Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Justice 2 Committee, 27 Nov 2002

27 Nov 2002 · S1 · Justice 2 Committee

Item of business

Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Mr Wallace: Watch on SPTV

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 all undoubtedly agonised about and debated it in our own minds, as well as in committee rooms, for some months. I share Stewart Stevenson's views about the importance of information and support for good parenting. He mentioned the Swedish position, which has been based on a combination of legislation and persuasion. I want to make it clear that the Executive considers that an information campaign on positive parenting and alternative disciplinary tactics is as important as changes in legislation are. Officials in my department are liaising closely with colleagues in education and health—such positive messages might come better from the education and health departments than from the justice department—to consider the most effective ways of communicating messages on positive parenting. We want to ensure that we do not duplicate effort but draw on other information campaigns to ensure that we maximise the impact of the message when it is put out.Bill Aitken said that the fact that some people will not obey a law is reason enough for not passing it. Duncan Hamilton responded well to that. If we took that attitude, I am not sure what there would be on the statute book. We certainly would not have any speeding laws, because some people will never obey the law on speeding, but the consensus in society is that it is worth having such a law. On clarity, the research that we commissioned showed that 62 per cent of parents said that they did not know much about the current law; only 2 per cent felt that they knew what it was. That research work was made available to the committee. By specifically outlawing hitting on the head, shaking and the use of an implement, we will ensure that there is far greater clarity than there has been.I do not accept Bill Aitken's point that we are not treating Scottish parents as responsible. He should note the figures that I gave in my opening remarks showing that the overwhelming majority of parents support the proposals, which will bring clarity. Most parents do not go around carrying the extensive case law, which Professor Gane showed to the committee, in their hip pockets. However, it is clear from our debate that it will be well known that hitting children on the head, using implements or shaking them will be not only undesirable, but, if the committee and Parliament agree to the section, unlawful. That makes the position very clear.I welcome members' support for the Executive's position. I accept that the debate has not been easy, because people hold strong views for reasons that have been, in their own minds, well thought through. I respect that, but our proposals will clarify the law, protect our children and help to reduce general levels of violence in our communities.

Search Hansard contributions

Justice 2 Committee, 27 Nov 2002

In the same item of business