The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-14517, in the name of Johann Lamont, on the national strategy for survivors of childhood abuse. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament welcomes that it is 10 years since the launch in September 2005 of the National Strategy for Survivors of Childhood Abuse; believes that the Cross Party Group on Adult Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse was instrumental in establishing the strategy, which it considers a groundbreaking initiative that has benefited all survivors; congratulates everyone involved with survivor services in Pollok, across Glasgow and throughout Scotland on what it sees as the difference that they make to people’s lives; recognises that survivors’ groups, including the cross-party group, Open Secret in Falkirk and others, have concerns about the future of the strategy; understands that the overwhelming majority of childhood sexual abuse takes place within the immediate family or the community; believes that the intent of the national strategy is to be of benefit to all survivors and to provide a platform for other initiatives, including the Historical Child Abuse Inquiry Scotland and the National Confidential Forum, and notes the view that survivor-led services are crucial for supporting victims and that any confusion in the delivery of this service impacts adversely on survivors.
17:08
It is a privilege to open the debate, and I thank all the members who supported the motion and those who are here to listen to the debate tonight.
I also welcome to the gallery members of the cross-party group on adult survivors of child sexual abuse, and I thank them, Barnardo’s Scotland, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and Children 1st for the briefings that they have provided. I particularly thank Margaret Mitchell, who is the convener of the group, for the work that she has done over a significant period of time to keep its work going.
It is difficult to do justice to all the issues that are highlighted in the motion in the time that I have, so I urge members to attend the meeting directly after this debate to hear more about the concerns and challenges that the cross-party group has identified. This is an opportunity to recognise the importance of the cross-party group on adult survivors of child sexual abuse and its role in the creation of a national strategy for supporting survivors, and the establishment of SurvivorScotland. Today, the 10th anniversary of the strategy gives us the opportunity to thank all those who were involved at the time, particularly survivors and those who worked with them, including my friend, the former MSP Marilyn Livingstone, whose work as part of the group at that time was pivotal in ensuring that this important issue was being addressed.
In marking the anniversary, we also have the opportunity to address the concerns that are voiced by survivors, by the people who attend the group and by those who work with survivors, about the current effectiveness and the level and strategic direction of support and whether they match up to the ambitions of 10 years ago.
We have come a long way in dealing with a difficult issue. As a young woman in the 1970s, at the age my daughter is at now, I had little awareness of the nature of the suffering of child sexual abuse, of its prevalence, or of abuse within institutions—churches, schools and boarding schools—where adults in positions of trust chose to betray that trust, and within the homes of children by their own families.
The celebrities of my youth are men who now find that their crimes against children have been exposed. We are more aware now of that crime and there is more acknowledgement of it, but the test for us is whether there is more understanding of what we need to do to address it.
As a young secondary school teacher in the late 1970s and into the 1980s, my training did not refer to child sexual abuse. No guidance was given to me as a young woman about how to be aware of the possibility of abuse being suffered by children in my class. No information was given about how or why to raise concerns, and there was no information about how to treat children who were victims. As a young political activist, I was only beginning to learn and understand from the brave men and women who began to insist that their abuse should be acknowledged, that its devastating impact should be understood and, critically, that there should be understanding and recognition that that abuse was as much a matter for political debate and action as anything else is. That political change and the recognition that Government action at every level was required have developed over time.
There is more talk about the subject now and there is more acceptance of the fact that grave injustice continues, but we have to understand that we need to do more. The test is whether we continue to focus on needs. Survivors need more than acknowledgement: they need to be sure that we will address the consequences for them throughout their lives. Ten years ago, the strategy outlined the need to raise awareness, the need for increased awareness of the long-term consequences for physical and mental health, the importance of survivor support services in enhancing the health and wellbeing of survivors, and the need to develop training and skills for front-line workers.
It was also recognised that it was important to tackle and identify the level of abuse. Critically, we need to ensure that survivors are not just supported to address the medical consequences for them, but that there is an understanding of the wide and diverse range of needs that they have and the importance of those needs being addressed. We need more education, prevention and protection, and we need understanding of the importance of support services. The strategy also needs to be clear that it should offer justice and a clear recognition that child sexual abuse is a crime and that justice for survivors must be pursued.
The cross-party group is clear that all survivors should have support, and that abuse of power by the people who betrayed the trust that was placed in them in care homes, churches, boarding schools and other institutional settings should be placed firmly in the context of child abuse: 80 per cent of child sexual abuse happens within the home and within communities. The one thing that is consistent in child sexual abuse is not the setting but the brutalising powerlessness of the child and the impact on that child throughout his or her life. Those are not competing needs; they all deserve justice.
Many members from all around the chamber supported the establishment of the inquiry into historical child sexual abuse in institutional settings. The minister will be aware of the concerns of groups including white flowers Alba about the narrowness of the inquiry’s remit in excluding consideration of survivors who still suffer today but whose abuse happened too long ago to be investigated, and which may in some circumstances exclude the experience of one survivor but include that of another, even when the perpetrator is the same person, because the setting was different. I urge the minister to listen carefully to those concerns and to reflect on how we may address them in the remit.
I also urge the minister to resist narrowing the Government’s focus in respect of how it supports survivors. There are genuine concerns among people who are at the very heart of the issue about the direction of SurvivorScotland in defining the criteria for funding. This cannot just be about medical recovery; it must be on the journey through life that survivors are supported. Ten years ago, it was clear that it is not just about accessing health services—it is also about support services that have been developed in the voluntary sector that draw on the lived experiences of the people who know best what such abuse means. I ask the minister directly to confirm that he will examine the approach that is now manifesting itself as funding a medical model rather than the deeper and richer support that was identified.
In conclusion and in summary, I urge the Scottish Government to recognise the pervasive nature of child sexual abuse in our society, and the traumatising impacts that it has—and not just on a person’s health. I further urge the Scottish Government to review the remit of the historical abuse inquiry to ensure that it gives comfort to those who are looking to it for justice. I ask the Government to look again, to resist the model that is developing through SurvivorScotland, and to ensure that a rich development of resources is available.
Finally, I urge the minister, in reflecting on the past 10 years, now to instruct the development of a refreshed and renewed national strategy. If he does that, and recognises that the time has come to address the matter again, he will find that the cross-party group, all those who support survivors, survivors themselves, and the people in this chamber are ready to help to ensure that the strategy is fit for purpose.
17:16
I congratulate Johann Lamont and the cross-party group not only on securing this debate, but on the work that they have done over the past decade. The group has been exceptional in its actions. I have no doubt whatsoever that the support, action and even the inquiry must learn from the work that the group has done with survivors, to ensure that they are survivor-centred, survivor-led and available to all. Those are basic principles that we cannot deny.
The reason for those things being survivor-led, survivor-centred and available to all is that there must be an outcome that allows survivors to move on from that definition, and not just to be defined by having survived, but by their wish to live and flourish after that experience. I am sure that the minister will reflect upon that, because it is the outcome that will be important.
The establishment of both the inquiry and the support fund has been a tense and difficult process—the cross-party group knows that better than most. The people involved have often had the most awful experiences, which have—fully understandably—destroyed their trust in Government, authority and fellow human beings. Therefore, it will not always go smoothly.
As Johann Lamont said, it is a political issue: politics has entered into it, and the slowness of the political process in recognising the injustices and acting on them is something that we should all be ashamed of. When we recognise such things, we have to find a way forward. The way forward is through goodwill, determination, courage and constant listening.
Last year in this chamber, on 11 November 2014, when I was still a cabinet secretary, I announced not only the Government’s acceptance of the outcomes of the insight process, but the establishment of the fund. That was confirmed in May 2015 by my successor at a total of £13.5 million over five years. However, that was a mechanistic thing. Of more importance to me was the experience that I had in coming to understand over a period of time and progressively, as Johann Lamont has said, the awful responsibility of society—the way in which society has to confront honestly what has taken place, and help those who have survived such experiences to move forward.
The most important part for me was the insight process. In April 2015, the Scottish Human Rights Commission, which was responsible for that process, made a submission to the Scottish Government about the inquiry. It made two crucial points that we should bear in mind tonight. First, it called on the Scottish Government to ensure that the PANEL principles—participation, accountability, non-discrimination and equality, empowerment and legality—are observed whenever the issue is considered. Every single thing that the Scottish Government does in the area should be underpinned by those principles.
Secondly, it asked the Government to ensure that work continues more widely for all survivors while the inquiry takes place, and not to delay the process of helping those people because the focus is elsewhere.
This has been a long, slow process. The national strategy and the cross-party group have paved the way for insight and the fund, which led to the inquiry, the action on the time bar and how much is in the fund. As I say, it is a process—it is not event-driven. The process is to provide justice, to restore trust and to create a future for those who have been affected, and moreover to ensure that it can never ever happen again. The debate will help that process, but nothing will overcome the injustice that was done. As politicians, working together with survivors and charities, we should, with every fibre of our being, do our best and do it together.
17:21
Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to speak in tonight’s debate, Presiding Officer. I congratulate Johann Lamont on securing the debate and acknowledge Margaret Mitchell’s convenership of the cross-party group on the adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. The CPG and its supporters, who are here in the chamber, have for 10 years been extremely successful in maintaining a spotlight on the pressing issues and demanding the need to implement an effective strategy and policies that support the survivors, the victims and their nearest and dearest.
I also acknowledge Mike Russell’s courage last year in recognising the need to change, thereby creating the context in which the Government could change its approach to the issue and, finally, see the need for a public inquiry.
The sexual abuse of any human being is repugnant. The circumstances of children suffering such abuse are particularly harrowing. No one comes to the issue voluntarily, whether it is those who seek the help of politicians or, indeed, the politicians who are drawn into the debate as they try to find a way of supporting survivors and victims.
It is not often that Mike Russell and I would agree, but I have to say that I have agreed with everything that he has said, so there is no need for me to repeat the words that he has uttered.
I am grateful for the many briefings that I received before the debate. I note that progress has been made in developing a Government strategy over the past 10 years. However, much has yet to be done, and there are concerns across the sector among survivors and victims about a commitment to funding the services and support to which Mike Russell referred. Survivors, victims and families need support now. They need medical, psychological and, on occasion, financial support.
We also need to decide on policy changes in the months and years ahead. We also need to demonstrate a true commitment to those changes, because survivors have too often been made promises only to be let down. White flowers Alba has briefed repeatedly on the shortcomings that it has identified. I know that members of the group are in the Parliament today. INCAS—In Care Abuse Survivors—has contributed, too.
The court service notes the substantial increases in cases being handled and the number of accused being prosecuted for sexual abuse. Many such cases are historical. That success sees a fresh demand for Government support as more survivors come forward. Indeed, we know that, with the growth of the internet, the extent of that need is in the thousands—we are not merely talking about a few people here and there.
The abuse of children has not yet been answered in a way that survivors and victims would wish it to be. I implore the minister to give a commitment to show a positive response to the needs of survivors and the demands that they make, which they make in good faith. They do not ask for much, and to listen to them and engage with them is all the more important at this time in our development.
I am grateful for that opportunity, Presiding Officer.
Thank you very much, Mr Pearson.
17:25
I thank Johann Lamont for using her Labour members’ business time to bring this important motion for debate to the chamber.
The cross-party group on adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse came into being following one of the first ever petitions to be lodged with the Scottish Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee, and I pay tribute to the first convener of the CPG, Marilyn Livingstone, and the members and co-conveners of the CPG for all that they have done to support survivors, to raise awareness of childhood sexual abuse and to focus on preventative measures for almost 16 years.
The national strategy for survivors of childhood abuse was the culmination of years of hard work and persistence, primarily on the part of the CPG, together with the successive former health ministers Malcolm Chisholm and Andy Kerr and, later, Nicola Sturgeon. The national strategy was a groundbreaking initiative that represented a pioneering approach in the United Kingdom and further afield that put in place a national plan for preventing abuse from happening in the first place and for increasing support for survivors of childhood abuse. Its aim was to address the situation that the strategy document sets out whereby
“Too many survivors report a ‘revolving door’ experience being moved from service to service without having their needs satisfactorily addressed.”
That explains why the strategy took a trailblazing survivor-led approach.
The achievements of the SurvivorScotland strategy as it celebrates its 10-year anniversary are not inconsiderable. They include the pooling of information online for easy access to resources and research; the highlighting of the needs of both female and male survivors; and the provision of funding services and projects to support survivors and to carry out preventative work.
However, 10 years on, despite the success that the strategy has had during that time, there are now serious concerns regarding its future. For example, survivors of abuse often look for support services in their area, and in particular for services that offer trauma counselling, but there is still a lack of specialist trauma services available. Given the shift of emphasis towards a medical model for determining our understanding of the needs of survivors, that lack of provision is clearly worrying.
In addition to that, the Scottish Government’s proposed changes to the way in which survivors will access support services has caused yet more concern. More specifically, survivors and support services are dismayed that moving to a broker model that further emphasises healthcare rather than a holistic approach that includes social welfare could be a significant risk to survivors’ wellbeing.
At a time when child sexual abuse cases are hitting the headlines across the UK, when the Prime Minister has prioritised childhood sexual abuse as a national threat on a par with serious organised crime and when a Scottish public inquiry into historical child sexual abuse is under way, there has been a worrying silence about the future of the national strategy. The CPG has therefore warned that, with the public inquiry and the focus on institutional abuse, the fact that the vast majority of child sexual abuse takes place within a family setting and in communities has been largely absent from the national conversation.
There are clearly many opportunities for a renewed strategy to further the progress that has been made in the past 10 years in supporting the courageous survivors who make the brave decision to disclose the abuse that they have experienced. Consequently, the uncertainty surrounding the future of the strategy and the changes to the provision of support services needs to be recognised and addressed as a matter of urgency. I hope that the minister can give some much-needed and deserved reassurance on that point.
17:29
I, too, congratulate Johann Lamont on securing this debate and the CPG on all the work that it has done, and I also very much support Margaret Mitchell’s comments.
Childhood sexual abuse is a sobering reminder that our main priority should be to do our best to put in place protections for people from the earliest point possible in their lives—which, unfortunately, means protecting people from other people. Children are probably the most sensitive and vulnerable to abuse—physical, emotional and sexual—as they are unable to defend themselves and are, too often, trapped in their own homes. Our duty and responsibility is to ensure that the measures that we put in place prevent abuse from happening. However, when these things happen, our systems must be ready and able to respond appropriately by always keeping the survivors in mind.
In Selkirk in my area, Children 1st has done commendable work on keeping children safe, helping them respond to their traumas and creating a slightly safer place for them. The organisation also works with survivors of childhood sexual abuse, but the fact that they have to travel many miles across the region to access the services in Selkirk—indeed, some have to travel for two hours—raises the question whether we are providing enough of a service across the country.
We need to build services, perhaps hire staff and establish organisations that can support people, but what is essential is the need for time and a focus on the individual or survivor. Any experience of childhood abuse will have long-term effects on the person in question, and in order for them to be able to come forward and talk about their experiences, they must have a good and trusting relationship with the person—the counsellor—to whom they are revealing their experiences. I am sure that we will all appreciate that such experiences are not taken lightly by anyone, even less by those who have lived through them, and giving people the time to trust that they have all the support that they need is a responsibility not just for the Scottish Government but for all of us. We need to support that approach. The nature of such experiences means that many of these painful memories are buried deep and hidden away and, in order to access them, the person must be able to trust their counsellor or consultant as a result of long-term consultations and meetings that take a very long time.
Of course, one of the biggest obstacles to a healing process for a survivor is the act of disclosure itself. It is not easy for someone to disclose these things and we have to recognise that, as more people come forward, many of them will need a safer environment to allow them to disclose what happened to them in the far past. Perhaps if general practitioners were able to ask a standard question during their standard meetings with patients, that might in itself make disclosure easier for survivors.
The Scottish Government’s new service model for in-care survivors, which will become effective next April, seeks to put in place national health service-led services using psychologists. Open Secret notes that the new service will not have any counsellors working for it and will not provide therapy, but the current limited resources for psychological provision throughout the NHS mean not only that the number of psychologists is limited but that there are even fewer who are able to give abuse survivors the kind of time and dedication that they need. We need consultants who are able to work with childhood abuse survivors in a long-term relationship.
The Government must provide time and adequate provision for survivors of childhood abuse. Children grow up to become adults, and such painful memories can damage people throughout their lives. It is our responsibility through the services that the state can provide to ensure that any person anywhere in Scotland can, at any stage in their lives, come forward and know that they will be heard and helped.
17:34
I thank Johann Lamont for introducing a very important subject and pay tribute to her work in the cross-party group on adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse and, indeed, to Margaret Mitchell’s work. I hope that the Government will pay very close attention to their speeches, because they encapsulated many of the current concerns of survivors groups. They certainly know far more about the matter than I do, although I was involved in the early days—Margaret Mitchell referred to that. In particular, I set up the short-life working group on the care needs of people who survived childhood sexual abuse. That group’s report still repays reading now—I read it prior to the debate—because it gives the broad view that we all want to see. Although that fed into the strategy, I think that the cross-party group was the main influence on the development of the strategy all those years ago. We should certainly celebrate the work that it does now and has done. That leads us back, of course, to Marilyn Livingstone, who was the first convener of the group. We should remember her today, too.
Survivors groups have always been crucial to the strategy, not just in respect of mutual support, but in spreading information and understanding to professionals, service providers and the wider public. It is therefore very important that those groups are supported financially in the first instance. The motion mentions Open Secret, but we know of other groups, such as the Kingdom Abuse Survivors Project. Those groups must be supported and involved in the continuing implementation of the strategy, and they should be in leadership roles, as they have been in the past. I hope that they will be in those roles in the future, if they are not adequately in those positions currently.
It is clear that one of the fundamental demands is justice. We are dealing with a crime, not an illness. It is also clear that survivors need the chance to confront their experiences with loving support around them. All that is part of the holistic approach to which members have already referred.
The motion refers to the concerns of survivors groups. Johann Lamont and Margaret Mitchell have referred to those concerns. I commend to the minister Sarah Nelson’s article in The Herald today, because she has been very closely involved with work in the area for many years. I first came across her through her report “Beyond Trauma: Mental Health Care Needs of Women Who Survived Childhood Sexual Abuse”, which made a very big impression on me in 2001 or some time around then. She pointed out how psychiatric services routinely do not face up to and understand the mental health implications of what some people have endured. I recommend that article.
Of course, we all welcome the focus on historical abuse in institutional settings and the inquiry that is chaired by Susan O’Brien although, as Johann Lamont reminded us, there are concerns about the narrowness of its remit. As Sarah Nelson and members have reminded us, 80 per cent of survivors were abused in the family or the community, so we need a holistic partnership approach to address their needs, too. The strategy also has to focus on prevention, staff training and the wider agendas that have been referred to. There are concerns about a narrowing of the strategy’s focus. Sarah Nelson described that in her article as a focus on individuals on a “medical model”. It is clear that we need a holistic approach that involves groups as well as individuals. The Government should pay attention to that article and to the speeches by Johann Lamont and Margaret Mitchell.
Sarah Nelson raised the interesting question of where the issue is located in the Scottish Government. I have recently found it confusing whether responsibility is located in education and young people or health. Justice no doubt also has a role. There are issues there. Sarah Nelson made the interesting suggestion that it should be located in the equality division.
Those are just things to reflect on. They are not the most important part of the debate, but they are part of what should be considered.
In conclusion, it is clear that the historical child abuse inquiry is very important, but the Government must also ensure that its policy and funding pay attention to the needs of the 80 per cent of survivors who were abused in the family or the community. Crucially, let us involve those people in the implementation of the strategy, as was always intended from the start.
17:39
As members have said, it is clear that the majority of childhood sexual abuse takes place within the family or within the community. As we know, it is not a case of stranger danger but something that is done by someone who is known to the child. Regrettably, it is still happening today.
As Malcolm Chisholm said, we do not know where the issue lands. It lands across many portfolios. In the chamber now we have a minister for health and a former cabinet secretary for education. Although I am a back bencher, I am a member of a Justice Committee, as is Margaret Mitchell. I congratulate her on her work as the convener of the cross-party group on adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse, which I know that she brings to the Justice Committee.
I will focus on some things that we have done in legislation. We have talked about justice, and the issue is not just about supporting people. It is about getting justice, a day in court and, I hope, successful prosecutions. Currently we have the Victims and Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2014. From the point at which someone comes into a police station to not just the point at which they give evidence in court or the point at which the accused person is successfully prosecuted and sentenced, but after that, when the person is imprisoned, then released—whether temporarily or on bail or because they have finished their sentence—the 2014 act tries to support the victim, put them at the heart of the judicial process and ensure that they are treated respectfully and sensitively in such cases. The various agencies have moved a long a way in that direction, in relation to police training, legal training, the judiciary and beyond. The Parliament brought forward that change.
This week, the Parliament brought into force an EU directive that further strengthens support for witnesses and victims. We did that through a statutory instrument from the Government. That support should be given and has long been missing from the judicial system. Sometimes the victim, who is often the prime witness in a case, was almost a bystander. They were not told what was happening, not engaged with and not supported. That situation has now passed, and I hope that we continue along that path.
I felt that it was important to talk about that part of what we want to be a resolution of sorts for victims of childhood sexual abuse and other abuse.
Margaret Mitchell’s Apologies (Scotland) Bill does not deal with remedies in the sense of criminal or civil actions, but at least it will allow apologies to be made. As members know, the committee is very sympathetic to it. The minister has moved, and the propulsion for that has come from Margaret Mitchell’s experience in chairing the cross-party group on adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse.
It is important to say that we should not put the issue in a silo. The issue crosses health, education, justice and social justice. It is important to put on record that I do not see it in a silo and that other members do not see it in a silo. We see it as something that is relevant to many of our workings within committees.
17:43
I thank Johann Lamont for bringing forward this sensitive but important subject for debate.
I thank members for their thoughtful contributions, and I thank members who have been involved in the work of the cross-party group on adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Johann Lamont and Margaret Mitchell are pre-eminent among them, and of course others have been involved over the years. As Michael Russell and the motion set out, the group played a prominent role in developing the national strategy for survivors of childhood abuse, which has been instrumental in raising awareness and improving knowledge of abuse.
I had been due to meet the office bearers of the cross-party group, but I regret that the meeting had to be rearranged—I cannot quite remember what events caused that. I will be happy to meet any member of the cross-party group—indeed, any member of this Parliament—to discuss any issues regarding our approach to childhood sexual abuse, should they request that.
Since 2007, £1.5 million has been invested in the in-care survivors service Scotland and £9 million has been invested in third and voluntary sector organisations that provide a wide range of local services to support all survivors of abuse across Scotland. However, since the survivors strategy was launched 10 years ago, we have learned more about the complex health and wider social needs of survivors, and we know that services must be more responsive to their individual needs. One size does not fit all. We also have more evidence on what services and interventions work well, enabling survivors to thrive and recover in all aspects of their lives.
Our recently published strategic outcomes framework sets out our vision. It builds on the legacy of the 2005 strategy and prioritises our actions to meet survivors’ needs. The priorities, which I am sure we all support, include preventing child abuse, enabling and educating Scotland’s public service workforce to be trauma informed, and continuously improving the wide range of local support services that provide vital support to survivors every day.
A recently published report by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children reveals that one child in eight will report abuse, but we already know the shocking statistic that one child in four is a victim of abuse. Preventing abuse is, therefore, a priority for this Government.
Achieving that will require professionals across all sectors to work together to identify our most vulnerable children and protect them from abuse and the devastating impact that it has regardless of where it has taken place. A national training framework led by NHS Education for Scotland will support that work, ensuring that there is a strategic and consistent standard of training for all those who need it across all the sectors that provide vital support to survivors.
Protecting children from abuse is a duty that is shared among us all as a society. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning has made clear that she is committed to improvement in child protection, and she will make a statement to the Parliament early in the new year.
The recent launch of the e-learning resource that was developed in partnership with Roshni, the Scottish Government and NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde is an example of how organisations are working in partnership to share their expertise and knowledge on this important issue. It is a free online resource that will raise awareness and help to build the skills and knowledge that our workforce needs to support survivors.
I am grateful to the service providers throughout Scotland in the statutory, voluntary and third sectors. The Moira Anderson Foundation in Airdrie, Rape Crisis, which works right across Scotland, and the specialist trauma centres in Lothian and Glasgow are just a few of the organisations that provide a valuable range of services to survivors of childhood abuse regardless of where or how long ago it took place.
It is fantastic to hear that news about what is going on, but does the minister recognise not only the need for survivors to be able to disclose easily but the need for long-term relationships with counsellors?
Mr Hume raised that point in his speech. I am just coming to the subject, so I will address his point in a moment.
The services that I mentioned are vital in helping survivors to access the range of support that they so desperately need. That is why, in the past few days, 20 organisations have been notified that they have been successful in securing funding of almost £1 million for innovative partnership projects. I will be happy to provide details to any member who wants them. I hope that the funding for that range of organisations demonstrates that our approach is not entirely health based or a so-called medical model.
That brings me to the point that Mr Hume made. There is a role for our national health service. He rightly identified some of the challenges that we face in mental health services, and I recognise that we have those challenges. In responding to them, we have invested an additional £100 million over the coming five years into mental health services. We have seen more people being treated through the services that we provide, but I recognise that we have to do more. That £100 million will bring forward a range of services that will offer improvements, including in the area that Mr Hume touched on a moment ago.
We must not forget that, without the dedication and bravery of survivors who have spoken out about their experiences and campaigned relentlessly to have their voices heard, the progress to date could not have been made. Graeme Pearson urged me to listen to the voices of survivors, and of course I assure him that we will always listen and look to respond.
In that regard, there have been some comments about the nature and scope of the inquiry. The original call for an inquiry related to in-care settings, and there was a call to extend it. We have listened to those calls, and the inquiry remit has gone beyond just institutional care to include foster care and other forms of residential care such as independent residential schools.
We would do well to remember that survivors do not always speak with one uniform voice. There are different points of view among survivors, and there are a range of views on the remit of the inquiry and on all the matters that we are discussing today. The remit aims to strike a balance, to seek truth and to address failings, and also to report according to a timescale that is meaningful and acceptable to survivors. Going forward, decisions will be for the chair of the inquiry to make.
I see that I am coming up against the time, so I will move to the final area that I wish to touch on, which is where we go in relation to our funding to support survivors. Over the past year there has been extensive engagement with survivors and the organisations that support them. That has allowed the Scottish Government to take stock of how far we have come and has given us the opportunity to hear survivors’ views about the things that matter to them. In May we announced investment of £13.5 million over five years to expand and enhance the current model of support for survivors of in-care childhood abuse.
Mike Russell was absolutely right to mention the need to focus on outcomes for survivors. That is our approach. The support fund is designed around the personal aspirations and outcomes that survivors wish to see. The fund will enhance and expand the current range of services to give survivors access to the information, resources and support that are important to them in meeting their individual psychological, physical, social, education, employment and housing needs. That list does not represent a medical model of support—it is not an entirely health-based model; it is a model that recognises that the needs of individual survivors will be different and specific to them as individuals.
Will the minister take an intervention?
If I have time, Presiding Officer.
Yes.
I recognise that the minister is coming to the end of his speech, but I wonder whether he would address specifically the strategy and its future funding.
I would be happy to discuss that further with the cross-party group. We have made a significant commitment in terms of our support to survivors, and I have just set out a significant increase in funding. I can commit to meeting Ms Mitchell to discuss that further—I would be very happy to do that. That could be a way of moving forward.
The Government’s vision is that survivors should have equal access to integrated care, support and treatment resources and services to reduce the impact of the inequalities and disadvantage that they have experienced as a result of abuse. That is why we will continue to develop and invest in the capacity and capability of current services. We will support new approaches for integrating individual needs-based and outcome-focused support and care, which enables survivors to achieve their own personal outcome goals. Survivors have told us that that is what they want; that is what we will seek to deliver.
Many thanks, minister, and many thanks to you all for taking part in this important debate.
Meeting closed at 17:53.Previous
Decision Time