Chamber and committees

I disagree with the member on that, but she is absolutely correct to say—as I said—that the Scottish Police Authority already stands as an independent governance body for policing in Scotland. However, having served on the Criminal Justice Committee for more than four years with the member, I still say that there is a need for far greater scrutiny of policing in Scotland. The committee is very aware of that.

The Scottish Government has previously commissioned independent reviews into police complaints, such as those that were undertaken by Lady Elish Angiolini. Police Scotland has also established independent oversight bodies such as the equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights independent review group. We believe that independent oversight of the audit is appropriate and that it would not undermine the operational independence of Police Scotland. We welcome the appointment of Professor Alexis Jay and reiterate our view that that role needs to be independent and have full, unfettered access to all information and records.

Pauline McNeill and Rona Mackay spoke about the audit that was undertaken by Baroness Casey in relation to group-based abuse and exploitation of children and young people in England and Wales. Although we recognise that many of Baroness Casey’s recommendations apply to other parts of the UK, we think it appropriate that the Scottish Government look at that work and provide an update to identify what can be implemented in relation to any recommendations in Scotland.

I understand that the First Minister previously stated that the Scottish Government is doing work on child protection policies and practices through the national child sexual abuse and exploitation strategic group. It would be helpful if he could clarify how survivors and other relevant stakeholders are being engaged in that work to ensure that there is no further exploitation of vulnerable children and young people in the future.

Members have rightly highlighted the recent powerful testimony of Taylor, the care-experienced survivor of human trafficking and child abuse, and have talked about many other children. All the bodies that we have spoken about in the debate have, in the past, failed to take the necessary safeguarding and reporting actions. Taylor herself has called on the First Minister to establish an inquiry, and Scottish Labour supports her in that call. We believe that an inquiry is vital if we are to establish why there has been a lack of intervention and investigation into cases such as Taylor’s.

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children has rightly stressed the need for ministerial leadership to establish the true scale of child abuse and exploitation, particularly in relation to group-based abuse. Although we think that the Scottish Government has been slow to call for an inquiry and show leadership on the issue of group-based sexual exploitation and abuse, we believe that the review can help to determine the extent of grooming in Scotland and the remit of any inquiry. That is why we believe that the review is required and we will support the Scottish Government in that work. However, we believe that it is likely that the review will lead to an inquiry.

It is helpful that that has been put on the record.

On the provisions on the law of retention, I note that proposed new section 21A(4) states that the effects of retention

“must not be clearly disproportionate to the effects of the breach”

of contract. Can you clarify exactly what “clearly disproportionate” means? Why is that going to be included in the bill?

Proposed new section 21D(b) gives courts the power

“to refuse the exercise of … retention where that … would be inequitable.”

Can you explain what is meant by that and what you envisage will be covered by that provision?

Good morning. What is your understanding of the main benefits of the new rules on remedies for breach of contract in part 2?

Obviously, if you want to write to us further on that, that will be very helpful.

I was going to come on to that in my next question, but if you want to deal with those issues as a whole, that is fine.

That would be fine. Your position, then, is that this is a codification of current law. There is no intention to change the law—this simply codifies what is already there.

It is very concerning that the legislation that was passed by the Parliament five years ago to give women and girls extra protection from genital mutilation remains unimplemented. That failure has directly impacted women and girls in Scotland, including the more than 1,200 who have been treated for genital mutilation in Glasgow over the past five years. Will the minister commit to meeting members from all the front benches, to discuss how we can ensure that the legislation’s implementation happens before the parliamentary session ends? Will she also accept that, if that is the timetable, it is completely unacceptable?

I am pleased to open the debate for Scottish Labour and to reaffirm our support for the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence.

For more than 30 years, the 16 days campaign has raised international awareness of gender-based violence and the need for action to tackle it. We commend the work of the campaign and the thousands of organisations, including those in Scotland, that have supported it. This year’s 16 days campaign is welcome, as it highlights the growing threat that online spaces, services and technologies pose in relation to gender-based violence.

Digital violence is now one of the fastest-growing forms of the abuse of women and girls, with digital tools being used by men to engage in harassment and abuse on a daily basis. Digital tools have empowered men and boys to engage in new kinds of abuse and violence, such as revenge porn, deepfakes, catfishing and trolling. I welcome the cabinet secretary’s proposal on deepfakes and I look forward to considering it in detail. Digital violence also negatively impacts the mental health and wellbeing of women and girls. It often leads to offline forms of abuse and violence, including femicide.

The level of digital violence that is experienced and witnessed by women and girls in Scotland is particularly shocking. More than a third of women in Scotland have witnessed online violence and more than one in six have experienced it. Online violence is an even greater problem among younger women in Scotland, with nearly 30 per cent of 16 to 24-year-olds having experienced it. Six in 10 of the women who have experienced online violence also reported enduring negative impacts on their mental health and wellbeing.

Women and girls across Scotland lack confidence in the Scottish Government and Police Scotland to tackle online violence. More than three quarters of women who reported online violence were not satisfied with the outcome, and more than 60 per cent of women believe that the police lack the necessary resources to tackle online violence. Women and girls in Scotland are more likely to seek support from friends than from the police when they experience online violence, and less than 15 per cent of women have confidence that the Scottish Government is doing all that it can to tackle online violence.

Earlier in this parliamentary session, I was pleased to lead, alongside Pauline McNeill MSP, Scottish Labour’s consultation on ending violence against women and girls. Respondents to our consultation made it clear that there must be better controls available on online platforms and that social media companies should be legally accountable for online violence that occurs on their platforms. Although the Online Safety Act 2023 and Ofcom’s new guidelines on improving online safety for women and girls are welcome, there is clearly much more that can be done, such as exploring the introduction of legal requirements for social media companies. Respondents also highlighted the need for Police Scotland to be better resourced and for specific offences to be created in relation to cyberflashing and the creation of intimate images.

Although the Scottish Government’s motion focuses on digital violence, we must also recognise that the issue affects women and girls in all areas of life, including in public spaces such as schools and workplaces. I commend trade unions such as Unite, Unison, the Educational Institute of Scotland, the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, the Transport Salaried Staffs Association, the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers and many others that have published reports in recent years outlining the growing scale of the problem.

The NASUWT found that nearly half of female teachers in Scotland have experienced physical abuse or violence from pupils in the past year. The public sector trade union Unison has exposed the shocking rates of violence faced by workers across the public sector. Unite, the RMT and the TSSA have highlighted the increase in violence and sexual attacks on our trains and buses, particularly against female members of staff. The transport unions are calling for a specific offence of assaulting a public sector transport worker, similar to the one that we created for retail workers. Sexual harassment is endemic in Scotland’s workplaces, with nearly 10 per cent of women workers having experienced work-related sexual assault.

However, despite the alarming scale of violence across Scotland, we must accept that Government efforts have been largely ineffective in tackling the issue. Just a third of Scotland’s schools are signed up to the equally safe programme. Less than half of the rape and attempted rape cases that make it to court result in a conviction. Domestic abuse and sexual crimes are reportedly on the rise. Cuts have been made to funding for Rape Crisis and other support services for women and girls who experience violence. In my region, there are campaigns for closed-circuit television to be installed in parks after rape and sexual assaults have taken place. Our train network has fewer staff and reduced ticket office opening hours. As Tess White said, the Scottish Government also abandoned its misogyny bill.

There are clear actions that the Scottish Government could take now that would help to tackle violence against women and girls. For example, we must introduce a cross-campus strategy in all our schools to address sexism, misogyny and the growing influence of far-right social media on the behaviour of young men and boys in schools and other educational institutions across Scotland.

I welcome today’s debate, but I hope that, in the coming budget, ministers will provide sustainable funding for support services for women and girls, including funding for an expansion of the pilot of independent legal representation for rape victims and reliable funding for Rape Crisis and Scottish Women’s Aid.

Scottish Labour will support the Scottish Government’s motion due to our shared commitment to tackling violence against women and girls, but we are clear that more can and must be done, and we will work across the chamber to achieve that.

The only new designations that would automatically take place as a result of the bill would be those under section 3, on publicly owned companies. People can already make FOI requests about those companies, but any requests would have to be made to the public body that owned the company in question. We hope that there will be savings, because it will no longer be necessary to go to the parent body, which would otherwise have to retrieve the information from the publicly owned body and then provide it to the member of the public or whoever made the FOI request. In drafting the financial memorandum, we looked at those organisations. We costed in that there may be a cost for the publicly owned body, but we hope that that cost would be transferred from the organisation that owns it.

The evidence that the committee has heard and, indeed, the evidence that was put before me is that there is a very wide range of views and evidence on the cost of an FOI request. The amount that different organisations spend varies tremendously. Sometimes, the cost is said to be related to the efficiency of the organisation’s systems and the amount of resource that it decides to put into FOI compliance.

The policy intention behind the bill is to reduce cost, and we hope that that will happen through standardisation and the codes of practice. However, we recognise that when there is a designation of a new body—it could be a very large body—there will be costs for that body, and we have outlined those in the financial memorandum.

In general, those costs will not be borne directly by the Scottish Government; they will be borne by the new body. That body might be a multinational company, a third sector organisation or a charity. It could also be a private body—for example, it could be a privately owned care home, if the Parliament decided to go down that path. However, all those matters will be looked at by the Parliament when the Scottish ministers come forward with a recommendation for a designation or, indeed, if the Parliament decides to use the designation mechanism that is proposed in the bill.