Violence Against Women
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-3670, in the name of Malcolm Chisholm, on violence against women. I call Johann Lamont to speak to and move the motion.
As all members are aware, this debate is very important—some might even say that it is symbolic of the Parliament that we have at least an annual debate on violence against women. In highlighting the priority that Parliament places on the issue, the debate is an important symbol for us all.
Given our determination to secure change, the debate is, of course, not simply symbolic but practical, so in reflecting on its symbolism, we should be clear that holding it is not a matter of routine. In highlighting brutality against and the misery and exploitation of women in a debate on violence against women, we are not ticking some kind of emotional box, but reflecting on the challenges that lie ahead of Parliament, and society more broadly, in dealing with the issue.
We want to focus not only on what happens but on how we must deal with the problem. The figures can be overwhelming: we need to think only of the two women a week who are murdered by a partner or an ex-partner, or to reflect on the global exploitation, trafficking and prostitution of women and the use of rape as a weapon of war.
The debate is not a counsel of despair, however. In considering the issue, we should reflect not only on the challenges but on how far we have travelled. In terms of attitudes to domestic abuse in particular, we should reflect on how much further forward we are today then we were even 20 years ago. This issue is not about a domestic, in which the police and the judiciary have no particular role; nowadays, the police and the judiciary are actively and positively engaged.
I am pleased that we are again marking the United Nations international day for the elimination of violence against women and the 16 days of activism against gender violence campaign. I am delighted that not only is the Scottish Parliament marking the campaign but that a wide range of organisations and groups continue to show solidarity with women globally who experience violence. I congratulate all the women's groups and organisations, including the Scottish Women's Convention, and all those who over the years have made it their life's work to highlight this important issue. I had the privilege recently to meet people who serve on the domestic abuse helpline. If only we could bottle their enthusiasm and energy, how much better we would all be for it. Across Scotland, a number of events, activities and meetings have been held to support the campaign. I was pleased to be invited to East Renfrewshire's walk against violence on Sunday. If there is one thing that all the activity has in common, it is a determination to support the message of this year's campaign, which is: for the health of women, for the health of the world, no more violence.
As I said, keeping violence against women on the agenda remains a priority for the Scottish Executive and we are making progress on a number of fronts. We are working to broaden our domestic abuse strategy, which is based around the themes of protection, prevention and provision, in order to address all forms of gender-based violence.
I will say a little more on that in a moment. Before I do so, I want to emphasise that, whether through a pilot project such as the domestic abuse court in Glasgow, through increased resources for development of support services for children and young people who experience domestic abuse in their homes, through an on-going commitment to awareness raising, or through specific support service funding, we remain determined to eradicate from Scotland violence against women. There is no single solution, so we will continue our commitment to fund a range of activity that supports the women who experience violence and which challenges the men who perpetrate it.
Support for service provision remains crucial. In October, we announced that we would be introducing a new violence against women fund to replace the existing domestic abuse service development fund and the violence against women service development fund. That decision was taken following consultation over the summer of a range of organisations, including the projects that currently receive funding, all multi-agency partnerships and the national group to address violence against women.
The consultation showed that, throughout Scotland, even in areas where there is a strong commitment from the health board, local authority and other partners, there remains a need to develop provision of front-line services to support women and their children. We have committed £6 million to that work from 2006 to 2008 and I am delighted that we have received more than 100 applications from a wide range of projects. Over the next month, we will assess them with a view to announcing the successful applications early in the new year.
We also want to work to build local capacity through multi-agency partnerships, so that we can strengthen local partners' ability to deliver on the agenda. That is an area on which I want the national group to focus in the next couple of years—it will be supported by the new violence against women fund. We have decided to keep separate from the new fund the rape crisis specific fund, which is designed to support rape crisis services, which remain underfunded at local level. We must ensure consistent service development, so we have committed funding to every rape crisis centre in Scotland up to 2008.
In addition, we will continue our core funding for Rape Crisis Scotland and will work with it to develop it further. That work will include consideration of the need for new centres and specific support, which has been offered by the Justice Department to standardise the way in which information is recorded by the Scottish network of local rape crisis centres. The aim is to improve the accuracy and reliability of statistics on the nature and occurrence of rape and sexual violence, which will in turn assist with development and effective operation of services.
A great deal of domestic violence goes unreported. Unfortunately, it sometimes comes to light only when it results in serious offences, including murder. Given that, has the minister considered measures that are used in the United States of America, particularly in California, that require the medical profession, and especially hospitals, to report to the police any abuse that they encounter? That allows early intervention and gives women and families the support that they need to prevent further abuse.
I do not know the specifics of the measures, but I will be more than happy to examine the detail if Stewart Maxwell provides it.
It is clear that there needs to be partnership among a range of groups and organisations so that when they see things, they understand what is going on. People need training so that they are tuned in, for example, to what children say or to what women say in a general practice.
Many measures come together to support people, but we have to increase confidence that support will not make the situation worse. We need to get all the bits right. I gave the example that two women a week are murdered by their partners or ex-partners: there is a consequence of that. Somebody might take their hand away from the phone because they are not confident that they will be protected by the system if they report violence. We recognise the serious points that have been raised.
In talking about how things have changed, I want to take about rape. Cathy Jamieson, the Minister for Justice, has asked the Scottish Law Commission to review the current legislation. We are examining the prosecution of rape and other sexual offences, and we are examining the effectiveness of the Sexual Offences (Procedure and Evidence) (Scotland) Act 2002. I mention that specifically because of the recent Amnesty International poll that highlighted all too starkly people's attitude to rape. While the advertising campaign on domestic abuse clearly struck a chord—a chord that is echoed in storylines in soap operas and elsewhere—and there has been progress, it was depressing to read the extent to which women are still blamed for being raped. It is important that we move on those attitudes, because they remain prevalent. Our challenge is to change the culture that allows such views to prevail.
We must build on the work and extend the scope of our awareness raising to other forms of violence against women. As I said, that is not a counsel of despair—it builds on the success of what already exists. It is recognised that there is underreporting of a range of incidents, but I am sure that through our commitment to the three Ps we can give people confidence that there is a point in reporting and challenging what happens to them, because when they go into the system they will be supported. I urge members to support the motion.
I move,
That the Parliament believes that the International Day of Action to Eliminate Violence Against Women and the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence are vital in continuing to raise awareness of violence against women; supports the work of the Scottish Executive in seeking to challenge violence against women in its commitment to the new Violence Against Women Fund and the Rape Crisis Specific Fund; welcomes the work of the Scottish Law Commission and Crown Office to review the law on rape and its investigation and prosecution to ensure it is effective, fair and robust, and, in particular, supports all efforts to challenge the attitudes which place the blame on the woman and not the perpetrator, thereby allowing gender-based violence including domestic abuse, rape and sexual assault to continue.
I rise to speak to the amendment in my name and to support the motion and the amendment in the name of Margaret Mitchell.
I recognise the serious and sustained commitment of the coalition and Parliament to do all that politicians can to eliminate violence against women in all forms—physical, emotional, psychological and exploitive. I endorse the sentiments in the Conservative amendment. it acknowledges the invaluable work of charitable organisations such as Barnardo's, Rape Crisis Scotland, Scottish Women's Aid and others, which not only support victims—women and their children—but fund research and provide invaluable briefings for politicians, for which I thank them.
However, in this short and unfortunately necessary annual debate, I will focus on the attitudes and the cultural environment that encourage young girls—let alone teenagers—who are nowhere near their teens to dress in a sexually provocative fashion, all in the interests of selling products. That is a difficult path to tread, because I could be accused of saying, "She asked for it because of the way she dressed." She did not. I repeat: she did not. As the motion and my amendment say, such attitudes must be challenged constantly. They are the excuse of the cowardly and the ignorant and of those who assault, violate and degrade women by their actions. However, that is unfortunately not the view of a substantial percentage of the public. A recent poll revealed that 45 per cent of Scots think that a woman had a degree of responsibility if she was raped and had worn "sexy clothes", and that 37 per cent think that she is totally or partially to blame if she was "flirty".
I do not support those views at all, but they require us to consider the responsibility of the paper and electronic media which day in and day out, in public places that the eye cannot avoid or where there is no remote switch, present images of scantily clad or near-naked girls and women in overtly provocative poses. Such images, which can be found on bus shelters and bill boards or in the newspaper of a man sitting on the bus, are used to sell anything from TV programmes—think of the voyeuristic and titillating promise of live sex on "Big Brother"—to newspapers such as the News of the etc, to lawnmowers. Images of young girls are often the best selling aid.
Images of the female body beautiful have long been prevalent in the work of artists, photographers and film makers of the distant and recent past, both in erotic and pornographic depiction, but the sexploitation and dehumanisation of the female form have accelerated as a result of the electronic age, combined with commercialisation and mass consumerism. Our social environment is a heady breeding ground for the violator, the rapist and the exploiter of women.
There are magazines that would rob girls of their childhood and propel them into a premature sexually aware adulthood. Gone are the days when 10-year-olds teetered around in their mothers' stilettos and played with lipstick and powder; now, the make-up for young girls is real and is marketed directly at them. I am thinking of magazines such as Bliss, which gives away make-up, shows 14-year-olds how to look 19 and entices girls to spend their pocket money with the promise of "a hot new body". Bliss, which is the fastest-growing magazine for young girls, has headlines such as "Be sexy, be sussed" and "Look 5 years older in 5 minutes", for an article in which a 14-year-old undergoes
"a makeover which actually convinces an older boy she is 25."
The magazine is estimated to have about 257,000 buyers, half of whom are under 15. However, despite criticism, its editor claims that it is
"providing a service to girls which is absolutely essential".
How can that be when it has cover lines about a "pervy sex cult" and 21 pages of "sexy secrets"? It is no wonder that a recent BBC poll found that nine out of 10 adults want toughened controls on children's publications that are seen to promote sex.
I repeat that the situation does not excuse for a moment any unwanted sexual or violent actions, but it creates a climate of dehumanisation of the female form. The ultimate extension of that perception of women is the sex-trafficking trade. Women are taken from small impoverished villages in, for example, Albania or Lithuania with the promise of au pair work or English lessons, are sold on to a brothel for a few thousand pounds and then sold on again and again, like cattle. Regrettably, when they are liberated, the women are returned to their countries, again like cattle. That is a blight on our society.
I am no Mary Whitehouse; indeed, I am very much a libertarian, but the commercialisation of sex and the sexploitation of women and young girls have come at a high cost to the many women who have been traded, raped, sexually abused or suffered other forms of violation. If the media cannot regulate themselves and be responsible for the consequences of their actions, politicians should seek to make them responsible.
I move amendment S2M-3670.2, to insert at end:
", and further, in challenging the attitudes which place the blame on the woman and not the perpetrator, condemns the overt sexualised representation of young women prevailing in a range of publications, electronic or paper, driven by commercialism, which presents women as objects rather than individuals."
An issue such as violence against women not only transcends party politics but unites individuals and groups around the world in a common purpose, namely the elimination of all forms of violence against women. The 16 days of activism campaign that is referred to in the motion has been used as an organising strategy by individuals and groups around the world to call for the elimination of violence against women. The campaign runs from 25 November to 10 December, which is human rights day. Among other things, it seeks to establish a clear link between local and international work to end violence against women and it provides a forum in which organisers can develop and share new and effective strategies.
Disturbingly, despite all efforts to raise awareness about violence against women, statistics clearly indicate an increasing trend in incidents of repeat domestic abuse victimisation. Data from January to December 2004 revealed 43,678 incidents of domestic abuse, of which a staggering 52 per cent involved repeat victims who were trapped in abusive circumstances. It appears that, despite best efforts, domestic abuse and violence against women is not only always with us but, more alarming, it is a growth industry. The issue is hugely complex and takes up vast amounts of police time. It is a problem that thrives on fear and secrecy, which is why the raising of awareness and strategies involving multi-agency work are so important in providing a framework to attempt to eliminate violence against women.
I wish to concentrate my remarks on a particular aspect of violence against women, namely domestic abuse and children. The report of the child protection audit and review, "It's everyone's job to make sure I'm alright", highlighted the fact that the general public trust voluntary organisations, which are in turn able to act as a bridge to families and statutory organisations. Crucially, the report states:
"Agencies and professionals need to … recognise that protecting the mother may be the best way to protect the children"
and that
"Providing for the needs of children living in households with domestic abuse should be a priority for inter-agency planning".
The voluntary sector has a pivotal role to play in the attempt to eliminate violence against women. It has the advantage of being removed from and unconnected to statutory agencies, including local authorities, which for various reasons the public may be reluctant to approach. Too often, women and children who are subjected to domestic abuse find themselves with no option other than to flee the family home to escape violence. That brings me to the Conservatives' amendment, which seeks to emphasise that research confirms that the best outcome for women and children who are victims of domestic violence is when they can remain safely within their own home and community, with the continuity of support from family and friends.
The Executive has done much to ensure that that objective is achieved, but I turn the minister's attention to considering the enforcement of tenancy agreements to ensure that they are not being breached by an abusive partner being allowed to move in or to come and go when he has no right to do so. Better regulation and enforcement of the terms of tenancy agreements could provide many victims and children with more protection and allow them to stay in the family home.
Finally, I earnestly request that the Executive reconsider its policy on automatic early release, which serves merely to shorten an unacceptable time for respite that victims have from jailed and violent partners, and which leaves those victims unnecessarily vulnerable. The Conservatives will support the motion and the SNP amendment.
I move amendment S2M-3670.1, to insert after "Rape Crisis Specific Fund;":
"recognises the expertise and contribution the voluntary sector can provide in dealing with domestic abuse; acknowledges that usually the best outcome for women and children is one where they can remain in the family home;"
The United Nations international elimination of violence against women day on 25 November and the 16 days campaign that follow it are intended to help individuals and groups around the world to call for the elimination of all forms of violence against women.
There is no country in the world in which women are safe from violence. A World Bank report estimated that violence against women was as serious a cause of death and incapacity among women of reproductive age as cancer and a greater cause of ill health than traffic accidents and malaria combined.
Between a quarter and a third of all women in Scotland will experience domestic abuse at some point in their lives. Domestic abuse can and does happen anywhere. Therefore, the likelihood is that among our friends, family, colleagues and acquaintances are women who are subjected to domestic abuse. That we cannot identify them demonstrates the hidden nature of the problem and the importance of raising awareness, changing attitudes and encouraging women to come forward to seek help.
The first step in seeking help is usually confiding in someone else. The courage that is needed to take that first step should never be underestimated, and we should also remember that some encouragement is often necessary for it to happen. Thereafter, services need to be in place to help: counselling, support or somewhere to go. The contribution of the voluntary sector in that regard should be acknowledged and commended.
I want to say a word about the difficulties of providing accessible services in rural areas. The difficulties are not just practical ones of poor public transport or lack of access to a car or, for service providers, the high unit cost of service provision to small numbers. There are social and family barriers as well for women who live in small communities in which everyone is related to everyone else: who do they—who can they—turn to? It can be even more hazardous to make a move to get away from a place in which one's every move is visible. We should not forget that small communities can mean small ethnic minority communities within larger communities. The same difficulties apply to them.
A place of refuge is just part of what is needed. At this point in their life, women need help with the practicalities of their situation as well as emotional support and skilled counselling. The same goes in spades for children who are caught up in fleeing from domestic violence. They, too, need skilled help if they are to come through as unscathed as possible.
All those matters have to do with the aftermath, but prevention is better than cure. The briefing from the Zero Tolerance Charitable Trust highlights the fact that male violence is increasingly being recognised as a social problem.
The member has one minute.
It has roots in social structures and cultural attitudes that have historically privileged men's needs over women's needs, thus creating the conditions for violence.
There is a huge job to do to shift social attitudes to domestic violence. In 1998, one out of two boys and one out of three girls thought that there were some circumstances in which it was okay to hit a woman or to force her to have sex. By 2005, an Amnesty International-sponsored poll showed that 28 per cent believed that women were partially responsible for being raped if they had behaved in a flirtatious manner and 20 per cent believed that women were partially responsible for being raped if they wore sexy or revealing clothing. We have not moved very far.
There has been a 10 per cent increase in the number of domestic abuse cases reported to the police since 2003, according to the report on recorded crime in Scotland 2004-05. If the increase in the reporting of this type of violent crime means that more people feel that it is worth reporting violence because they have confidence that it will be dealt with, that is a good thing. If more violent crime is being reported—
I have to hurry you.
I have one more sentence. If more violent crime is being reported because more people find violence unacceptable, that means that the message that we are trying to send out about violence is beginning to reach its target.
There is no room for complacency. This debate illustrates how far we are—just in our own country—from our goals of eliminating violence against women. We should also reflect on the horrors that women face in war-torn parts of the globe—
The member really must close.
I hope that what we do here to challenge and change attitudes and what is accepted will eventually have wider currency.
We move to the open debate. Time is extremely tight, so members must stick to four minutes each if I am to get everybody in.
In the short time that I have, I want to make particular reference to the effect that violence against women has on our children and young people. There is a substantial body of research that demonstrates both the scale of domestic abuse and the impact that it has on children and young people. I will highlight a few statistics that emphasise the scale of that impact.
Some 100,000 children in Scotland live with domestic abuse and 90 per cent of them are in the room or in an adjacent room during attacks on their mother. One third of those children try to intervene to protect their mother and many of them are injured during that attempt. Some 76 per cent of children who are ordered by courts to have contact with a violent parent are said to have been further abused as a result. The Barnardo's report "Bitter Legacy: the emotional effects of domestic violence on children" reveals that in 50 per cent of cases of violence between adults there is violence against children too.
The Scottish Executive has shown unquestionable commitment, support and leadership in relation to the gender-based violence agenda and the protection of our children and young people. I agree with the minister and others that the joint working approach has led to the implementation of innovative policies such as the national domestic abuse prevention strategy and refuges for women, children and young people.
In October 2004, the Scottish Executive published guidance notes for planners on children and young people who experience domestic abuse. It was agreed that Fife domestic abuse forum's annual conference should focus on those guidance notes. The conference was seen as an ideal opportunity to develop an action plan that outlined the way forward and utilised the experience of the wide range of practitioners in Fife. I am pleased that Johann Lamont addressed the conference, which was held in April this year, and outlined the Executive's vision. At the conference, 120 professionals who work with children and young people in Fife—in both the voluntary sector and the statutory sector—identified key themes. From that, the Fife action plan was developed.
The Executive has announced funding for the development of specialist services. That is welcome. Partnerships throughout Scotland have the opportunity to apply for funding from the violence against women fund. In Fife, we will apply for funding for a children's co-ordinator and I hope that the application will be successful. A successful application for Executive funding enabled the appointment of a training co-ordinator in Fife. That will allow the working group on children and young people to develop appropriate training for service providers. I know that the minister will agree that such training is important. In speaking to key service providers locally, it has become apparent to me that we are managing to make a difference in terms of provision, protection and prevention. There are several factors at play and the partnership between the Executive and local bodies is crucial.
I am chair of the cross-party group in the Scottish Parliament on survivors of childhood sexual abuse, which has been working closely with the Executive on the issues that affect our communities. The group welcomes the establishment of the survivors reference group, which will help to take forward our agenda. I am also a member of the Fife domestic and sexual abuse partnership and I thank all the members of that group for their help and support, particularly Sheila Noble and Avz Crossley, whose innovation and commitment have helped to make such a difference.
Executive and local partnerships are crucial and, when they are effective, they can be powerful. Many challenges lie ahead but we must celebrate the road that we have travelled and, in particular, dispel the myths that surround abuse. Our generation has a great opportunity to protect today's children as well as to support yesterday's. Together, we can and must do that. I ask members to support the motion in the name of the minister.
The minister is quite right to repeat on an annual basis that violence against women is entirely unacceptable. There is no excuse for it—no one deserves a slap, let alone a serious physical or sexual assault—but sadly it is perceived by many as legitimate. However, we must place violence against women in a wider context. It is a cultural assault as well as a tangible physical assault and for that reason I am happy to support Christine Grahame's amendment.
Two particular points apply to the cultural aspect that overarches the incidents of violence that are perpetrated, whether at a minor level or at an extremely serious level, against women. There is the aspect that demeans and degrades women and there is also a culture that celebrates machismo in Scotland. Both are equally pernicious.
With regard to our amendment, it is clear that we have a culture that demeans and degrades women. In my view, pornography is the same situation as prostitution. I do not regard prostitution as a victimless crime; it is most certainly not that. I never subscribed to the position of some members on prostitution. I welcome the position that the Executive has taken, but I think that it should go further. Pornography is in the same category; my colleague Christine Grahame dealt eloquently with that matter. Pornography clearly views women as products. It undermines and degrades their position and views them almost as assets to be traded rather than as citizens to be respected.
In Scotland, there is a culture of violence that must be addressed. To some extent, it is a culture of machismo. I noticed that the papers referred to a speech that the Solicitor General for Scotland made earlier in the week. Sadly, the Executive website does not deal with her comments on that matter, but it deals with other points that were equally laudable. She is correct to say that there is a culture in Scotland that, to some extent, venerates the hard man. As a result, there is an overarching culture of violence.
Violence in Scotland is an important matter. However, does the member agree that despite the existence or absence of machismo in the cultures that exist across the world, violence against women is a common thread and that that is the challenge?
Absolutely. I do not dispute that some cultures have less machismo than ours but still have the problem of violence against women.
Part of the root problem in Scotland is a perception that we are, to some extent, the Scottish hard man who participates in the extensive drinking that results in the knife culture and in going home and giving the wife a slap, or worse. I do not see the two aspects as mutually irreconcilable. If we are to address some aspects—if not all aspects—of violence against women, we must address that culture of violence and machismo in which the hard man is venerated. Sadly, that happens in many instances, but there is an attempt to play it down. It is also part of common parlance and is viewed in television shows as something that is almost funny. We must address that. I accept the minister's point, but the two aspects are not necessarily irreconcilable.
Until we recognise the wider cultural aspect, we must oppose those aspects of our culture that demean and degrade women, such as pornography, prostitution and trafficking. We must also recognise that we have a serious cultural problem with violence. The culture in which we view ourselves as harder than our neighbours south of the border or elsewhere results in knife carrying, binge drinking and violence against women. As well as taking legislative action, we must address that cultural problem. That is why we are happy to support the motion as well as our amendment.
The 16 days of activism against gender violence is now in its 15th year. Since 1991, approximately 1,700 organisations in approximately 130 countries have participated in that campaign. The campaign runs from 25 November, which is international day for the elimination of violence against women, to 10 December, which is international human rights day. There is a clear link between those days. Violence against women is a violation of human rights.
The 16 days include 1 December, which is world AIDS day, and 6 December, which is the anniversary of the Montreal massacre. In 1989, a gunman entered the École Polytechnique and killed 14 women, screaming, "I hate feminists." That is horrifying, but we should not forget that extreme gender violence is more common than many think. Every year millions of women are raped, and as many as 2 million are forced to undergo genital mutilation. The World Health Organisation reports that 70 per cent of female murder victims are killed by their male partners. Studies in the United Kingdom have found that at least one woman in four will experience domestic abuse at some stage in her life. The British crime survey 2004 suggests that that figure may be as high as 45 per cent. Nearly half of UK female murder victims—an average of two women a week—are killed by a male partner or former partner. One hundred and sixty-seven women are raped every day.
This year, the theme of the 16-day campaign is for the health of women, for the health of the world, no more violence. In that context, I am pleased that the Parliament passed the Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation (Scotland) Act 2005.
I welcome the fact that £3 million per year has been given to the violence against women fund, which replaces the two previous funds. That is in line with the adoption of a broader, more cohesive and more integrated approach to domestic violence against women.
The domestic abuse court pilot in Glasgow has now been running for more than a year and has halved the time that it takes for cases to come to trial. The ASSIST support service is a crucial element in providing support for witnesses throughout the process and the signs are good for those who would like there to be Scotland-wide implementation. I look forward to an early report and ask the minister to say when an evaluation of the pilot will be forthcoming.
Of course, there is no room for complacency and there are still gaps in provision. Section 27 of the Social Work (Scotland) Act 1968, for example, provides for the funding of perpetrator programmes such as those that are run by the Grangemouth-based Change organisation, the Safeguarding Communities-Reducing Offending Falkirk domestic violence project and the Lothian and Borders domestic violence probation project. However, there is no statutory funding for complementary work with people's partners and families and that undermines the value of the programmes. In the light of the Executive's desire
"to challenge the attitudes which place the blame on the woman and not the perpetrator",
I hope that it will ensure that that desire is reflected in the funding status of work with the families of perpetrators.
It is important that we are having this debate in the Parliament, but it is far too short and I would have liked to see more men here. Let me echo the campaign theme, which the Parliament should send out as a message: for the health of women, for the health of the world, no more violence.
As one of the men who are here, I underline the fact that the debate has been inspired by the international day of action to combat violence against women worldwide. We could be complacent about the current situation in Scotland when we see what happens worldwide—particularly in the Balkans, Africa and the middle east—but we would be doing ourselves absolutely no favours if we did not recognise that there is a problem of violence against women in Scotland, which is particularly manifested in domestic violence. We must consider that matter.
Over the past few years, the Executive and the Parliament have made sincere efforts to do something about violence against women, but it is clear that not enough is being done. In 2004, 52 per cent of victims who recorded domestic abuse reported that it was not the first time that they had suffered from domestic abuse. Victims are still finding themselves trapped in abusive situations and do not know where to turn to when the same thing happens over and over again.
The majority of studies show that most victims do not even know about the legislation that the Parliament has passed to help them. Some 87 per cent of women who were sampled in one survey had never heard of the Protection from Abuse (Scotland) Act 2001. That act and the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004 were passed unanimously in the Parliament to help victims of domestic violence, but they cannot reach their full potential until awareness of them is raised in the public. I am well aware of the good campaigns that have been run, but it is clear that they have not penetrated. Therefore, something must be done. A little more professional training of judges and police officers in particular is still needed, so that they can better understand the acts that the Parliament has passed and how best to use and enforce them.
There is a constant trend of violence in the context of Scottish lawlessness. Since 2000, overall crime has gone up by 15 per cent. We must recognise that and put things in context. Margaret Mitchell suggested that some of the current policies are affecting the trend.
Cathy Peattie mentioned the domestic abuse court in Glasgow, which has been running for the best part of a year. The jury is out on how successful it will be, and we will revisit that matter in due course. However, I point out that someone can have a summary conviction for assaulting their partner by punching and kicking them on the face and body, but even when there has been an analogous conviction—and possibly a previous custodial sentence—the maximum sentence for a summary complaint will be six months. If that is discounted by a third for the plea, the sentence can go down to four months and automatic early release can then mean that it can be discounted by 50 per cent. Therefore, a sentence of six months becomes two months. Frankly, I do not think that is an appropriate sentence for someone who assaults a woman in that way; the matter must be looked into. I accept that, in serious cases, the prosecution could proceed on indictment; nevertheless, with the current discounted sentencing, there is a lack of deterrence.
We can reflect on what we have done with regard to legislation. We can look at what we have done with regard to campaigns. We are entitled to claim some credit, but we still have a problem and much more requires to be done.
I declare an interest as a director of Ross-shire Women's Aid. In the area that I represent, new refuges have been built and Highland Council, the Northern constabulary and the Procurator Fiscal Service have given their whole-hearted commitment to treat domestic violence with the seriousness that it deserves. We have a zero tolerance campaign in the Highland region that addresses our rural situation.
One would think that society has accepted that domestic violence against women is unacceptable, yet refuges are still full and are still turning away women and children. Last year, 380 contacts were made at the Dingwall refuge and 104 women asked for refuge with their children, but only 12 women and their children could be accommodated. What more can we do to address the power imbalance in society that causes husbands, boyfriends and fathers to terrorise the women whom they should love and respect?
I recently overheard a young man on a train give the opinion that the best way of breaking off a relationship was to give the girl a punch in the face. The girls whom he was with laughed. What makes men want to lock women in cupboards, cut them with knives, beat them on unseen parts of their bodies, control their friendships and wider family contacts or threaten their children? How can we change attitudes that are so deep rooted?
Moreover, why is it so difficult to convict men of rape? Only 6 per cent of reported rape cases reach conviction, no matter that the Executive is making its best efforts to protect rape victims in court and is examining why convictions are so few and what it can do to address that. To many women, it still seems as though it is the woman who is on trial, not the man. Are juries reluctant to convict because of stereotyped ideas about appropriate behaviour in a woman and a stereotyped concept of what rape is? The findings of the recent poll have been mentioned.
At the weekend, I listened to a radio comedy show called "I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue". The all-male panel were asked to add their own punch line to the public advertisement against binge drinking: "pretty girl, pretty drunk". The punch line that brought great clapping and cheers from the audience was, "Well, you'll be all right then." In other words, a man could have sex with her with no repercussions. Of course, it was just a laugh—a bit of fun. They did not really mean it. However, it produced a response in that sophisticated middle-class Radio 4 audience that shows how deep rooted the attitude is in society—another pointer.
A procurator fiscal who was serving in a rural area once told me that he believed that there was a serious problem in the small communities with what he called low-level sexual violence. The young men insisted on having sex with their girlfriends and the girls just had to put up with it. No complaint was ever made. It is difficult to brave publicity in a small community by making an accusation of rape in such cases. Stereotypically, rape is seen as a heinous, violent crime that is committed by a stranger, and date rape goes unreported. The perpetrators are, after all, the boys whom those girls were at school with and their families know each other.
I have grave reservations about the ability of our adversarial system of justice to deal with rape cases, although I realise that that touches Scottish justice to the quick. Studies have found that, rather than seeking new information, the procurator fiscal tends to dismiss cases that are too weak. Therefore, perhaps we need a more inquisitorial approach. I wonder, too, whether we need other definitions or descriptions of rape if it is the word itself—with all its stereotyped connotations—that makes juries shy away from convicting the date rapist. People must accept the fact that rape, like domestic violence, is not about sex or love but about power and control.
Most of all, we need to address the inequalities of power that still exist between men and women and the double standards that colour society's views of women. We need to do that most urgently through our schools—I am sorry that the Minister for Education and Young People is not here. I am talking about not just one or two lessons in personal and social education, but an approach that permeates the curriculum. Highland Council is investigating how that might be done. We need to catch the minds of the young men and women who think that control and violence are acceptable before they reach their teenage years and long before they become the members of the juries who demur at convicting a man of rape.
In its recent campaign, Amnesty International asked us to imagine a world where women and girls are free from gender-based violence and discrimination, where women can fully participate in the political, economic and social life of their communities and where women and girls no longer have to fear violence or the threat of violence simply because they are women.
The Executive can be congratulated on the work that it has done on violence against women and especially on the money that it has committed to domestic abuse campaigns and services. The domestic abuse agenda is now being broadened to cover gender violence against women. In particular, the national group will expand the prevention strategy on domestic abuse to include all forms of violence against women. That move is welcome because, although we must not lose sight of our focused work on domestic abuse, we must also ensure that there is a concerted effort to address all forms of violence against women and girls.
The three key pillars of our approach to violence against women and girls—prevention, protection and provision—must be dealt with in equal measure. I suggest that our prevention work is perhaps not as strong as it should be and that there needs to be a greater focus on the primary prevention of violence.
Only seven years ago, Zero Tolerance found that one in two boys and one in three girls thought that there were some circumstances in which it could be acceptable to hit a woman or force her to have sex. A significant minority of boys—36 per cent—thought that they might personally force a woman to have sex. More than one in two young people thought that women might provoke violence in a range of ways—for example, by the way in which they dress.
Just two weeks ago, Amnesty International published findings from its survey of public attitudes towards women who have been raped. It found that one in three people would blame a woman for being raped if she had flirted or had been drinking or because of the clothes that she was wearing. Seven years on, we still find those ingrained cultural attitudes towards violence against women. How can we achieve a world where women and girls live free from gender-based violence if such attitudes continue?
The root causes of violence against women are embedded in our social structures and cultural attitudes. If we accept that male abuse of power and male violence are social and cultural problems, we can change the situation. The mass media campaigns on domestic abuse have been successful. The work of the Tayside domestic abuse partnership between Barnardo's and Tayside police has been effective, too, as was revealed by the University of Dundee report "Behind Closed Doors".
However, such campaigns have a limited impact on changing attitudes. We need to balance them with educational work with children and young people in a range of settings, addressing all forms of gender-based violence. Just half of all local authorities have made the Zero Tolerance respect programme available, either wholly or in part, in primary and secondary schools. That is precisely the kind of work that the Executive should ensure is being done in every school in Scotland. There is still much work to do before we can enjoy living in a world without violence against women and girls.
During the past fortnight or so, there have been some concerning press reports on or around violence against women. The minister and others mentioned the Amnesty International opinion poll, the findings of which are frightening, as they illuminate the extent of the sexist blame culture that exists in our society. However, as other members have talked about the poll, I will not go into it.
A recent rape case in Wales showed how such attitudes can manifest themselves in the justice system. That case, which was heard in Swansea crown court, collapsed because the victim had blacked out from excess alcohol consumption at the time of the alleged attack and she could not remember saying no. The judge ruled that drunken consent was still consent, despite the fact that her alleged attacker was a security guard who had been entrusted to escort the girl to her flat because of concerns about her. The case was extremely worrying. There is no doubt that such decisions serve only to discourage women from reporting attacks.
Last week in Scotland, the owner of a Scottish Premier League football club openly blamed a 15-year-old girl—a child—for a sex offence for which a 41-year-old man was convicted. It astonishes me that someone with that kind of influence in Scotland has been able to make such a statement without any significant repercussions. I ask the minister whether the Scottish Executive can do anything about that.
I welcome the funding that has been announced today and the Scottish Executive's commendable record in tackling violence against women, but we need a more determined and robust approach. As Shiona Baird mentioned, that approach should be based on primary prevention. Earlier this year, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children found that, within the United Kingdom, teenage girls in Scotland are at most risk from violence in relationships. Research from Zero Tolerance found that as many as 66 per cent of young people believe that girls can provoke violence and abuse because of how they dress and behave. The fact that such attitudes still prevail among our young people is extremely concerning.
As ministers will know—I have mentioned this to them time and again—the Zero Tolerance respect project provides us with a tool to move future generations forward on the issue by changing people's attitudes. Having had demonstrable successes, with positive evaluations from both the Executive and the Home Office, the project has now been rolled out either fully or in part to, I think, 12 local authorities for use in primary and secondary education and in the informal youth sector.
How would the member respond to a local authority that refused to adopt the respect project because it claimed that no such problem existed in its schools?
That is completely ridiculous and the local authority should reconsider its decision.
Despite its considerable achievements, the primary prevention approach that ZT has promoted seems to have been marginalised in favour of secondary prevention measures such as national advertising campaigns. Although such campaigns are undoubtedly worthy, they do not reach young people to the same extent as primary prevention measures do and they do not have the same potential to secure a lasting impact on societal attitudes. We need an equal focus on primary and secondary prevention measures if we are to effect profound and long-term change. I ask the minister to comment on that.
Given that the problem exists nationwide and can be found in every school, we need diverse solutions that are delivered locally but driven at a national level. That means that we need national funding of, for example, the roll-out of the respect project with different formats for different age groups.
Finally, we need more robust legal responses to rape and other acts of violence against women. Amnesty International's report states that, for instances of recorded rape, the conviction rate in Scotland fell from 6 per cent to 4 per cent last year. That drop followed Lord Gill's ruling, but I do not know whether that is a coincidence.
I had not intended to speak in today's debate as I felt that I might be in danger of repeating myself, but I believe that we all need to repeat ourselves until we sort out the issue once and for all.
I agree with much of what other speakers have said in today's welcome debate, which is part of the on-going process of challenging gender violence.
I want to make one point about funding before I make some points about culture. Since the launch in 1999 of the hugely welcome domestic abuse service development fund, voluntary sector bodies, local authorities and the national health service have developed strategies to support women who face violence. However, all such strategies—including the new initiative that the minister presented—are currently funded through grant applications. Like those who work in the field, I believe that, if such work is to be strategic, it should be core funded. We need to ask why we do not provide core funding for such initiatives if we are serious about dealing with the issue in a strategic way.
In my remaining three minutes, I want to deal with the issues of culture and prevention. Having put in resources to tackle the issue on the ground by providing support to women, the Parliament must now challenge and take on the culture that women, especially young women, now face. I could not agree more with Christine Grahame's comments on the images of women. So-called lads mags are not found on the top shelf, yet they contain pornographic images. The fact that such magazines are allowed to promote a culture in which it is permissible to view women in such a way is the reason why we receive such surveys from Amnesty International.
For me, the central question is how we as a Parliament tackle that situation. Where do we start? At a recent public event in Scotland, a woman complained about police officers reading a pornographic magazine on duty. Her complaint was taken up by the police. Afterwards, the following statement appeared in the magazine, which is considered to be not a pornographic magazine but a lads mag. Someone told the magazine about the incident and it responded as follows:
"Strathclyde Superintendent Jeanette Joyce made two brave policemen undergo counselling because of their love"
of the magazine. The statement continues:
"Cue revenge. And although we are big fans of violence, we've opted to niggle"
the woman
"in a peaceful manner because we know it will rile her intensely."
The magazine is sold to hundreds of thousands of young men, but its editor thinks that it is okay to print the statement that I have cited. What will the Parliament do about that? The salient point is that, at a public event, on-duty policemen were reading a magazine in which such attitudes are expressed. The police took action, which is welcome. The magazine is now attacking the woman who made the complaint; it thinks that that is acceptable. Surely the magazine, which is on sale all around Edinburgh today—not on the top shelf—to young men between the ages of 16 and 25 should be subject to our laws. However, it is allowed to print such statements.
If we cannot change the culture by persuasion, we must persuade it by law, by discipline and by saying that such things are not acceptable in public bodies and from public workers in our country. We must consider how we can raise the issue and move on the debate in order to hold men accountable for their attitudes and behaviours towards women. Far too often, women end up as the victims when they challenge such behaviour. This is a test case for us. I will write to the minister and others involved to ensure that we get an answer.
I will confine my remarks to one aspect of violence against women. The expert report on prostitution has as a stated objective
"To influence the attitudes which lead to the abuse of women sexually and physically through prostitution."
I am happy that the Executive has taken that on board. It should be congratulated on adopting a sensible, caring approach to how best it can exert influence. The Deputy Minister for Justice has indicated that he sees no reason to distinguish violence against that group of women from violence against any other group of women and that he will expect local agencies to instigate local awareness-raising initiatives that mirror the Executive's guidance on managing prostitution and exercising a duty of care towards street prostitutes.
It is proved beyond doubt that street prostitutes are at greater risk of experiencing violent attack, although the experience of the managed or tolerance zones in Aberdeen and Edinburgh indicates that there is a higher level of protection from violence if women are working in an area that incorporates security measures such as suitable surveillance by police or security cameras and a closely sited drop-in centre. The statistics from Edinburgh appear to bear that out. In the last full year of the managed or tolerance zone, there were 11 reports of violence against prostitutes—less than one a month. In the first three months without a zone, there were exactly the same number of reports of violence as in the entire previous year. I think that, statistically, the increase in the number of violent attacks on women working as prostitutes in Edinburgh has been more than 1,000 per cent.
The difference between the levels of violence experienced by indoor and outdoor sex workers shows the advisability of managing the business in order to reduce harm and the violence that people selling sex can experience. A study of indoor and outdoor workers in Leeds, Glasgow and Edinburgh has been carried out. Eighty-one per cent of street sex workers reported violence, as opposed to 48 per cent of indoor sex workers. Fifty per cent of street workers reported violence in the previous six months, as opposed to 26 per cent of indoor workers. Forty-four per cent of street women who had experienced violence had reported the crimes, whereas only 18 per cent of indoor workers reported a crime. The case appears to have been made for a duty of care to be exercised towards prostitutes, if we mean to reduce the harm that is done to them while they are prostitutes. I have spoken only about harm reduction, but most people would like prostitutes to exit prostitution. Much of the Executive's plan is geared towards that.
Attitudes towards violence against women must be changed, as many members have said. Although the Executive, like those who have spoken today, advocates local initiatives through schools and community education to educate people out of the attitude that violence against women is only to be expected, how can that possibly win the battle—I was going to say for hearts and minds, but I think that that is the wrong expression—to influence opinion in face of something such as the popular computer game "Grand Theft Auto: Vice City", which is sold over the counter and in which prostitutes are killed? I do not want to ban or proscribe anything, but if we can say that we will not sell fireworks to people under a certain age, surely we can say that we will not sell games that make fun out of killing prostitutes.
This has been a consensual debate in which many new issues about domestic abuse have been raised, in comparison with previous debates. I am pleased to support Margaret Mitchell's amendment, as well as the Executive motion and the SNP amendment. Margaret Mitchell's amendment highlights the fact that the best outcome is for women and children to stay in the family home, where they can remain safely with continuity of support from family, friends, peer systems and agencies, including schools.
There is no doubt that stability in the family home is welcome during traumatic times in a family. However, in the circumstances that we are debating today, if the mother and children wanted to stay safely in the family home—an idea to which we are all signed up—the father would have to leave. There is a concern that the current housing shortage could be an obstacle to the abuser leaving home. Even if the man were fully aware of his offending behaviour and knew that he needed help and that the family needed time apart from him, where would he go? That is my question to the minister.
In the Highlands, the man would join nearly 2,000 others who are designated as homeless. Margaret Mitchell mentioned tenancy. If the man were to pass the tenancy of the home over to his wife or partner and moved out, whatever the circumstances of the break-up of the relationship, he—as happens to many men—might still be living in a single-room bedsit a decade later with no possibility of access to his children because of the lack of accommodation for overnight stays.
Whether the violence is physical, verbal or of any other kind, its effect on the children in the family carries through into their adult lives.
The Scottish Executive document "Violence Against Women: A literature review" is excellent, but the point is highlighted throughout that, although much good work is happening in Scotland, it is largely undocumented. More research would provide better evidence on which to base and share good practice. The literature review highlights the need to share best practice in data collection across agencies, as that could provide links between dealing with violence against women and homelessness, for example. The review also says that we need more understanding of interagency response, child protection and substance abuse.
Many members today have highlighted the statistics on domestic abuse, so there is no need for me to say much more on that. The increase in the figures in the statistical bulletin could be attributed to more accurate recording and the fact that more women are speaking out, or it could mean that the incidence of domestic violence is increasing. I know that that is difficult to judge, so more research would be useful.
Nora Radcliffe spoke about hidden abuse. Like Maureen Macmillan, I commend the work of the Highland wellbeing alliance, which has pointed out that only 36 per cent of women ever tell anybody about abuse and that only between 2 and 18 per cent of domestic incidents ever come to the notice of the police. Nora Radcliffe also mentioned rural areas. We should ask why the figures for recorded domestic abuse in Edinburgh are eight times higher than the figures in Orkney and Shetland. That is food for thought.
The debate is timely, not only because of the international 16 days of activism but because it is the start of the festive season. Domestic violence, or violence against women, rises at this time of year, which is unfortunate. I hate the phrase "domestic violence" because violence is violence regardless of whether it is perpetrated in the home or elsewhere. I hope that people will remember that.
I ask the Executive whether it will use the debate as a springboard for a media campaign against violence against women in the lead-up to Christmas and the new year. It has done that in the past.
At the Public Petitions Committee this morning, we heard moving evidence from Hazel Reid, who had been a victim of domestic abuse. Her husband ended up being charged with attempted murder. His sentence was three years in jail—and, obviously, he got out on early release. Even more harrowing is the fact that, when Hazel Reid tried to find out under the victim notification scheme when her husband would be released, she was told that she had no right to find out. Unless the sentence is more than four years, people have no right to find out the release date. The police cannot find out either. The victim notification scheme really has to be revisited. If someone has perpetrated that type of violence—attempted murder—they should get more than three years. All violent assailants should be given sentences that fit the crime. Once again we see how the judiciary seems to look on violence against women as a lesser crime.
If not the ending of automatic early release for crimes of violence across the board, would the member support the ending of automatic early release for violent criminals in the circumstances that she has described?
I do not support automatic release but I am talking about the notification scheme. People should be able to access information on release dates. I ask Margaret Mitchell to bear with me while I go on to a point that Elaine Smith raised. She spoke about rape crimes—another example of the judiciary not taking crimes as seriously as it should.
I welcome the minister's announcement of the new violence against women fund, although I share Frances Curran's concerns. I hope that as many groups as possible will benefit from the fund. My colleague Christine Grahame, Shiona Baird and others have spoken of disturbing statistics. Forty-five per cent of people believe that women who wear what are described as sexy clothes are in some way responsible if they are raped. We must educate not only men but women that such attitudes are not acceptable. Young and old people must be educated so that they know that, just because a woman was wearing clothes that, in their perception, were sexy, she did not deserve to be raped.
Marilyn Livingstone and others said that it is not only women who suffer but children, families and, in the end, society as a whole. As Nora Radcliffe said, we must change attitudes and the culture before we can address this issue. As Kenny MacAskill said, it is just not good enough that there is this macho attitude that it is all right for a man to beat his wife or mentally abuse her. The problem exists not only in this country but in others too. We have to make people realise that such an attitude is totally unacceptable. The Parliament must reinforce that message.
I ask that both the amendments to the motion be agreed to. The way in which women are portrayed in the media has been mentioned. It results in violence against them. Margaret Mitchell mentioned the support of Barnardo's allowing women and children to remain in their own homes. I agree that they should be allowed to remain in their own homes, and their own communities, but only if they choose to do so.
As Cathy Peattie reminded us, extreme gender violence is much more common than many people think. In recognition of that, the Executive has made delivering on the domestic abuse strategy a high priority and is now making the wider work on violence against women a similarly high priority.
During the debate, the term "culture" has been widely used, but the fundamental cultural point is that we must understand the underlying causes of violence against women, which are rooted in gender inequality and, as Maureen Macmillan reminded us, inequalities of power.
The SNP amendment refers to a particular aspect of violence against women. We accept that commercial sexual exploitation is a form of violence that is predominantly directly towards women. The amendment identifies the normalisation of women as sexual objects rather than individuals. Of course we condemn that and accept the amendment.
Margaret Mitchell's amendment rightly emphasises the key part that the voluntary sector plays, not only in delivering much-needed services, but in working in partnership with the Executive to develop policy. Scottish Women's Aid, Rape Crisis Scotland and many local bodies such as the women's support project, Women's Aid groups and rape and sexual assault centres make an immeasurable contribution, to which I pay tribute.
On the second part of Margaret Mitchell's amendment, the key is to acknowledge that giving women choice over where they are accommodated and ensuring their safety and that of their children are the two fundamental drivers. In many cases, giving them such choice will mean that they remain in, or return to, the family home. That is not always the case but, having given that proviso, I am happy to accept Margaret Mitchell's amendment.
I will deal with the three Ps of protection, provision and prevention, in that order. Cathy Peattie and Bill Aitken referred to the domestic abuse court in Glasgow, on the recent first anniversary of which I was pleased to speak at a conference. The successes of that court are already evident. It has resulted in increased multi-agency working, especially among the police, procurators fiscal, the ASSIST project and other voluntary organisations. Another success has been the fast-tracking system, whereby all cases are heard within six weeks. In addition, there has been an increase in guilty pleas, both at the outset and at the intermediate trial stage. Overall, the court has had a highly positive impact on people who experience domestic abuse. I heard a heart-rending comment from a woman that is testimony to the success of the court:
"I have suffered over 40 years of abuse and rang the police for the first time after reading about ASSIST and the DA court in the paper."
Bill Aitken said that people had not heard about the Protection from Abuse (Scotland) Act 2001, but the act is widely used and the evidence suggests that there is a high level of awareness of it among lawyers. In the written evidence that the Law Society of Scotland recently submitted to the Justice 1 Committee, it said that the 2001 act was the principal and most widely used piece of legislation containing powers of arrest.
Maureen Macmillan mentioned the many problems to do with rape convictions. It was because of those problems that Cathy Jamieson asked the Scottish Law Commission to undertake a review of the current legislation and to make recommendations based on its findings. The discussion paper that will form the basis of the consultation on that issue is almost complete—we hope that it will be released in January 2006 and that the recommendations will follow in 2007. The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service is undertaking its own review of the prosecution of rape and other sexual offences and of the evidence that is required in such cases.
We will soon be considering legislation on prostitution, which Margo MacDonald spoke about. We believe that with prostitution, as with any other form of commercial sexual exploitation, we must ensure the protection of the women who are involved in it and must understand why their involvement has come about. However, as well as supporting those women, we must challenge men who believe that it is acceptable to purchase sex from vulnerable women and make them understand that their behaviour falls firmly within the spectrum of violence against women.
I move on to service provision. In the first half of her speech, Marilyn Livingstone majored on children. Over the next two years, the allocation of £6 million will increase the number of workers in Women's Aid groups and will allow outreach work to develop for the many children and young people who live with domestic abuse but do not come into contact with refuge. That will help with the achievement of the objectives of Margaret Mitchell's amendment.
Marilyn Livingstone also referred to the sexual abuse reference group. Obviously, work on sexual abuse also relates to the violence against women agenda and an announcement was made fairly recently on a £2 million survivors fund.
Frances Curran raised funding, too. The domestic abuse service development fund and subsequent violence against women service development fund were introduced in recognition of the much-needed support for local service provision and to ensure greater consistency and higher-quality provision across Scotland. Of course, funding will be considered in examining how support is developed. We intend to undertake a strategic review of violence against women funding to inform our decisions about how best to proceed in the next spending review period.
Mary Scanlon emphasised the importance of homelessness services, given the number of people who are homeless in areas such as the Highlands. Recently, I visited an excellent new project in Glasgow that provides a service during the night for women who have to flee domestic abuse. It is an extension of the homelessness services that are available in the city.
I turn to the issue of prevention, which featured strongly in the debate. I am pleased to tell Sandra White that we will be running a further campaign this Christmas with new television and radio advertising. We will also use other media platforms to support our messages, which will include work that will be targeted specifically at young people in both primary and secondary education.
As Elaine Smith reminded us, media work is not sufficient on its own. In common with Shiona Baird, Nora Radcliffe and Maureen Macmillan, she emphasised the importance of work in schools. The Executive has provided support to a variety of organisations to help them to produce education packs for use in schools. Elaine Smith mentioned the respect pack, which is produced by the Zero Tolerance Charitable Trust as part of its respect campaign. The Executive has contributed significant funding to the campaign pack, which is exactly the kind of material that is needed in schools. It is only through educating children and young people about what is acceptable that we can expect some of the more worrying trends and perceptions around the acceptability of violence to change.
As I pointed out, only half of schools have taken up Zero Tolerance's respect project. How can the Executive ensure that all schools take it on board?
I am a great supporter of Zero Tolerance's work in general and of its respect pack in particular and in this context. However, we must recognise that other material is being produced on the subject and we cannot be too prescriptive in that sense. Certainly, I would encourage all schools to use the respect material or its equivalent.
Shiona Baird and other members highlighted the recent Amnesty International UK poll, which showed all too starkly people's attitudes to rape. The matter featured prominently in the debate. The poll made it abundantly clear that not only did respondents underestimate the scale of the problem but, rather than blame the perpetrator in each and every case, they felt it right to apportion blame to the woman. The Executive absolutely abhors that view, which is why the last sentence of our motion highlights the issue.
I join Elaine Smith in condemning what the particular football manager said in relation to the 15-year-old girl being blamed. On specific action, apart from saying what I have just said, there is nothing else that we can do about that.
Our domestic abuse campaigns have had a significant impact over the past few years. Evaluations show a continuously higher level of awareness and understanding of the messages. However, we must build on that work and extend the scope of our awareness raising to tackling other forms of violence against women. Of course, we must challenge the attitudes towards rape that were highlighted in the debate. The national group to address violence against women has established a sub-group to consider the way forward so that we can develop a more comprehensive media strategy over the coming months.
Last week, I spoke at an event in the House of Commons that was hosted by the Women's National Commission, Amnesty International and the Trades Union Congress. I am sure that members will be pleased to hear that it was the work that is being done in Scotland that was held up for praise; the work that is being done in other parts of the United Kingdom came in for some criticism. I say that not in the spirit of complacency; we should recognise the progress that we have made but, given what we have heard this afternoon, we must all redouble our efforts, because there is a great deal more to do.