Chamber and committees

Until 2015, I was a member of the UK Parliament and a member of the select committee that took evidence in that year. However, like many other MPs, I was aware of the serious concerns that had been raised about the Horizon convictions prior to then. Does the Lord Advocate not accept that it was clear from at least 2013 that it was unsafe to prosecute those cases and that any convictions were unreliable? Has the Lord Advocate given thought to why the Crown Office wished to accept what the Post Office said and to prosecute so many people who had always been law abiding, when there was so much concern that there had been miscarriages of justice?

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s statement and the approach that she has taken in trying to consult other political parties. Scottish Labour has been concerned about the steep rise in prison populations for some time now. Can the cabinet secretary advise how many prisoners the Government plans to release early and what advice is she receiving on that? Can she guarantee that no violent offenders will be released? Can she also advise what other measures are being considered?

In particular, the cabinet secretary will be aware that Scottish Labour has been calling for the modernisation of electronic monitoring systems, including the use of general packet radio service systems. Can she advise what work is being undertaken to progress better electronic monitoring systems and, indeed, to ensure that there is full compliance when those systems are ordered, given that that has, as we know, been an issue in the past?

Does the First Minister accept that it is now too late to go to tender, which means that, irrespective of the outcome of the due diligence process, it will be necessary for CalMac to continue to provide the service after September, and that it is therefore only fair to let CalMac know that as soon as possible?

The delivery plan refers to the modernisation of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service but not to the state of the fire estate, although a national review of the service has been published. Nearly half of the fire estate has been assessed as being in either bad condition or poor condition. What priority is the Scottish Government giving to the lack of adequate decontamination facilities available to many firefighters, given the serious medical consequences of contact with toxins?

Some of the witnesses on the previous panel were supportive of a completely independent complaints process, which they referred to as the gold standard. There have been concerns about the resource implications of such an approach in the past, but one witness on the previous panel made the point that the same resource issues exist with the current PIRC system. What is your response to the proposal for an independent complaints process, which operates in several other countries? We will start with Chief Superintendent Hay.

I would like to hear from Unison, if that would be okay with the convener.

Unison organises civilian staff rather than officers, although, increasingly, your members undertake many roles that would previously have been undertaken by police officers. How do you think that the issue relates to Unison? How does your complaints process operate? Would it be appropriate for civilian staff to be covered by an independent complaints process?

Could I go to David Kennedy to get the federation’s perspective? Would you have any concerns?

If we can put the resource issue to one side, would you have a problem with such an approach? It is not a question of whether a case has been made in relation to the police; independent complaints processes are being considered across a range of institutions. Is there any reason why we should not go down that path if the resource implications were equivalent?

Will the minister provide a timetable for when a rent control system will be in operation, given that the system that was recently introduced by the now-departed Minister for Zero Carbon Buildings, Active Travel and Tenants’ Rights introduced a complicated system of transitional measures? Does the minister envisage that those measures will be in operation until there are rent controls?

I am pleased to close the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour.

We congratulate the petitioner, Nicola Murray, on bringing the issue to the Scottish Parliament and on her courage in sharing her personal experiences, and we welcome the opportunity to consider whether the law in the area is adequate. We know that, historically, the justice system has treated victims of domestic abuse very poorly and, indeed, that it has often not treated domestic abuse as a crime. We must all recognise that, although there has been significant progress over recent decades, there is still a long way to go.

As Pauline McNeill, Fulton MacGregor, Foysol Choudhury and others have said, pregnancy loss is not an uncommon feature of domestic abuse. Pregnant women, in particular, are often a target of male partners, and there is often a rise in violence against women during pregnancy. As Pauline McNeill said, pregnancy can alter the pattern of assault, with pregnant women more likely to be struck on the abdomen.

We recognise that Scots law has always allowed the facts of a case and the injury as part of an assault to be narrated by the Crown and that the Scots legal system has always had a far more flexible approach than there has been in England and Wales. As the cabinet secretary said, there is already provision in Scots law for pregnancy loss and the intense distress that it can cause, which could be lifelong, to be taken into account in sentencing. It would be very helpful to get more detail from the Scottish Government—either from the cabinet secretary in her summing up or after the debate—as to whether the sentences that courts are giving in such situations are adequate.