UNCRC Implementation Embedding in Public Services Group minutes: 19 February 2024

Attendees and apologies

• Lyndsey Saki, Scottish Government (Chair) (LS) 
• Luiza Leite, Scottish Government (minutes) (LL)
• Abbie Montgomery-Fox, Children’s Hearing Scotland (AMF)
• Aqeel Ahmed, Scottish Government (AA)
• Darren Little, Dumfries and Galloway Council (DL)
• Dragan Nastic, Unicef UK (DN)
• Eloise Di Gianni, Observatory for Children’s Human Rights Scotland (EDG)
• Judi Martin, Together Scotland (JM)
• Laura Crossan, Police Scotland (LC)
• Lucinda Rivers, Unicef UK (LR)
• Paul Gorman, Scottish Government (PG)
• Rebecca Spillane, The Improvement Service (RS)
• Rebekah Cameron-Berry, Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) (RCB) 
• Sarah Rodger, SOLAR (SR)

Apologies

• Alison Sutherland, Social Work Scotland
• Alistair Stobie, SOLAR
• Cathy Asante, Scottish Human Rights Commission
• Deborah Davidson, ADES
• Felicia Szloboda, The Improvement Service
• Gita Sharkey, Scottish Government 
• Joanne Glennie, Right There
• Julie Williams, Quarriers
• Juliet Harris, Together Scotland
• Kenny Meechan, Glasgow City Council/SOLAR 
• Maria Doyle, Together Scotland  
• Nicola Hogg, SOLAR
• Simon Webster, CCPS 
• Suzanne Brown, Quarriers
   

Items and actions

1. Welcome and introductions

LS welcomed attendees and noted any apologies received. LS welcomed Judi Martin who attended for the first time on behalf of Together Scotland.

2. Actions from previous meeting

Minutes from the previous meeting on 20 November 2023 have been shared with members and will be made available later on the group page.

Outstanding actions:

A number of actions were captured at the meeting on 20 November 2023.

Complete actions:

• LS to share a copy of the draft non statutory guidance with members for any final comments, with a short turnaround of one week for feedback.
• LL to share a link to the survey with members for further comments – issued in November minutes.

Still to complete:

• LS to connect with RCB with Caroline McMenemy on SPSO pilot.
• LL to share Regulation & Improvement Group Terms of Reference document with LC.
• LL to share the Innovation Fund presentation slides after the meeting of 20 November.

LS apologised for the delay, noting that any actions missed will be completed as soon as possible following today’s meeting.

Members were content with the minutes from 20 November 2023 which should be available on the group page.

3. Update on UNCRC Act

LS noted that members will be aware that the UNCRC Bill received Royal Assent on 16 January and is now the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024.

She also highlighted that, as the Act was updated to reflect additions and deletions during the Bill's Parliamentary passage, the numbering of several sections in the Act differ from those in the Bill.

The section 6 duty on public authorities and section 18 duty on listed authorities will commence on 16 July 2024.

4. Update on support to public authorities

Non-statutory guidance and upcoming statutory guidance consultation

LS informed members that non-statutory guidance on taking a children’s human rights approach was published on 8 January 2024. The non-statutory guidance provides practical support for public authorities to prepare for commencement of duties in the Act while consultation takes place on the draft statutory guidance. While the aim is to publish statutory guidance in time for commencement, it may not be possible, given the short 6-month commencement period. 

The statutory guidance consultation could not begin until provisions to publish and consult on statutory guidance commenced on 31 January 2024. The intention is for the consultation to go live as soon as is practicable thereafter, around mid-February. The consultation is likely to go live next week, LS noted that we will share this with members. Consultation with children and young people will also be taking place from early March.  

Support for public authorities on commencement

LS shared that NHS Education for Scotland has been commissioned to provide support to health boards and special health boards with their preparedness for commencement. 

The intended outcomes of this work are that: 

• Health boards report increased understanding and preparedness for the commencement of duties under the UNCRC Act. 
• Adult services within health boards have greater awareness of the UNCRC Act duties and what that means for service delivery, and commit to appropriate action. 
• Key senior leaders within health boards have appropriate tools and support to self-evaluate preparedness for the UNCRC Act commencement and consider any areas of practice that may require attention. 

Child Rights Regulation & Improvement Action Group

AA updated members on the work of the Regulation and Improvement action group and initial engagement with listed authorities. The Group will support regulators to embed child rights considerations into their practice and the practice of the organisations they reach. It will assist the Scottish Government to identify and implement practical steps to further embed children’s rights within regulatory frameworks and inspection regimes. The Group has been exploring the 5 principles of embedding children’s rights in public services developed by the Welsh Commission for Children and Young People. The group is looking at what guidance and supports already exists, where there may be gaps and any questions and concerns members may have. This includes considering how best to engage with children and young people whose rights are at risk and looking at how inspection can instil accountability and ensure young people have the opportunity to hold institutions to account.

AA talked about some of the emerging themes from discussions with listed authorities and the opportunities and challenges they faced in embedding UNCRC in their work. Listed authorities appreciate ongoing dialogue, ensuring they are kept up to date on all activities underway in the lead up to commencement and the supporting resources available. AA mentioned some of the early challenges that have been identified such as child friendly reporting and engaging with children and young people whose rights are at risk.

DL asked about the compatibility duty and whether a list will be available of what falls in/out with compatibility, i.e. functions that are compatible and functions that are incompatible. Members raised concerns that adult services may not see this as applying to them. RCB agreed that it’s important to apply scope as people will be unsure where the new enforceable legal duties apply. LS noted that public authorities will need to seek legal advice if they are unsure when the section 6 duty applies to their functions.

RCB asked about the timeline for the Skills & Knowledge Framework. LS noted this is progressing to launch for Spring/Summer.

DN asked AA about contracted out services, legal contracts and child friendly clauses and whether the CR regulation and improvement group would look at that. AA responded saying if this is something the group would wish to focus on then this could be looked at but we may also touch on some of these areas within the planned workstreams shaped by the group.  

RCB asked about awareness and whether national resources will be provided to save them from producing local resources. PG highlighted the parent club website resource, which currently exists in digital format. The Empowering team are also doing a consultation with parents next week before publishing physical copies.

RCB shared that the Improvement Service just published a paper on Children's Rights and Placemaking in Scotland. It is targeted at those working in planning / regeneration / placemaking, who may not traditionally consider the relevance of their work to children's rights.

5. Pathways to remedy document

PG shared that the University of Edinburgh, the University of Stirling, and the Children’s Commissioner held a webinar on Embedding Systems of Child Friendly: Complaints, Remedy and Redress in Scotland in 2021

Two of the key recommendations were to design systems with children and ensure children are at the heart of them and to think systematically and create a ‘joined up’ system. This links in with Concluding observation number 17.

A working group has met to discuss a series of pathways that children and young people can access to seek remedy and justice. The pathways include those organisations and services that support children and young people to make a complaint, find legal information, and access remedy/justice. A group of children and young people will then create a new resource that visualises the pathways in an accessible format, with the publication expected later this year

All pathways included will be open to children and young people at all points, ie. they will not require to follow a linear journey through them. Complaints procedures should not be used to handle any concerns that suggest significant harm might have been caused to a child or that a child might be at risk of harm.

Pathways (draft)

• Local – child resolves concern at a local level – school, social work, health, etc
• Raised – make a formal complaint using the public bodies child-friendly complaints procedures
• Escalate/Urgent – ideally the child or young person has found remedy in the first two pathways. However, they may choose to go straight to this pathway or have not been satisfied with the way the complaint was handled in the first two. The child can escalate the complaint to various bodies: SPSO, CYPCS, Law centres, Advocacy Provision, bespoke services, etc.

PG welcomed feedback from the group and posed the following questions:

• Would this be a useful resource to support you to raise awareness with children and young people, parents carers and families?
• What should we be paying attention to?
• Where might the challenges exist?
• What could you offer to the development of the resource?

Discussion / feedback from members:

DN mentioned the scope and remit of this work goes further – i.e. ensuring proper implementation of a child human rights based approach is the best method to avoid remedies. In the future it would be helpful to clarify this in the pathways resource. DN expressed this document will be really important going forward.

DL noted effective resolution should not require a formal complaints process. We would aspire to resolve these issues quickly. We wouldn’t want to lose sight of this through any guidance. We don’t want people to think that resorting to escalation is the only path. Focussing on the early resolutions is important. PG agreed to add this framing in the introduction to the resource; there’s also escalation to the courts which we want to avoid completely.

RCB raised concerns about consistencies across local authorities in complaints processes. It was suggested that we learn from complaints and monitor over time. Can we record what some of the complaints are telling us and where there are discrepancies in different parts of Scotland? PG mentioned SG is looking at doing a piece of research around social and financial barriers children and young people face in these situations, which would be helpful to attach this to the pathways document.

RCB shared that some orgs might find this work difficult to implement. PG explained the plan is to create a design brief for the children and young people who will work through this content. PG suggested one of the questions could be “could this resource apply to all services” – so there are ways to build on this.

6. Discussion – public authority FAQs – what do SG policy teams need to know?

LS highlighted that there are some misconceptions about the UNCRC Act, and that we provided some FAQs in the last UNCRC programme update to counter this. She asked members to share any questions they have, or any areas of concern where they feel stakeholders may not fully understand the Act.

DN highlighted that non-stat guidance has a lot of info on the use of resources, and asked about what happens when resources aren’t available? Maximum use of available resources has limits. DN asked if we have received any questions on the use of child budgeting, the use of resources, and the concept of progressive realisation. LS confirmed our team not received any specific questions. LS explained there is no duty on public authorities in relation to child rights budgeting (although there will be a commitment from SG through the Children’s Rights Scheme) so it’s something that we encourage in the non-statutory guidance. We hope to share learning between organisations as practice develops. DN noted he would be happy to share case studies from other countries.

RS asked about grassroots organisations and how the duties apply to them, particularly in terms of child friendly publications – to what scale they be creating them and whether there are any existing texts and guides. LS noted there are some examples available in the non-statutory guidance. Grant funding is covered under statutory guidance, functions of a public nature carried out by organisations through a contract or other arrangement with public authorities would be subject to the section 6 duty (subject to the definition of ‘relevant function’ in that section).

7. Any other business

DL asked about advocacy and whether any scoping has been done for increased capacity in the system. PG said there’s a commitment in the action plan to map out current provisions of advocacy. The Children’s Rights Unit now have an internal map to see where these provisions sit and all the different directorates and legislation it covers. PG expressed that we would like to understand unmet needs through this work, but it’s still a very complex area.

RS asked about baseline indicators and that it would be useful to have a further discussion. LS agreed to get in touch with Carola Eyber from the Monitoring team and invite her to the next meeting.

The next meeting is scheduled for Monday 20th May 2024 from 10:00 – 12:00.

LS notes the need to issue upcoming meeting dates beyond May. LL will update the calendar invites with further meetings soon.