Chamber and committees

I very much hope that the Parliament will look sympathetically on the motion.

It is a pleasure to make this closing speech on behalf of the Scottish Labour Party and associate myself with the solidarity with women and girls around the world that the First Minister and other members have expressed.

This is a day to celebrate the achievements of women against the backdrop of centuries of oppression. It is a day for sisterhood. I welcome the speeches from women MSPs who have spoken of the systematic discrimination against women in Scotland and throughout the world. I also welcome the speeches from men who spoke of the actions that men must take.

My colleague Pam Duncan-Glancy highlighted the specific challenges for disabled women. Kaukab Stewart, Foysol Choudhury and Pam Gosal spoke of the challenges that women from black and ethnic minority backgrounds face. Ruth Maguire and Gillian Martin spoke eloquently of the horrific situation of women in Ukraine, Afghanistan, Yemen and many other countries. Rona Mackay and Christine Grahame spoke of the struggles and strength of women in working-class communities over many generations and confirmed again that education will be the liberation for women.

International women’s day was created by working-class women fighting for their rights. In 1908, women in the needle trades demonstrated in New York to form their own trade union for better pay, shorter working hours and the right to vote. The fights of women in the United States reached Europe and inspired socialist women, such as Clara Zetkin, who suggested the creation of an international day for women. In 1975, the United Nations made that an official day, and this year’s theme, #BreakTheBias, asks us to imagine a world free of bias, stereotypes and discrimination.

This Parliament has a good record when it comes to improving women’s representation in Scotland, although, as we all know, there is still a long way to go. More women have been elected to this Parliament since 1999 than have been elected to Westminster since 1918. Forty five per cent of members of the Scottish Parliament are women, which of course means that women are still underrepresented in this chamber. Even more needs to be done at council level, for example.

We have heard from members of all political parties, who talked about many aspects of women’s lives. We heard about women’s health and women’s achievements in sport and many other fields.

There were many expressions of solidarity with women in Ukraine. Of course, it is women who bear the brunt of violence, including sexual violence, in war. It is right that we also express solidarity with the people in Russia who are protesting against the war, many thousands of whom have been arrested—even children have been arrested.

The challenges for women are challenges for humanity. We have to recognise that the position of women in the UK has worsened, due to the pandemic. The World Economic Forum says that the time that is needed to close the global gender gap has increased from 99.5 years to 135.6 years, due to the pandemic. It is not necessarily the case that the position of women and girls in society continues to get better. What we heard about Afghanistan reinforces that.

Austerity, too, has had a disproportionate impact on women. I ask politicians in all political parties to think about that when they make the political decisions that have an impact on communities.

We know that there is a growing rape culture in schools and that new technology has created a new range of pressures on girls and young women. In Scotland, 40 per cent of the sexual crimes that are recorded by the police relate to a victim who is under 18 years old. The Labour Party has strongly welcomed the report from Helena Kennedy and the proposal that misogyny be made an aggravating factor in criminal cases.

I am a member of the Criminal Justice Committee of the Scottish Parliament, which has heard repeatedly from victims about the retraumatising effect on women of going through the criminal justice system in cases of rape, attempted rape and other forms of sexual violence. We look forward to the recommendations in Lady Dorrian’s report being implemented during this parliamentary session.

International women’s day was created as a day on which to fight for women’s rights. It has changed over the years, with a far greater range of organisations involved and a far greater range of events taking place. The fact that a whole afternoon is dedicated to this debate, with speeches from members of all political parties, demonstrates that change.

Fundamentally, this is a day on which to celebrate the struggles of women and the fight of women and girls against the challenges and discrimination that we face. It is a day on which we can refocus ourselves, not just on the massive challenges that women and girls face but, more important, on what we all need to do as we fight collectively to ensure that historical oppressions become a matter for history, so that we go forward, united as sisters, with the rights that mean that such oppression is discussed in history classes but does not need to be discussed weekly in chambers such as this one.

Has the cabinet secretary been provided with a breakdown of the kind of offences that those who are involved have been convicted of? For example, does he know how many sexual offenders are involved in the cases, and has he been advised of the potential implications of the errors in those cases?

It sounds as though the work will be resource intensive at a time when the legal system is already under massive pressure. What information has the cabinet secretary been provided with by the various agencies about the work that will likely be involved?

I want to raise a point about the level of income, which has been put to us by the Law Society of Scotland, and I would like to hear your reaction. The Law Society is saying that, even taking into account the recent uplifts and the increase that will be introduced by the regulations, legal aid rates will be about 60 per cent lower in real terms than they were when the Scottish Parliament was created. It is quite obvious that hourly rates have not gone up by much. The Law Society of Scotland is saying that that is in the context of a long-term decline in overall legal aid expenditure, with the 2021-22 budget being £138 million, in comparison with £160 million in 2010-11. Do you accept all that?

It is clear that we have a crisis. The word “bottleneck” has already been used. When we heard from the Scottish Prison Service last week, it put the proportion of prisoners on remand at 30 per cent, which is higher than the previous figure that we were given—the most recent official figure—of 27 per cent. It is clear that we must address the problem. What are the alternatives? In what ways could we change the system to address the crisis? Does Vicki Bell have any suggestions, based on her experience?

Approximately £500 million was cut from the legal aid budgets up until 2019. Since 2019, there have been increases. The 5 per cent increase that has been proposed in the Scottish statutory instrument before us is obviously below current inflation rates. Do you accept that it is, in effect, a cut?

But the rates that lawyers are receiving are broadly similar to those that they were receiving in 2007, although there have been increases since 2019. Do you think that explains why so many lawyers are now saying that they will no longer do legal aid work?

Thank you.

We have written to the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, asking for information about the extent to which virtual trials and other forms of criminal procedure have taken place during the pandemic. As you know, the bill proposes that, in summary cases—many thousands of cases every year—the default should be virtual. I appreciate that you will not have numbers, but, so that we can take an evidence-based approach in our decision making, will you indicate how many virtual cases you think have taken place or, anecdotally, what percentage of defence agents’ casework would have been virtual during the pandemic; whether you are aware of any evidence as to what happened during those cases, including outcomes—whether the verdict was guilty, not guilty or not proven; and what kind of charges and sentences were involved in those cases? I appreciate that you will not have researched those issues, but can you give us a feel for the level to which virtual trials have been taking place in summary cases—perhaps in different sheriffdoms—or in relation to specific types of charge?

I do not know whether Vicki Bell has anything to say on that. She said that she had not dealt with any such cases—which, in itself, is of great interest.

I ask Stuart Murray to come in on those issues.