Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 19 March 2026
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 738 contributions

|

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

My answer to your question—if I have understood it correctly—would be that people who seek guidance from a hospital chaplain, of whatever denomination, are not covered by the bill, because that is a consensual conversation that the patient is seeking out. They are seeking out guidance, which is not covered by the bill. The issue could be included in guidance for health boards, but it does not need a specific exemption in the bill, because consensual conversations are not covered.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

The post-legislative scrutiny—we will stop using that phrase in a minute—of various acts that we have passed in this committee has proved very useful. To me, that route is the appropriate mechanism for ensuring that we can appropriately scrutinise the legislation’s effect and make sure that it is having the effect that we want it to have.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

I think that the bill has sufficient flexibility on that. Currently, we see protests only at specific types of settings, so it is right that the bill is limited to the 30 premises that are captured by the 1967 act. There would be a difference if GP surgeries or pharmacies started to be designated under that act, but they would still be captured with the relatively small number of premises that are included now. As drafted, the bill provides enough flexibility to ensure that, should we see behaviours at services where we do not see them at the moment, we could move to protect those services as appropriate.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

A lot of that is about proportionality. One of the things that was cited in the Supreme Court judgment for the Northern Ireland bill was that the punishment involved only fines. That was considered with regard to proportionality. Given that that set a precedent, it would have potentially been unwise to depart from something that was so heavily referenced in the Supreme Court judgment for that bill.

The Scottish Government also has a presumption against short sentences, and offences under this bill would likely fall in that category, so it would be counter-productive to even put that in the bill. As the minister said in the previous session, there is flexibility in the fines system to deal with repeat offenders and people who commit particularly flagrant breaches of the zone.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

No, it would not be. In the first instance, I doubt that many people know what that flag is, but it would not be covered under the bill.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

We would first have to see activity at those premises similar to what we currently see outside hospitals, which we have not seen. That is why such premises are not currently covered, and why we are using the designated services aspect of the Abortion Act 1967. The minister indicated that there would have to be consultation, and we would have to consider how such behaviours were manifesting and to assess their impact, in the way that we have done here, to ensure proportionality and to extend the scope to any other sites.

It is right for us to retain such flexibility, because, as you said, medicine moves on. However, the protesters’ tactics have changed, too, over the years. To leave out such premises would be to tempt fate and would potentially displace protests to those other places. We need to ensure that there would be appropriate consultation if the scope were to cover those premises too, but I do not currently foresee that being needed.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

Yes.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

Yes.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

Private property is included in the zones in England and Wales. I think that we have struck the right balance in this bill. The issue is not one that we have come across so far in testimony, but there could be an undermining effect if private property was not covered, as you have heard from other witnesses. As I have said, I believe that we have struck the right balance in protecting a person’s right to private conversations and their right to a private life in their own home, while not allowing them to use their property to attempt to influence someone else’s decision or to undermine the effect that we are trying to have with the bill.

Health, Social Care and Sport Committee

Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 March 2024

Gillian Mackay

I think that that, in and of itself, would potentially not be a breach of the bill’s provisions. In all of the scenarios that have been played out over this evidence session and in the session with the minister, the context of what is happening at the moment in question will be key. I believe that something additional would have to be involved for that to be a breach. As the minister has said, that will be for the police to deal with when they arrive at the scene of a complaint.

Here in committee, we cannot play out every scenario that might arise. As I have said previously, the provisions might not stop someone complaining about such a symbol being displayed, but, in the absence of any further context, I doubt that that is something that the police would take action on.