Chamber and committees

I have another question for Lynsey Smith. In your contribution, you said that your view was that the status quo could not continue. Our understanding of how the national care service will work is that, unlike the national health service, it will not actually provide a service or employ any staff. A lot of us who campaigned for a national care service were campaigning for a body that would provide a service, which would employ staff directly and provide a high quality of service. Our understanding of how the national care service will work is that it will commission services and, effectively, put out tenders.

I will ask COSLA about this in a minute, but I have been told by people in local government that it is unlikely that many councils will participate in the process, because of their own financial situations. When you say that the status quo cannot continue, what are your reasons for saying that? Is the top reason the funding?

I have a question about body-worn cameras for the police. Police Scotland has told us that funding would ensure only 500 body-worn cameras, that specialist police arms officers in Scotland would have them and that a flat rate settlement would inhibit their roll-out.

As the cabinet secretary knows, in England and Wales, police officers already have that kit—and, indeed, are moving on to the second generation. Will you outline where you are on that issue, what discussions are taking place and whether you are looking at something beyond 500 and ensuring that the whole force is equipped?

I have a brief question on the capital budgets and the modernisation of the prison service. We have heard some evidence that, to put it crudely, newer prisons are cheaper than older prisons. Have you considered that? Is there a business case for capital investment in that it will help budgets in the future?

But is that the top problem at the moment—a lack of funding or resource?

It has come through clearly from all the witnesses that you feel that there is a lack of detail in the proposals. Obviously, the bill is an enabling piece of legislation, so there is not a huge amount of detail in it in general, but it gives ministers significant powers to create a new way of providing a service. It has been said that the inclusion of the sectors that we are discussing is overreach, given that they were not included in the Feeley report. Do you agree with that assessment?

Reflecting on the comments made by other witnesses, what does Unison feel are the major problems in this sector at the moment?

I congratulate Pam Gosal on securing the debate and all who have contributed to it. The purpose of the debate is to recognise and bring focus to the international day for the elimination of violence against women and girls, which takes place on Friday, and to the following 16 days of activism, which run until 10 December, which is human rights day.

As has been said a number of times, the World Health Organization estimates that, globally, almost one in three women are subjected to partner violence. It is perhaps more shocking that the statistic is similar for Scotland: one in three women and girls in Scotland experience the threat and the reality of physical violence. Those are statistics, but they are about real people and real women.

However, many of those victims are hidden. I will speak about one of those women, who has already been referred to by Beatrice Wishart: Adrienne McCartney, whose experience was recounted in an article on 3 October 2021 in the Sunday Post by Marion Scott. On that occasion, Adrienne McCartney spoke in her own words about a series of failures by the police and the prosecution service that she said had shattered her trust in Scotland’s justice system. She described an on-going campaign of abuse and harassment from her estranged husband, and she claimed that officers had dismissed her fears for her family’s safety. Eventually, her husband was charged and received a £450 fine and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service apologised for errors.

More shockingly, however, Adrienne is no longer with us. She was found dead as a result of taking drugs that she had initially been prescribed—powerful painkillers that she was taking as a result of injuries to her arm, which her husband had caused in a violent outburst—and alcohol. Her family are of the clear view that her death was a direct result of her treatment by the police and prosecution services. Unfortunately, Adrienne was only one of many women who can recount similar experiences. Members of this Parliament have to reflect on the fact that, despite all our debates, we continue to fail women and girls in Scotland.

Last week, an inquest in England found that the police had made errors that contributed to the deaths of Raneen Oudeh, aged 22, and her mother, Khaola Saleem, aged 49, in Solihull in 2018. Many of us will have heard Raneen Oudeh’s call to the police asking for help, as it was widely circulated in the media.

I congratulate everybody who contributed to the debate today, but we all have to reflect that, despite these debates, the threat that we face is probably getting greater. Both Martin Whitfield and Pauline McNeill have spoken about the experiences of girls and young women. Over the coming period, and particularly during these 16 days of action, we need to reflect on what we can do to ensure that we truly take the action that is required to eliminate violence against women and girls in this country and, indeed, worldwide.

It is estimated that 432 people own 50 per cent of the privately held land in Scotland. In 2021, a record £447 million was invested in the purchase of private Scottish estates, which was a 333 per cent increase from 2018. Given that financial backdrop, does the Government accept that it is now essential that we introduce a land value tax as a matter of urgency?

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the finance ministers have had with ministerial colleagues regarding any plans to investigate the feasibility of a land value tax. (S6O-01586)

Does the minister accept that the model for the higher education sector in Scotland is, as I outlined, one of endemic low pay, poor conditions, excessive executive remuneration, casualised contracts and marketisation? Does he accept that it is the Scottish Government’s responsibility to ensure that the model is acceptable to the people of Scotland? Will he look at fair work and at how employment practices can be improved in the sector?