Chamber
Plenary, 24 Feb 2000
24 Feb 2000 · S1 · Plenary
Item of business
Children (Physical Punishment)
Like others, I welcome the fact that we are to have consultation on this issue, followed by legislation. The crucial point is how much or how little Scotland wants to achieve. Where do we draw the line between inhuman, degrading treatment and reasonable chastisement? I sincerely believe that we should not be seeking to define where, how and with what a child can be hit. That is a recipe for confusion and an approach that fails children in the new millennium. As a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the UK should honour article 19, which obliges us
"to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence".
The Children are Unbeatable! alliance is seeking legal reform to give children the same legal protection from assault as adults have. The alliance wants to move society beyond smacking towards positive, non-violent forms of discipline. It is significant that all the major child care organisations in the country, including Children 1st, Save the Children, Children in Scotland and Barnado's, are members of the alliance.
A few weeks ago, the cross-party group on children held a discussion on physical chastisement. Following the discussion, Scott Barrie lodged a motion stating that
"in a modern Scotland concerned with social justice for all there is no place for the concept of ‘reasonable chastisement' of children; that children should have the same protection under the law as adults from being hit; that a new, modern legislative framework would be the best basis from which to promote positive discipline".
Several weeks later, only a further five members have signed the motion, which—I accept—reflects the widely held reluctance in society to legislate on the matter. However, there is evidence to suggest that parents' views are changing. A recent poll conducted by MORI on behalf of the National Family and Parenting Institute found that only one in five parents thought that smacking was an effective way of teaching children the difference between right and wrong. The poll concluded that the weight of public opinion was behind positive parenting.
Any proposed change in the law on disciplining children must be accompanied by a well-resourced campaign to inform parents about positive alternatives to smacking. Such alternatives must be age and stage appropriate, beginning with the concept of encouraging and rewarding good behaviour, rather than punishing bad. It is a matter of regret that children's views are not being sought in the consultation exercise because the evidence tells us that children do not talk about being smacked—they describe it as being hit.
It is also significant that eight countries in Europe, including Finland, Denmark and Sweden, have banned all corporal punishment. Sweden is a particularly good example; I was very influenced by the time that I spent there a few years ago researching child care practice. The Swedish laws are educational, not punitive. They work to change attitudes and to move parents on to positive discipline.
In 1979, Sweden was the first country to ban smacking. I take issue with the Minister for Justice on this point, because my understanding is that when the legislation was introduced, it did not have the support of the majority of the Swedish population. It is a good example of the need for Governments occasionally to be proactive and to allow accepted wisdom to follow the legal precedent. Now, only 6 per cent of Swedes would like those laws to be repealed.
Although the Scottish Parliament must take full account of all the views expressed in the consultation process, it could choose to lead public opinion towards more effective forms of discipline and away from smacking. The simplest and fairest way of doing that is to remove the defence of reasonable chastisement, creating a basis on which to develop the debate in Scotland. That will make a statement about the kind of society to which we want to aspire for our children.
"to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence".
The Children are Unbeatable! alliance is seeking legal reform to give children the same legal protection from assault as adults have. The alliance wants to move society beyond smacking towards positive, non-violent forms of discipline. It is significant that all the major child care organisations in the country, including Children 1st, Save the Children, Children in Scotland and Barnado's, are members of the alliance.
A few weeks ago, the cross-party group on children held a discussion on physical chastisement. Following the discussion, Scott Barrie lodged a motion stating that
"in a modern Scotland concerned with social justice for all there is no place for the concept of ‘reasonable chastisement' of children; that children should have the same protection under the law as adults from being hit; that a new, modern legislative framework would be the best basis from which to promote positive discipline".
Several weeks later, only a further five members have signed the motion, which—I accept—reflects the widely held reluctance in society to legislate on the matter. However, there is evidence to suggest that parents' views are changing. A recent poll conducted by MORI on behalf of the National Family and Parenting Institute found that only one in five parents thought that smacking was an effective way of teaching children the difference between right and wrong. The poll concluded that the weight of public opinion was behind positive parenting.
Any proposed change in the law on disciplining children must be accompanied by a well-resourced campaign to inform parents about positive alternatives to smacking. Such alternatives must be age and stage appropriate, beginning with the concept of encouraging and rewarding good behaviour, rather than punishing bad. It is a matter of regret that children's views are not being sought in the consultation exercise because the evidence tells us that children do not talk about being smacked—they describe it as being hit.
It is also significant that eight countries in Europe, including Finland, Denmark and Sweden, have banned all corporal punishment. Sweden is a particularly good example; I was very influenced by the time that I spent there a few years ago researching child care practice. The Swedish laws are educational, not punitive. They work to change attitudes and to move parents on to positive discipline.
In 1979, Sweden was the first country to ban smacking. I take issue with the Minister for Justice on this point, because my understanding is that when the legislation was introduced, it did not have the support of the majority of the Swedish population. It is a good example of the need for Governments occasionally to be proactive and to allow accepted wisdom to follow the legal precedent. Now, only 6 per cent of Swedes would like those laws to be repealed.
Although the Scottish Parliament must take full account of all the views expressed in the consultation process, it could choose to lead public opinion towards more effective forms of discipline and away from smacking. The simplest and fairest way of doing that is to remove the defence of reasonable chastisement, creating a basis on which to develop the debate in Scotland. That will make a statement about the kind of society to which we want to aspire for our children.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Patricia Ferguson):
Lab
The next item of business is a debate on motion S1M-586, in the name of Mr Jim Wallace, on the physical punishment of children, and amendments to that motion.
The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Justice (Mr Jim Wallace):
LD
The Executive has sought this debate today so that members of the Scottish Parliament may have an opportunity to express their views about the Executive's pr...
Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh (Central Scotland) (Con):
Con
But.
Mr Wallace:
LD
We also recognise the value of asking the question in order to expose the issue to debate. It is not our intention to stifle debate, which would be a danger ...
Mrs McIntosh:
Con
But.
Mr Wallace:
LD
But.The amendment calls on the Executive to take full account of all views expressed in the consultation. That is a matter of normal practice so we can suppo...
Nicola Sturgeon (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
Not always, Jim.
Mr Wallace:
LD
I remember that it was in a previous Administration that Lord James described a consultation as a genuine consultation—that was perhaps more a feature of tha...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
Please wind up, minister.
Mr Wallace:
LD
Change in legislation usually happens because the attitudes of society change. The Executive believes that the prevailing attitude in Scotland is that parent...
Nicola Sturgeon (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
The SNP welcomes the Scottish Executive's consultation on physical punishment of children. As the Deputy First Minister said, it is eight years since the Sco...
Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
I welcome Nicola Sturgeon's comments about consulting children. Unlike Jim Wallace, I see no difficulty in supporting her amendment. Were we in government, w...
Nicola Sturgeon:
SNP
I am glad that the Tories have learned from their mistakes and are now in favour of consulting people; that is not something that they were good at when they...
Mrs McIntosh:
Con
Will Nicola Sturgeon give way?
Nicola Sturgeon:
SNP
I may accept interventions later in my speech.I am sure that most parents would consider those methods of discipline far more effective than smacking a child...
Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh (Central Scotland) (Con):
Con
Deputy Presiding Officer, I am sure that there have been occasions on which you have witnessed behaviour here and wished that you could administer a smack. H...
Scott Barrie (Dunfermline West) (Lab):
Lab
Is Mrs McIntosh seriously suggesting that we turn the clock back to pre-1986 and reintroduce the belt into our schools?
Mrs McIntosh:
Con
I am saying that there is an opinion abroad that that might be appropriate. That is all that I am saying.The Executive may wish to consider why parents all o...
Scott Barrie (Dunfermline West) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome this debate on the Executive's consultation paper, although it seems a bit late in the day that, in 2000, we are discussing how we hit our children...
Mrs McIntosh:
Con
I find it hard to believe that Mr Barrie had friends who competed to get the belt. I had it once in my life, and it cured me.
Scott Barrie:
Lab
As someone who never had the belt, I am not sure what that means. The point that I was making was that a number of people went out of their way to be belted,...
Irene McGugan (North-East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Like others, I welcome the fact that we are to have consultation on this issue, followed by legislation. The crucial point is how much or how little Scotland...
Cathy Jamieson (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab):
Lab
I am pleased that the debate is taking place, as it sends a message to the people of Scotland that the Scottish Parliament is committed to children. We have ...
Mrs McIntosh:
Con
For some people, those are terms of affection.
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
I am sorry, but I simply do not see it that way.We have moved a considerable way towards zero tolerance of domestic violence; we should move towards zero tol...
Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I join my colleagues in welcoming the consultation document; it is clear that this area of policy must be updated. The document demonstrates that much of the...
Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
All members will agree that this Parliament should not turn into some sort of Mary Poppins for adults, acting as a national nanny to parents by wagging its f...
Scott Barrie:
Lab
Will Dorothy-Grace Elder give way?
Dorothy-Grace Elder:
SNP
I am sorry. I am a back bencher and we do not get much of a chance to speak in this Parliament, and when we do it is only for four minutes. Other members get...
Scott Barrie:
Lab
As one back bencher to another—