Chamber and committees

Once again, it is important to note that I am simply introducing the bill today. People will have opportunities for input. If you feel that what I am proposing should be delivered in a different way or that the bill should be amended, I am quite open to using the expertise of the committee, and I am open to listening to what everybody says.

I will pass over to Agata Maslowska to deal with the cost issue.

In relation to rehabilitation, as many members already know, the Scottish Government was meant to roll out the Caledonian system to 32 local authorities. It is 2025, but that has been rolled out to only 21 local authorities, which is not pleasing. On top of that, different systems are being used out there, so not all local authorities will be using the Caledonian system.

However, on the resource side, the Government has pledged that it will roll out that system, so I do not think that there will be what I would call additional need, because that system is already being rolled out. My bill would put in statute a provision that would ensure that that happens.

My bill covers three areas. It deals with what happens when someone is convicted. Mandatory assessment is important in determining whether rehabilitation would be suitable for someone who has been convicted of domestic abuse, which is not the case at the moment. That requirement would apply when someone is convicted, when they are in prison and when they leave prison, when the Parole Board would have to obtain an assessment. At each point that rehabilitation could be provided, my bill would help people by making sure that we have that programme in place.

I have been in this Parliament for four years, and I know how much members talk about helping people rather than punishing them. I think that my bill goes the extra mile to help people by providing not only for education but for the collection of data, rehabilitation and a notification system that would protect victims from serious offenders.

I will hand over to my colleague Charlie Pound to answer your technical question.

I have to disagree with you there. When bringing forward legislation, whether it is a member’s bill or a Scottish Government bill, if we were to pack up and say, “Hold on—this legislation is not right,” we would never bring forward any legislation at all. Right now, there is a big, deep increase in domestic abuse, and we need to do more to tackle that.

I listened to survivors and to organisations before introducing my bill. I take the issue of domestic abuse very seriously, which is why I brought the bill to Parliament—I believe that it is needed. We should not think, “Hold on—there was poor legislation in 2021.” If anything, that should make us see that we should pass good legislation, such as my bill, that will actually make a difference in protecting people.

I do not think for one minute that we should step back in our role as parliamentarians and think, “Hold on—we’re not going to be putting anything through.” It is up to the Scottish Government to answer the question as to why the 2021 act has not been implemented. I am sure that when I see Siobhian Brown, not long from now, I will ask her that question.

We have been elected, and we are in the Scottish Parliament, to make good legislation—I agree with that. However, we should not be scared to make any legislation that will help, because in Scotland we are absolutely amazing in respect of the historic legislation that we have passed in Parliament. We need to say that we have made good legislation as well. I hope that that helps.

I will bring in Charlie Pound on that technical issue.

My bill sets out a provision for education. With regard to what that education would look like, I have said that it would be about domestic abuse. On how it would be delivered and what it would look like, it will be important, again, that the right sort of consultation is undertaken with the right authorities—the right people and the experts—to ensure that the provision is implemented. The onus is on the Scottish Government to ensure that the provision is taken forward—that is why my bill is there. As I said, I am sure that the Scottish Government will be open to consultation in order to shape what that education will look like.

I will start by saying a bit about the financial side. We are talking about a maximum cost of £23 million, which is only 0.5 per cent of the justice budget. In my opening statement, I mentioned that domestic abuse costs the public sector £7 billion over a three-year average period of abuse. We should also not forget, when we talk about domestic abuse in monetary terms, that we are talking about real people. Even one person going through domestic abuse is one too many, and we know that many have lost their lives. The money will be very well spent.

We talk about a figure of £23 million, but that is the highest amount. As we go through the bill, members will see that there are certain things for which we can look at mitigating costs as we go along. You mentioned the costs around part 1 of the bill, but part 1 is essential and important. I have spoken to many survivors—I have spoken to the organisations, too—and not one survivor said to me, “Pam, we don’t need this so-called notification” or register, as one might call it.

Notification is important because right now, to be honest, if I were not a politician, I certainly would not know anything about any disclosure scheme or anything in that respect. I know about that only because I am a politician and I am doing the work. I will describe a scenario that might play out. If I was a survivor and I was experiencing domestic abuse, I would not know to pick up the phone and to look for a disclosure scheme. I would be domestically abused, and the abuse would carry on. Coming from a BAME background, and having friends from other backgrounds, I know that the abuse continues on and on.

Having a lifeline, and knowing that somebody out there—the authorities, whether it is MAPPA or the police—has a little bit more information than I do, might save my life. The notification provisions in part 1 would require that the information has to be provided by the offender. That has never been done before, as far as I know, in any legislation to do with domestic abuse. The offender would have to go into a police station or to a member of police staff to give the information that their circumstances have changed. That could save somebody’s life. I believe, therefore, not only that the bill is a lifeline, but that the notification scheme would give victims a feeling that there is extra safeguarding, and that there is somebody else out there looking out for them so that they will be notified.

Last but not least, the bill could be a deterrent. Who wants to be on a so-called notification database or register? We know that it could act as a deterrent, in a similar way to the sex offenders register.

I have got all that information from my consultations. I went out to do personal, informal consultations: one in 2024, and then the main consultation; the committee has that information in front of them.

I did not take the decision to introduce the bill at all lightly, convener. I hope that I have answered your questions.

That is a good question. I mentioned in my opening statement and in my answer to the convener what happens with the disclosure scheme. It is a good scheme, and my bill would work closely with it and with MAPPA. However, I have spoken to survivors, and I am aware that people who have been domestically abused but do not know about the scheme will not know that they can contact the police in that regard.

Although the police have some—I stress “some”—names of certain sex offenders and more serious offenders, my bill will bring out more extensive knowledge on people who will have to give that information, which the police will hold. That will better protect victims, because, at the moment, they do not know that they can contact anybody. We are making sure that the police contact them, based on the limited information and knowledge that they have. I mentioned earlier that 3,000 offenders would be added to MAPPA. That information will enable the police to act fast. We can save lives out there.

I have been speaking to survivors, and the disclosure scheme has been letting them down. Although, as I said, I respect it and believe that it works, we need that extra layer of protection. Knowledge is key to saving somebody’s life. That is why part 1 of the bill, on notifications, is important. We just cannot let people think that they can rely on saying, “Somebody is going to save my life if I have been domestically abused.” We need more information and more knowledge out there, because the statistics are very high right now.

Charlie Pound might want to add to that.

I know that you are very passionate about this issue, Mr Macpherson. There is also one organisation in the BAME community that we have spoken about, and I know that you know the subject well.

You have said that 2022 to 2025 is a long time, but we are talking about the parliamentary process around bills. I have to thank the non-Government bills unit, which did a lot of work very quickly on this. It was important to me that, at every point between 2022 and 2025, I gave organisations and survivors opportunities to contribute.

Around twice a week, I get a phone call in my office from somebody asking me for help, and I pass them to the correct authorities or charities. People think that I am going to be a lifeline for them, and I hope that I am.

You are absolutely right that the committee is here to scrutinise legislation, and I am here so that you can do so. I am quite open minded today and I will take away all the feedback from committee members. I will also look at what else we can add to the bill when we get to the later stages.

You asked about the kind of engagement that I have carried out. I have done quite a lot, and I had a chance to meet—

I will start on that, then pass over to Charlie Pound, who can cover the technical points.

I saw a lot of domestic abuse around me when I was growing up—not in my family, but among other friends and relatives. I have spoken to organisations and survivors, and Dr Marsha Scott from Scottish Women’s Aid—I think it was her; I will correct the record if I am wrong—asked me what happens with the women who have to retaliate to protect themselves and end up being subject to the notification or inclusion on the so-called register. That was also mentioned to me by somebody else.

When I was drafting the bill, I had to consider that and ensure that serious offenders and re-offenders were covered. The bill must take into account the issue of women—I use the word “women” but also put it on the record that the bill covers men and women, male and female—who are in the situation that was described to me. I listened to organisations and made sure that the bill was changed. It started off quite wide, because it was important that everything was in it, but I made sure that I listened to the experts, which is why the focus was narrowed.

That is what I was going to say—I had a meeting with Angela Constance, and the cabinet secretary—