Hansard

I begin by thanking COSLA, Mark Ruskell and officials for their continued commitment and support ahead of today’s reconsideration debate, and Andy Wightman for his work before that. I thank the Local Government, Housing and Planning Committee and the stakeholders who engaged with it on my reconsideration amendments, and I also thank my officials, who have worked hard and supported me to reach this point.

Following the referral of this member’s bill to the Supreme Court, the Scottish Government confirmed that we would do all that we could to support Mark Ruskell to progress the bill to reconsideration as soon as practicable. That commitment was reaffirmed in the Verity house agreement.

On 1 October 2024, I confirmed in writing that the Scottish Government would lodge and speak to the necessary amendments, drawing on our experience with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill. That is what we have done. The amendments agreed to today address the issues identified by the Supreme Court and I am confident that they will bring the bill within the legislative competence of this Parliament.

I have been clear that my amendments reduce the reach of the charter provisions in Scots law. The Scottish Government had hoped to preserve more of the bill as originally passed, including our hope to avoid restrictions to section 2, which the Supreme Court did not specifically adjudicate on. However, despite extensive engagement with the UK Government, we were unable to rule out the possibility of a further referral of the bill to the Supreme Court unless a more cautious approach was adopted. Given the limited time left in this session of Parliament, we therefore agreed with Mr Ruskell and COSLA that the priority must be to complete reconsideration swiftly while minimising the possibility of a further referral. I welcome Opposition members’ acknowledgment of that in the debate on 4 February.

I emphasise that, even as amended, the bill remains an important step forward. It embeds charter principles in Scots law, providing legal protection for local government that is not available elsewhere in the UK, and signals this Parliament’s commitment to respecting local democracy and fostering the cultural change that that requires.

My amendments broadly align with the approach taken during reconsideration of the UNCRC bill, ensuring coherence across the legislative framework. Key provisions of real value remain intact, including the duty on ministers to promote local government and the requirement for charter compatibility statements for every new bill. COSLA, as the principal stakeholder, has been clear that enacting the bill, even in its amended form, remains far preferable to having no legislation at all, and that the bill will still play a significant role in strengthening the position of local government in Scotland’s constitutional landscape.

I am aware that a number of stakeholders who wrote to the committee in response to its call for views have suggested that, in future, the bill’s scope could be expanded by, for example, re-enacting relevant UK act provisions as acts of the Scottish Parliament. As I mentioned earlier, the University of Glasgow’s centre for public policy recently published a major report that examines devolved lawmaking following the Supreme Court’s section 28(7) rulings. That report highlights that, although the Scottish Parliament may amend or repeal UK laws in devolved areas and create new laws, it may not condition the meaning or effect of UK legislation, nor may it make UK Parliament rules dependent on decisions by Scottish ministers or the courts.

Although the report acknowledges that potential workarounds exist, the authors are of the view that an overall solution is required to the issues that have affected the UNCRC act and the bill that we are discussing. As the children’s rights scheme that was laid before Parliament in November 2025 records, the Scottish Government is committed to progressing engagement with the UK Government in that regard. However, the report concludes that the Scottish Government cannot resolve those challenges alone. We will consider the next steps, including engaging with this Parliament, the UK Government and others on the authors’ expert analysis.

As I outlined during the earlier debate, reconsideration of the bill was the logical next step to enshrine existing good practice in law following the signing of the Verity house agreement. I am confident that the amended bill addresses the Supreme Court judgment, brings the bill within legislative competence and minimises the possibility of a further referral to the Supreme Court.

16:27