Hansard

There is a sense of déjà vu about this debate, because it is not long since committee members talked about the report that established the case for the appointment of a commissioner for young people in Scotland. I welcome this short debate as the next procedural step on the way to establishing that post. I pay tribute to the work of the committee members, to Karen Gillon's convenership, to Jackie Baillie and Irene McGugan's work as reporters, to the work of the clerks, advisers and the non-Executive bills unit and to our witnesses, including the young people who are here today. I also warmly welcome the Executive's support. As Karen Gillon said, the bill is a good example of a committee and the Executive working together.

We have established that the key function of the commissioner should be to promote and safeguard the rights of children and young people. The independence of the post is important and, as others have said, the commissioner will be required to have regard to the views and best interests of children and young people. We have also established the commissioner's right to undertake investigations. All that is important, as is the commissioner's function of reporting to Parliament annually—given that Parliament created the post—and when investigations are carried out. I can also imagine times when the commissioner will be asked to give evidence to committees on legislation—not just education legislation, but other legislation, too.

Recent debates have covered the kind of territory that might be of interest to the commissioner. We have discussed bills that deal with such issues as the protection of children, reviews of child protection, the treatment of young offenders, safety on the internet and the regulation of care. We have also discussed issues relating to education in its widest form, including provision for particular groups of young people. For example, we have considered the way in which young disabled people, refugee children and young people with special needs are dealt with. Sport in schools, school meals provision and health and physical activity are other issues that might be of interest to the commissioner. The remit is wide.

As Murdo Fraser and others have said, it is true that, initially, people questioned the need for the commissioner. Karen Gillon, the convener of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, has acknowledged that, although she began by being sceptical, she was convinced by the evidence.

On a previous occasion, Brian Monteith reminded us that a range of individuals and bodies—MSPs, ministers, local authorities and voluntary organisations—are already charged with caring for young people. The title of the recent report of the child protection audit and review—"It's everyone's job to make sure I'm alright"—indicated that it is everyone's job to look after children. However, when everyone is supposed to be doing a job, the network that is created often has flaws that mean that each agency is in danger of leaving elements of responsibility for others to pick up.

It is important that the commissioner will be charged with having an overview of all children's issues and with spotting relevant issues, challenging them and drawing people's attention to them. The commissioner will have primary responsibility for promoting and protecting the interests of young people. He or she will be dedicated to that task. The commissioner's independence will avoid the baggage of political bias, and ministers will have to respond to comments and challenges from a powerful advocate of children's needs.

As others have said, the commissioner's access to children is a central issue. The Parliament has tried to consult children at every stage and we wish to expand such consultation. However, the ways in which we can do that are cumbersome. The commissioner will be more agile in being able to meet and deal with children. The commissioner will be able to move around the country more easily than we can. That is an important aspect.

I want to comment on the commissioner's ability to conduct investigations. It was suggested that the commissioner should be able to investigate individual cases, but the committee, in framing the bill, decided against that. We were right to do so for two reasons.

First, the commissioner's time could be dominated by individual cases, to the extent that his or her ability to have a general oversight of children's issues might be threatened. Secondly, it is important that the commissioner's perspective should be broad. Conflicts can arise between the rights of an individual and the rights of those around them. A legal case might seek legitimately to elevate the rights of an individual client above the rights of others who have been affected by the case. The commissioner should always have a broader view—he or she should have the interests of children as a whole in his or her sights.

I look forward to the bill's swift progress through the Parliament and to the appointment of a commissioner who will focus sharply on the remit that we have outlined in the bill. I know that he or she will pursue that agenda with vigour and I hope that he or she will be focused and persuasive in advocating the interests of children. I hope, too, that the commissioner will not be a zealot and will recognise that, as well as human rights, we have responsibilities, and that the wider issues of children and young people are best served when their interests are acknowledged proportionately, within society as a whole.

The commissioner will be a champion and an advocate of children's rights. Yesterday, the First Minister indicated that he wished to establish better monitoring and inspection regimes for public services. At the highest level, the commissioner will be a powerful and respected monitor and scrutiniser of the way in which Scotland treats its children.