March 2026. We provided the Scottish Parliament’s Education, Children and Young People Committee with a briefing ahead of their consideration of amendments to this bill at Stage 2.

The Commissioner supports this bill and thanks Daniel Johnson, MP, for introducing it. This Bill addresses longstanding concerns about the use of restraint and seclusion in Scottish schools and follows a long campaign by parents such as Beth Morrison and Kate Sanger as well as our own investigation, No Safe Place, in 2018[1]. It will support and protect both children and school staff from the distressing experience and consequences of unnecessary and unlawful restraint and seclusion.

We have previously provided the Committee with written[2] and in person evidence on this bill.

Meaning, and recording, of restraint and seclusion

We cannot support amendments 3 and 7. They risk significantly raising the bar on the types of restraint which must be recorded, whilst failing to address concerns raised at Stage 1 about use of restraint in an emergency or behaviours which are not restraint such as hugs.

In the example of a child running into a road, the use of restraint would be justified but should still be recorded, reported to a parent or carer (and investigated), to ensure that the circumstances are understood and any learning implemented. This Bill is not about punishing or criminalising teachers. It is about recording incidents of restraint, understanding the reasons why it happened and reducing the risk of it happening again.

Likewise, we cannot support amendment 23. Whilst we recognise its intent with regard to restraint, the inclusion of seclusion in this amendment is likely to be incompatible with children’s rights. Put simply, seclusion should not be taking place in schools.

Seclusion means a child being put into a place which they cannot leave. It represents an unlawful deprivation of liberty and is in breach of Article 16 of the UNCRC and article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. There should be no instances where seclusion takes place and is not reported. This must be made clear in the statutory guidance required by this Bill. 

We urge Mr Johnson not to press these amendments. We would be happy to discuss our concerns to ensure that alternatives can be brought at Stage 3.

Application of Bill to school pupils

We remain concerned about the use of definitions drawn from the Education (Scotland) Act 1980, as they are outwith the scope of the UNCRC Incorporation (Scotland) Act 2024, however understand the reasons Mr Johnson has chosen to do so in this case. We support all amendments in this group.

Consultation

We welcome the inclusion of children and young people and support amendment 10.

Informing parents

We have some concerns about the sharing of sensitive personal information about children with people who do not have a legal right to that information, on the basis solely of parental consent, though we understand the concerns this amendment is trying to address. Amendment 16 could be strengthened by recognition of the child’s right to decide who information can be shared with, but we do not oppose it.

Regulations, commencement and minor

Recording and reporting mechanisms

Wethink amendment 22 would be strengthened by changing “may” to “must” in the first line of 3A, in line with the intent of this Bill to ensure restraint and seclusion is properly recorded.

Training standards

[1] CYPCS, 2018. No Safe Place. https://www.cypcs.org.uk/resources/no-safe-place/

[2] CYPCS, 2025. Restraint and Seclusion in Schools (Scotland) Bill. https://www.cypcs.org.uk/resources/restraint-and-seclusion-in-schools-scotland-bill/