PE1363, from Ken MacLennan, calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to formally and publicly apologise for the ill-treatment by Governments and public bodies of the Scottish Gypsy Traveller community in light of evidence that clearly shows it to be one of the most marginalised and discriminated against communities. What are members’ views on the petition?
By way of background, I should say that, last week, I chaired a meeting of the Parliament’s cross-party group on human rights and civil liberties in my capacity as convener of that group, and we took evidence on the matter that the petition raises. Broad evidence was submitted to that group and, while it is clear that there are issues to be addressed, I did not get the sense that there is systematic ill treatment, abuse or neglect of the Scottish Gypsy Traveller community by the Scottish Government. That is not to say that there is not an issue. If such treatment has occurred, it would be absolutely right that the Scottish Government should apologise, but I do not get the sense that there is enough evidence to proceed on that basis.Perhaps we could ask the petitioner for a little more evidence to back up why the Scottish Government should apologise. I do not think that what it is meant to apologise for is clear. For example, the petition mentions:“The publication of Never to Return, The Harrowing True Story of a Stolen Childhood by Sandy Reid”,which is a“heartbreaking tale of the life of a child snatched from his family”.It suggests that the Scottish Government should give an apology that is on a par with the Australian Government’s apology for the treatment of aboriginal children. However, the difference between what has happened in Scotland and what happened in Australia may be that it can be clearly demonstrated that a systematic approach was taken to aboriginal children. It is not clear that the same approach has been taken to the children of Scottish Gypsy Travellers. On that basis, I suggest that we get a wee bit more evidence before a final decision is taken.
As Jamie Hepburn said, it would be helpful to get more evidence. It is always possible to ask the petitioner for more supporting evidence but, as well as doing that, we should write to the Scottish Government, asking whether it accepts that discrimination against the Gypsy Traveller community goes back hundreds of years—that is the easier question—and, on the petition’s broader aspects, what measures it is taking to encourage local authorities and others to follow its lead in recognising Gypsy Travellers as an ethnic group. As I say, we can do that as well as ask the petitioner to supply more supporting evidence. Although very worrying, the claim is also very large and we probably do not have quite enough evidence to support it. If members agree with that course of action we can in the meantime ask the Scottish Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International and the Equalities and Human Rights Commission for their responses to the petition.
Although I support the suggestion that we seek more information from the petitioner, I suspect that the information will be lengthy and that they will be able to cite many examples of where they should be given an apology.As well as doing that, we should look closer to home. If my memory serves, I believe that the Equal Opportunities Committee in the first parliamentary session carried out an inquiry on Gypsy Travellers and came up with certain recommendations and the committee in the second session did the same. To be honest, I do not know whether the Equal Opportunities Committee in this session is carrying out such an inquiry but, if it is, I am sure that it, too, will make its own recommendations. I suggest that, as a way forward in establishing whether we are actually addressing the inequalities and the discrimination that have been raised in the petition, we gather that information together and find out whether the parliamentary committees’ recommendations have been put into action.
I support both Cathie Craigie’s suggestion and the thrust behind it. I realise that I sound like I am trying to rewrite people’s petitions for them this afternoon but I have to say that, although I understand why people might want an historical apology, I do not think that it will be a great deal of use to them. I am much more concerned about addressing the issues as they stand and seeing what we can do to ensure that things are different in a year’s time. As a result, in writing to the various organisations that have been mentioned, we should see how the current situation is being addressed in order to improve the future. We would be failing in our duty if we did not try to make that the thrust of our consideration of this petition.
The type of each item (debate, statement, questions, members’ business and so on) and the times shown are worked out by this site from headings, the chair’s opening words and the Official Report’s running timestamps. They are not the Parliament’s own classification. Text: the Scottish Parliament Official Report.