THE issue of smacking children has always been contentious. Indeed the very term itself, many would say, undermines the argument against what more accurately should be called physical punishment. The nomenclature is important here, as this whole issue is about so much more than labels, sitting as it does at the heart of children’s human rights.

It’s significant then that Scotland’s Children Commissioner Tam Baillie has highlighted his regret that on this issue, Scotland remains out of step with Europe and, increasingly, the world.

As Mr Baillie prepares to leave his post next month after two four-year terms, he has expressed his disappointment that Scotland has yet to comply with international human rights law and to prohibit all forms of physical punishment in line with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.

This means we still have in Scotland legislation allowing what is termed “justifiable assault.” This physical punishment has the potential to damage children and carries the risk of escalation into physical abuse. This is clearly not acceptable given that children are entitled to the same protection against physical assault as adults.

In many areas of human rights, Scotland has often been ahead of others, so why then are we lagging behind universally-accepted standards when it comes to the abolition of physical punishment of children?

Part of the explanation perhaps lies in a political reluctance by government to engage with an issue that might invoke the indignation of some parents, who feel this is an infringement too far by the state and law into their lives.

Related to this is the misguided notion that the intention of legal reform is somehow to criminalise parents for their actions.

This could not be further from the truth. Far from seeking to criminalise parents, the aim is to help redefine what is acceptable in how we treat our children – and each other – and what we teach them through our own behaviour.

In a report entitled Equally Protected? which was commissioned by children’s organisations in Scotland, this position is made clear. It concludes: “Protecting children equally against assault in the law does not lead to prosecutions of parents for ‘trivial smacking’, any more than it leads to prosecution of adults for trivial assaults on other adults.”

As Mr Baillie, points out, government can no longer simply wait until public attitudes towards physical punishment change sufficiently to allow legal change to be ushered in without controversy.

He was tasked as children’s commissioner with the job of promoting children’s rights and in speaking out on this issue that is precisely what he is doing.

As he prepares to stand down, Mr Baillie leaves behind a better understanding of the need for government to focus on the early years and has contributed positively to that work and the goals set by ministers.

He is right to stress the need for Scotland to live up to what commissioners like him see as our commitments under the UN Convention. The time has come to ensure children have equal legal protection from violence.