Committee
Justice 2 Committee, 27 Nov 2002
27 Nov 2002 · S1 · Justice 2 Committee
Item of business
Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
I would love to be a fly on the wall when Alasdair Morrison gets home. Most of the arguments have been rehearsed. I cannot support Scott Barrie's amendments 121 and 122. My reasons are well known. His proposal is unworkable and, although I respect his position, I do not agree with him in principle. His amendments would be a step too far.Bill Aitken's amendment 45 gives me some cause for concern. Initially, I was attracted to it for the simple reason that I have been dubious about the argument that current law is unclear. However, I did not find Bill Aitken's remarks persuasive, especially the argument that a minority would not take cognisance of the law if it were changed. That is not an argument for not legislating. Members must understand that the law exists to do something about such people. The fact that some people might ignore the law is surely an argument for changing it.I require further clarification. The minister will recognise this question because members have asked it about 34 times. He said that there are three different policy objectives. The first is protection, with which the committee agrees; the last is to reduce the number of assaults and the incidence of violence in society, with which the committee also agrees; and the second is to clarify the law. I still do not understand what is unclear about the current position, as other members have said many times.I note George Lyon's comment that there is no harm in putting the factors outlined in A v UK into law, but I am still to be persuaded by the evidence that we heard that that is not done now. Although all members are against blows to the head and child abuse, that is not the issue. The issue is finding a balance between having no desire to reduce protection for children and having no desire to pass unnecessary legislation. Although I suspect that I will support the Executive's amendments, it would put my mind at ease if the minister explained what is unclear about the current position and provided evidence to show how it has been unclear in the courts.
In the same item of business
Section 43—Physical punishment of children
The Convener:
Lab
I welcome Jim Wallace and the Executive officials.Amendment 121 is grouped with amendments 8, 9, 10, 122 and 45. If amendment 121 is agreed to, I cannot call...
Scott Barrie (Dunfermline West) (Lab):
Lab
Amendments 121 and 122 seek to remove the defence of "reasonable parental chastisement" that is set out in section 10 of the Children and Young Persons (Scot...
The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Justice (Mr Jim Wallace):
LD
I welcome the opportunity to come before the committee to discuss this topic, which I seem to have discussed with it on a number of occasions. Fate has some ...
The Convener:
Lab
We were saying the same thing only this morning.
Mr Wallace:
It is important that I set out the policy objectives of section 43 at the beginning, because there has been much discussion on the issue. Some people support...
Bill Aitken:
Con
We are going over old ground to some extent, as the committee has debated this matter at considerable length and in great depth. Scott Barrie has been entire...
Stewart Stevenson:
SNP
I commend Scott Barrie for lodging amendment 121. I have not the slightest difficulty in supporting his objectives. In previous discussions, committee member...
Mr Morrison:
Lab
I support the position that has been outlined by the Minister for Justice. I cannot support the amendments that have been lodged by my colleague Scott Barrie...
The Convener:
Lab
Are you sure?
Mr Morrison:
Lab
The Child Support Agency has not contacted me. One of my children is three years of age, which is what I intended to say, and the other is 18 months. I see t...
George Lyon:
LD
I, too, support the minister and welcome his response to the committee's report. He took on board the concerns and addressed them. I respect where Scott Barr...
Mr Duncan Hamilton (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
I would love to be a fly on the wall when Alasdair Morrison gets home. Most of the arguments have been rehearsed. I cannot support Scott Barrie's amendments ...
The Convener:
Lab
The minister is not bound to answer that question.
Mr Wallace:
Thank you. I will respond to one or two of the points that have been made. We have had a good debate on what we all recognise is a difficult subject. We have...
The Convener:
Lab
Thank you, minister. I am glad that you acknowledged that some thought had gone into the committee's stage 1 report. We spent a considerable amount of time c...
Scott Barrie:
Lab
I echo the first point that the convener made. I do not think that members of the committee are 100 miles apart on the issue, which the popular press has som...
The Convener:
Lab
The question is, that amendment 121 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members:
No.
The Convener:
Lab
There will be a division.
ForBarrie, Scott (Dunfermline West) (Lab)AgainstAitken, Bill (Glasgow) (Con)Hamilton, Mr Duncan (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)Lyon, George (Argyll and Bute) (...
The Convener:
Lab
Now Scott Barrie knows how Bill Aitken usually feels. The result of the division is: For 1, Against 5, Abstentions 1.
Amendment 121 disagreed to.
Amendments 8 to 10 moved—Mr Jim Wallace—and agreed to.
Amendment 122 not moved.
Amendment 45 moved—Bill Aitken.
The Convener:
Lab
The question is, that amendment 45 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members:
No.
The Convener:
Lab
There will be a division.
ForAitken, Bill (Glasgow) (Con)AgainstBarrie, Scott (Dunfermline West) (Lab)Hamilton, Mr Duncan (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)Lyon, George (Argyll and Bute) (...