Chamber and committees

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to improve pay in the college sector. (S6O-05349)

That is helpful. We will look at the example of East Dunbartonshire, because, as you know, violence in schools is a big issue in that area in particular.

The committee heard evidence that the provisions in part 4 that relate to the ability to remove a child from any domestic abuse education, might not be compliant with international obligations and the UNCRC. Was that raised with you at any point? Was it considered when you drafted the bill? Having gone through the member’s bill process, I know that such matters are often looked at. Will you respond to the suggestion that the provision might not be compliant?

When we took evidence, one issue that was raised was how domestic abuse programmes and education could potentially be very traumatic, particularly for children who have directly experienced domestic abuse. Did you consider that in the work that you did?

I am sorry to interject, but do you have any examples of good practice? Have you been to a school where you have seen good practice, or do you have evidence from the consultations that you have done, whereby people have identified work that has been done in a particular school as a really good programme that they think had an impact? From the work that you have done, is there anything to which you can point us to give us an idea of what you are saying should happen in every school?

I understand what you are saying, and I understand your frustration.

The bill includes provisions on a lot of different issues, and I am not sure how much time you have been able to devote to part 4. You have said that there is a postcode lottery. Are there any examples of good practice that you can point to that you would like to be rolled out throughout the country? Have you had the time to look at examples of good practice, given that there is so much in the bill?

I want to ask about how we deal with these issues in schools. You will have heard what the Scottish Government said when the Minister for Victims and Community Safety gave evidence to the committee. She took the view that putting the matter in statute would not be in line with the current discretionary and non-prescriptive approach to the delivery of learning and teaching.

Why do you think that there should be something in statute in relation to education on domestic abuse? Do you think that it might be helpful if the bill’s provisions were broadened out? We know that a significant problem exists with sexism and misogyny, including in school settings. Do you think that the provisions should be wider than domestic abuse and that that part of the bill should be about ensuring that, in the curriculum, we deal more widely with sexism and misogyny, including domestic violence and violence against women and girls?

There are two parts to my question. First, I would like your justification as to why you think that education on domestic abuse should be statutory. Secondly, I would like to know whether you have given any consideration to the provisions potentially being broadened out.

That would be very helpful.

Violence, sexism and misogyny are on the rise in schools across the United Kingdom, which is why the UK Government announced plans for specialist training courses, including on issues such as consent, for teachers and pupils who are classified as high risk. Will the Scottish Government work with key stakeholders such as Police Scotland and the education sector unions to introduce a cross-campus strategy to tackle violence, sexism and misogyny in our schools, including looking at the specialist training approach that the UK Government has set out?

I am aware of the very recent increases, but, as the minister is aware, the problem is the significant cuts that have been made over many, many years. The 10 per cent rise in fees in 2023 effectively meant little in the face of cumulative inflation of 16 per cent at that time. I accept that the situation has improved in some ways in that there have begun to be increases in legal aid rates, but that is against a backdrop of many years of cuts. I am sure that the minister accepts that point.

If the minister has worked to fight for more funding and to ensure that there has been at least some increase, I welcome that, given that, in the past, there were many times when rates were frozen and there was no increase.

Does the minister want to make another intervention?

There is also concern about the fact that few younger solicitors are doing legal aid work. Currently, twice the number of solicitors registered for legal aid are aged 40 and over, compared with those who are 40 and under. Historically, it was disproportionately the case that younger solicitors carried out legal aid work. Many of the solicitors who undertake legal aid work are likely to retire in the next few years.

In its report, the committee has highlighted that many stakeholders believe that it is the low rates of fees for legal aid work that have contributed to the growing shortage of solicitors. There is no sign that that trend is changing, despite the minister pointing out that there has been at least some increase in rates in recent years, as opposed to the previous freezing of rates. That is why Scottish Labour welcomes the review that the Scottish Government has undertaken. However, it believes that it is too little, too late, and that we could have avoided the recruitment and retention challenges that we currently face.

I welcome the fact that we are having this debate today. We are very disappointed that more action has not been taken in this parliamentary session. We believe that the situation is getting worse and that action is now needed urgently.