Official Report 947KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19980, in the name of Pauline McNeill, on transparency in tackling group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse. I invite those members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons, and I call Pauline McNeill to speak to and move the motion.
16:01
Grooming vulnerable children for sexual exploitation is one of the most heinous crimes that can be committed, but for that to be compounded by systematic failures by institutions that are meant to protect those children—after crimes that have been conducted for so long and on such a scale—is unforgivable, and a scar on our society.
The scale of those crimes in Rotherham and Rochdale was unprecedented. Hundreds of vulnerable girls, many of them in local authority care, were systematically groomed, plied with drugs and alcohol, and trafficked. Professor Alexis Jay, who produced the “Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham” report, said that there were 1,400 victims in Rotherham alone, and that a common thread in Manchester and South Yorkshire was the catastrophic failure of agencies, including the police, local councils and social services.
What made the Scottish Government so complacent about the situation in Scotland? What made the Scottish Government think that it could dismiss calls for an independent review? What made the Scottish Government believe that it could dismiss a proposed amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill, justifying its position by misusing a quote by Professor Alexis Jay, who serves on the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group? The Government was complacent.
The Government has got itself into a complete mess. Today, it has had to cave in and do now what it should have done in the first place: announce an independent review.
Despite that, Scottish Labour welcomes the last-minute announcement that Professor Jay will lead a review of the handling of complaints against grooming gangs, which could lead to an inquiry. We want full and unfettered access for Professor Jay to all the data, and the review must be done urgently. We want there to be independent oversight of Police Scotland’s review of historical and current cases so that it is not, in effect, marking its own homework.
We know that Scotland is not immune to organised grooming gangs. Many of us have seen the interview that was given by Taylor, who relayed a horrific account of what happened to her, aged 13. She said that she was sexually exploited by grooming gangs. ITV’s Peter Smith reports that Taylor’s care records showed that
“staff at the care unit described her as disruptive”
and that
“she was encouraged to wear less fake tan and make up”
and stop “drawing attention to herself.” That is utterly shocking.
Taylor went on to say, importantly, that she was added to a list, kept by Police Scotland, of 45 other children who were vulnerable to sexual exploitation, but no one yet knows what happened to that list or whether further action was taken. In fact, Taylor said that no one at the care unit asked her any questions about it, despite her records clearly documenting that there were concerns that she was being sexually exploited.
Does anyone need any convincing that, from what we have learned in recent weeks, there are similar threads to what happened in Rotherham and Rochdale?
There must be transparency on exactly what we know about the scale of the problem in Scotland. There must be an assessment of how we are protecting children in care, who are the most vulnerable children in our society, and we must ask what changes we need to make to ensure that children’s protection is paramount.
In June this year, Baroness Casey told the Home Affairs Committee that
“People do not necessarily look hard enough to find these children, in particular ... it is clear that it is still happening.”
She said that we do not have enough data in Scotland. We urgently need to change that, because we know very little.
As Joani Reid MP, who has been championing this cause, has said, we need independent experts to look at the case files—whether they are open or not—and to interview victims and speak to the social workers and educational establishments that have supported children and young people when they have made accusations.
This summer, the previous Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, said that the law on rape would be tightened so that adults cannot use consent as a defence against the charge of raping a child who is under 16. Baroness Casey’s report concluded that too many grooming gang cases have been
“dropped or downgraded from rape to lesser charges”
because a 13 to 15-year-old was perceived to have been “in love with” or “consented” to sex with the perpetrator.
As Baroness Casey said, “children are children.” If we also believe that in this Parliament, I would like to draw the Scottish Government’s attention to the reforms that the Parliament made in 2009. Looking back, I think that those reforms were wrong, because the rape of a child who is aged 13 or 14 is no longer considered statutory rape. I ask the Scottish Government whether it will look at those provisions.
As I have said, we must take similar action in Scotland, and so I turn to the amendments. We have one disagreement with the Tory amendment, which is that we believe that there should first be a review, but we recognise that that could lead to a public inquiry. Apart from that, we support what the Conservatives say in the amendment.
We recognise the work that Police Scotland and the National Crime Agency have carried out. However, we ultimately need to show victims—past and present—that we will bring perpetrators to justice, that this Parliament and this Government are not afraid to look behind difficult issues and that we will do everything that we can to show the victims that we brought independent oversight. We must do the right thing and show that, in Scotland, we are not complacent about the exploitation of children in our country.
I move,
That the Parliament believes that there should be independent oversight of the Police Scotland review into group-based sexual exploitation of children, and calls on the Scottish Government to urgently clarify whether it will conduct an inquiry into grooming gangs in Scotland.
16:07
The sexual exploitation and abuse of children and young people in Scotland is, sadly, not a historical issue. As we have heard, it is a challenging and complex issue and, in recognition of that, maturity is required in this debate. I am also mindful that we have a relatively short debating slot this afternoon. Therefore, I will set out a number of actions that we are taking and, in her closing remarks, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs will provide further detail on the parallel work by Police Scotland that is already under way. However, I intend to return to the chamber, prior to the Christmas recess, to provide a more detailed update to Parliament.
In setting out those actions, I am particularly mindful of the needs of survivors of exploitation and abuse—those brave young women who have come forward to share their horrific experiences of having been exploited in the past. They should not have had to relive their trauma in order to have their voices heard. I know that it will be difficult for many to hear the Parliament debating these matters today, and that it will reopen old wounds that they had hoped were long closed. As a Parliament, we must therefore ensure that the matter is treated with the sensitivity and seriousness that it deserves and demands of all of us.
This may not come as a surprise to members today, but it remains the case—shockingly—that children in Scotland are far more likely to be abused in their own homes by someone that they know. Our child protection data indicates that, in about eight out of 10 cases of child sexual abuse or exploitation where such information is recorded, the main abuser is a parent. That context is important.
However, we know that the tactics that are used by non-familial perpetrators of child sexual exploitation and abuse mean that such harm is often hidden. To better protect children now and in the future, I hope that we can agree today that the Parliament must urgently understand the extent and scale of child sexual exploitation and abuse in Scotland.
That is the collective view of the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group, which brings together expertise on the issue from social work, police, education, healthcare, academics and the third sector, as set out in the minutes of its meeting on 25 November. They state:
“A number of Group members stated that they did not feel there was enough information or data at present to inform a decision about whether an inquiry should take place. It was reflected that further work is needed to identify the nature and scale of the issue in Scotland so that an informed position can be taken on whether or not a public inquiry is required”.
That is also the view of Professor Alexis Jay, with whom I spoke yesterday. Professor Jay told me that, at the current time, we do not have an accurate picture of the nature or extent of child sexual abuse in Scotland, as is the case elsewhere across the United Kingdom. She went on to state that establishing that picture would allow us to make an informed choice about the necessity of an inquiry.
I am therefore pleased to confirm to Parliament today that Professor Alexis Jay has accepted the role of independent chair of the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group. Professor Jay will oversee the group’s on-going work to enhance the capacity and capability of Scotland’s collective response to child sexual abuse and exploitation.
I also announce that ministers will be directing the Care Inspectorate, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland and Health Improvement Scotland to conduct a national review to scrutinise—
Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?
Yes. I am happy to give way.
I appreciate that, given the time.
Can the cabinet secretary confirm that she regards the process as an independent review, given that Professor Jay, whom we welcome, will chair the group? Will Professor Jay have unfettered access to all the data that she requires from all the agencies?
I give Ms McNeill my assurance that the inspectorates are independent of ministers, so that is my understanding. I reassure Ms McNeill that Professor Jay has had sight of the planned independent review, and I am pleased that she has agreed to provide her expert advice on developing the methodology that will sit alongside that and at key stages of the review process.
The national strategic group will also consider the findings of the review, and it will provide expert advice to ministers as it reports its progress. That work will be accompanied by the Police Scotland activity, which, as I have set out, is already well under way and which the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs will set out in her closing remarks. The justice secretary and I are clear that that work must be undertaken at pace, with ministers being provided with iterative updates, but we also commit to regularly updating Parliament on the review’s progress.
As part of that approach, I have today written to Opposition leaders and spokespeople to offer a briefing with Professor Alexis Jay and Police Scotland on that work, which is to take place early in the new year.
Does that mean that the Government will reject Russell Findlay’s amendment calling for a grooming gangs inquiry?
As I have set out to Parliament today, the Government has to analyse the evidence that is put before us. As Alexis Jay has said, and as we have heard from Ms McNeill, we do not yet have the evidence base to substantiate that decision. However, I reassure the member that that is under active consideration.
I highlight that we should not forget that, in Scotland, we have a live public inquiry, which is already hearing directly from survivors of child sexual abuse. Although it is, quite rightly, a matter for Lady Smith and the Scottish child abuse inquiry to determine how to take into account potential group-based sexual abuse, in cases where any conduct that constitutes grooming is alleged, the inquiry can, if the circumstances allow it, consider whether those cases are within the inquiry’s terms of reference.
The national review that I have announced today, alongside Professor Jay’s leadership of the national strategic group and Police Scotland’s on-going work, will provide a more accurate and focused picture of the scale of and response to group-based sexual harm in Scotland. That will ensure that informed and evidence-based decisions can be taken on the need for further independent inquiries and reviews.
Please conclude, cabinet secretary.
Above all, we must remember that this is about better protecting Scotland’s children and young people from abuse. I hope that Parliament will support the Government’s approach and the amendment in my name.
I move amendment S6M-19980.2, to insert at end:
“, and, in doing so, to give consideration to the continuing work of the statutory Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry, which is considering the abuse of children in care in Scotland, the effects of that abuse and if changes to the law, policies or procedures are needed; recognises the independence of Police Scotland and that the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012 stipulates that the Chief Constable is responsible for the policing of Scotland, and is accountable to the Scottish Police Authority, and acknowledges that the information and data being gathered by members of the National Child Abuse and Exploitation Strategic Group is necessary to ensure that informed evidence-based decisions are taken on the need for further independent inquiries or reviews.”
16:13
A “conspiracy of silence”—that was the phrase that was used by journalist Andrew Norfolk, who, in 2011, uncovered what became known as the grooming gangs scandal. Initially, he was squeamish on hearing allegations of vulnerable white girls in Rotherham being targeted by gangs of predominantly Pakistani Muslim men, but he went on to lay bare the epic scale of those heinous crimes in Yorkshire and beyond.
He established that the authorities often knew what was going on but covered it up. Police officers and social workers, fearful of being branded racist, looked the other way, and those who did try to speak out were silenced.
Children in local authority care were targeted, stupefied with alcohol and drugs, trafficked and gang raped. Some were as young as 10 years old. In the words of Mr Norfolk:
“They were treated like sub-human species for the pleasure of these men”,
yet those poor children were often branded as troublemakers, even as prostitutes. Victim blaming has never been so obscene.
The crimes were abhorrent; the conspiracy of silence was shameful. Fourteen years after Mr Norfolk’s first report, I believe that there is a risk of history repeating itself. There is growing evidence that so-called grooming gangs—although I think that “rape gangs” is a much more accurate description—were active across Scotland. However, just as we saw elsewhere, there is also evidence that some sought to cover it up.
This week, I spoke with former residential social workers who suspected what was going on in the early 2000s in Glasgow. They were told to keep their mouths shut. I have spoken with victims such as Taylor, whose case files confirm a conspiracy of silence.
What shocked many is that there are two tiers of child abuse victims in Scotland. The Scottish child abuse inquiry is closed to many due to its remit, which was set by Scottish Government ministers and which they have consistently refused to broaden. Locked out are young footballers such as Peter Haynes and Stuart McMillan, who were targeted by paedophiles. Locked out is Susie Henderson, whose lawyer father allowed her to be raped by members of the legal establishment. Locked out are many of Scotland’s grooming gang victims. Yes, some victims might be able to engage with the Scottish child abuse inquiry, but they have no faith in an inquiry that has already cost taxpayers more than £114 million. They question why the inquiry granted anonymity to abusers at some of Scotland’s leading private schools, yet refused anonymity to abuse victim Kevin Sutherland. His family blamed the inquiry’s refusal for his suicide one year ago.
The victims who I have spoken with also have no faith in the Scottish Government’s strategic group on child sexual abuse. They see it as a talking shop that is controlled by the very same authorities that failed to protect them. They are angered at the justice secretary misrepresenting the views of grooming gangs expert Professor Alexis Jay, who today spoke publicly about the need for urgent action. I believe that the justice secretary’s position is no longer tenable.
I will end by paying tribute to Mr Norfolk, who passed away six months ago, and to all of Scotland’s child abuse survivors, who are still not being heard.
John Swinney can and should instruct a robust and independent grooming gangs inquiry without any further delay. End Scotland’s conspiracy of silence.
I move amendment S6M-19980.1, to leave out from “clarify” to end and insert:
“establish an inquiry into grooming gangs in Scotland.”
16:18
As the cabinet secretary said, the issue that we are debating—the sexual exploitation and abuse of children and young people—is not only an historic issue; it is happening now, in our communities and in ways that we often fail to recognise. Because it is happening now, our responsibility is immediate, urgent and profound.
We must do better to recognise the signs of abuse in children and young people. That means ensuring that our teachers, social workers, health and social care staff and all other professionals who work with children are properly supported and confident in spotting, reporting and acting on concerns. It means doing more to support children and young people to stay safe, both online and offline, through our wider children’s rights works, to ensure that they know how to respond when they feel unsafe. It also means that, where sexual exploitation of anyone is identified, whether by individuals or groups, our justice system must respond robustly and consistently.
There must be no doubt that we do not tolerate such abuse. However, those important measures come mostly after abuse has already begun. If we are serious about eliminating child sexual exploitation, we must also confront its root causes—gender inequalities, power imbalances, social and economic inequalities and a failure to listen properly to children whose voices have been dismissed or ignored.
Disabled children, care-experienced children, migrant children and other marginalised young people face disproportionately high risks. Yet, as the Centre for Excellence for Children’s Care and Protection at the University of Strathclyde has shown, disability and other protected characteristics are underrecorded in child protection data. We cannot tackle what we do not fully understand, so improving reporting and data collection must be a priority.
That brings me directly to the motion before us. Transparency in how we investigate and understand group-based child sexual exploitation is essential. I welcome the motion and the Scottish Government’s amendment. Taken together, they recognise the independence of Police Scotland, which has clear statutory responsibilities under the Police and Fire Service Reform (Scotland) Act 2012. They call for independent oversight of the current Police Scotland review, which is important not because we doubt the professionalism or integrity of individuals in the police, but because transparency strengthens trust.
Police Scotland’s work with the National Crime Agency and its participation in the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group are crucial parts of that effort. Those partnerships allow Scotland to share intelligence, respond to cross-border offending and build a clearer national picture of the risks that children face now and what they have faced in the past. The data gathered through the strategic group is essential in order to determine what next steps, including a potential inquiry, are needed. Once all that evidence is analysed, the Scottish Government must clarify as soon as possible whether an independent inquiry will take place. That is an important question, but it must be extremely carefully handled and discussed.
Child exploitation by anyone in any context is abhorrent. However, debates around grooming gangs have too often been distorted by racism, religious prejudice and xenophobia. We have seen unfounded and prejudiced claims—even claims that have been disowned by those who initially made them—repeatedly invoked, and they continue to circulate, fuelling division and hatred. Such words have very real consequences for migrant communities, people seeking safety and MSPs and for the cohesion and trust that we need to keep all our communities safe.
We must do better at prevention, protection, data collection, transparency and ensuring that our institutions are equipped to act, but we must do so without providing ammunition to those who would use the issue to stoke hatred and fear. Our task is clear: to protect children, to confront exploitation wherever it exists and to build a Scotland where abuse is not hidden, minimised or weaponised but eradicated.
16:22
I thank Pauline McNeill and Labour for enabling this debate to happen. Some of the issues that we are discussing were touched on in yesterday’s debate on violence against women and girls, but it is good that we have an opportunity to focus specifically on this topic, which is certainly challenging.
Group-based sexual exploitation of children, which involves targeting often incredibly vulnerable young people, subjecting them to horrific abuse and isolating them from support systems, is surely one of the most abhorrent crimes imaginable. We were all horrified by the experiences of Taylor, whose heart-breaking testimony shows that there are victims of group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse across Scotland, and for the most part, their stories go untold. They have been let down by a lack of joined-up working between agencies and a failure of safeguarding, and the perpetrators have seldom faced justice. We have a duty to those young people to act.
The motion appears to have been successful in prompting an overdue response from the Government. I welcome the news that Professor Alexis Jay has been appointed to carry out a review and hope that it will lead to wider investigation. Police Scotland has reviewed historic and on-going child sexual abuse in Scotland since 2013. The results of that will be integral to any associated inquiry. Although duplicating Police Scotland’s work serves nobody’s interests, the case for increased transparency and independent oversight is reasonable. The investigations that were carried out in England and Wales by Professor Jay and Baroness Casey show that institutional failures of the police and other public agencies often prevented victims from coming forward to report abuse, delayed appropriate investigation and hindered the eventual prosecution of perpetrators. A subsequent failure to acknowledge those failings has since delayed access to justice for survivors.
Concerns have also been raised about Police Scotland’s approach to data collection in relation to group-based child sexual exploitation. Questions remain as to whether the methods appropriately identify the risk factors in current and historical cases. Pauline McNeill was right to underline concerns that a remarkably low number of children have been recorded on the register of those at risk of sexual exploitation across Scotland in the past year. Can we really be confident that the system is reliably identifying those who require support?
Police Scotland is certainly to be commended for its response to many of the reports of group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse that we have heard about. However, if we are to build a complete picture of the scale and nature of the problem in Scotland, independent scrutiny needs to be built into any review. As the NSPCC warns, Scotland lacks that clear understanding at present.
The Scottish Government points to the Scottish child abuse inquiry and the national child abuse and exploitation strategic group in relation to adopting an evidence-based approach to the issue. Both are undoubtedly important, but they are limited, compared with the approach in England and Wales, in allowing a proper analysis of the extent and scale of group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse in Scotland. Indeed, Baroness Casey told a House of Commons committee that it would be a “missed opportunity” if the national inquiry did not extend across the entire UK, given the importance of a joined-up approach. She also warned that gangs that are identified in England and Wales might very well be operating across borders, including in Scotland.
Even if Scotland is to go down the route of having its own inquiry, there is a strong argument for close collaboration with the on-going inquiry in England and Wales. Such collaboration will be needed if we are to be effective in tackling these abhorrent crimes, ensuring prevention and protection, and doing justice to the needs of some of the most vulnerable people in our society. Scottish Liberal Democrats will support the motion.
We move to the open debate.
16:26
It is a pleasure—unfortunately—to take part in the debate and to see how far the Scottish Government has moved. I thank the previous speaker for articulating the abhorrent history of the issue and the abhorrent nature of the experiences that our young people have had to face. That has led us to discussing the subject today, and I note the hard work that has been done by people outside the Parliament to provide support when that has been necessary.
In their most recent comments, Professor Alexis Jay and the NSPCC are unequivocal about the need for an independent review of child exploitation. Indeed, as my Scottish Labour colleague Joani Reid MP noted,
“Scottish government ministers were willing to quote”
Professor Jay
“as the final word in the argument when they mistakenly thought she was opposed to an independent investigation, and so they would be nothing more than hypocrites if they failed to act now.”
To be fair, based on the cabinet secretary’s opening speech, the Government is starting to act now. However, unfortunately, it appears that we will need to wait until some point before Christmas before we get a statement that will allow us to dig into the challenges relating to data and who will take control.
I welcome the appointment of Professor Jay as the independent chair of the strategic group. That represents a very sensible move forward.
Those who are watching the Parliament from outside still have many questions that need to be answered, so it is disappointing that it has taken an Opposition debate to get the Government to move its position. I find it very challenging, as was said earlier, to think why it has taken so long to reach what most mums, dads, brothers and sisters would have thought would be the most obvious answer. There has been a failing that needs to be looked into.
I thank the cabinet secretary for drawing on global statistics regarding the sexual abuse that young people face. Sadly, the majority of such abuse is faced within the family. That must be noted, but it is not an excuse for failing those who have suffered abuse and manipulation at the hands of strangers or for not addressing the lifelong challenges that have been caused by the abuse that young people have faced. Nor does that mean that we should, in any way, move our eyes away from supporting young people and mothers who face such abuse within families. Here we are during the 16 days of action, and we had a very powerful debate about that yesterday. Those people absolutely deserve and require the support of the Parliament and the Scottish Government.
I return to the subject matter of today’s motion and to the facts that have led to it being lodged. There are heart-wrenching examples of abuse of children who were meant to be protected by a system but were let down and then cast aside by it. Putting our head in the sand to avoid facing those failings is not acceptable.
I must address the remarks made by the cabinet secretary, Angela Constance, when she told us in the chamber that Professor Jay was against the review and then, sadly, ducked the scrutiny when that turned out to be false.
I am grateful to Martin Whitfield for giving way. I advise him and others that, when I look at the Official Report of those remarks, I cannot see that I stated at any point that Professor Jay was speaking directly about Liam Kerr’s amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill. I have never ducked anything in my life, and I am more than happy to answer questions at some point about why I was not in the chamber that day. It is because I was travelling on Government business to the European Union in Brussels in order to engage on matters of serious organised crime, including online harms and child sexual exploitation.
I am very grateful for that intervention, but, again—and I say this with respect, because I have huge respect for the cabinet secretary—that is not an answer to the questions that were posed when the cabinet secretary was not in the chamber.
I go back to my opening remarks, to the previous contribution, to the opening of the debate and to the opening from the Opposition. We are talking about women and girls who have suffered the most horrendous abuse. We owe them a level of honesty—and, frankly, a level of kindness—that they have not seen.
I am conscious of the time, so I will finish my remarks. Again, I will quote my colleague Joani Reid, who said in an interview this week that Scotland has
“a system that is not looking”
and that
“is not willing to look”.
If we cannot have, at an absolute minimum, a proper, full and independent review of the evidence of child sexual exploitation in Scotland, then Joani Reid MP has been proved right.
16:32
I begin by acknowledging the cabinet secretary’s update on the appointment of Professor Alexis Jay as independent chair of the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group, which will work on a national review on group-based child sexual exploitation.
I very much support the Government’s motion this afternoon. However, it is important to reflect on the range of work that has already been undertaken to start informing how we shift the dial in this very complex space. In her national audit report on group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse, Baroness Casey said:
“The ... public are rightly appalled when they hear of group-based child sexual exploitation and expect it to be investigated thoroughly, offenders brought to justice and punished severely.
They, undoubtedly, also expect ... the right systems in place to understand child sexual exploitation ... and who is perpetrating it ... so that we can prevent it from happening in the first place.”
That audit made 12 recommendations in relation to tightening the law, bringing perpetrators to justice, data collection and use, and applying best practice across safeguarding agencies.
We have also heard today about the Jay review of criminally exploited children, which looked at the scale and nature of the criminal exploitation of children. It was an excellent review, with recommendations spanning across policy and practice at the local and national level, investment and whole-system learning. It said:
“What is required is a new system designed with the explicit purpose of tackling the criminal exploitation of children.”
I note that, during a members’ business debate earlier this year, which was secured by Michael Matheson MSP, on the review, no calls were made to hold an inquiry. It is important to highlight operation Beaconport, which is overseen by the National Crime Agency. That operation is bringing policing partners together south of the border in order to develop a more effective response to group-based child sexual exploitation. I hope that that will provide a platform for Police Scotland to do further work to examine relevant cases, past and present.
That is a crucial piece of work, and I especially welcome the update on self-assessment across key areas of practice within Police Scotland, including data analysis, investigation, disruption and resources. I anticipate that that work will inform the inquiry that has been announced today. At this point I commend officers and specialists in Police Scotland for their work in this specialist area of investigation. I know from personal experience that the work is harrowing, sensitive and very complex.
On the Police Scotland response and what Pauline McNeill’s motion relates to, I note the cabinet secretary’s response to Ms McNeill’s question about independent oversight. I point out that Police Scotland is one of the public bodies in Scotland that attracts the most scrutiny, not least from the Scottish Police Authority, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland, various commissioners and, indeed, the public. I absolutely agree that a significant piece of work is required to further enhance our response to group-based sexual exploitation of children, so I am pleased to hear the update from the cabinet secretary regarding the appointment of Alexis Jay. I very much look forward to supporting that work.
I am pleased that there is now an opportunity to move forward collectively on the issue, thereby demonstrating our commitment to the public across Scotland that we are united in addressing it together, once and for all.
16:36
As colleagues have already noted, this issue is fundamentally about transparency and clarity.
We have seen from the Casey report in England and Wales that there were systemic problems in the protections from grooming gangs. For example, victims were not believed because they were young or from a particular social background, they were often blamed by the police for what had happened to them and there was systemic underrecording of key data, notably around race, so as not to appear biased.
That is why I am glad to hear that the Scottish Government will not be leaving it up to the police to assess their own work, because that would not be acceptable. Some may try to turn this into another culture war, but that would be counterproductive and would detract attention from the voices of the victims.
The primary goal of an independent review should be to establish whether further investigation and, ultimately child protection measures, are needed, with the bonus that it will help to build public confidence in the Government and the police, improving their ability to detect and protect. I am glad to hear that the Scottish Government is going to hold a review, putting to bed already festering mistrust in the background among the public. That will reduce the space for malign groups to profit and sow the seeds of hate.
Any review should have a wide remit to find the scale of abuse, to establish what risk factors were prevalent and to ascertain what actions were taken by public bodies.
Let us face it: sexual exploitation of children by grooming gangs—or by anyone, for that matter—is a vile, heinous crime, and it should carry the most severe punishment. It deserves our full attention. If we do not protect children, who will?
The police must be unencumbered in their ability to record data on victims and alleged perpetrators, and to react to the data gathered—not just around race, immigration status or language but on indicators of poverty, social class and even household income. Basically, no stone should be left unturned for the sake of political correctness. After all, the protection of children comes first, and this issue is about the protection of children from sexual violence and public confidence in the police and the Scottish Government. The Government’s belated decision to use its existing powers to take action on the matter is welcome, however.
I see no justifiable reason why all members should not support the motion.
16:39
This is a subject of considerable importance. When the Government voted down our amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill that would have introduced a grooming gangs inquiry, the cabinet secretary told us that, if we believed that an inquiry into grooming gangs was necessary, we should “go and make the case for one”. We did exactly what she asked. We gathered what evidence we could, and what we found was deeply troubling.
In recent days, the Scottish Information Commissioner has ordered the Scottish Government to release vast amounts of material that it wrongly withheld in relation to the Salmond inquiry. Clearly, the Government has learned nothing from that and is continuing to make the same mistakes—only, now, they touch on the sensitive matter of child sexual exploitation and grooming gangs.
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs has repeatedly stated in the chamber that there is no need for an inquiry because the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group delivers the necessary coverage and oversight. Today’s announcement shows that, in its current format, the strategic group is not up to the job and never was. The Government announced that Alexis Jay will lead a review of complaints—essentially, what we asked for in our amendment that the Government voted down. We need a fresh start. We need a full public inquiry, independent of the Government and of that group. Frankly, we do not believe that anything related to that group will achieve justice for victims.
Our recent freedom of information request on the strategic group and its work on grooming gangs was met with a response that had sweeping redactions and vast sections that were blanked out. Those sections included material that would have shown whether the group ever meaningfully considered grooming gangs and whether it understood how to track them. Under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002, when the Government chooses to withhold important material from the public, it is legally required to provide a clear and compelling rationale for doing so, especially when there is a strong public interest in disclosure.
What was the Government’s strong justification for withholding key information on its strategic group? It was the impact on marine planning. That is right—marine planning was in official Scottish Government documentation about grooming gangs. That was clearly a lazy copy-and-paste job: a poor, sloppy reason that demonstrates that the Government has still not learned the lessons of the Salmond inquiry. It is continuing the same patterns of excessive secrecy, casual errors and careless redactions. Victims need transparency. What the Government has been producing is not good enough.
The concerns about the group go beyond its scope or the secrecy. They also touch on ministerial oversight, which is probably the most concerning aspect. We saw that the cabinet secretary had to be corrected on vital information that she presented to the Parliament about the views of members of the group. Clearly, ministerial engagement is poor, but we did not realise how bad it was until we submitted parliamentary questions about ministerial involvement with the group. Shockingly, we discovered that no relevant minister had attended any of the key meetings of the strategic group—not the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, not the Minister for Victims and Community Safety and not the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise.
Given the collapse of the inquiry in England and the recent harrowing testimony of victims, it is astonishing that ministers did not think it necessary to attend any meetings of the strategic group to ensure proper oversight. If ministers are not in the room, victims are not represented—it is as simple as that. On the matter of grooming gangs, the group lacks transparency, it lacks leadership and it has given us no reason to believe that it can tackle this sensitive issue head on. We certainly do not have any assurance about the review.
We were challenged to find evidence; we did. We asked for openness; we were blocked. We looked for seriousness; we found errors. We sought ministerial accountability; ministers did not turn up. We do not have confidence in the strategic group or the review to deliver full justice for victims. We need a national inquiry.
16:44
I thank the Labour Party for securing this important and topical debate.
At any level, sexual exploitation of children is one of the most abhorrent crimes that can be committed. It is a complex and insidious form of child abuse that involves manipulating and coercing children to participate in criminal activities, and it creates lifelong trauma for victims. That is why I am reassured that protecting children from harm is an absolute priority for the Scottish Government. As someone who has been convener of the cross-party group on violence against women and children since my election in 2016, I find the reports of increased exploitation incredibly troubling, as, I know, do all members.
The issue of grooming gangs is very complex, but I am very pleased that the Scottish Government has committed to an independent review of the handling of complaints, which is to be chaired by Professor Alexis Jay.
The Scottish Government’s on-going approach is absolutely informed by data and evidence. The intensive work of Police Scotland and the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group will help to inform the Scottish Government’s approach and, of course, the review. I was sorry to hear the Tories running down the experts in that group, who have done so much work.
A vast amount of work is being done to combat the scourge of child sexual exploitation and abuse. That work, which extends across all areas, includes the on-going work of the statutory Scottish child abuse inquiry, which is considering the abuse of children in care in Scotland.
Will the member take an intervention?
No, thank you.
That is a hugely important piece of work for many people, despite what Russell Findlay says.
It is always important to recognise the independence of Police Scotland and the chief constable in dealing with operational matters, as that can often get lost in the narrative.
The crucial information and data that is being gathered by members of the strategic group is necessary to ensure that informed, evidence-based decisions are taken on the need for further independent inquiries following the review that we are now committed to. The group is already working at pace to identify abuse, to understand its prevalence and to improve data collection and the co-ordination of responses by all agencies to this abhorrent crime.
The First Minister, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills, and the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise have met Police Scotland regularly, and the NCSAE group, to discuss the prevalence of these issues in Scotland. I was pleased to receive an invitation from the education secretary, along with members of the Criminal Justice Committee and the Education, Children and Young People Committee, to meet Professor Jay and Police Scotland in the new year.
The Labour motion calls for us to clarify our position on grooming gangs, and I hope that it now has that clarification. The Conservative amendment makes an outright call for an inquiry, but it has not outlined what shape or form such an inquiry should take.
To be clear, the UK Government is not carrying out a national inquiry into grooming gangs; rather, it is undertaking a targeted regional inquiry, in which five local investigations are being conducted into areas of concern. In February, the UK Government established the national audit on group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse—the Baroness Casey review—to evaluate the scale, nature and drivers of exploitation. It reported in June 2025, and that led to the UK Government announcing an independent commission on grooming gangs. The commission has not yet been established, and a chair has not yet been appointed.
As we know, Liam Kerr lodged an amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill that provided for the victims and witnesses commissioner to carry out research into group-based child sexual exploitation. He likened the proposed research to the Casey review and said that it would help to build a national picture of what is known about grooming gangs in Scotland.
Our rejection of that particular ask has been portrayed by the Conservatives as a vote by my party against tackling grooming gangs. That misinformation has been incredibly troubling to all of us who care about the welfare of children. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I really regret the extent to which the issue has been politicised. Surely we should be working together—[Interruption.]
Members.
Surely we should be working together to eradicate this vile crime and gather much-needed evidence, rather than squabbling and scoring political points.
I look forward to hearing about the progress of the independent review and its vital work to protect children.
I advise members that we have a little bit of time in hand, so I can be a wee bit generous with members’ times.
I call Liam Kerr to close the debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. You have around four minutes, Mr Kerr.
16:49
I have been shocked and stunned listening to the debate, partly from hearing some of the horrific details of this most heinous and vile of crimes. Russell Findlay told us about victims Peter Haynes, Stuart McMillan and Susie Henderson. Pauline McNeill and others reminded us of Taylor, who spoke out so courageously recently, including about terrible institutional failures. Russell Findlay also spoke of Kevin Sutherland, who ultimately took his own life.
We must also not forget that, in October, five members of a grooming gang in Dundee were jailed after raping and sexually abusing 10 women—some as young as 16—and that, last January, seven were jailed after findings that three victims under the age of 13 had been subjected to horrific sexual abuse and violence in Glasgow over a seven-year period.
I was also shocked by what we have heard about the appalling lack of data and evidence on things such as the scale of the problem, how cases are handled and where the system is failing victims. Pauline McNeill and others reminded us that Baroness Casey said that there is insufficient data. According to the minute of a meeting in October, the Scottish Government’s own chief statistician said that the point that the data on those crimes was “incomplete or inaccurate” was “a good starting point”.
The child sexual abuse and exploitation workforce deep dive report confirms that by stating:
“There is a lack of robust data on the scale of child sexual victimisation in Scotland”.
Just today, Professor Alexis Jay was on record as saying:
“we do not have a clear or reliable picture of what the present situation is in Scotland”
and
“we do not know enough of the scale of child exploitation in Scotland”.
Despite that, as Sharon Dowey told us, the cabinet secretary has repeatedly stated in this chamber that there is no need for a full inquiry, because the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group delivers the necessary coverage and oversight. That assertion is found wanting. First, a freedom of information request to find out what the group was doing was responded to with sweeping redactions and vast sections blanked out, including material that would have shown whether the group was meaningfully considering grooming gangs. Secondly, today, the Scottish Government has asked Professor Jay to review the handling of complaints against grooming gangs. Although, as Martin Whitfield pointed out, we lack details, surely that is an admission—if ever one were needed—that, as we always suspected, the strategic group is not covering what is required.
However, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills is right—we must understand the extent and scale of this. I am truly stunned that, after hearing harrowing testimony; hearing about the lack of data on the scale of the problem and the lack of knowledge of victims’ experiences; hearing about where institutions are failing; and hearing yesterday’s reports that Professor Alexis Jay thinks that, ultimately, there could be a full grooming gangs inquiry, Scottish National Party MSPs will vote against Russell Findlay’s amendment, which simply instructs there to be a full grooming gangs inquiry in Scotland.
It appears that, having been presented with another opportunity to launch a grooming gangs inquiry, those MSPs will again reject it, simply because something far short of an inquiry has been floated today, without our having been given any details about it.
Will the member give way?
I will not take an intervention, because I am running out of time.
Decision time is still 10 or 12 minutes away. There is still time for those MSPs to reconsider. I urge them to do what is right, and not what they have been told to do. That means voting for the Conservative amendment to establish an inquiry into grooming gangs in Scotland.
Cabinet Secretary Angela Constance will close on behalf of the Scottish Government.
16:53
I am pleased to participate in today’s debate with my education colleagues who lead in child protection. However, of course, every Scottish Government minister has a duty and a role to protect our children, as we all do as parliamentarians. One member from the Opposition benches earlier made the important point that people need to work together, not just on the ground in our communities, but here in Parliament at a national level.
In a moment, I will speak to the justice contribution to what is a sensitive and complex issue, which has, at its heart, the protection of children now and in the future, and the voices of survivors and victims in the past.
The Scottish Government, like others today, recognises that the sexual abuse and exploitation of children are abhorrent crimes with devastating impacts on the victims. We know—I know—that, throughout time and society, there have been individuals who seek to abuse children and will use every means available to do so. That is why we should all rightly be concerned about the current threats and challenges, including the 20 per cent year-on-year increase in reported online child sexual abuse.
As justice secretary, I want to address the role of Police Scotland. Oversight of its work is through the Scottish Police Authority. That is set out in legislation, which I know that all members are aware of. Just last week, Police Scotland provided a comprehensive update to the SPA on its activities in relation to group-based child sexual abuse and exploitation. That highlighted Police Scotland’s response to the establishment of operation Beaconport in England and Wales, and the chief constable confirmed support for a UK-wide law enforcement approach. Police Scotland is taking a co-ordinated approach aligned to that being taken by police forces in England and Wales as they respond to the findings of Baroness Casey’s audit on group-based sexual abuse.
Police Scotland is reviewing past investigations and, if evidence of group-based child sexual abuse and exploitation is identified, cases will be referred to the National Crime Agency, which is providing another layer of additional independent oversight. If the conclusion is that further investigation is required, Police Scotland would lead that work.
In a meeting with ministers last week, Police Scotland highlighted that we have strong foundations to tackle those harms, including the ability of the police to take a national approach through the national child sexual abuse investigation unit.
It is essential that we await the outputs from that work and from Police Scotland’s further activity to develop an overview of the demographics of suspects and offenders in those crimes, to identify any key patterns or trends before any decision can be made on a national inquiry into the issue.
The only point that I would make with regard to Mr Findlay’s amendment is that it pre-empts the work that Ms Gilruth and I will oversee—work that we want to take place at pace. Our position has always been that this is a matter to which we would give the most serious and careful consideration.
Will the cabinet secretary give way?
Perhaps in a moment.
I have consistently agreed with the point that members have made—it was directly raised by Mr Kerr and mentioned by Mr McArthur and Mr Whitfield—about the importance of data. Child protection has grown in breadth and complexity, so we need new and improved data to understand the scale and nature of the evolving threat. That threat to our children exists now. We have to recognise—we do recognise—that harm is hidden and that sometimes those risks are not immediately in front of us.
What is the cabinet secretary’s objection to a full grooming gangs inquiry, then?
I can give you back your time, cabinet secretary.
We have taken advice from Alexis Jay and from the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group. We are looking at the work that Police Scotland is doing. The view that is coming back is that right now we need to do work to get a more comprehensive picture in order to consider the matter further.
I emphasise to Mr Kerr that our position has always been that we are giving the matter serious and detailed consideration. I also note the importance of the work that the various inspectorates will now do with regard to that review. That work is crucial, because it will help to inform our view about the need for any further type of inquiry. Crucially, it will also inform our view about what needs to be done in our services on the ground and in our communities today and tomorrow to protect our children.
The on-going work is about what we can do to actively intervene in the lives of our children in the here and now, but we are deeply alive to the lessons of the past that we can and must learn from.
17:00
Scottish Labour lodged the motion because we believe that there must be accountability, transparency and justice, and we believe that the Scottish Government has been complacent on group-based sexual exploitation and abuse. The individuals, organisations and public bodies that fail to protect children and young people, especially girls, must be held to account for their failings, and we believe that victims and survivors must have confidence in that process.
We need full transparency from the Government, police, local authorities and other relevant bodies about how and why those failings have occurred. Children and young people who are subjected to such appalling abuse and exploitation deserve justice, including a commitment from the Parliament and the Scottish Government that all steps will be taken to ensure that such crimes never happen again.
I welcome the announcement from Police Scotland last week that there will be an audit to identify any child grooming gangs that have been reported to the force since 2013. We know that there are significant problems with child abuse and grooming in Scotland, and the audit will be key in helping to identify patterns, trends or concerns in relation to the demographics of suspects and offenders. It will be vital in helping to build a clearer picture of the scale of such abuse and exploitation across Scotland, and it will contribute to the on-going work of the National Crime Agency’s operation Beaconport, which forms a broader UK law enforcement approach to the issue.
If the audit identifies any potential cases for reinvestigation, that will hopefully lead to convictions for those who have engaged in such crimes. However, members have rightly questioned whether the audit will inspire the confidence and trust of victims. After all, Police Scotland has been accused of failing victims of group-based sexual exploitation and abuse. That is why Scottish Labour believes that independent oversight of the audit is vital if Police Scotland is to have the confidence and trust of victims. Independent oversight is not uncommon or inappropriate in relation to Police Scotland reviews and audits. The Scottish Police Authority already stands—
Will the member give way?
Yes, I will take an intervention from the convener of the Criminal Justice Committee.
I want to highlight the points that I made earlier with regard to the scrutiny that already exists above Police Scotland from the Scottish Police Authority. Police Scotland is accountable to the SPA and a range of other organisations. I am not sure that there is a lack of scrutiny, although I accept the point that the member is making about independent oversight.
I disagree with the member on that, but she is absolutely correct to say—as I said—that the Scottish Police Authority already stands as an independent governance body for policing in Scotland. However, having served on the Criminal Justice Committee for more than four years with the member, I still say that there is a need for far greater scrutiny of policing in Scotland. The committee is very aware of that.
The Scottish Government has previously commissioned independent reviews into police complaints, such as those that were undertaken by Lady Elish Angiolini. Police Scotland has also established independent oversight bodies such as the equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights independent review group. We believe that independent oversight of the audit is appropriate and that it would not undermine the operational independence of Police Scotland. We welcome the appointment of Professor Alexis Jay and reiterate our view that that role needs to be independent and have full, unfettered access to all information and records.
Pauline McNeill and Rona Mackay spoke about the audit that was undertaken by Baroness Casey in relation to group-based abuse and exploitation of children and young people in England and Wales. Although we recognise that many of Baroness Casey’s recommendations apply to other parts of the UK, we think it appropriate that the Scottish Government look at that work and provide an update to identify what can be implemented in relation to any recommendations in Scotland.
I understand that the First Minister previously stated that the Scottish Government is doing work on child protection policies and practices through the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group. It would be helpful if he could clarify how survivors and other relevant stakeholders are being engaged in that work to ensure that there is no further exploitation of vulnerable children and young people in the future.
Members have rightly highlighted the recent powerful testimony of Taylor, the care-experienced survivor of human trafficking and child abuse, and have talked about many other children. All the bodies that we have spoken about in the debate have, in the past, failed to take the necessary safeguarding and reporting actions. Taylor herself has called on the First Minister to establish an inquiry, and Scottish Labour supports her in that call. We believe that an inquiry is vital if we are to establish why there has been a lack of intervention and investigation into cases such as Taylor’s.
The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children has rightly stressed the need for ministerial leadership to establish the true scale of child abuse and exploitation, particularly in relation to group-based abuse. Although we think that the Scottish Government has been slow to call for an inquiry and show leadership on the issue of group-based sexual exploitation and abuse, we believe that the review can help to determine the extent of grooming in Scotland and the remit of any inquiry. That is why we believe that the review is required and we will support the Scottish Government in that work. However, we believe that it is likely that the review will lead to an inquiry.
That concludes the debate on transparency in tackling group-based child sexual exploitation and abuse.
Previous
Social CareNext
Business Motion