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

Fairer Scotland Duty summary

Title of policy, strategy or programme

Children (Withdrawal from Religious Education and Amendment of UNCRC Compatibility Duty) (Scotland) Bill

Summary of aims and expected outcomes of strategy, proposal, programme or policy

The overarching policy objectives are to:

• Religious observance (RO) and religious and moral education (RME, also referred to as religious education in Roman Catholic schools or RERC) in schools: Amend the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 (“the 1980 Act”) to require that pupils’ views are considered when parents are exercising their right to withdraw their child from RO and/or RME in order to provide clarity and align legislation with existing non-statutory guidance.
• Add an exemption to the Section 6 compatibility duty in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 (“the UNCRC Act”) in circumstances where a public authority is compelled to act incompatibly with the UNCRC requirements in fulfilment of another Act of the Scottish Parliament.

It will affect children, parents/carers, and public authorities (including those delivering functions of a public nature carried out under a contract or other arrangement with a public authority).

The Bill will amend both the UNCRC Act and the 1980 Act to provide clarity to public authorities on how they should interpret and apply their duties, and improve the clarity of our statute book, thus strengthening legal coherence and reducing complexity. As well as ensuring consideration of pupils’ views (in line with Article 12 of the UNCRC), the amendment to the 1980 Act will put beyond doubt the position in Scotland in relation to UNCRC obligations relating to RO and RME.

Summary of evidence

Religious Observance and Religious and Moral Education in Schools

We do not anticipate any specific or differential impact on different socio-economic groups under the RO/RME provisions in the Bill. It is anticipated that there may be greater impacts on those attending or sending their child to a denominational school, or for those attending or sending their child to a smaller school, however this does not cross over with any socio-economic considerations needed for this assessment. Therefore, we do not anticipate impacts on the general public on the basis of socio-economic status or any cross-cutting socio-economic considerations when assessing the RO/RME aspects of the Bill.

The proposed change will support alignment with the UNCRC, while balancing three key considerations: parental rights, stakeholder views, and the practicality of implementing the changes for schools. These changes will effectively align legislation with existing guidance. It is proposed that this approach supports alignment with the UNCRC by ensuring children’s views are considered, as well as supporting their right to education including their spiritual development.

The five stakeholders the Bill team have engaged with most closely, and will continue to engage with to help inform implementation, are the Humanist Society Scotland, the Scottish Catholic Education Service, the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland, Together (Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights) and the Scottish Teachers Association of RME.

In terms of wider evidence which brings in individuals from all backgrounds, a public consultation on ‘Proposals to Amend the Legislation on Religious Observance and Religious Education in Schools to Support Alignment with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child’ was published in November 2024 and closed on 26 January 2025.

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.

However, there were no specific points raised in response to the consultation or as part of wider engagement activity regarding the impact of the proposed changes on existing inequalities of outcome caused by socio-economic disadvantage.

As noted above, we do not anticipate any specific or differential impact on different socio-economic groups under the RO/RME provisions in the Bill. Alternative approaches considered are outlined in the policy memorandum for the Bill, however there was no evidence to suggest that alternative approaches would have had a more positive impact on different socio-economic groups compared to the chosen approach.

In relation to the RO/RME provisions in the Bill, a lack of evidence was identified regarding how the right to withdraw currently works in practice, as well as in terms of children and young people’s views on the right to withdraw. This was partly addressed by the public consultation and engagement with stakeholders, including the Scottish Youth Parliament. However, there were a very small number of pupil responses to the public consultation, therefore further engagement is planned with children and young people in particular, to inform consideration of potential amendments during the parliamentary passage of the Bill as well as the development of associated updated guidance on the right to withdraw from RO/RME.

As noted above, the evidence from the general public and specific groups has been gathered through the public consultation and engagement with key stakeholders. This included representatives from faith and belief communities, teacher organisations, local authorities and children and young people organisations.

As the consultation respondents were self-selecting and were not asked for information regarding their experience of poverty and disadvantage, it is not possible to determine whether or not experiences of these groups have been reflected in the consultation responses. However to try and capture these experiences, as part of the further engagement planned with children and young people, we will ensure that part of the engagement takes place with schools or pupils in deprived areas.

Amendment to the UNCRC Act

In relation to the UNCRC Act amendment provisions within the Bill, there are no anticipated negative impacts on the general public on the basis of socio-economic status because this is a technical change aimed at improving legal coherence and legal clarity. While we are not aware of any provisions in Acts of the Scottish Parliament that require a public authority to act incompatibly with the UNCRC requirements, this provision is designed to ensure the continuity of services if that situation arises in the future. As those of a lower socio-economic group may be more likely to rely on essential services, there is a potentially positive impact on this group. The amendment intends to remove the risk of public authorities stopping the delivery of essential services if they believe that delivery would mean they were acting incompatibly under the UNCRC Act. This amendment would allow for essential services to continue to be delivered while Scottish Ministers consider and address any potential incompatibility in the legislation under which that service was being delivered. Therefore, there is a potential for this amendment to positively impact those accessing these services.

On the amendment to the UNCRC Act, there was engagement with the UNCRC Strategic Implementation Board, which has representatives from the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland Office, Together, UNICEF, and the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service. In addition, Scottish Government engaged with the Embedding Children’s Rights in Public Services Group, Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA), the UNCRC Peer Support Network, NHS Education Scotland and the Society of Local Authority Lawyers & Administrators in Scotland (SOLAR). Together (Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights) also worked with the children and young people consulted on the original UNCRC Bill to explore this provision and develop a child-friendly explainer, which officials will share with key children’s rights stakeholders.

Most stakeholders consulted understood the rationale for this amendment, and Together reported that the feedback from the children and young people they consulted showed broad support for the principle behind the amendment, provided it is clearly explained.

There is evidence to suggest that those in poverty are more likely to use essential services such as health, education, criminal justice and housing. Utilising data from Scotland’s Public Service Reform Strategy Delivering for Scotland, it is identified that the whole-system cost of poverty, including the increased public spending on health, education, criminal justice and housing, that results from poverty, is projected to reach £11.1bn by 2035/36. Reducing overall poverty by a quarter (which, based on the latest statistics, is equivalent to reaching the Scottish Government’s target for child poverty by 2030) could avoid £2.9bn of public spend and halve the projected fiscal gap by 2035/36. Additionally, between 2021-2024, of those adults in the lowest socio-economic dataset, 44% of their income was made up of social security benefits, this was 47% for those in the second lowest socio-economic dataset. Comparing this to the highest and second highest datasets, this percentage reaches 2 and 4% of income^[1]. This demonstrates that there is a higher potential for those in a lower socio-economic bracket to access essential services and therefore, there is a potential for these groups to be more positively impacted by the proposed UNCRC Act amendment than those in a higher socio-economic bracket due to the reduced risk of these services stopping when a Local Authority is unsure how to act when navigating between conflicting pieces of legislation.

The Scottish Government has considered issuing guidance but this would not achieve the necessary legal coherence and it would lack legal force. To ensure clarity, consistency, and legal certainty, legislating through a Bill is the only appropriate course of action.

We have not identified any gaps in evidence of impact. We are not aware of any existing legislative incompatibilities but it is possible that future court determinations relating to UNCRC compatibility will provide a new context to assess the compatibility of our statute book.

We continue to engage with public authorities to ensure that they are aware of the duties in the UNCRC Act, and we will undertake further specific engagement to ensure that public authorities understand how this provision will operate in practice. In addition to this, we will update the UNCRC (Incorporation) (Scotland) Act 2024 - part 2: statutory guidance to reflect this change. We are also working with Together (the Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights) to develop a child-friendly explainer for the amendment.

Summary of assessment findings

As we have not identified any unequal outcomes or positive/negative impacts to particular socio-economic groups as a result of this Bill, we do not consider that the Bill in its current form should be changed or a different option considered to reach the intended outcomes.

Sign off

Name: Lewis Hedge

Job title: Deputy Director, Curriculum and Qualifications

Date: October 2025