UNCRC Implementation Embedding in Public Services Group minutes: 09 March 2026

Attendees and apologies

• Lyndsey Saki, Scottish Government (Chair) – LS
• Ezhilarasi Mahadevan, Scottish Government (Minutes) – EM 
• Luiza Leite, Scottish Government (Minutes) – LLe 
• Aqeel Ahmed, Scottish Government – AA 
• Liz Levy, Scottish Government – LL
• Darren Little, Dumfries and Galloway Council – DL  
• Denise Rooney, Qualifications Authority (QS)  – DR 
• Juliet Henderson, Police Scotland – JH
• Katrina Reid, Public Health Scotland (PHS) – KR
• Mary Campbell, Together (Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights) – MC
• Nick Targontsidis, NHS Education for Scotland – NT
• Rebecca Spillane, The Improvement Service – RS
• Sarah Weir, Children’s Hearings Scotland – SW

Apologies 

• Joanna Smith, NHS Education for Scotland (NES)
• Juliet Harris, Together (Scottish Alliance for Children’s Rights)
• Felicia Szloboda, The Improvement Service
• Julie Williams, Scottish Children’s Rights Officer Network

Items and actions

Welcome and introductions

LS welcomed members and noted apologies received. Sarah Weir (SW) from Children’s Hearings Scotland and Juliet Henderson (JH) from Police Scotland joined for the first time, replacing Laura Conachan and Alyson Lambert respectively.

Minutes and actions from previous meeting

LS went through the actions from the meeting on 8 December 2025.

Actions from the previous meeting:

• members to contact LS with suggestions of resources or case studies to be included in the Children’s Rights Skills and Knowledge Framework. This is ongoing
• LLe to send presentation slides to members. There was an issue when sharing the presentations with members due to the file size. LS asked for members to get in touch if they didn't receive the slides
• LS to confirm whether the Workforce Development subgroup is still active. LS confirmed that the Workforce Development Subgroup is currently paused, as is its parent group, the Children and Families National Leadership Group. It is unlikely any changes will take place with these groups until after the election period
• LLe to circulate new meeting dates for next year. Members should have now received calendar invites for 8 June, 7 September, and 7 December
• members to get in touch with MC with case studies on accountability. This action is closed as Together Scotland have recently published their latest State of Childrens Rights report

Action 1: Members to contact LS with suggestions of resources or case studies to be included in the Children’s Rights Skills and Knowledge Framework.

There were no requested changes to the minutes, which will be made available on the group page soon.

Update on support to public authorities

Members received the January SIB highlight report ahead of the meeting. LS highlighted some key points which were relevant to the group:

• letters were issued to listed authority senior leaders in February on the UNCRC Act Reporting Duty and the Children (Withdrawal from Religious Education and Amendment of UNCRC Compatibility Duty) (Scotland) Bill, which was passed on 17 February
• the Embedding team have been scoping a potential webinar to reflect on how UNCRC Innovation Fund projects improved services. Responses from the original successful projects have been positive. The intention is to schedule a webinar after summer
• from April 2026, NES will become part of the Common Services Agency, currently known as NHS National Services Scotland (NSS). The UNCRC Implementation Programme with health boards will come to an end this month, but the information on TURAS will remain and the UNCRC peer leads network across health boards will continue. The Embedding team will continue to engage with NES colleagues in their roles in the Common Services Agency
• there is work to identify three groups of children and young people for targeted awareness raising. This work on this will sit with the UNCRC awareness raising Network . LS agreed to update members on the groups identified, the rationale for selecting them, and the awareness raising plan

LS also highlighted two recent cases which relate to the UNCRC Act. The judgment in Glasgow City Council v James Stringfellow and others was published last week on 5 March. This case concerned the council’s action to evict a family of Travelling Showpeople, including a young child, from land.

Additionally, Clan Childlaw, successfully supported a child in a Judicial Review of a Children’s Hearing decision dated 18 September 2025, in respect of the petitioner’s contact with his sister. It centred on sibling contact rights and Article 3 of the UNCRC which relates to the child’s best interests. More information, including the link to the judgment, can be found on Clan Childlaw’s website.

NT asked about the outcomes of these cases, and whether SG are aware of the court remedies. LL explained that it was too early to determine the full implications of the Stringfellow case, as the case may still be appealed. However, in terms of remedies, the Court refused Glasgow City Council’s eviction request, finding that the family’s occupation was protected under the Mobile Homes Act 1983 (1983 Act) and that the historic lease governing the site remained in force. 

Child Rights Regulation and Improvement Action Group

Membership of the group can be found in the Child Rights Regulation and Improvement Action Group terms of reference. AA reported that recent meetings had focused on identifying children and young people whose rights are at risk, and on how scrutiny bodies help their sectors understand this. There have been discussions around best interest on the child, including discussions on ensuring practitioners are able to determine a child’s maturity and when they are capable of being involved in a decision. AA added that the group continued to consider UNCRC related issues and identify resources that require updates.

UNCRC Listed Authority Peer Support Network

AA noted that individual support was frequently requested, including help with Child Rights and Wellbeing Impact Assessment (CRWIA) and the first UNCRC Act children’s rights reports. The group will meet on 11 March, with reporting as a key agenda item. The network continues to share examples of how organisations are implementing the reporting duty, including developing child friendly versions of materials. The network provides a supportive space for authorities to share practice and learning. An informal mutual mentoring process will be piloted, to allow authorities in similar sectors to link up and share good practice.

Insights from attendees on early implementation

RS updated members on the Improvement Service UNCRC Local Authority Conference held in February, which brought together local authority (LA) colleagues and partner organisations to share best practice and progress on implementation. Young people played an active role in delivering workshops, contributing valuable insights and enthusiasm.

RS noted that some colleagues felt overwhelmed by slower progress compared to others, highlighting the need for support and strong leadership to sustain children’s rights work as new priorities emerge. Key themes discussed at the event included child friendly complaints processes, empowering children and young people, building practitioners’ skills, and participation.

RS highlighted ongoing challenges in applying child friendly complaints processes, noting some LAs colleagues were unsure whether their approaches were sufficiently child‑centred.

There were also concerns about access to services, particularly for young people aged 16-17 who may access adult services in some sectors.

MC provided an update on this year’s State of Children’s Rights Report, which focuses on case studies illustrating children’s rights in practice. The report is structured around the five principles of a children’s human rights approach: equality, non‑discrimination, empowerment, participation and accountability. Accountability remains a gap and identifying strong examples had been challenging. Further work is planned, including webinars and the development of additional case studies that were not ready in time for publication.

In line with the Education Scotland Act, Qualifications Scotland (QS) was required to establish a Learner Interest Committee to support development of the organisation’s Learner Charter. QS met with Professor Lundy for guidance on involving children and young people in the committee’s work, particularly around recruitment.

As NES is transitioning into a new organisation, NES systems will be shut down on 31 March. Therefore publication of NES’s children’s rights report will likely take place within the new organisation.

NSS may choose to voluntarily publish a children’s rights report alongside their corporate parenting report. NT will keep in touch with colleagues regarding the reporting cycle and potential publication.

A new Chair will be nominated for the UNCRC peer leads network in health boards. It was agreed that the Chair should join the group to share updates on UNCRC work across boards and feedback insights from the wider network.

Discussion of further support to public authorities

The Embedding team is currently updating the non-statutory guidance on Taking a children's human rights approach, as it was published prior to commencement of the UNCRC Act. The guidance was originally developed with a subset of this group, the guidance subgroup. LS invited any members interested in reviewing the draft updated guidance to get in touch. MC, DR, RS, KR asked to be involved.

Action 2: Members interested in reviewing/commenting on the draft guidance to get in touch with LS.

Action 3: LLe to share a copy of the draft guidance with members interested in reviewing, once ready.

LS highlighted that practitioners have raised difficulties in applying the concepts of the best interests of the child and evolving capacities. LS invited members to share any useful approaches.

RS noted that evolving capacities and best interests frequently arise in practice and highlighted Highland Council’s Participation ROCCS resources as a helpful example. She agreed to look out for further examples to share.

KR asked for clarification on the purpose of collecting examples and suggested that there might be relevant material from the vaccines programme relating to informed consent and evolving capacities. LS explained that practitioners had reported difficulties applying the concepts, particularly complaints handlers who often needed to make quick decisions.

RS added that confusion often arose around the age of 12, with some practitioners assuming that capacity to be involved in decision-making begins at that age.

DL reported that local discussions had focused on supporting health colleagues, particularly in building staff confidence to work appropriately with young people. DL highlighted that the Children’s Rights Skills and Knowledge Framework had been a useful starting point for practitioners, and emphasised the need to continue strengthening and framing this support to better meet workforce needs.

NT highlighted the relevance of existing Scottish legal frameworks, noting that consent and capacity are informed by Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC). NT identified fear of legal repercussions as a factor influencing practitioner decisions, and suggested that clearer understanding of existing legal frameworks would help practitioners feel more confident.

MC raised concerns about best interests decisions being used to override children’s views, noting that this is a common issue reported by practitioners. MC asked whether this reflected the concerns being raised within the group.

LS explained that some practitioners may tend to exclude children from discussions they felt might be distressing, even though re-traumatisation would only apply in a small number of cases. LS added that tensions between best interests and participation have been highlighted as a challenge.

Action 4: Members to share examples of resources or good practice where evolving capacities and best interests of the child are considered.

Update on considerations re the analysis of the first UNCRC children’s rights reports

LS shared a summary of advice previously provided at the UNCRC Local Authority Conference for listed authorities that might be anxious about sharing areas for improvement in their children’s rights reports. Listed authorities should always look at the UNCRC Act and the Part 3 (section 18) and Part 2 statutory guidance in the first instance.

A report must cover the actions taken during the reporting period and planned for the next to comply with the compatibility duty and secure better or further effect of children’s rights. Listed authorities need to consider the actions taken and planned by all the operational and support services they control and so it’s likely that reports will touch on areas where improvements have been made or where further development is planned.

Children’s rights reports are an opportunity to take a children’s human rights approach. In terms of embedding they should support conversations across organisations on where lessons can be learned and transferable approaches applied. For equality and non-discrimination, we hope reports can provide some insights into where services have considered children whose rights may be at risk, and how to improve services to mitigate these risks. For participation and empowerment, engaging with infants, children and young people in line with a children’s human rights approach will support the development of children’s rights reports. For accountability, listed authorities may wish to create opportunities to engage children, families and communities in discussions about the findings of children’s rights reports once they’re published.

RS noted that authorities continued to seek clarity on the difference between “further and better effect” and “progressive realisation”.

Clarification of inherent obligations of the UNCRC explains progressive realisation and the articles it applies to, as well as Minimum Core Obligations. The guidance includes sections helpful for report development.

KR asked for clarification on the format of children’s rights reports, including whether the child friendly version could serve as the main report or whether a more detailed written version was also required.

LS explained that there is no prescribed format for the reports, however listed authorities must, under s.18 of the UNCRC (Scotland) Act 2024, produce two versions of their report: a full report covering actions taken and planned to comply with the compatibility duty and secure better or further effect of children’s rights; and a child friendly version.

AA provided an update on the planned approach to reviewing and analysing the first cycle of children’s rights reports, noting that the Embedding team have been successful in a bid for a fellow to help analyse the first cycle of children’s rights reports.

The fellow will support the review and analysis of the reports over approximately one year, and possibly conduct interviews with a sample of listed authorities to understand their approaches and experiences.

A fellow has not yet been appointed, the team expects to know by June whether a suitable candidate is in place. AA will keep members updated as this progresses.

AOB

The next meeting is scheduled for Monday 8 June from 10:00 – 12:00