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

McNeill, Pauline Lab Glasgow Kelvin Watch on SPTV

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 considering whether the law was adequate and, if not, what it should be. We also took a great deal of evidence. I have to say that I am greatly concerned about the way in which the committee's discussions have been portrayed, which makes them seem to some people to be about who cares more about children. We have to clear that up. We have different positions on the committee—indeed, having listened to what everyone has said, I can tell that each member has a slightly different position. That reflects the views that we get from people outside Parliament to whom we speak. Whether we take Scott Barrie's or Bill Aitken's position, I believe that both members care deeply about children. They just have different ways of trying to achieve the objectives. I object to the comments that were made about the committee report, saying that we do not consider the matter to be about child protection and child abuse—it is, as we said in our report.As always, the committee was asked whether the law put before us was workable. I believe strongly that, when it comes to what rights we give parents and the removal of a defence, it is not possible to draw the line at sending out a message. By passing the provisions as they stood, we would clearly have removed the defence, ensuring that prosecutors would almost definitely have to act.The provision differs from the Swedish position in that a level 3 fine and a penalty of up to three months in prison are attached to it. Such penalties are not attached to the Swedish model. We were asked not to consider the Swedish model but to consider something that would be akin to common-law assault. I genuinely believe that the Executive has been extremely responsive in relation to all aspects of our report, particularly the one that we are discussing. If I had wanted to lodge an amendment, it would have been like amendment 8, under which a court will have to have regard to the child's age. As things stand, prosecutors do a good job of ensuring that they prosecute those who abuse and cause harm to children. However, although prosecutors take age into account, amendment 8 is necessary for the avoidance of any doubt. Our adviser was of the view that it would be useful for the age of the child to be included as part of the consideration of whether someone should be prosecuted.Bill Aitken makes an important point about parents' responsibility. One aspect of the evidence that concerned me was how little parents are referred to in the context of recognising the difficulties that good parents have in bringing up children. That is why I welcome what the minister said in response to Duncan Hamilton about the Scottish Executive's overall approach to helping parents to bring up children. A more holistic approach is required. I also support Stewart Stevenson's comments. Although we might all agree that our objective is that a child should never be struck, the issue is how we achieve that objective. The Executive's response has been important.The inclusion of reference to the child's age in section 43, which amendment 8 would achieve, will allow prosecutors to develop a more sophisticated approach to dealing with cases in which physical chastisement has gone beyond reasonableness. If we adopt the Executive's revised provisions in section 43, we will be doing something good. Like Stewart Stevenson, I am stunned by some of the correspondence that we have received. I do not know whether the minister has seen any of it. Someone who wrote to us said:"I choose to discipline my children with an implement rather than my hands."They do not even provide any indication of what kind of implement it might be acceptable to use. That confirms my view that the Executive was right to include additional provisions.The debate has been excellent. I invite Scott Barrie to wind up.

Search Hansard contributions

Justice 2 Committee, 27 Nov 2002

In the same item of business