UNCRC Strategic Implementation board minutes: January 2026

Attendees and apologies

            Members of the board

• Caitlin Fitzgerald, Scottish Human Rights Commission – CF
• Kay Tisdall, The Observatory of Children’s Human Rights in Scotland – KT
• Juliet Harris, Together Scotland – JH
• Laura Pasternak, Coalition of Care and Support Providers Scotland – LP
• Amy Woodhouse, Parenting Across Scotland – AW
• Jennifer Davidson, Institute for Inspiring Children’s Futures – JD
• Jennifer Cannon, Scottish Human Rights Commission – JC
• Nick Hobbs, Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland – NH

            Scottish Government supporting officials

• Ian Donaldson (Chair), Deputy Director, Children’s Rights, Protection and Justice – ID
• Liz Levy, Unit Head, Children’s Rights Unit (CRU) – LL
• Lyndsey Saki, Embedding Children’s Rights in Public Services Programme Lead – LS
• Joe Smith, Right Reporting and Monitoring Programme Lead – JS
• Paul Gorman, Empowering Children and Young People Programme Lead – PG
• Aqeel Ahmed, Improvement and Innovation Programme Manager – AA
• Saleem Umar, UNCRC Policy Officer (minutes) – SU

           Guests

• Maxine Jolly, Education Scotland – MJ
• Craig Flunkert, Scottish Government, Directorate for Education Reform – CF

           Apologies

• Craig Morris, Care Inspectorate
• Laura Caven, Chief Officer, CoSLA
• Gina Wilson, Head of Strategy, CYPCS  (Nick Hobbs substituting)
• Lucinda Rivers, UNICEF UK
• Eleanor Deeming/Caitlin Fitzgerald, Scottish Human Rights Commission (Jennifer Cannon substituting)

Items and actions

Welcome and apologies

ID opened the meeting and welcomed members. 

Minutes and actions from previous meeting

The minutes of the previous meeting, circulated on 10 October 2025, were agreed with no amendment requests.

ID reminded members that, once agreed, the minutes would be published on the UNCRC Strategic Implementation Board webpage on the Scottish Government website.

Two actions arising from the September 2025 meeting were reviewed:

•    To issue a follow-up paper on additional children’s rights concerns raised by stakeholders. Closed - the paper was issued to members on 1 October 2025.

•    For the Children’s Rights Unit (CRU) to consider whether guidance for Scottish Government Bill teams on drafting new provisions could be shared with the Board. 

LL explained that the guidance that has been developed is for lawyers responding to policy instructions. It is to support them in giving legal advice and instructing the drafting of provisions to give effect to policy instructions about what’s to be included in Bills. If we were to share this, we would need to give careful consideration to which parts constitute legal advice. LL advised that CRU intends to engage directly with policy leads on bill teams and to develop written guidance targeted for them, which would not need to contain legal advice. Members were invited to indicate if they would like to comment on a draft of this guidance as it’s developed. JH, JC and NK indicated that their organisations would welcome this opportunity. 

NH asked whether the broad messages from the existing guidance could be shared. LL explained that the guidance explains the relevance to children’s rights of decisions about how to make new provisions (whether to do so by amending UK Acts or making them as free standing provisions on the face of an Act of the Scottish Parliament) but explains that the final decision about this needs to be made on a case-by-case, weighing up the benefits for rights protections against the implications for legislative complexity. 

CF asked where the new proposed guidance for policy leads would sit. LL advised that she would confirm this in due course. (UPDATE – the intention is to add the guidance to the Bill Handbook.)

ACTION: Members to inform LL if they wish to be involved in drafting or reviewing guidance targeted at policy leads on Bills.

All actions arising from the September 2025 meeting have now been closed.

Highlight Report (Paper 5)

Members were invited to raise any questions about the Highlight Report.

KT noted that the UNCRC Implementation Project with NHS Education for Scotland (NES) will come to an end in March and welcomed the consideration of whether further support could be provided to health boards, particularly in relation to reporting.  CRU will continue to engage with NES to understand whether any further support may be beneficial for health boards.

JH and NH asked whether the review commissioned from Professor Norrie, to explore how to create a more streamlined legislative framework relating to care experience, would explicitly include consideration of bringing this legislation within the scope of the protections for children’s rights in the UNCRC Act. LL advised that she has not yet seen the Terms of Reference for the review but will seek these and check whether UNCRC scope is sufficiently reflected.

ACTION: LL to review the Terms of Reference for the review commissioned from Professor Norrie and update members on whether UNCRC scope issue is sufficiently reflected.

JH raised the interaction between the UNCRC Act and the Human Rights Bill. The proposal is for the Bill to include oversight duty that is not included in the UNCRC. Together are hoping that Human Rights Bill will be an opportunity to add this to the UNCRC Act. LL recognised that there may be calls to strengthen the provisions on children’s rights as part of the development of the Human Rights Bill. 

NH asked why the wording on promoting, respecting, protecting and fulfilling the rights of children and young people for Scottish Government grant letters was optional instead of mandatory. LL advised that this issue had been raised by stakeholders during consultation on the Children’s Rights Scheme and at the time those responsible for the model grant letter had agreed to keep this under review.  LL confirmed that CRU will re-engage with the grants team to seek an update.

ACTION: CRU to follow up with the grants team on whether children’s rights wording in grant letters can be made mandatory.

AW asked for further detail on how priority groups for awareness-raising are identified and whether a public summary of participation framework commissions is available. PG advised that work is underway to clarify the rationale for identifying priority groups and that a summary of participation framework activity can be shared, subject to confirmation.

ACTION:  PG to present at a future SIB meeting on how priority groups for awareness-raising are identified. 

NK raised concerns about the review of provisions in UK Acts being solely focused on provisions that are relevant to the future legislative programme without also identifying key provisions that should be re-enacted regardless. He explained that the proposed approach effectively presupposes that Ministers would not be prepared to consider legislating on an important area that (initially) sits outwith their starting list of priorities. LL explained the need to be realistic about the how the findings from the review would be used and not set expectations that Ministers and Parliament would commit to a programme of Bills with the sole purpose of re-enacting legislation. She confirmed that the CRU had engaged with a range of Ministers about how this commitment should be framed. However, she thought it likely that the review will alight on some key pieces of UK legislation that are fundamental to children's rights, and that these will crop up in relation to a number of planned bills. 

Support for Public Authorities

LS provided an update from the Embedding Children’s Rights in Public Services Reference Group meeting on 17 November 2025. That meeting included two presentations on children’s rights reports produced under the Children and Young People (Scotland) Act 2014. The Children’s Rights Unit conducted an AI analysis and noted that the reports demonstrated strengths such as: staff awareness; effective workforce training; trauma-informed approaches; strong partnership working; and alignment with national priorities. There were also gaps and challenges, such as: limited demographic breakdowns; limited evidence of outcomes; lack of transparency on resources and budgets; and limited evidence of accountability systems such as feedback, complaints and remedies. Public Health Scotland (PHS), provided an overview, at that meeting, of how PHS data and programmes can support children’s rights reporting and broader implementation. PHS is using children’s rights as key levers for prevention and tackling health inequalities.

NHS Education for Scotland hosted a conference and webinar in November showcasing good practice across health boards, with over 400 attendees. 

The Improvement Service has held two roundtable events on children’s rights reporting to date, with further sessions planned. A UNCRC local authority conference will be held on 23 February 2026.

The CRU recently ran a session with a listed authority to work through the UNCRC Implementation Framework, focusing on actions taken to date and prioritisation of next steps. This was the first session of this kind and was useful in highlighting relevant resources and approaches. A further session with another listed authority is planned for February, with the intention to extend this offer more widely.

Letters will shortly be issued to Chief Executives of listed authorities to remind them of the reporting duty and highlight the statutory guidance.

The CRU is considering how best to analyse and learn from the first UNCRC children’s rights reports. A sample analysis of reports will be undertaken and a bid has been submitted for a research fellowship to support wider analysis. The potential use of AI to support analysis of reports is also being explored.

Stakeholder Prioritisation of High Priority Issues

ID reminded the Board that the Children’s Rights Scheme includes a commitment that “The Scottish Government will invite the CYPCS, Together, the SHRC and UNICEF UK to keep the Scottish Government informed of the children’s rights issues that are most concerning them and use this information, alongside other internal and external sources, to help determine Ministerial priorities for the year ahead.” The CRU wished to use the meeting to discuss how the invitation should be framed.

There was a general agreement that setting a deadline for a response to the invitation of early May would be realistic and would allow the priority issues to be shared with new Ministers as they begin considering their own priorities. 

LL noted that CRU has committed to publishing an interim response to the UN Committee’s Concluding Observations later in the year. While this could be helpful context for stakeholders in identifying their priority issues, the earliest this could be made available would be September or October.

LL suggested inviting stakeholders to identify six high-priority issues, aligning with the number of Calls to Action identified by children and young people. 

LL explained that it may be helpful to avoid duplication between stakeholder-identified priority issues and the Calls to Action from children and young people, allowing a broader spotlight on key issues. It was noted that Calls to Action are developed through an iterative process, with no fixed deadline, and that a practical approach may be to set the stakeholder priorities first, with children and young people taking account of these during their own discussions. CRU offered to support coordination and information-sharing between those developing Calls to Action and those identifying high-priority issues.

JC advised that it may be more appropriate for SHRC to support the development of criteria or a framework for prioritisation, rather than submitting a specific shortlist of issues. JD emphasised the importance of transparency around how priorities are determined and suggested that contributors could be asked to explain the principles guiding their prioritisation.

JH explained that Together has begun discussions with its membership and highlighted strong support for focusing on the general measures of implementation of the UNCRC. JH advised that Together plans to hold a further member meeting on 1 April, linking members’ manifesto priorities, the Scottish Government request, and agreed principles around implementation. 

LP echoed the importance of balancing priorities that impact the largest number of children with those addressing systemic issues and children whose rights are most at risk.

LL clarified that CRU does not intend to prescribe criteria for prioritisation but welcomed the suggestion that organisation outline the rationale behind their priorities. 

CRU confirmed it can offer practical support, including sharing existing lists of stakeholder-raised issues, coordinating meetings, or providing chairing and minute-taking support, while recognising that stakeholders may prefer to meet independently.

Embedding children’s rights in schools following the end of the three-year national grant for the Rights Respecting Schools Award

CF and MJ were invited to provide an update on how children’s rights continue to be embedded in education policy and school settings following the end of the three-year national grant in March 2025 to UNICEF (UK) for their Rights Respecting Schools Award (RRSA).

CF outlined the current programme of curriculum and qualifications reform, noting that this work is being taken forward in response to recommendations from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) review and is led by Education Scotland, Qualifications Scotland, and the Scottish Government.

CF explained that the ongoing Curriculum Improvement Cycle provides an opportunity to strengthen how children’s rights are embedded across the curriculum, including through:
•    Learning for Sustainability and social justice
•    Political and media literacy
•    Democratic values and engagement

CF highlighted that updates are being made across all eight curriculum areas, with particular relevance for Social Studies, Expressive Arts, and the life and ethos of the school. Reference groups, including children and young people, parents and carers, and ASN representatives, are providing critical challenge and input.

CF also noted ongoing reforms to qualifications, including:
•    Rebalancing assessment away from exams where appropriate
•    The establishment of a Schools Partnership Team within Qualifications Scotland to strengthen engagement with learners and educators
•    Alignment of updated qualifications with the refreshed curriculum, with rollout planned from 2031.

CF provided an overview of wider policy work supporting children’s rights in education, including:
•    The Learning for Sustainability Action Plan, with a commitment for all learning settings to be sustainable by 2030
•    Anti-racist curriculum work, including updated guidance and learning resources
•    Work on misinformation and digital discourse
•    Development of guidance on artificial intelligence in education
•    Ongoing work on revised Relationships, Sexual Health and Parenthood guidance
•    Implementation planning for the Residential Outdoor Education (Scotland) Act
•    Progress on the Children (Withdrawal from Religious Education and Amendment of UNCRC Compatibility Duty) (Scotland) Bill, including future guidance and awareness-raising should the Bill pass.

MJ outlined how Education Scotland supports embedding children’s rights across the education system, including early learning and childcare, schools, community learning and development, and local authority leadership.

MJ emphasised that children’s rights are treated as a foundational principle, underpinning wider priorities such as Learning for Sustainability, inclusion, and skills development. Professional standards for teachers and leaders explicitly reflect children’s rights, with a focus on how rights are experienced in practice rather than treated as an add-on.

MJ highlighted the development of a children’s rights self-evaluation tool, co-created with children and young people and referred to as “Head, Hands, Heart”. The tool is free to use, continues to evolve, and can complement RRSA participation. It supports children and young people to reflect on:
•    What they know about their rights
•    How their rights are experienced
•    What actions are needed to improve practice

MJ also described the Young Leaders of Learning Programme, which supports children and young people across different educational settings to identify strengths and areas for improvement and to work collaboratively on change.
MJ further noted the availability of a UNCRC sketch note, developed jointly by Education Scotland and the Scottish Government, designed as an accessible overview with links to further resources. 

LP asked how The Promise is reflected across curriculum and policy activity. CF acknowledged the challenge and agreed there is scope to strengthen alignment, welcoming further engagement on this and committed to taking this feedback back to colleagues.    `

KT shared positive reflections on attending meetings of the Rights and Participation Network and noted the strong commitment demonstrated by staff and children involved in the Young Leaders of Learning Programme.

AW and KT welcomed the availability of accessible resources, including the sketch note, and highlighted the value of practical, rights-based tools for education settings.

CF shared a link to the Learning for Sustainability Initial Teacher Education (ITE) Framework, noting that it has been found useful in practice and supports embedding rights-based approaches in teacher education.

MJ highlighted that Education Scotland remains open to bespoke support requests from education settings and local authorities and noted that Education Scotland is not represented on SIB anymore. 

ACTION - UNCRC sketch note and CF’s slide to be shared with SIB members along with the minutes.

Exemption to compatibility duty – update on progress with Part 2 of the Children (Withdrawal from Religious Education and Amendment of UNCRC Compatibility Duty) (Scotland) Bill

JS provided an update on progress with Part 2 of the Bill, which relates to the UNCRC Act.

JS reminded members that Part 2 of the Bill introduces an exemption to the UNCRC compatibility duty where a public authority has no discretion and is required by an Act of the Scottish Parliament to act incompatibly with UNCRC requirements.

JS confirmed that the Bill has now passed Stage 1 and Stage 2, with Stage 3 approaching.

JS explained that during Stage 1, many stakeholders and MSPs accepted the rationale for the exemption but raised concerns about transparency, particularly the need for a mechanism to ensure the Scottish Government is notified when the exemption is relied upon. This would allow Ministers to consider whether legislative change is required to address any incompatibility.

In response, the Scottish Government brought forward an amendment at Stage 2 to introduce a notification duty. The amendment requires that where a public authority seeks to rely on the exemption in legal proceedings, the Scottish Government (via the Lord Advocate), the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland, and the Scottish Human Rights Commission must be notified, if they are not already parties to the case.

JS noted that the notification would be carried out largely through the courts and tribunals system, in line with existing intimation arrangements under section 27 of the UNCRC Act. The Scottish Government believes this is a proportionate and workable mechanism, with clarity about when the duty would be triggered. JS explained that, at the point the exemption is relied upon in proceedings, public authorities will generally have taken legal advice and be confident that the exemption applies.

JS acknowledged that some stakeholders and MSPs remain concerned that notification at the point of legal proceedings may come too late in the process. JS noted that, alongside the court-based notification duty, the Children’s Rights Scheme already commits Ministers to seek annual information from public authorities on potential incompatibilities or intended use of the exemption, and that statutory guidance already encourages early engagement.

JS confirmed that, in recognition of continued stakeholder concern, the Cabinet Secretary has committed to cross-party engagement ahead of Stage 3 to explore whether notification could take place earlier, before legal proceedings are commenced. JS explained that any earlier statutory mechanism would, in practice, involve public authorities and must be framed in a way that is clear, proportionate and workable.

JS noted that some stakeholders have proposed a duty triggered when a public authority “becomes aware” of potentially incompatible legislation. However, JS explained that this approach has been carefully considered and raises concerns about the lack of a clear and objective test for when the duty would apply.
JS confirmed that CRU has reached out to key stakeholders and is continuing discussions to explore viable options ahead of Stage 3.

JS also confirmed that, at Stage 2, the Cabinet Secretary committed to consider whether there should be a statutory duty on the Scottish Government to report on the operation of the exemption. JS advised that proposals are currently being developed with the intention of bringing forward amendments at Stage 3.

JS emphasised that the purpose of the update was to inform members of progress rather than seek formal views at this stage, noting that ongoing engagement with stakeholders will continue.

NH welcomed the update but reiterated concerns that reliance on legal proceedings to trigger notification risks creating an adversarial route for identifying incompatible legislation and may place burdens on children and public authorities. NH advised that alternative amendments may be brought forward at Stage 3 and offered to share these with members.

JH thanked JS and LL for their continued engagement with Together’ s members on the Bill. 

JS confirmed that an explainer document on the exemption has been developed and can be shared with members.

A.O.B and Close

No items were raised under Any Other Business.
ID confirmed that the next meeting of the UNCRC Strategic Implementation Board will take place on Tuesday 28 April 2026.