Chamber and committees

Good morning, and thank you for joining us today. I want to explore, first of all, who you report to and the ways in which you are reporting to the Government on this. How frequently are you doing that and what are you providing the Government with?

Does that monthly update include all your management information data, or is it just a free-form textual?

Okay. What feedback are you getting?

What would be your assessment for the people watching this session? You are probably aware that there are some members of the public here. Will they be more or less confident about their particular situation after this session?

In terms of trust—a word that my colleague Liz Smith mentioned—pensions, more than any other benefit, talk to trust in the state. When people have contributed throughout their entire working life, nothing diminishes trust more than an issue with their pension. Looking back, you mentioned that, historically, there has not been the required investment in the agency, particularly in automation and digitisation. How has that impacted the trust of the population in a critical state benefit?

Therefore, will you be applying even more caution to any subsequent commitments and promises that you make? Part of the issue, particularly with the most recent October date, is that people have been blowing a gasket, in effect, when they have been told and they have been hanging on. I, too, have many constituents—quite a case load of people—who are affected in this way. Part of it is the death by a thousand cuts when they are hanging on, and then they are told, “No, we are not going to meet that deadline either.”

In this debate to mark the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, I think that we are united in our commitment to end violence against women and girls in all its forms, online and offline. As has been said, this is not just a women’s issue; it is a societal crisis that demands action from every sector, community and individual.

Let us begin by confronting a difficult but urgent reality: the pervasive nature of online pornography and its impact on young people, especially boys. Recent research by the Children’s Commissioner for England has revealed a disturbing link between boys’ exposure to violent pornography and subsequent harmful sexual behaviour. In half of the cases examined, acts of sexual violence that are depicted in pornography, such as strangulation or slapping, were mirrored in real-life abuse among children.

Boys are more likely to actively seek out pornography, and repeated exposure reduces shock and confusion, normalising harmful behaviours and making them seem acceptable. By the age of 15, most boys have seen pornography, and a significant proportion report that they want to act out what they have seen.

In Scotland, we are not immune to that. A major Scottish study by the University of the Highlands and Islands found that 86 per cent of boys aged 13 to 15 in the west of Scotland had viewed online pornography. NHS Scotland’s own research highlighted that 41 per cent of popular online pornography videos that it analysed depicted violence against women. The content distorts young people’s understanding of sex, relationships and consent, and it normalises aggression and exploitation. It is not only a matter of curiosity, as we sometimes hear said; it fundamentally shapes attitudes, which ultimately distorts relationships and fuels abuse. The trauma that is inflicted by that exposure can also be profound, and boys become victims, too. Experts warn that the eroticisation of violence in pornography can lead to traumatised sexuality, difficulties in ultimately forming healthy relationships and, in some cases, a cycle of aggression or, alternatively, dissociation.

I put it on the record, up front, that this is a public health problem that we cannot afford to ignore, and I welcome the efforts to work with the UK Government to address this important reserved area. However, if we are to end violence against women and girls, we must also address the role of men, not as bystanders but as active allies and agents of change. Engaging men and boys is crucial to shifting the societal norms that underpin gender-based violence. Men have a clear role in challenging toxic masculinity, rejecting harmful stereotypes and modelling healthy relationships. That means speaking out, as we have seen with the very successful Police Scotland “Don’t be that guy” campaign. Men have to recognise that ending violence against women is not a burden for women to shoulder alone; it is a collective responsibility, and men have to be at the forefront of the movement.

I hope that the promotion of the white ribbon campaign by Ben Macpherson will continue. Now that he is in a ministerial position, we need somebody to pick that up—I see that he is pointing at Paul McLennan, behind me, which is excellent. To remind members, the white ribbon symbolises a pledge to never commit, condone or remain silent about violence against women and girls. To pick up Maggie Chapman’s earlier point, all men here, particularly those who are in this profession, should not remain silent and should speak out regardless of whether they agree with a person’s political party or view. We all need to do that.

Frankly, our efforts are undermined when the Government fails to prioritise women’s safety, dignity and privacy. The Scottish Government has made public commitments, but its actions have often fallen short. Sometimes, that has been because of complexity, and I understand how difficult such matters are. However, I reiterate—all members in the chamber know that this is my view—that the Supreme Court decision has made it clear that, for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, “sex” means biological sex.

Picking up on an earlier point, the decision to shelve legislation on misogyny disappointed many people, and we have heard that reiterated today, but at least there is now action to add sex as a protected characteristic. It was ridiculous that women, who make up 51 per cent of the Scottish population, were the only group not to be covered. I do not underestimate the systemic nature of the challenge, however, and, in some respects, we are still at the early stages. We still do not routinely disaggregate data across policy making by sex—or other data collectors—in order to glean critical insights, particularly around economic measures. That is a point that I have consistently reiterated.

If we are truly committed to ending violence against women and girls, we must address the root causes, including the commodification of women’s bodies. The Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill, which Ash Regan has introduced, is a critical step forward. By criminalising the purchase of sex, the bill targets demand, not those who are exploited by the sex trade. I know that the Government has some concerns relating to amendments that would be needed to the bill, but I hope that the Government can support it at least through stage 1, to make a statement that we, in the SNP, agree with the principle. That would send a clear message that women are not commodities to be bought and sold. Until we challenge and dismantle the systems that treat women as objects for consumption, violence will persist.

Let us unite not just in words but in action to build a society in which every woman and girl is safe, respected and free to live with dignity.

In this debate to mark the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, I think that we are united in our commitment to end violence against women and girls in all its forms, online and offline. As has been said, this is not just a women’s issue; it is a societal crisis that demands action from every sector, community and individual.

Let us begin by confronting a difficult but urgent reality: the pervasive nature of online pornography and its impact on young people, especially boys. Recent research by the Children’s Commissioner for England has revealed a disturbing link between boys’ exposure to violent pornography and subsequent harmful sexual behaviour. In half of the cases examined, acts of sexual violence that are depicted in pornography, such as strangulation or slapping, were mirrored in real-life abuse among children.

Boys are more likely to actively seek out pornography, and repeated exposure reduces shock and confusion, normalising harmful behaviours and making them seem acceptable. By the age of 15, most boys have seen pornography, and a significant proportion report that they want to act out what they have seen.

In Scotland, we are not immune to that. A major Scottish study by the University of the Highlands and Islands found that 86 per cent of boys aged 13 to 15 in the west of Scotland had viewed online pornography. NHS Scotland’s own research highlighted that 41 per cent of popular online pornography videos that it analysed depicted violence against women. The content distorts young people’s understanding of sex, relationships and consent, and it normalises aggression and exploitation. It is not only a matter of curiosity, as we sometimes hear said; it fundamentally shapes attitudes, which ultimately distorts relationships and fuels abuse. The trauma that is inflicted by that exposure can also be profound, and boys become victims, too. Experts warn that the eroticisation of violence in pornography can lead to traumatised sexuality, difficulties in ultimately forming healthy relationships and, in some cases, a cycle of aggression or, alternatively, dissociation.

I put it on the record, up front, that this is a public health problem that we cannot afford to ignore, and I welcome the efforts to work with the UK Government to address this important reserved area. However, if we are to end violence against women and girls, we must also address the role of men, not as bystanders but as active allies and agents of change. Engaging men and boys is crucial to shifting the societal norms that underpin gender-based violence. Men have a clear role in challenging toxic masculinity, rejecting harmful stereotypes and modelling healthy relationships. That means speaking out, as we have seen with the very successful Police Scotland “Don’t be that guy” campaign. Men have to recognise that ending violence against women is not a burden for women to shoulder alone; it is a collective responsibility, and men have to be at the forefront of the movement.

I hope that the promotion of the white ribbon campaign by Ben Macpherson will continue. Now that he is in a ministerial position, we need somebody to pick that up—I see that he is pointing at Paul McLennan, behind me, which is excellent. To remind members, the white ribbon symbolises a pledge to never commit, condone or remain silent about violence against women and girls. To pick up Maggie Chapman’s earlier point, all men here, particularly those who are in this profession, should not remain silent and should speak out regardless of whether they agree with a person’s political party or view. We all need to do that.

Frankly, our efforts are undermined when the Government fails to prioritise women’s safety, dignity and privacy. The Scottish Government has made public commitments, but its actions have often fallen short. Sometimes, that has been because of complexity, and I understand how difficult such matters are. However, I reiterate—all members in the chamber know that this is my view—that the Supreme Court decision has made it clear that, for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010, “sex” means biological sex.

Picking up on an earlier point, the decision to shelve legislation on misogyny disappointed many people, and we have heard that reiterated today, but at least there is now action to add sex as a protected characteristic. It was ridiculous that women, who make up 51 per cent of the Scottish population, were the only group not to be covered. I do not underestimate the systemic nature of the challenge, however, and, in some respects, we are still at the early stages. We still do not routinely disaggregate data across policy making by sex—nor do other data collectors—in order to glean critical insights, particularly around economic measures. That is a point that I have consistently reiterated.

If we are truly committed to ending violence against women and girls, we must address the root causes, including the commodification of women’s bodies. The Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill, which Ash Regan has introduced, is a critical step forward. By criminalising the purchase of sex, the bill targets demand, not those who are exploited by the sex trade. I know that the Government has some concerns relating to amendments that would be needed to the bill, but I hope that the Government can support it at least through stage 1, to make a statement that we, in the SNP, agree with the principle. That would send a clear message that women are not commodities to be bought and sold. Until we challenge and dismantle the systems that treat women as objects for consumption, violence will persist.

Let us unite not just in words but in action to build a society in which every woman and girl is safe, respected and free to live with dignity.

Good morning. I, too, want to qualify anything that I might say by making it clear that I am not a lawyer. If you think that I have asked a ridiculous question, please suppress your laughter.

I have been wondering about the definition of a digital asset. I know that you will have considered the advent of artificial intelligence, particularly generative AI, where an asset might be part of the whole generative thing. As a result, it will be evolving—it will never be the same thing twice. That whole part of a particular package might have some definition or some descriptor around it, but it could be eternally evolving. At the point at which the packet transfer takes place, the packet will be the descriptor of the generative AI piece of technology, and that will be the only thing that we will have to hang on to.

How do you square off that kind of situation with your definitions thus far? I appreciate that you have taken cognisance of that by making things as simple as possible, because we do not know what we do not know. However, that is, I think, one of the key challenges, and, indeed, we are not that far away from that.

I hope that I have been sort of clear.

I can see how you are making that backwards link into other areas of law at present, but I still think that there is a potential challenge. Something would be flushed out if there was intrinsic value—somebody would come forward; that is the nature of it. However, if there is something that lets in the amorphous thing that is constantly changing, I think that it will be very hard, unless somebody steps forward with regard to believing in intrinsic value or it butts into other areas of law.

I do not expect you to have the answer to that, because we do not even have the questions. I suppose that it is about fleshing out sufficient flexibility in what has been determined thus far to at least take account of what we think that we are starting to imagine some of the issues might be. It sounds like you are more confident about that.