Children’s Rights

18/07/2024
Kaitlin Dryburgh

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Children (UNCRC) has officially been incorporated into Scots law. Although for many this is a long fought for day, will this really help the children of Scotland in the most fundamental ways?

The children in Scotland, for newborns all the way up to 18-year-olds now have 42 new legally enforceable rights. Covering anything from the right to education, freedom of beliefs, and protection of identity.

The road to incorporation has been marred with legal pushback from the UK government. Although Westminster already ratified the UNCRC in December 1991 it wasn’t included in domestic law. Meaning no child could actually challenge the government based on the UNCRC alone. It has been an uphill battle for Scotland to get to this point. Holyrood first passed the incorporation Bill back in 2021 but Westminster challenged it based on the fact that four sections were deemed to have out-stepped Holyrood’s powers. Meaning that if it had been incorporated as is the UNCRC would have included laws that are not inclusive with laws from Westminster.

But no further push-backs means Scotland is the first devolved nation to embed the convention into domestic law. Public authorities, public bodies, and the Scottish Government are now in breach of the law if they don’t comply.

Not only does it give children the opportunity to finally challenge those responsible if their rights aren’t adhered to, but it also means that any policy or law, or just about any decision must consider the rights of children and how it could affect them. For example, a bus service that was going to be cut now must consider how that would impact upon children in that area. And if that severely impacted children getting to school for example, the bus service may be forced to remain.

Minister for Children Natalie Don hailed it a landmark moment. While children and family orientated charities commended the campaigners in reaching this moment.

Although the adoption of such convention is a positive happening, it doesn’t subtract from the fact that we are already failing so many children. We would hope that by adopting the UNCRC conditions would improve, but why weren’t we doing more before this?

The housing emergency in Scotland means that every day 50 children are facing homelessness. Totalling an eye-watering 18,400 children who live in temporary accommodation limbo. Among this the majority of public authorities have admitted to placing children into unsuitable accommodation, which is already a breach of the law.

Aberlour the children’s charity fears that this new law means there is already incompliance among local authorities due to the housing emergency.

Article 27 states every child should have an adequate standard of living. “Every child has the right to a standard of living that is good enough to meet their physical and social needs and support their development. Governments must help families who cannot afford to provide this”. To a point it begs the question why adopt this into our charter when we were already failing on the most basic necessities and not making any big moves to change.

For the campaigners who worked hard to see this incorporation this is a win for the rights of children. Yet it’s hard not to be cynical of the Government’s motivations. With over 18,000 children in temporary accommodation why weren’t they looking to overcome these issues before?

Housing is one aspect that already sets us on the back foot, but poverty is another unavoidable failure we’re yet to seriously tackle. As of March 24% of all children remain locked in poverty. Nearly one in four children face poverty on a daily basis, in a country with so much wealth.

We’ve heard as recently as May that the Scottish Government are aiming to eradicate child poverty like the many times previously stated. Very little is divulged in the sense of how they’ll actually achieve that. We can’t continue this circle of promising change and failure over such an important aspect.

“article 6 (life, survival and development) Every child has the right to life. Governments must do all they can to ensure that children survive and develop to their full potential”.

It could be argued that both article six and 27 apply to the many children growing up in relative and absolute poverty. Are we providing every child with a standard of living that supports their needs and are we allowing every child to develop to their potential?

But then the question arises of who do you go to if these rights are being breached? More protection and accountability is the over-riding message. But how would that work in real-life? There isn’t exactly a helpline to call that starts legal proceedings. Would they make it that easy when they seem to be in breach of the convention already- I doubt it very much. It’s a positive that we have adopted these articles but who is accountable for them. Rights are wonderful but without any real mechanism to enforce them their usefulness diminishes drastically.

For example, a family with a parent carer and only one income coming into the family aren’t getting sufficient help and their situation was worsening, it would be the responsibility of the child/family to bring any violations to the attention of those responsible. So when a violation is brought forward what mechanisms are in place to rectify the problem. In a time where local authorities are struggling for resources who is responsible to see to it that that breaches of the law are put right?

Furthermore, who would be liable in criminal proceedings if rights weren’t being fulfilled? Take housing for example, a local authority being unable to source child-friendly housing may deem them liable. But the housing emergency is really due to lack of housing stock so the Scottish Government should therefore bare part of the blame. Where does it stop?

Obviously it’s never a hopeless case, there are many examples all over the world where the brave few have challenged those responsible for breaching their rights, and they have brought about substantial change because of it. Unfortunately, it just seems that the incorporation of this convention is only half the job, maybe not even that.

First off, the issues aren’t unknown and a new set of rights won’t bring to light the most fundamental problems as they have been known for some time. Housing, poverty, poor health, inequalities, big problems granted, but we’ve seen very little progress.

Secondly, where is the infrastructure to ensure these new rights are enforceable? Children and the voices for children have new powers but don’t quite have the full capability to harness that power, just yet.