smyth for lodging his motion and securing this debate, and for his very powerful and moving opening speech. I concur with every single word.

I am so immensely grateful, too, to the Fornethy survivors for their determination in their fight for justice. It is right that we recognise and commend that courage and perseverance today, although they should never have been put in the position of having to fight. It should shame us all—though I do thank them, and I am sorry that I cannot be there in person this afternoon.

I am also grateful to the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee for its sensitive discussions on the petition submitted by the Fornethy survivors. That petition begins—and I quote—

“Survivors need acknowledgement, closure and compensation.”

It is right that we voiced those words today, because they reflect the three time dimensions of the process.

First, the petition seeks acknowledgment of the past. Fornethy survivors experienced harm, not as objects but as children, young people and human beings. Redress Scotland’s presumption of truth is important here. I am sure that we will all empathise with the stories told by survivors—children being taken from their homes in the city to a strange place and separated from their parents and their families for long weeks with no way of reaching them, and possibly with no way of knowing when their ordeal would end.

We have heard survivors tell their stories of the types of harm that they experienced and the losses that they bore—of childhood, joy and safety. We heard of the power imbalances, which affected not only them as children, but their parents and families, who experienced little or no choice in the decision to send their little girls away. We have also heard about the responsibility for that harm. Who should bear that responsibility, both individual and institutional? We should acknowledge that past, however uncomfortable it might be for us.

Secondly, the petition seeks closure in the present, through having the experiences of those women recognised appropriately; through obtaining answers to their questions; through an apology that is full, precise and unstinting; and through assurances that, as far as is humanly possible, we will see to it that this wrong will never recur.

Thirdly, the petition calls for compensation to go into the future, as recognition of the reality of loss, as acknowledgement of responsibility and as seeds of future growth and flourishing.

Trauma-informed practice is not enough without trauma-informed policy, and I very much appreciate the petitions committee’s work on this matter. It has worked exactly as it should have done, by responding to concerns, investigating the situation and making practical and feasible recommendations for action. As Foysol Choudhury has just said, there is no time limit on trauma, so it is time for the Scottish Government to act on the committee’s recommendations.

The Redress for Survivors (Historical Child Abuse in Care) (Scotland) Act 2021 was, as Thompsons Solicitors has pointed out, based on principles of dignity, respect and compassion. The associated regulations turned out not to be consistent with those principles and not to consider the longer-term issues at stake. That was a mistake, but one that can and must be rectified. We must ensure that Redress Scotland is given what it needs to deliver justice, as Colin Smyth has said, and to provide justice for the Fornethy survivors. That is because this issue is not about process—it is about justice.