One key solution to the housing crisis is to empower councils to purchase homes to create more social housing. A report last year found that Fife Council had purchased only four homes in the Dunfermline area and that the council’s buy-back scheme was underspent by £3.5 million. What more can the Scottish Government do to ensure that councils buy up more housing stock to create more affordable homes for their areas?

As a member of the Social Justice and Social Security Committee, I am pleased to speak about the findings of our inquiry into financial considerations when leaving an abusive relationship. The committee’s report highlights the serious challenges that are faced by domestic abuse victims and how basic financial protections are still missing for many of those individuals. The most recent statistics show that more than 63,000 domestic abuse incidents took place in Scotland in 2023-24: that is one incident every eight minutes.

The committee report confirms that, unfortunately, financial instability is one of the most common reasons why victims stay with their abuser. Many stakeholders were clear that victims who attempt to leave an abusive relationship often face unaffordable housing and rising living costs. Evidence has shown that that is particularly the case for older victims and those with a disability. Age Scotland highlighted that long waiting lists for properties can act as a significant barrier to those individuals. If new care arrangements are also required, the situation becomes even more difficult.

Among the issues in the committee’s report is access to advice and information. Too often, victims are not aware of where to turn when fleeing an abusive relationship. The Glasgow violence against women partnership revealed that a victim would contact, on average, up to 11 services before they get the information that they require.

Local authorities have an important role to play in helping domestic abuse victims. The committee report recommends that the Scottish Government work with COSLA to create a single point of contact within each council area where victims can seek support and advice. It also recommended that the Government work with COSLA to improve the consistency of financial support across different council areas. I hope that the Government will look at those recommendations closely.

We also heard evidence that, in single-sex relationships, it is often the main earner who is the victim of abuse. That challenges the common narrative that financial control always aligns with financial power. It is important that the equally safe framework is able to reflect the needs and circumstances of different victims, including those with protected characteristics.

The Scottish Government must play a role in providing victims with the funding that they need to leave an abusive relationship. In respect of that, the fund to leave pilot scheme is very much welcome. That funding plays a vital part in easing the financial burdens that many victims have to deal with when they leave. The recently announced additional £500,000 for the fund is also welcome. However, the Government must now confirm whether it intends to make the scheme permanent, as the committee’s report calls for.

The committee’s recommendations should be looked at in the light of the urgent need to stamp out domestic abuse altogether. Those of us who are committed to that want to see progress.

Where appropriate, offenders should also have the chance to undertake rehabilitation, in order to lower the number of repeat offenders. In Scotland, reoffending rates remain stubbornly high.

We must also help young people to understand the dangers of domestic abuse and to recognise when a relationship is becoming abusive.

With regard to those issues, I note that the Prevention of Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill, which was introduced by my colleague Pam Gosal, is currently being scrutinised by the Criminal Justice Committee. I urge the Scottish Government to support the bill’s important proposals on those issues when the time comes.

Domestic abuse victims deserve and need proper support from the Scottish Government. Those individuals should not have to suffer for a single day longer than is necessary. We hope that the Scottish Government will take the findings of the report seriously and implement some or all of those common-sense proposals to support victims of domestic abuse wherever possible. That is the least that we can do as a Parliament to support them as they progress through a difficult time.

Good morning. This follows on from talking about the commissioner. If a commissioner is required, what are the witnesses’ thoughts on the general functions of the commissioner? The commissioner will have a variety of duties to perform, one of which is

“to promote the wellbeing of future generations by promoting sustainable development by public bodies in all aspects of their decisions, policies and actions.”

It would be good to get a view on whether, if there is a commissioner, it would be achievable and sustainable to ensure that all public bodies do that.

Frances Guy, do you have any views on that?

There will be real challenges for the commissioner in ensuring that public bodies have the ability to deliver what is expected of them. If they are expected to ensure that all their actions, policies and decisions incorporate what is proposed in the bill, that will end up creating challenges for each public body.

What challenges might public bodies face in trying to achieve that goal? They might not be doing exactly what they want to do, but they will be forced into it if a commissioner is in place to ensure compliance. Are there any views on how that might play out if the commissioner is in place?

Council leaders and Unison have said that efficiencies have already been achieved and we are well aware that that is the case among all councils. However, they are suggesting that that has had a knock-on effect. Back-room services have been decreased, which puts an added increased pressure on to front-line services, and that has a knock-on effect on workload and the timescales that staff are having to endure. That in turn has a knock-on effect on retention and the ability to ensure that you have the right people at the right place doing the services and improving all that for you.

It would be good to get a flavour of what you think of that view. Are there concerns that efficiencies have been made but that you are now getting to the stage where there is not much left to go and there is a knock-on effect when it comes to staffing, recruitment and retention and the ability of your workforce to fulfil and manage their roles effectively under the current climate of budget reform and transformation?

Cabinet secretary, you have said that transformation is already happening and that councils are doing that, supporting it in their choices and attempting to provide better services for the communities that they represent. However, we still hear from the public at large that they believe that they are paying more and getting less from council services.

You touched on the invest to save fund and the reform programme, and said that you want that fund to “oil the wheels”. What engagement has the Scottish Government had with local authorities about the projects? The Government ring fenced £6 million for local government to support that, but does that result in genuine public sector reform? We had a discussion with the previous panel about the fact that councils need to have oven-ready policies or things that are ready to go, but the timescale is tight, so they do not always manage to get funds unless their plans are well advanced. How has the Scottish Government engaged and how does local government support that? Will that approach result in genuine public sector reform?

Good.

Council leaders and Unison have talked about their concerns that efficiencies have already been achieved across local government and that backroom reductions can lead to increased pressure on front-line staffing. That has an implication for workforce. What is your view of that? Many people said that backroom functions could be adapted, but people are now saying that the effect on backroom functions is having an impact on front-line services.

Thank you for your answers so far. There is no doubt that the transformation agenda has had a massive impact. This morning, you have identified how that impacts on choice and outcomes, and how it leads to better services. However, that is not the public’s perception. The public’s perception is still that they seem to be paying more and getting less. There is therefore an imbalance there.

I would like to ask about the invest to save fund and about the engagement that local authorities have had with the Scottish Government on the projects that were awarded some of that money. The Scottish Government chose to ring fence £6 million for local government, and it would be good to get a view from you as to how that fund supports genuine public sector reform. Who would like to take that first?

Could aligning the definition to include

“individuals, families and other groups within society”

place constraints on the definition?