Seòmar agus comataidhean

I do not think so. No, I do not.

No, I have not considered that. I would hope that, as politicians, we would all have the humility to recognise that our fate does not always rest in our hands. At times, it can rest in that of others. That is my philosophy and approach.

In terms of right now?

I have had considerable time to reflect on all matters, as you would expect any minister to always reflect on their actions. The basis of my position has not changed—what I said was a correct quote and Professor Jay was seeking clarification. However, while my position on what I said and why I said it in the chamber has not changed, I do of course reflect greatly on how matters are handled. For me, as I said in my opening remarks, if information had been made available, people will always come to their own conclusions about matters.

I am always very respectful of other people’s views, Mr Rennie, and I try my best to understand things from the perspectives of others, not least victims and witnesses.

Yes, it was.

I have made some additional remarks today—

I recognise that, convener. As I would with any committee, I will seek to give a speedy response.

The quote was in a briefing note that I had. I do not know whether it was officials or special advisers who wrote it. Of course, there was a bill team that was supporting me with a large landmark piece of legislation. Any briefing pack is divided into the groupings for debate. There will be purpose and effect notes and additional information. The quote was in the information that I had to hand on the day.

Thank you, and good morning. I am very grateful to the committee for allowing me to make a short statement, so that I can put on public record the apology that I gave privately to Alexis Jay for the fact that there has been so much focus not on her eminent work or on the substance of child protection, but on remarks that I made in the chamber. It was never my intention for Professor Jay to be the subject of so much intrusion and attention, and I very much regret that.

With regard to Liam Kerr’s urgent question on 19 November, I unfortunately could not attend chamber, due to being away from Parliament on Scottish Government business, so another minister had to reply. On reflection, I should have written to Mr Kerr and provided then the information that has been provided since.

I wrote to Mr Kerr twice in relation to two of his stage 3 amendments to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill—which, incidentally, I am very proud of—to explain why I could not support those amendments. Work led by experts was already on-going, through the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group and Police Scotland’s review of historical and existing cases. The research that he proposed, which was to be undertaken, within three years, by a commissioner who had yet to be established or appointed, would have been a duplication of that work. I repeated that argument in the grouping debate on 16 September.

In a later intervention on Mr Kerr regarding data, I quoted what Professor Alexis Jay said in an interview in January with BBC Radio 4. I did not state that Professor Jay was commenting on Liam Kerr’s amendments; I was making a general point on Professor Jay’s views on calls for further inquiries.

As the committee will be aware from reading the Official Report, I started by saying:

“Is Mr Kerr aware of the work led by Professor Alexis Jay, who was the chair of an independent inquiry into child sexual abuse in England and Wales and who currently sits on our national strategic group? She shares my view and has put on the record and stated to the media that she does not support further inquiries into child sexual abuse and exploitation, given the significant time and resource already spent in the review that she led, the Casey audit and other reviews. She says that it is now time that

‘people should just get on with it’.”—[Official Report, 16 September 2025; c 31.]

Professor Jay wrote to me on 26 September, noting that, although I had correctly quoted her, her comments were made in the context of a public inquiry in England and Wales, not Liam Kerr’s amendment. She said that

“the Scottish Government should urgently take steps to establish reliable data”

and that she had already been in discussions with officials about how that might be achieved. She also asked for her position to be clarified.

Officials contacted Professor Jay on 3 October, proposing to do that at the meeting of the strategic group that was scheduled for 8 October and noting that minutes of such meetings are published. Professor Jay responded on 6 October, agreeing to that. That was done as planned, and the minutes were published on 18 November.

I conclude by addressing the most important people in all of this, who are the victims. I have been driven in my work by the experiences of victims, who must have their voices heard. That is why I established what is now the Scottish child abuse inquiry with the education secretary and why I took forward the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Act 2025.

Although the focus of some in the past few weeks has been on the way in which I quoted Professor Jay, I hope that, after today—I note that the education secretary will make a statement this afternoon—attention can rightly turn to victims and survivors and the work that we all need to do together to protect our children.