Children (Withdrawal from Religious Education and Amendment of UNCRC Compatibility Duty) (Scotland) Bill: consumer duty assessment

Evidence gathering

Potential impacts on consumers

Religious Observance and Religious and Moral Education in Schools

As indicated in the consultation analysis report, the consultation received over five hundred responses, which did not reach a clear consensus on a preferred approach. Instead the responses show a wide range of views, with many recognising both advantages and disadvantages to the proposed approach.

The consultation findings mirrored those of targeted engagement with key stakeholders, with some respondents and stakeholders objecting to any legislative changes due to concerns about parental rights and others of the view that far more radical change is needed, for example providing a parallel right to withdraw for learners, or by contrast removing the right to withdraw entirely for either or both RO and RME. There was also a strong desire expressed for clear guidance to support the consistent implementation of any changes.

However, significant support was expressed for improved consideration of pupils’ views and strengthening children’s rights in this area. In particular there was a clear consensus regarding the benefits of RME for children and young people, including to support community cohesion. Taken together these findings suggest consumers will be potentially positively impacted by the RO/RME provisions in the Bill, though consideration will continue to be given to how to ensure parental rights continue to be upheld in line with the child’s evolving capacity.

Engagement with members of the Scottish Youth Parliament and the small number of consultation responses from pupils, allowed us to hear from children as consumers in themselves to see how the RO/RME provisions had the potential to impact them during their school education.

Support was expressed for greater autonomy for children and young people in this area, noting the need to ensure that schools understand the pupil’s perspective. It was felt that some pupils are likely to act according to their own views on RO/RME regardless of the process, for example through not attending RO/RME when they are asked to, or by attending RO/RME when their parents have withdrawn them.

However, they also noted the need to provide clear guidance for schools, particularly around assessing a pupil’s capacity to form a view, avoiding bias, and consideration of minority faiths, particularly in denominational schools. It was also felt that clear communication between pupils and schools was important, including regarding pupils’ rights, the reasons for RO/RME in schools, where to go for help, and offering multiple ways for pupils to express their views. It was also remarked that LGBT young people and those from stricter religious backgrounds may be particularly affected by the changes.

This told us that from the perspective of pupils as consumers, the changes to improve consideration of pupil views in the withdrawal process would be welcomed. However, as noted above there is a need for clear guidance to support the implementation of the changes.

Amendment to the UNCRC Act

By minimising complexity for public authorities, improving legal coherence, and ensuring the continuity of public services should an incompatibility arise, it is considered that this amendment may make it easier for public authorities to deliver services more effectively aligned to legal duties. This in turn has the potential to positively impact those accessing services. A clearer legal framework means public authorities can work more efficiently, potentially reducing the time and resources needed for legal analysis and decision-making. This could lead to cost savings as less time will be spent navigating legal uncertainties and could therefore positively impact consumers accessing these services.

A targeted approach to evidence gathering on the amendment was deemed proportionate, which focussed on feedback from key stakeholders including: the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland Office, Together (the Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights), UNICEF, and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service. In addition, Scottish Government engaged with the Embedding Children’s Rights in Public Services Group, COSLA, the UNCRC Peer Support Network, NHS Education Scotland and SOLAR.

Most stakeholders consulted understood the rationale for this amendment. When asked specifically about the financial implications for public authorities, COSLA and SOLAR indicated that they did not anticipate any negative financial impact. In fact, they suggested that the increased clarity provided by the changes could have a positive financial effect.

Therefore, we have concluded that the amendment to the UNCRC Act is likely to have only positive impacts.