Chamber
Plenary, 17 Mar 2005
17 Mar 2005 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Protection of Children and Prevention of Sexual Offences (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
All of us in the chamber recognise the importance of getting child protection right. The minister used the word "despicable" earlier in the debate to describe the sexual abuse of children. I am sure that none of us would disagree with that description.
I will raise two areas of concern that have been touched on by other members: the impact of the bill on sex education; and its potential impact on non-abusive consensual behaviour between people who are over the age of consent.
Sensitivities around sex education are such that a piece of legislation need not be used, or even be usable, against teachers to have an impact on the delivery of sex education. Section 28 showed us that clearly. It was never once used in court; according to senior legal figures, it never could have been successfully used in court. However, it was used in school boards, parent-teacher associations, the media and elsewhere as a weapon of fear by those whose agenda was one of bigotry and prejudice. Given the importance that the Executive has attached to the sexual health strategy, it is essential that it takes seriously the possibility that risk of sexual harm orders could be used in the same way as section 28 by those who oppose meaningful and comprehensive sex education.
I emphasise that I am suggesting not that such orders will themselves be used against teachers, youth workers or others who provide education and advice, but that those who seek to undermine or detract from sex education or to cause fear among professionals could use the fear of such orders to deter professionals from continuing in their work or from volunteering for organisations and so on. I commend the written evidence from East Lothian Council, which suggested that the provision of education and advice, rather than categories of individuals such as teachers or youth workers, could be ruled out. That would send the right message about the importance of sex education while addressing the Executive's concern about the dangers of excluding categories of people from the offence in section 1.
The Executive has made clear its intention to lodge amendments at stage 2 to make it illegal to posess certain images of people aged under 18, as opposed to under 16 as the bill stands. That is highly problematic. It risks criminalising young people who are over the age of consent, their friends or their sexual partners for possessing images that have been created with consent for completely harmless purposes. The suggestion that the Justice 1 Committee heard that married couples and civil partners should be exempted reinforces the notion that all other sexual relationships are in some way inferior or are to be frowned on, and that the law should be less tolerant of people who have a sex life without a piece of paper from the state.
Similar concerns exist over the perfectly innocent use of chat rooms, websites, weblogs and online profiles by people who have no abusive intentions or history and who merely use such facilities either as part of their sex lives or to communicate with other consenting adults. I ask the minister whether it is possible to ensure that consent is referred to in the Executive's forthcoming amendments to ensure that young people who are over the age of consent are able fully to exercise their right to consent.
The protection of children from abuse is a serious matter—it can be a deadly serious matter—but if the Executive wants to ensure that its measures to address the need for protection are effective and gain the credibility that they need, it must take care to ensure that the provisions in the bill are relevant to real people's lives in the modern age, are not open to misuse or misunderstanding and focus on the real problem. I would not be able to support the bill if it was presented in this form at stage 3. However, I give my support to it at stage 1 in the hope that it will be improved significantly before we get to stage 3.
I will raise two areas of concern that have been touched on by other members: the impact of the bill on sex education; and its potential impact on non-abusive consensual behaviour between people who are over the age of consent.
Sensitivities around sex education are such that a piece of legislation need not be used, or even be usable, against teachers to have an impact on the delivery of sex education. Section 28 showed us that clearly. It was never once used in court; according to senior legal figures, it never could have been successfully used in court. However, it was used in school boards, parent-teacher associations, the media and elsewhere as a weapon of fear by those whose agenda was one of bigotry and prejudice. Given the importance that the Executive has attached to the sexual health strategy, it is essential that it takes seriously the possibility that risk of sexual harm orders could be used in the same way as section 28 by those who oppose meaningful and comprehensive sex education.
I emphasise that I am suggesting not that such orders will themselves be used against teachers, youth workers or others who provide education and advice, but that those who seek to undermine or detract from sex education or to cause fear among professionals could use the fear of such orders to deter professionals from continuing in their work or from volunteering for organisations and so on. I commend the written evidence from East Lothian Council, which suggested that the provision of education and advice, rather than categories of individuals such as teachers or youth workers, could be ruled out. That would send the right message about the importance of sex education while addressing the Executive's concern about the dangers of excluding categories of people from the offence in section 1.
The Executive has made clear its intention to lodge amendments at stage 2 to make it illegal to posess certain images of people aged under 18, as opposed to under 16 as the bill stands. That is highly problematic. It risks criminalising young people who are over the age of consent, their friends or their sexual partners for possessing images that have been created with consent for completely harmless purposes. The suggestion that the Justice 1 Committee heard that married couples and civil partners should be exempted reinforces the notion that all other sexual relationships are in some way inferior or are to be frowned on, and that the law should be less tolerant of people who have a sex life without a piece of paper from the state.
Similar concerns exist over the perfectly innocent use of chat rooms, websites, weblogs and online profiles by people who have no abusive intentions or history and who merely use such facilities either as part of their sex lives or to communicate with other consenting adults. I ask the minister whether it is possible to ensure that consent is referred to in the Executive's forthcoming amendments to ensure that young people who are over the age of consent are able fully to exercise their right to consent.
The protection of children from abuse is a serious matter—it can be a deadly serious matter—but if the Executive wants to ensure that its measures to address the need for protection are effective and gain the credibility that they need, it must take care to ensure that the provisions in the bill are relevant to real people's lives in the modern age, are not open to misuse or misunderstanding and focus on the real problem. I would not be able to support the bill if it was presented in this form at stage 3. However, I give my support to it at stage 1 in the hope that it will be improved significantly before we get to stage 3.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-2353, in the name of Cathy Jamieson, on the Protection of Children and Prevention of Sexual Offences (Sco...
The Minister for Justice (Cathy Jamieson):
Lab
There is no doubt that any offence that involves harm being done to a child is despicable, but it is hard to imagine anything more despicable than sexual off...
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Evidence from the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents, or possibly it was from the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, raised the co...
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
A number of issues are involved, including the definitions of a child and an adult. We will come to those issues during the debate and when we examine the bi...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con):
Con
Will the minister give way?
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
I am sorry, but I must move on.The order will require the offender to stay away from the people or places that are associated with previous offending or, for...
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP):
SNP
The Scottish National Party will support the general principles of the bill at decision time. A reading of the introduction to the bill leads me to say that ...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con):
Con
A number of times when a bill has been introduced, I have questioned its value or opposed it outright on the grounds that it is unnecessary or counterproduct...
Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD):
LD
As I joined the Justice 1 Committee only recently, my comments will be largely from my viewpoint.It is, first and foremost, in the interests of society to ca...
Mrs Mary Mulligan (Linlithgow) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the Protection of Children and Prevention of Sexual Offences (Scotland) Bill. Unfortunately, there are people who are using the opportunities that ...
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
This is tricky legislation to get right. The definition in section 1 uses the phrase "having met or communicated", but it seems to me that the debate is circ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
I call Pauline McNeill, who will be followed by Jeremy Purvis. I apologise. I call Annabel Goldie, who will be followed by Pauline McNeill.
Miss Annabel Goldie (West of Scotland) (Con):
Con
Pauline McNeill's fright was nothing compared to mine.It has been said that the Conservative party welcomes the general principles of the bill. In an increas...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab):
Lab
I begin by thanking the Justice 1 Committee, the clerks, the bill team and the Deputy Minister for Justice for the work that they have all done in putting to...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
You have one minute.
Pauline McNeill:
Lab
The age question was a very difficult issue for the committee. As it stands, the bill will apply to persons aged 18 and over. The committee recommended that ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
You must wind up now, Ms McNeill.
Pauline McNeill:
Lab
As Mary Mulligan said, it is not helpful to compare an RSHO with an ASBO, given the massive stigma that will be attached to the former. We must get right the...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
As my colleague Jamie Stone said, the Liberal Democrats will support the general principles of the bill. In my view, the sober nature of this afternoon's deb...
Mr Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I welcome the bill. The legislation is overdue and the SNP will certainly support the bill's general principles this evening. Although other members have cov...
Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the debate on the general principles of the Protection of Children and Prevention of Sexual Offences (Scotland) Bill. Like members who have spoken ...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green):
Green
All of us in the chamber recognise the importance of getting child protection right. The minister used the word "despicable" earlier in the debate to describ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
We move to winding-up speeches and I call Jamie Stone. Mr Stone, you have a tight four minutes.
Mr Stone:
LD
I rise to speak for the second time this afternoon. The minister rightly pointed to the emotional damage that is done to children and, correctly, flagged up ...
Members:
Cheese!
Mr Stone:
LD
I remember, as a wee boy, sitting in our knackered—is that parliamentary language? Perhaps not. I remember sitting in our battered old van when, suddenly and...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
The debate is predicated—as, indeed, is the legislation—on the basic concept that the abuse and exploitation of children for sexual purposes are abhorrent to...
Mr Bruce McFee (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
The debate has shown that, although the bill is relatively short, it impacts on a wide and complex range of issues. As the stage 1 report points out, the com...
The Deputy Minister for Justice (Hugh Henry):
Lab
The encouraging part of today's debate was the will that exists across Parliament for further measures to be taken to give added protection to young people, ...
The Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid):
NPA
Briefly, please. You have about another minute, minister.