Education, Children and Young People Committee 10 September 2025
Good morning. There are positive aspects to the bill and elements that are very welcome, such as the discretion that the bill proposes to give to reporters to send cases in which the grounds for referral are opposed directly to the sheriff, which would avoid a grounds hearing.
Much of my criticism centres on the treatment of grounds hearings. The bill provides an opportunity to meet the desire of the young people whom we listened to during the working groups that fed into the preparation of the “Hearings for Children” report. We understood from them that the experience of a grounds hearing can be demeaning, embarrassing and, sometimes, traumatic. We found a way of suggesting that, in the many cases in which the grounds for referral are unopposed, we could deal with the grounds without a hearing. We displayed that ambition, but it has not been met in the bill.
Instead, I think that there has been a well-intended endeavour to modify the current process so that we will still have grounds hearings but make them easier—I might be oversimplifying, but, essentially, I think that that is the aim. I am afraid that, as a consequence, there is some really complicated language. I am not ashamed to say, as a lawyer of many years’ standing, that I find proposed new section 90 of the Children’s Hearings (Scotland) Act 2011 impossible to read. There are so many double negatives and cross references that is impossible to retain them in an ordinary reading of the provision.
Those are the highlights of my criticisms on grounds. There are others, which I would be happy to expand on, but that gives you a flavour of it.