Section 1 — Right of child to school education

Standards in Scotland's Schools etc Bill: Stage 3 – in the Scottish Parliament at 2:30 pm on 7 June 2000.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Nicola Sturgeon Nicola Sturgeon Scottish National Party

I will not incur the wrath of my constituents by suggesting that it is good to be back in Edinburgh, but it is certainly nice to be out of the rain.

It gives me great pleasure to move amendment 11. I will attempt to be brief, as there are a number of amendments to get through. Amendment 11 would ensure that education authorities have a duty to consider the welfare of children when making or entering into arrangements for the provision of school education. As many members will be aware, article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child requires that in all decisions affecting children their interests must be a primary consideration.

At present, in Scotland, courts, local authorities—in functions other than education—children's hearings and other bodies charged with making decisions about children have a duty to regard children's welfare as a paramount consideration, but education authorities owe no such duty. In my view, that highlights a gap in legislation.

Amendment 11 would impose such a duty for the first time and seek to define the extent of the welfare duty to show that it includes aspects other than educational well-being. Various aspects of a child's well-being may be at issue while the child is at school. It should be incumbent on the education authority, when making decisions that affect children, to consider the physical and emotional well-being of children as well as their educational well-being.

This amendment has been debated at stage 2 and has the support of many organisations in Scotland, notably children's organisations such as Children in Scotland. It also has the support, in its technical aspects, of the Law Society of Scotland. It would improve the law on children's welfare and bring education authorities into line with other bodies that are charged with making decisions about children's welfare. For that reason I ask the Executive to consider this amendment favourably.

I move amendment 11.

Photo of Scott Barrie Scott Barrie Labour

Amendment 13 seeks to put children, young people and the students in our schools at the heart of the bill. A bill that will have such a dramatic effect on young people, who spend a long period of their life, prior to adulthood, in schools, should have due regard to their views.

During the stage 2 debate, Karen Gillon said that one area in which the bill is particularly weak is consultation with children and young people about their education. Consultation is what this amendment attempts to ensure. Karen Gillon also said that she or one of her colleagues would lodge a further amendment to clarify that point at stage 3. That is what I hope to do this afternoon.

Amendment 13 has the support of other political parties and seeks to install in education legislation aspects that will make it compatible with other children's legislation and conventions—the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Section 17 of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 makes it clear that before any decisions are made which affect a child, the child's view should be ascertained if he or she wants to express a view. The wording of amendment 13 is drawn exclusively from that act.

Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child requires that

"States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child".

I hope that the minister will accept this amendment in the spirit in which it is offered, in the hope that it will build on the discussions at stage 2 in the Education, Culture and Sport Committee.

Photo of Adam Ingram Adam Ingram Scottish National Party

I support amendment 11. Enshrining the right of any child to receive a school education, as this bill does, is a welcome step forward and brings statute in this country into line with the European convention on human rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. It is a necessary improvement in the legal framework and it focuses on the rights of the individual.

However, it is not enough to ensure that a child's educational experience leads in the direction of fulfilling that child's physical and mental potential. All of us acknowledge that many children face considerable barriers to accessing education. Those barriers cover a range of physical, psychological and emotional factors that are imposed by their environment. At the very least, education authorities must be required to ensure that the school environment does not impose barriers to access. Physical safety and security must be a prerequisite for the establishment of a proper learning environment.

As it stands, the bill does not recognise that a welfare duty is owed by authorities to pupils in their schools. That is surely anomalous, bearing in mind the fact that—as the Law Society of Scotland and others have said—the courts, local authorities and children's hearings, in making decisions about children, must regard the child's welfare as the paramount consideration. Furthermore, such a position is at odds with article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which requires that in all decisions affecting children, their best interests

"shall be a primary consideration."

Amendment 11 proposes subsection (2), which would rectify that, and subsection (3), which seeks to define the extent of the welfare duty.

The misery and harm that can be inflicted on the bullied child is well documented. Surely it is reasonable and appropriate to direct education authorities to exercise a duty to eradicate the oppression of children by bullying in our schools. It is equally reasonable to require that safety and supervision on transport to and from school should be addressed. Surely the right to a school education is compromised if it is unsafe for a child to travel to school in the transport provided for that purpose.

Finally, the Executive itself has articulated the need for a joined-up approach to education and child development. Initiatives have been taken to establish community schools, breakfast clubs, after-school care and anti-bullying policies in an attempt to follow a social inclusion agenda. Amendment 11 is an opportunity to secure that commitment with a legal anchor.

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament 2:45, 7 June 2000

Four other members wish to speak on this group. I remind them that we have to get through three groups of amendments in 40 minutes. Brevity is the order of the day.

Photo of Irene McGugan Irene McGugan Scottish National Party

We have had many debates in the chamber in which a commitment has been sought—and been given—that the views of young people should be actively canvassed and given due regard. Amendment 13 seeks to do no more than require local authorities to take those views into account. It would have the positive effect of promoting the involvement of children in the delivery of their education and make a real commitment to giving children and young people early, meaningful and relevant experience of the process of decision making. That was one of the Executive's aims in "Improving our Schools", which sought actively to involve children in citizenship skills.

As members have heard, another argument is that amendment 13 would ensure that local authorities and the law are more in line with existing family and child care law. At present, local authorities must have regard to the large number of children and young people who are looked after. Decisions made about children at school are just as important—and children are just as competent to speak on them—as decisions made about children in relation to care. It would seem inconsistent to have one without the other.

The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child is soft law. There are no strict enforcement mechanisms, but there is an expectation that we will comply with its terms. Article 12 requires that children have the opportunity to express their views, but there is no such right for pupils in Scots education law. I urge members to support amendment 13.

Photo of Cathy Jamieson Cathy Jamieson Labour

I will speak in support of amendment 13 and wish to say a few words about the importance of taking on board the views of children and young people in decisions that significantly affect them. As Scott Barrie outlined, the amendment was lodged on the basis of an acceptance in principle during stage 2 that that was important. The amendment was lodged on behalf of the cross-party children's group. The aim is to tidy up the section. We hope that the Executive will feel able to support it.

As Irene McGugan mentioned, there is an issue about bringing the law into line not only with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child but with the Children (Scotland) Act 1995, which obliges parents to seek their children's views or to take account of those views in major decisions. It would be inconsistent for education authorities not to do the same.

Some people have been concerned that this might be seen as a step too far. I want to put on record that this is not about ensuring that children are consulted about the minutiae of day-to-day life—the school curriculum, for example—but about demonstrating that young people's views are valued and are important. The need for that has been made clear during consultation processes. I am glad that—hopefully—it will now be enshrined in legislation.

Photo of Donald Gorrie Donald Gorrie Liberal Democrat

I endorse the previous speech. There is strong, cross-party support for amendment 13 and an effective all-party group that relates MSPs to many organisations that help children. The cross-party group has pursued the important issue of listening to young people better than we do. I urge members to support the amendment.

Photo of Peter Peacock Peter Peacock Labour

I will try to address both amendments as quickly as I can. I spoke extensively at stage 2 to what is now amendment 11, which seeks to impose on education authorities a duty to make the welfare of the child a primary consideration.

Contrary to what Nicola Sturgeon and others have said, education authorities have a duty under a range of measures to ensure the health, safety and mental and physical well-being of pupils in their care. Those measures include a common-law duty of care, the Schools Safety and Supervision of Pupils (Scotland) Regulations 1990, provisions governing medical and dental inspections, duties under the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 to safeguard children at residential schools, and a range of guidance on protecting children from abuse. There are Scottish Criminal Record Office checks on the appointment of staff, and Her Majesty's inspectorate has scrutiny powers relating to the welfare of children at school. In addition, a range of measures has been brought forward to tackle bullying. That is a serious problem in our schools which is being addressed effectively.

Given that battery of safeguards covering health and safety in the widest sense, it is unnecessary for those aspects of welfare to be further reinforced in this bill, which focuses on the educational welfare of the child and gives it new meaning by taking internationally accepted and understood key words from the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

The bill sets a purpose for education in Scotland: the development of the personality and talents and physical and mental abilities of the child or young person to their fullest potential. Education legislation addresses a narrower component of welfare than other forms of legislation—in this context the educational component—and fleshes it out substantially. I hope, although I doubt, that that will satisfy Nicola Sturgeon and that she will feel able to withdraw amendment 11.

I turn now to amendment 13. The Executive has already signalled its intention to promote the involvement of children and young people in decisions in matters affecting their education. The process by which we consulted on the draft education bill showed our commitment—as do new provisions that are included in the bill. For the first time, schools will be required to say what they are doing to consult and involve children and young people in decisions concerning the everyday running of the school. That is in section 6.

Under section 5, local authorities are required to give children and young people an opportunity to make their views known regarding local improvement objectives for school education. Scott Barrie's amendment 13, supported by Cathy Jameson, Irene McGugan and Nicola Sturgeon, is more narrowly drawn than its predecessors and runs very much with the grain of our policy. I am happy to recommend its acceptance to the Parliament.

Photo of Nicola Sturgeon Nicola Sturgeon Scottish National Party

I thank the minister for his reply. As at stage 2, the minister outlined the range of duties that are already incumbent on local authorities in dealing with children in their care. What is lacking, however, is an overarching duty on them, while carrying out their education functions, to make the welfare of children a primary consideration. It is not immediately clear to me why courts, children's hearings and local authorities—other than in their education function—should be under such a duty but education authorities, whose decisions affect all children on a day-to-day basis, are exempt.

Irene McGugan said that there is an expectation that national legislatures will comply with the spirit of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. I endorse her comments. Peter Peacock said that the bill picks out key phrases from that convention. I submit that it is important to do much more than that to ensure that the spirit of that convention is incorporated into all legislation that affects children. Amendment 11 would ensure that that is the case for education authorities.

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament

The question is, that amendment 11 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

No.

Division number 1

For: Adam, Brian, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Cunningham, Roseanna, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Fabiani, Linda, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Grahame, Christine, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Lochhead, Richard, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McGugan, Irene, Morgan, Alasdair, Neil, Alex, Paterson, Mr Gil, Robison, Shona, Russell, Michael, Salmond, Mr Alex, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, White, Ms Sandra, Wilson, Andrew
Against: Aitken, Bill, Alexander, Ms Wendy, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Chisholm, Malcolm, Craigie, Cathie, Curran, Ms Margaret, Davidson, Mr David, Deacon, Susan, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Eadie, Helen, Ferguson, Patricia, Fergusson, Alex, Finnie, Ross, Galbraith, Mr Sam, Gallie, Phil, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Harding, Mr Keith, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Johnston, Nick, Johnstone, Alex, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Lyon, George, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Martin, Paul, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McLeish, Henry, McLetchie, David, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Monteith, Mr Brian, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Mundell, David, Munro, Mr John, Murray, Dr Elaine, Oldfather, Irene, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Scott, Tavish, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Margaret, Stone, Mr Jamie, Thomson, Elaine, Wallace, Ben, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan, Young, John

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament

The result of the division is: For 28, Against 83, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 11 disagreed to.

Amendment 13 moved—[Scott Barrie].

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament

The question is, that amendment 13 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members:

Yes.

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament

Amendment 13 is agreed to. We now come to amendment 17, which is grouped with—

Photo of Lord James Selkirk Lord James Selkirk Conservative

On a point of order. Members of the Conservative party called out "No" with regard to amendment 13. We might not have been as audible as we should have been.

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament

I am terribly sorry. I genuinely did not hear that. In that case, there will be a division.

Division number 2

For: Adam, Brian, Baillie, Jackie, Barrie, Scott, Boyack, Sarah, Brankin, Rhona, Brown, Robert, Campbell, Colin, Canavan, Dennis, Craigie, Cathie, Cunningham, Roseanna, Curran, Ms Margaret, Deacon, Susan, Eadie, Helen, Elder, Dorothy-Grace, Ewing, Dr Winnie, Ewing, Fergus, Fabiani, Linda, Ferguson, Patricia, Finnie, Ross, Galbraith, Mr Sam, Gibson, Mr Kenneth, Gillon, Karen, Godman, Trish, Gorrie, Donald, Grahame, Christine, Grant, Rhoda, Gray, Iain, Hamilton, Mr Duncan, Henry, Hugh, Home Robertson, Mr John, Hughes, Janis, Hyslop, Fiona, Ingram, Mr Adam, Jackson, Dr Sylvia, Jackson, Gordon, Jamieson, Cathy, Jamieson, Margaret, Jenkins, Ian, Kerr, Mr Andy, Lamont, Johann, Lochhead, Richard, Lyon, George, MacAskill, Mr Kenny, Macdonald, Lewis, Macintosh, Mr Kenneth, MacKay, Angus, MacLean, Kate, Martin, Paul, Marwick, Tricia, Matheson, Michael, McAllion, Mr John, McAveety, Mr Frank, McCabe, Mr Tom, McConnell, Mr Jack, McGugan, Irene, McLeish, Henry, McMahon, Mr Michael, McNeil, Mr Duncan, McNeill, Pauline, McNulty, Des, Morgan, Alasdair, Morrison, Mr Alasdair, Muldoon, Bristow, Mulligan, Mrs Mary, Munro, Mr John, Murray, Dr Elaine, Neil, Alex, Oldfather, Irene, Paterson, Mr Gil, Peacock, Peter, Peattie, Cathy, Radcliffe, Nora, Raffan, Mr Keith, Robison, Shona, Robson, Euan, Rumbles, Mr Mike, Russell, Michael, Salmond, Mr Alex, Simpson, Dr Richard, Smith, Elaine, Smith, Iain, Smith, Margaret, Stone, Mr Jamie, Sturgeon, Nicola, Swinney, Mr John, Thomson, Elaine, Ullrich, Kay, Wallace, Mr Jim, Watson, Mike, White, Ms Sandra, Whitefield, Karen, Wilson, Allan
Against: Aitken, Bill, Davidson, Mr David, Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James, Fergusson, Alex, Gallie, Phil, Harding, Mr Keith, Johnston, Nick, Johnstone, Alex, McGrigor, Mr Jamie, McLetchie, David, Monteith, Mr Brian, Mundell, David, Scanlon, Mary, Scott, John, Wallace, Ben, Young, John

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament

The result of the division is: For 92, Against 16, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 13 agreed to.