Official Report 514KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-21120, in the name of Daniel Johnson, on the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill at stage 3. I invite members who wish to participate in the debate to press their request-to-speak button, and I call Daniel Johnson, the member in charge of the bill, to speak to and move the motion.
15:00
I feel strongly that it is a basic human response that, when a child is in distress, hurt or injured, we want to help and protect them. That is one of the most fundamental human reactions. For a parent, that becomes amplified. When we see that our child is hurt, a knot forms in our stomach, we want to act immediately and we fundamentally feel guilty about not having prevented that harm.
Just imagine what it must be like when someone’s child returns home from school with bruises, and it takes days, weeks or months to find out where those bruises came from. That is what is at the heart of the bill and what motivated me to introduce it to Parliament. Too many parents, whose children often have additional support needs and are often non-verbal, are simply unable to find out what happened. Sometimes, they eventually find out that it was the adults who were charged with looking after their children who caused those injuries through the use of inappropriate restraint.
We have to accept that the use of restraint and seclusion will at times be necessary, but, when it is, we have to have the highest possible standards—not only in how it is applied and how those children are treated, but in informing parents. That is what the bill will do and what Parliament will have the opportunity to decide on. It is a huge privilege to stand here as the member who introduced it.
Above all else, we need to recognise Beth Morrison and her tireless campaigning. Her journey started when her son came home in 2010 with bruises. That started a campaign that culminates, I hope, today—this evening—with Parliament passing the bill. After that incident in 2010, Beth lodged a petition and she lobbied. It was not just those processes, however. We all need to recognise Beth’s absolutely winning personality: people cannot say no to her, whether through her perseverance in conversations with all of us in this Parliament, through her sending in all those submissions whenever a committee was looking at anything connected with the topic, and through her tireless work with the press. That is a huge amount of work. I fundamentally believe that this Parliament is about bringing power closer to people, and she stands as testament to the ability to do that. I hope that we will pass the bill this evening and, in so doing, bring about Calum’s law, but we all need to recognise that, although this may be Calum’s law, it is also definitely Beth’s bill. [Applause.]
We also need to pay tribute to Kate Sanger, who has absolutely been Beth’s partner and stalwart, standing alongside her. She has her own experiences with her daughter, Laura, and is an innovator, with the communication passport concept for children with additional support needs. We must pay tribute to such tireless campaigning, because that is something that we need more of. We should all be thinking about how we can support campaigners, making sure that their issues become real and become law, and that we see the change that we all want.
The bill that is in front of us does four critical things. It puts guidance on a statutory footing, ensuring that we have compliance with the standards that we expect. It contains requirements to inform parents so that, when such circumstances arise, parents are told as quickly as possible. It requires clear recording and reporting standards. Above all else, it requires training standards, so that when professionals in the classroom use such techniques, they do so in line with the highest possible standards.
I am pleased that the Government has today published its initial data on the use of the existing guidance, which tells us two clear things. First, it tells us that the overwhelming majority of local authorities and staff in the classroom say that the guidance has been helpful. Secondly, the data highlights the gaps. Only 30 of the 32 Scottish local authorities responded, while two did not. One local authority was unable to provide the data and almost half are not fully reporting data in a way that is compliant with the guidance. Therefore, although it is clear that the guidance is making a difference and bringing about improvements, the data shows us that we still need to go much further and that we need to pass the bill to ensure that we make progress.
In my closing speech, I will touch on some of the concerns that have been raised, particularly by trade unions, which I thank for their contributions. I also thank members around the chamber, including the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills and the Government more broadly, because the engagement that has brought us to this point has been productive.
I look forward to hearing everyone’s speeches. Most importantly, it is a great pleasure to move the motion in my name.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill be passed.
15:06
I thank Daniel Johnson for his commitment in bringing forward the legislation on restraint and seclusion that is before us today. I applaud his approach to working with the Government and I encourage more such good behaviour in the coming parliamentary session.
The bill has brought together parties from across the chamber, united by a clear and shared objective: to improve the lives of our children and young people. As we conclude these stage 3 proceedings, it is right to recognise the significant amount of work that has brought the bill to its final parliamentary stage. Families, campaigners, the Children and Young People's Commissioner, our teachers and school staff, the teaching trade unions and the Education, Children and Young People Committee have all approached the issue with seriousness and compassion.
I again pay tribute to the determined efforts of Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger, whose tenacious campaigning has ensured that children’s experiences remain firmly at the centre of this work. No children should have to experience what Calum Morrison and Kate’s daughter Laura went through in school. Beth and Kate have turned those traumatic experiences into a positive campaign to improve the lives of all our children, and were it not for them I am certain that we would not be having a stage 3 debate on a bill on restraint today.
As colleagues know, the Scottish Government’s position on the use of restraint and seclusion has been consistent throughout the passage of the bill. Restraint must only ever be used as a last resort to prevent injury. That principle, which underpinned the national guidance that was issued in 2024, remains central today.
The Scottish Government’s original intention was to conclude the review of our 2024 guidance before determining whether legislation was required. I confirm that, as we have heard from Mr Johnson, we published the review of the national guidance this morning. I thank all those who responded to the review and who have helped to implement the national guidance in our schools. Although the data that has been collected does not yet provide a full picture, as we also heard, we can clearly see that there is a higher prevalence of restraint and seclusion in our primary and special schools.
Progress is being made on professional learning to help support implementation. However, one year on from the implementation of the national guidance, there is clearly more work to be done to improve parental notifications and recording and to further support professional learning.
The review is perhaps itself evidence of the need to legislate in this space—there is a clear alignment between the review’s findings and the issues that Daniel Johnson seeks to address with his bill. That is why the Government will support the bill tonight. From the outset, the Government has seen the value in working constructively with Daniel Johnson to advance the bill, and that pragmatic, collaborative approach has been maintained throughout every stage.
The Parliament’s scrutiny has also been rigorous and thoughtful throughout the bill’s passage. The Education, Children and Young People Committee’s stage 1 report and members’ speeches in the stage 1 debate highlighted clear support for the bill’s general principles. However, the committee also highlighted many areas in which further clarity and precision were deemed to be essential if the bill is to work in practice for the schools and families that are affected by restraint.
As members have heard, I have been pleased to work collaboratively with Mr Johnson to strengthen the bill at stages 2 and 3 and to lay the groundwork for clear and effective implementation.
The support that Daniel Johnson and I have received from the Education, Children and Young People Committee and from across the chamber has reassured me that we have listened to and addressed the concerns that were raised at stage 1. As a result of Parliament’s close scrutiny, I believe that we have produced a stronger bill that is consistent with the initial intentions behind it.
The bill before Parliament today reflects that combined work of members, teachers, families and campaigners, and it represents a significant step forward in establishing a much clearer legal framework for the use of restraint and seclusion and for our rights-based approach to practice in our schools.
Should Parliament choose to pass the bill, the Government will focus on implementation. The creation of the new statutory guidance will be informed, of course, by the evidence that was gathered throughout the bill’s parliamentary progress and the findings from the guidance review.
I congratulate Daniel Johnson on navigating the legislation so successfully through Parliament. On the day before the dissolution of what has at times been a deeply divided Parliament, parties will instead come together to legislate in the best interests of Scotland’s children and young people.
As cabinet secretary, I have been proud to support along its way a bill that, as we all know, was driven from inception by the campaigning voices and tenacious spirit of Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger. At the end of the day, the bill is about Scotland’s bairns—for Calum, for Laura and for all of Scotland’s children.
15:11
I, too, pay tribute to Daniel Johnson, who underestimates his role in this matter. Those of us who have attempted to take through or have taken through a private member’s bill in Parliament know the amount of work that that involves. I pay tribute to him and his office for their work on the bill, which is why we are at this point today. I also thank the non-Government bills unit—I see that the team is sitting at the back of the chamber today. They must be counting down the hours to our passes being deactivated, to be quite honest. They have done a power of work on many pieces of legislation that have, or have not, gone through in this session of Parliament.
It is without doubt that it is only thanks to organisations such as the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland and individuals such as Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger that we will see this bill become law.
Beth began her campaign back in 2010. Work then began on a petition to the Scottish Parliament, which was lodged in 2015. I know that Beth and many of the campaigners have also acted as central contacts for many families who have faced similar traumatic situations. That is what has driven most of the work that they have undertaken in order to bring an end to restraint and seclusion. I am aware that Beth and other campaigners have undertaken huge amounts of investigation to try to understand the true scale of the problem and to demand action, which their Parliament is delivering today.
Many of us are wearing a little crown badge, which I am sure that people will be wondering about. All Beth’s work earned her the nickname “Queen Bee”, and the crown comes from that. I am very grateful for being sent one ahead of today’s debate.
The cabinet secretary touched on guidance. What will be really important is how it is received and that it will be implemented in the true spirit of the bill. I have written to the cabinet secretary about the concerns of unions and those of the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland about potential unintended consequences. I hope that, as soon as the guidance is published, it can be shared with all those who are involved. It is important that we and the teaching profession have confidence that common sense will always be looked at. However, it is clear that there are some concerns out there. Although this bill, which I welcome, will pass tonight, those concerns have not all been answered, and I hope that the cabinet secretary will make sure that a response to those concerns is forthcoming.
This is the final education debate of this session of Parliament, so I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to those who have worked on the education portfolios during their time in this Parliament, particularly Pam Duncan-Glancy, who has announced that she is not seeking re-election, and my colleague Roz McCall, who has worked on the education bills alongside me. There has been a lot of education legislation over the past year.
We can look back and be proud of some of the opportunities that this Parliament took forward last week in relation to the Children (Care, Care Experience and Services Planning) (Scotland) Bill and delivering the Promise.
I also want to thank and pay tribute to my colleague Douglas Ross, who will be making his final speech in the Parliament. He has done a triple now: he has served as a councillor, an MP and an MSP. He was also our party leader—I am not sure whether that was something that he also enjoyed. I know that he has always put his community in Moray first.
Many of us on the Conservative benches have been friends with Douglas and worked alongside him for many years. He might not thank me for saying this, but many people in the other parties probably do not see the true Douglas. He is an incredibly thoughtful and caring individual, who, I always find, remembers things about us and our families that we do not always remember ourselves. He is always checking in. That is one side of Douglas’s character that other colleagues probably have not had the opportunity to see in the rough and tumble of politics. I do not think that today will see Douglas blowing the whistle on his political career. I look forward to seeing him return to serve his community in Moray in the future in the Westminster Parliament.
To conclude, Deputy Presiding Officer—you have been generous in allowing me additional time—I will say that the Scottish Conservatives will be supporting the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill at decision time.
15:15
There is a distinct air of the end of term all around us. There was a degree of chatter at the back of the chamber between the cabinet secretary and me and others, because people are becoming slightly demob happy, notwithstanding that an election is to come. During the debate, I have been reflecting on who I was at the start of the session as opposed to who I am now. At the start of the session, I used to write my speeches down carefully and closely. Today, I have not written anything down. That is because I know exactly what I want to say, because I know how passionate I feel about the issues and the individuals who have been involved in bringing the bill to its fruition.
I begin by paying a warm tribute to my friend Daniel Johnson for his work on the bill—for his tenacity, energy and dedication to it, and for what he has done to get to know all the different facets of it and to engage with them honestly and in good faith, which is what has brought us to this point today. I also join Miles Briggs in paying tribute to the other education spokespeople who I have had the pleasure of serving alongside in the latter stages of the Parliament, and to the cabinet secretary for her efforts on the bill and for the collegiate way in which she has sought to work on it. I know that in the coming weeks it will not seem as though we always have that collegiality, so it is important to put on the record today my thanks to her and to Miles Briggs, Willie Rennie, Maggie Chapman and others who have engaged on the bill.
There is a real sense of coming full circle at the end of a parliamentary session. For me, there is a personal element to that, given that my career at Enable Scotland ended on my election to Parliament, but that was also the point at which I began to do a lot of work with the people who have been involved with the bill.
I want to pay particular tribute to Beth Morrison in that regard. We have heard her described as “Queen Bee” and the driving force behind the legislation, and she is an incredible woman and a tenacious campaigner. Along with Kate Sanger and other parents who have experienced horrendous situations, she has fought every step of the way to ensure that we pass the bill. Behind that, there is a real kindness and warmth to Beth. It radiates out of her—I always thought that when I worked with her at Enable. I was always struck by the fact that Beth’s email address was “calumsmummy” at whatever the email provider was. I do not know whether that is still the case, but she used to laugh and say, “I had that email address because that’s how folk knew me. I was Calum’s mummy at the school gates, and I was Calum’s mummy when organising him seeing his friends and all those sorts of things. I stuck with that, actually, because that’s who I am.” Many people in the country now know Beth Morrison as Calum’s mummy, because that was behind her driving determination to pass the legislation.
I think that all of us who are parents would recognise that. When I became a dad in August, somebody said to me, “The way you feel right now about your wee boy is how you will always feel about them—they will always be your little boy or your little girl.” Daniel Johnson spoke to that experience powerfully today. It will always be our desire to protect and support them and to give them a future that perhaps will be better than what has gone before. That is what the bill is all about. It is about our children and ensuring that they can live safely at school and have all the support and protection that they need.
I was talking about the bill with some colleagues I used to work with at Enable, Kayleigh Thorpe and Jan Savage. I reflected that sometimes in life you plant trees for other people to sit under. They recognise much of their part in the journey, as I am sure many of the campaigners in the gallery do. There are days in this place when it does not feel like we are planting trees for other people to sit under, but today is not one of those days.
15:19
I am grateful to Daniel Johnson for his work on the bill, and I pay tribute to him for that, but we should reflect on why it took a member’s bill to get us to this point. Why have successive Governments not acted on this most important issue for 27 years?
Parliament has acted for children before. After some delay, we incorporated the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child into our laws. Prior to that, we agreed to John Finnie’s plans to end exemptions that allowed parents to physically punish their child. Our getting it right for every child—GIRFEC—strategy aims to keep children and young people safe and protected from abuse, neglect or harm at home, at school and in the community. The bill is a natural next step on the journey towards protecting children’s rights by ensuring that seclusion and restraint are used only as a last resort and when there are genuine health and safety reasons for doing so.
The UNCRC is clear that protection from punishment and detention is crucial. It enshrines the idea that children should be isolated only as a last resort and for the shortest time possible. However, restraint and seclusion are sometimes used as frequent responses to behaviour that is perceived to be challenging. Pupils find that traumatic, not just at the time but for years afterwards. The bill has been drafted well to respond to exactly those concerns.
The bill is right to support staff, too, by making clear in law what constitutes appropriate and inappropriate restraint. We should be outlining best practice and alternatives that prevent or minimise the use of restraint and seclusion. The current inconsistency and unclear expectations leave staff exposed.
The requirement to notify parents, carers and guardians of the use of restraint and seclusion is the key provision in the bill. Those people have a right to know that those methods have been used within 24 hours of that happening. They should not find out by finding bruises on their child or through children coming home from school in tears. Along with the requirement to keep records, that will bring much-needed transparency.
The Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland’s report “No Safe Place: Restraint and Seclusion in Scotland’s Schools” found that only 18 of 32 councils recorded all incidents. We must know when, how often and where restraint and seclusion are happening, because only then can we drive down their inappropriate use. I share trade union concerns about workload, but the answer to that is to ensure that staff are given time and support, and I ask the cabinet secretary to give assurances on that point.
Within the scope of the bill, Daniel Johnson has done well to draft legislation that addresses those concerns. However, inappropriate use of restraint and seclusion stems from broader failures in our education system. There is a failure to understand and cater to the additional support needs of the children or young people involved; a failure to recognise that every child and young person has rights; and a failure to properly fund additional support needs in all our schools.
We have nowhere near enough support in our schools for children with additional support needs, and those children are disproportionately affected. As Kate Sanger told us at stage 1, a child’s shout is often not aggression requiring restraint but distressed communication requiring love and understanding. Her communication passport, which helps staff to understand how and why a pupil behaves in the way that they do, should be in all schools. I ask the cabinet secretary to address that proposal in her closing speech.
As this session of Parliament draws to a close, there has been some good progress on children’s rights. The bill is a testament to that, and the Scottish Greens are proud to support it. However, as we move into a new session, we recognise that we still have much further to go to ensure that the rights of all children are respected, defended and promoted.
15:24
I have met Beth Morrison on several occasions. I recall one particular occasion in the middle of winter in my office in Cupar. I said something that she disagreed with, and I was left in no doubt about the truth of the situation and how I needed to amend my views.
Therefore, although I congratulate Daniel Johnson on introducing the bill, I know that, in reality, he did not really have any choice. Once Beth Morrison had made her mind up that a bill was required, it was going to happen and Daniel Johnson would just be a victim along the way.
Will the member take an intervention?
Certainly.
Just to update Willie Rennie’s characterisation, it should be noted in the Official Report that I was a very willing victim. [Laughter.]
That is what all hostages say, so we should express our concern about Daniel Johnson’s future.
Beth Morrison’s campaign has been going on for 11 years, and anyone who is involved in politics knows that that is a long time. It is a tremendous commitment that has, I am told, involved her speaking to 3,000 families and bringing together people from across the country who have had similar experiences to hers. In a recent communication to us, she said:
“The children aren’t naughty, they’re scared”.
That offers a different perspective on how we should view restraint and seclusion.
The campaign has involved two different phases. The first phase was to develop guidance that involved the adoption of best practice, understanding what the young people experience and considering what the response from the educational establishment should be.
The second phase was to bring that into law. The fact that there was a need to do so says something about how we view guidance. Often, guidance is produced, it sits on a shelf and it is ignored, along with all the other guidance that has been produced. If we feel the need, on every occasion, to put something into law, we need to consider carefully how we bring together guidance, because it is often viewed by professionals—not only in the education world but across every part of our public sector—as having a somewhat diminished status.
We need to think very carefully about that, because if we go down the route that the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland highlighted in her evidence to the Education, Children and Young People Committee, which would involve putting other areas on a statutory footing, that would introduce significant complication into our law. Elevating a very complex set of issues by putting them on the statute book is not a simple matter. We need to consider all that. I fully understand that, when particular cases are brought forward, they should be elevated to a higher status than that of others, because they are incredibly important. However, we need to look holistically at how we drive forward guidance and legislation to ensure that they are complete and are considered in the round.
I do not have a lot of time left, but I recognise the anxiety of many unions across the board, which came together throughout the process to express concerns about workload and definitions. We need to consider their concerns, which we have reflected in the stage 3 amendments.
This issue is part of a wider debate. This session of Parliament has been dominated by debates about behaviour, violence, ASN and absence, and restraint and seclusion are part of that mix. We need to consider everything in the round to ensure that our classrooms are a safe place to be, as well as a good place to have a great education.
We move to the open debate.
15:28
I thank Daniel Johnson for his work to introduce the bill. As the MSP for East Lothian, I am proud to support the bill on behalf of the children and young people of the county.
As Daniel Johnson said, the passing of the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill—which is often called Calum’s law—is a landmark moment. The bill puts clear, enforceable protections in place so that restraint and seclusion are used only as a genuine last resort and never as a first response. I commend Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger for their work in getting us to this position.
We all know the current reality for too many children, especially those with additional support needs. More than a third of pupils have been subjected to practices that are inconsistent, poorly recorded and sometimes downright harmful. The 2018 investigation by the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland laid bare the gaps: there were no national standards, there was patchy monitoring and parents were left in the dark. The voluntary guidance had not been good enough.
That ends today. The bill changes that by placing the Scottish Government’s guidance on a statutory footing. It requires every school—public or independent—to train staff properly in de-escalation techniques and positive behaviour support. It demands that parents are informed immediately when restraint or seclusion is used, and it insists on proper recording and reporting, so that we can spot patterns, learn lessons and drive down the use of such measures for good.
The bill is not about tying teachers’ hands; it is about empowering them. It is about giving every educator the tools and the confidence to support children without resorting to physical intervention or isolation. It is about creating the trauma-informed, rights-respecting schools that Scotland’s young people deserve. As legislation, it sits squarely within the Scottish Government’s values. I thank the cabinet secretary, Jenny Gilruth, for her collaborative work with Daniel Johnson and the Education, Children and Young People Committee in considering the bill.
The Government incorporated the UNCRC into Scots law. As a Parliament, we made the Promise to Scotland’s care-experienced children just last week. As a Parliament, we believe that every child, regardless of their needs, should thrive in an inclusive education system. The bill delivers on those commitments. It turns warm words into legal duties. It puts children’s rights at the heart of our schools.
Once again, I thank and pay tribute to Daniel Johnson for introducing the bill and for the thoughtful way in which he has worked across the Parliament. I also thank fellow members of the Education, Children and Young People Committee for their rigorous scrutiny. Above all, I thank the families, the campaigners and the children themselves, who have shared what have often been painful experiences. Their courage has made the bill possible. They are an inspiration to all of us in this place.
Today, Scotland has a chance to say loud and clear that we do not restrain our children unless there is no other way, and that we do not isolate them from their peers without proper safeguards. Instead, we choose dignity, support and inclusion. I urge every colleague to join me in voting to pass the bill. Let us send a message that, in Scotland, our children’s rights are not optional—they are the law. The bill is for every child who has ever felt powerless in a school corridor, for every parent who has waited anxiously for a phone call that never came, and for the future of an inclusive, compassionate Scotland.
15:31
I rise to make my final speech in the chamber. I chose to speak in this debate, on this subject, for a number of reasons. First, the member in charge proved to be a very conscientious and determined member in getting the bill through. I was reminded that he is the only member to take forward a member’s bill in this Parliament to have come to a Conservative group meeting to discuss the bill. I was leader at the time, and I remember watching him walk out the door and thinking that he got a far easier ride from my colleagues at that group meeting than I often did in the same room. That proved that Daniel Johnson was determined to get as much support for the bill as possible at every point.
Another reason for speaking in this debate is the campaigners, who have already been mentioned. Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger have my utmost respect and admiration for what they have done to get the bill to this stage and for the work that they have done for more than a decade to reach this point. I know that Peter, Calum, Beth and Kate are in the public gallery today to watch the bill reach this point and get passed into law. They should be extremely proud of the work that they have done. [Applause.]
I will make two final points as to why I thought that this was the right topic to finish on. First, I will mention the non-Government bills unit. I took a bill through the Parliament to stage 1. It was unsuccessful, but I saw up close the skill, dedication and commitment of that unit—something that I had not witnessed before, as I had not been involved. I believe that that team needs to be nurtured and celebrated in the next session of the Parliament, because it is a great asset to those of us who are lucky enough to take a bill through various stages.
The Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill came to the Education, Children and Young People Committee—a committee that I have been very proud to convene over the past 18 months. I have enjoyed my time as convener; I am not sure that my fellow members enjoyed it quite as much as I did. I know that I stretched the limits of the convener’s role at times, but I always did it in the best interests of trying to get to the root of some of the issues.
Willie Rennie quoted an email that we got from Beth Morrison this week. When we are thinking about the bill, which will undoubtedly pass at stage 3 today, I am sure unanimously, we might consider what she said in her email:
“Calum can’t advocate for himself due to his complex disability, but he can express this truth: the children aren’t naughty, they are scared.”
Children should not be scared in Scotland, and they should certainly not be scared in an educational setting. If passing the bill prevents just one more child from being scared at school, we will have done our job today.
In the time that I have available, I will make a couple of offers of thanks. The first is to the staff who have been with me through my time in Parliament—some of whom have been with me the entire time since I was first elected in 2016 and others who have come more recently. The work that I have done as an individual member, as a party spokesperson, as a party leader and as a convener has been assisted by their tremendous efforts.
I also want to say thanks to my wife, Krystle, and our two boys, Alistair and James, who will see a bit more of me in the coming weeks and months and who have been a great support to me, as has my wider family.
A final speech by me in a consensual debate would not be quite the same if I did not add in just a hint of controversy. I do not think that I have hidden—certainly not well—that I have grown increasingly frustrated with the mechanisms of the Parliament, because I do not think that we are doing enough. Today is an exception—I think that we will pass an important bill—but, other days, I come in here and I am frustrated. I am frustrated that we have politicians who cannot speak for four minutes without having the lectern up and reading from a script, daring not to deviate by taking an intervention. When people look at that from the outside, they do not see politicians who are upping their game; they see people who are reading a script that could have been delivered by anyone. From the back benches, we hear softball questions that are supposed to be spontaneous in response to an answer from a minister, and then the answer to that scripted question is also scripted. We can and should do far better than that. In the seventh session of the Parliament, more people will be looking to see an improvement, and I hope that we see that. We have an opportunity in the Parliament that is not offered to many. If we up our game, that will improve how this institution is viewed from the outside.
To have the chance to serve is a huge privilege. For me, that began 19 years ago, when I was first elected as a councillor. I have since been an MSP and an MP, and I now conclude my time in the Scottish Parliament. To those who gave me that opportunity, I say thank you. To the people of Moray and the Highlands and Islands, who, 19 years ago, put their trust in a young farm labourer to represent them, which has been a huge honour and privilege for me, I simply say thank you.
15:37
I ask members to note my entry in the members’ register of interests.
As we come to the conclusion of today’s debate, I rise to offer the full support of Scottish Labour for the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill. At its heart, the bill is about dignity, rights, protection and transparency for some of our most vulnerable children. The purpose of the bill is to minimise the use of restraint and seclusion and to ensure that such practices are used only as a last resort and only when there is an immediate risk of harm. The bill will place a statutory duty on ministers to issue national guidance, to set consistent national training standards and to require the recording and reporting of all such incidents to parents and guardians, ending the unacceptable inconsistency that has persisted across Scotland for too long.
The case for the bill was driven by families, campaigners and organisations that refused to let experiences remain unseen. Reports from the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland, “No Safe Place: Restraint and Seclusion in Scotland’s Schools”, and Enable Scotland, “In safe hands?”, have made clear the scale of the challenge and the lack of proper systems for reporting and accountability. The findings are reflected in the fact that Scotland has fallen behind other United Kingdom nations, particularly Northern Ireland, in providing a clear statutory obligation to protect children in schools.
The bill is a culmination of more than a decade of uncompromising advocacy by individuals such as Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger, who fought not for personal recognition but to ensure that no other family would experience what they had to go through. Their tireless campaigning alongside the children’s commissioner, Enable Scotland, the National Autistic Society and others has ensured that children’s voices and their rights are now central to this legislative approach.
The Parliament should be in no doubt that the practices that we are legislating for are serious intrusive interventions that must be governed by robust rights-based and trauma-informed standards. That is what the bill will do. It will establish a clear legal duty, requiring all instances to be recorded and communicated to parents and ensuring that staff have access to high-quality training that is aligned with national best practice.
I will touch on a couple of contributions before I close. The first was from Douglas Ross, who has just sat down. It is always a pleasure to follow Douglas Ross. I note his incredibly useful confirmation that one of my party’s members attended a Conservative group meeting and will file that away.
As a wise parliamentarian, Douglas Ross acknowledged those who support us here. In this case, it was the non-Government bills unit, but there are many people around us who allow us to do our jobs. I will dwell on the comments he made as convener of the Education, Children and Young People Committee, because it is a tribute to him that he saw, in that committee, the ability to fulfil a role that is crucial for committees in a unicameral Parliament. Those who return in the next session could do a lot worse than to look at some of the reactions and strategies that the convener chose to use to hold the Government to account and consider the legislation that came before the committee.
Finally, I pay tribute to Daniel Johnson, whose determined and principled leadership has brought his member’s bill to its final stage. It seems that he is getting quite good at member’s bills, so let us see what the election brings, in the hope that he will be working on a Government bill next time.
15:41
First, I congratulate Daniel Johnson, the non-Government bills unit and everyone involved in getting this important bill to this stage. I am deeply impressed by all the members who have managed to navigate the maze of the legislative process. We have had some excellent bills to discuss and scrutinise in the past few months of this session, and this one is certainly right up there in terms of importance.
We have had an essential debate about a sobering issue. Throughout the bill process, and for many years before that—we have heard mention of 11 years—we have listened to powerful stories from families, campaigners and professionals about what too many children and young people have been facing in our schools. That restraint and seclusion have been used inconsistently and without parents being told is worrying, and that is exactly what the bill hopes to address.
When parents find out what has happened to their child only because of bruises, distress and changes in behaviour, that is not just a failure to communicate; it is a failure of trust. Children are being harmed, which puts extra pressure on families, who should be treated as partners in their child’s education, not as an afterthought. During our discussion of the bill, members on all sides have agreed that relying on the current process does not give children and families the consistency or protection that they need. Scotland now needs a national legal framework to ensure that restraint and seclusion are used only as a last resort and only when there is an immediate risk of harm.
Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger have been mentioned by absolutely everyone who has contributed to the debate, which shows just how much work they have done to contact every single one of us, to lobby us and to highlight how important the legislation is. I greatly appreciate all the work that Daniel Johnson has done with them on the bill, and I highlight that the cabinet secretary has spoken about the collaborative work that has been done to get us to this point. I echo those sentiments: there has been seriousness and compassion as the bill has gone through the process.
In the little bit of time before I conclude, I will highlight the work of Douglas Ross and apologise that I am doing so by reading from speaking notes on my lectern—I will try to ad lib a little. As a friend and colleague, Douglas Ross is a force to be reckoned with. He is a strong voice for the people of the region that he represents and, as Miles Briggs said in his contribution, he has a side that many people do not see when he is in in the political arena. I know that Douglas feels deeply and passionately about the need for change for young people in Scotland and it does not at all surprise me that he wanted to speak about this bill.
Does the member agree not only that Mr Ross is an outstanding and fearless parliamentarian—as we must all agree, whatever our views—but that he has, as I know, been prepared to work across parties in order to try to achieve things for Scotland? Is that not an example for us for the next session of Parliament?
I thank Fergus Ewing for that intervention. I cannot disagree with a single word that he said. In the work that I have tried to take forward with the minister Natalie Don-Innes, we have tried very hard to work on a cross-party basis, and that is definitely something that we should be looking to do.
To be clear, I note that no child should face restraint or seclusion unless there is truly no other option. For those reasons, putting the law into practice will be crucial.
The Scottish Conservatives are happy to support the bill. Scotland’s children deserve consistency, openness and safety in every classroom, and the bill is an important step towards making that happen.
15:45
I start by making it absolutely clear that all of Scotland’s children deserve and have the right to feel safe in our schools. They should not be restrained or secluded. The only occasions on which that should be considered are when there is an immediate risk of injury to the child or others, as we heard from Paul McLennan and others, and the cross-party support for Daniel Johnson’s bill shows that the Parliament shares that view.
I thank members for their really constructive and thoughtful approach to today’s debate and indeed to the bill process as a whole. I will respond to some of the comments that members have made in the debate.
First, I have some bad news for Miles Briggs: this is not the final education debate in the current session of Parliament. In fact, his colleague Pam Gosal will be leading a members’ debate tomorrow afternoon on mobile phones in schools, and he can be assured that I will attend that debate.
I absolutely love that Beth Morrison—the “Queen Bee”—has ensured that we are all wearing our crown badges today. After the stage 1 debate, Beth presented me with a tiara, but I did not think that it would be appropriate to wear a tiara in the chamber, so I have not come wearing it today.
Miles Briggs spoke to the importance of the statutory guidance, on which I firmly agree. The consultation will sit alongside that statutory guidance.
I turn to the concerns of stakeholders, and particularly the teaching trade unions, with whom I have spent a lot of time in the past three years. First, I am sympathetic to some of the concerns from the teaching trade unions. We rehearsed some of this in the stage 1 evidence session at the Education, Children and Young People Committee, but I have engaged directly with all the teaching trade unions, including as recently as last Thursday, and the Government has ensured—working with Mr Johnson, of course, whose bill it is—that the teaching trade unions will be consultees in relation to the statutory guidance. That is hugely important.
Secondly, a number of Scottish Government amendments last week spoke to some of those concerns, and an amendment by John Mason made it clearer that the proposed changes will not apply to nursery settings. Mr Mason’s amendment on the definitions speaks to the issue being revisited in the future, which addresses a concern that the teaching trade unions highlighted about the broadness of the category.
Thirdly, amendments were agreed to at stage 3 to support things that will be non-reportable in order to minimise the workload burden on teachers. That also addresses a concern that the teaching trade unions highlighted and to which I was sympathetic.
We heard from Willie Rennie about the churn of guidance that the Government produces. I remind members that much of the raft of guidance that the Government has produced in the education space, particularly in the past three years, has been at the behest of the Opposition parties. However, we need to consider the matter. I discussed with my officials only yesterday that, when we are creating a range of guidance, such as on attendance, behaviour and mobile phone use, we also need to step back and ask what needs to go, and to be mindful of the workload that they create for our schools. Publishing reams of non-statutory guidance arguably does not create the behaviour change that we need. That substantiates the need for Daniel Johnson’s bill, because we need that behaviour change. The review guidance update that officials published this morning covers the rationale for Mr Johnson’s bill.
Paul O’Kane was quite right to reflect on the collegiate spirit that has characterised engagement on the bill throughout its passage. In that spirit, I pay tribute to Douglas Ross. He said this weekend that he did not think that it was his job as convener of the Education, Children and Young People Committee to give the Government an easy time. I say to Mr Ross that absolutely no one in the Scottish Government thinks that he has given ministers an easy time so, on that, he has absolutely succeeded.
I also commend the diligent work of members across parties—in particular, Miles Briggs, Roz McCall, Martin Whitfield, Paul O’Kane, Ross Greer and Willie Rennie—for their work with the Government on a range of educational issues.
If you will indulge me, Presiding Officer, I will also pay tribute to Natalie Don-Innes, who will be stepping down. I was not able to contribute to the debate that she led last week, in which lots of accolades were paid to her. As her cabinet secretary, I thank her for her diligence as a minister and congratulate her on the successful passage last week of a vital piece of Government legislation that was also supported across parties.
I am glad that the bill that we have worked on together will—as I hope—pass this evening. It sends a strong signal. It signals to teachers and staff that we will support them to de-escalate challenging situations in schools. It signals to parents that their children matter and that, when something happens at school that involves their child, they should be told about that timeously. More importantly, it signals to all our children that they should not be restrained or secluded at school.
I am pleased that one of the final bills that the Parliament will pass in this session relates to children and to giving effect to their rights. As Calum put it, the children
“aren’t naughty; they’re just scared.”
I agree with that. That is why the Scottish Government will vote in support of the Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill today.
I call Daniel Johnson, the member in charge, to wind up the debate.
15:51
The challenge in summing up a stage 3 debate for my own member’s bill is to prevent that from becoming akin to a gushing Oscar acceptance speech. I will therefore try to marshal my thank-yous and to make some points. I begin not just by thanking members for their contributions this afternoon but by thanking the Parliament more broadly. The passage of the bill has been a genuinely cross-party effort, and the bill is better as a result of not just that engagement but the overall parliamentary process: the definitions are tighter; there is flexibility in the way that it is framed; and the scope is right, because nursery classes have been removed from it. Above all else, as members from across parties have pointed out, it will make our children safer, provide clarity for practice and treat the issue with the seriousness that it deserves.
On that cross-party effort, Miles Briggs’s contribution in particular has been very helpful. He has taken a real interest in the topic, as has Willie Rennie, whom I also thank for his on-going dialogue.
Indeed, I thank the entire Education, Children and Young People Committee. Its work was diligent, detailed and critical to providing the scrutiny that allowed the bill to be improved.
I pay tribute to Douglas Ross. He has been a diligent parliamentarian throughout, and I agree with him on what the Parliament needs to aspire to being when it comes to how it works and how contributions are made. That is very important.
I pay tribute to the non-Government bills unit. When we think about what the Parliament should be, the member’s bill process is critical. Roz Thomson and her team do an outstanding job.
I pay tribute to the children’s commissioner and third sector organisations—in particular, Enable—for the work that they have done in shining a light on the issue and providing the impetus.
I also thank the trade unions. They have not always been welcoming of the proposal, and I understand why. It is a difficult topic. However, I have no doubt that the bill has been improved by their engagement and has tighter definitions. I am also mindful of the bureaucracy and workload about which they have raised concerns, and of the on-going resourcing and support that teachers and classroom assistants require.
Let us be in no doubt that this is not the final word on the topic. Indeed, following 7 May, it needs to be at the top of the to-do list for whoever will form the next Government, because there is work to be done to implement the bill’s intent.
We need the guidance to remain a living document that is updated so that it reflects best practice. Above all else, it must be a practical document that everyone in the classroom can use.
We need continuing professional development for all practitioners in the classroom. Most practitioners will not need training, but those that do, definitely need it. Therefore, we need a focus on the training and on ensuring that it is available to all practitioners who require it.
We also need to look very carefully at the fact that while there has been a huge expansion in the number of children identified as having additional support needs, the level of resource—particularly the number of specialist, trained, additional support needs teachers—has declined.
However, I also want to thank the Government, because this has been a really rewarding process. The communication has been constructive, on-going and focused. In particular, I thank Jenny Gilruth. I remember the two of us as very newly elected members back in 2016, sitting around the table at the away day in Stirling for the Education and Skills Committee. I do not think that either of us would necessarily have imagined that that on-going relationship might have resulted in a bill such as this.
Ultimately, politics is about interpersonal relationships, dialogue, identifying where there is common cause and doing something about it. I hope that this bill stands as testament to that. This is my second member’s bill. I do not know whether two for two is a record. If this bill passes, as I hope it will, I will be proud of it.
However, above all else, I repeat my thanks to Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger: you are absolutely outstanding campaigners and you are delivering change. I know that I should speak through the chair, but please forgive me, Deputy Presiding Officer. All of us in the Parliament owe you a debt of gratitude.
The cabinet secretary stole my closing line. As we pass Calum’s law, let us end with Calum’s words:
“The children aren’t naughty, they’re just scared.”
Let us put that to an end.
That concludes the debate on Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill at stage 3. It is time to move on to the next item of business. There will be a brief pause to allow members on the front benches to change over.
Air ais
Climate Change PlanAir adhart
Visitor Levy (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill