Committee
Justice 1 Committee, 02 Nov 2005
02 Nov 2005 · S2 · Justice 1 Committee
Item of business
Family Law (Scotland) Bill: <br />Stage 2
I am grateful to Margaret Mitchell for lodging amendment 14, because we should debate the matter. I know that such a system was tried in England and Wales. My understanding is that it was not very effective, but it is an important matter to debate in the context of the consultation on family matters and family law.I ask myself what we are trying to do. It seems to me that I could support the principle of trying to save marriages when that can be done, so my next question is how that can be done. Marlyn Glen suggested that it could not be done by forcing couples into reconciliation, so should the Executive be doing more to make such services available? We have deliberately separated this amendment from Stewart Stevenson's amendment 42. Members will get a chance to discuss what they think about mediation and conciliation support services. It is important to distinguish between the two debates.We have learned a lot during the passage of the bill. I have learned about the importance of conciliation services and, as Bruce McFee pointed out, about the important difference between mediation and conciliation. It strikes me that early intervention is key; I think that early intervention can save relationships. My problem with amendment 14 is that it proposes consideration of reconciliation at the end of the process, and I am not convinced that that would be effective. It could be effective if the issue were tackled earlier.I have the same question as Jim Wallace about the construction of amendment 14. The sheriff is to decide"whether there is a reasonable prospect of a reconciliation".I could be satisfied on the point that Fergus Ewing makes, because I do not believe that any sheriff would think that there was a reasonable prospect of reconciliation if issues are brought to the court about violence and so on. However, the amendment would mean that the sheriff effectively had the power to delay the decree if they thought that there was a reasonable prospect of reconciliation. How is the sheriff to judge that?My fundamental concern about the amendment is the stage at which the prospect of reconciliation is assessed. Should conciliation be supported before couples get to the stage of applying for divorce or should it be at the end? When we debate Stewart Stevenson's amendment, I will certainly say that, if we believe that relationships require support from time to time, these services are very important and couples and families of all descriptions should benefit from them.
In the same item of business
The Convener:
Lab
Item 2 is the Family Law (Scotland) Bill at stage 2. I welcome once again Hugh Henry, the Deputy Minister for Justice, and his legal team: Carol Duncan, Anne...
The Deputy Minister for Justice (Hugh Henry):
Lab
I am entirely in your hands, convener. I am content to listen to what other members have to say.
The Convener:
Lab
Okay. I will take two or three comments, and then allow you the final say.
Mr Bruce McFee (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
As members know, I spoke on the matter at length previously. It is regrettable that the advice was the way it was; we do not want to hammer home the point an...
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP):
SNP
I did not participate in the first stage 2 meeting, but I remain concerned about cases in which, through inadvertence, it transpires that a marriage that too...
Mr Wallace:
LD
It is regrettable that we are in this position. However, I note that section 28 relates to the validity of marriages contracted abroad. Given that the number...
The Convener:
Lab
I would support that approach. In fact, I was going to conclude my remarks by saying that I think that the Executive ought to remain open to that possibility...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
I regret that I inadvertently misled the committee about the impact of the abolition of marriage by cohabitation with habit and repute on couples who marry a...
The Convener:
Lab
I am aware that you described the Executive's position at the previous meeting. We do not seek to argue against the Executive—well, perhaps some of us do—but...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
If we decide that it would not be appropriate to lodge an amendment and another member wishes to do so, we would support the right of that member to have the...
The Convener:
Lab
Before we begin consideration of stage 2 of the Family Law (Scotland) Bill, I welcome to the committee several visiting members: Ken Macintosh, Brian Adam an...
Before section 10
The Convener:
Lab
Amendment 14, in the name of Margaret Mitchell, is in a group on its own.
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con):
Con
Good morning, minister. The purpose of amendment 14 is to make explicit the possibility and encouragement of reconciliation in the proposals that are contain...
Mrs Mary Mulligan (Linlithgow) (Lab):
Lab
Good morning, minister. I fully accept the intention behind Margaret Mitchell's amendment 14. We all want to support marriage; we want, in particular, to sup...
Stewart Stevenson:
SNP
I, too, have sympathy for what Margaret Mitchell seeks to achieve through amendment 14, but I also have difficulty with the means by which she has expressed ...
Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP):
SNP
These are highly sensitive matters, and I am sure that we all respect the opinions of those with whom we may not necessarily agree. I am inclined to support ...
Mr McFee:
SNP
I have a great deal of sympathy with Margaret Mitchell's attempt to introduce some sanity into a process that sometimes loses its footing. I have swithered o...
Marlyn Glen (North East Scotland) (Lab):
Lab
I start by reminding the committee of the lengths to which we have gone to take formal and informal evidence, from many organisations and at many levels, on ...
Mr Wallace:
LD
I fully understand and have some sympathy with the reasoning that underlies amendment 14. However, Bruce McFee put his finger on it when he said there is a d...
The Convener:
Lab
I am grateful to Margaret Mitchell for lodging amendment 14, because we should debate the matter. I know that such a system was tried in England and Wales. M...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
I support many of the comments that have been made and the legitimate aspiration of trying to get people to make a marriage work. A marriage is a serious und...
Margaret Mitchell:
Con
This has been an excellent debate. Amendment 14 has been thoroughly discussed and some good points have been raised. Jim Wallace's point was that if a couple...
The Convener:
Lab
The question is, that amendment 14 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members:
No.
The Convener:
Lab
There will be a division.
ForMcFee, Mr Bruce (West of Scotland) (SNP)Mitchell, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Con)AgainstGlen, Marlyn (North East Scotland) (Lab)McNeill, Pauline (Glasgo...
The Convener:
Lab
The result of the division is: For 2, Against 4, Abstentions 1.
Amendment 14 disagreed to.
Section 10—Divorce: reduction in separation periods