Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Wednesday, February 1, 2017

Official Report 832KB pdf

---

Female Genital Mutilation

The next item of business is a debate on motion S5M-03761, in the name of Angela Constance, Cabinet Secretary for Communities, Social Security and Equalities, on the prevention and eradication of female genital mutilation and all other forms of so-called honour-based violence. I call Angela Constance to speak to and move the motion—up to 12 minutes, please, cabinet secretary.

15:11  

On behalf of the Scottish Government, I am pleased to open the debate on this important matter.

Today, ahead of the international day of zero tolerance for FGM on Monday 6 February, we collectively have the opportunity to add our voices to those around the world opposing female genital mutilation. That global day, which has been marked by our Parliament for a number of years, provides people all over the world with an opportunity to take a stand against a practice that has no place in society but which, unfortunately, still affects far too many communities across the globe.

Female genital mutilation, as with any form of so-called honour-based violence, is a specific form of gender-based violence and an abuse of human rights. World Health Organisation figures tell us that 200 million women and girls globally are affected by FGM, which is symptomatic of the inequality that women and girls all over the world experience because of their gender. Our equally safe strategy recognises that so-called honour-based violence, regardless of what form it might take, is purely and simply, like all forms of gender-based violence, about power and control. Our strategy embeds that understanding in the law of the land and gives the police and our prosecutors the power to tackle that violence.

Practices such as FGM and forced marriage are manifestations of the gender-based imbalance of power. I am glad that the United Kingdom Government has recognised that by finally supporting, at the end of last year, the private member’s bill brought forward by Dr Eilidh Whiteford MP, which calls for the UK Government to ratify the Istanbul convention. That is an issue that I support and which I highlighted in the chamber at the end of last year when we all marked the 16 days of activism against violence against women and girls. Although the UK Government signed the convention nearly five years ago, it has, as we all know, yet to ratify it.

The convention states that there is a need to address fully violence against women, in all its forms, and to take measures to prevent it, to protect its victims and to prosecute perpetrators. I hope that by supporting Dr Whiteford’s bill, the UK Government is now signalling a momentum for ratification of the convention and that it will work, with the Scottish Government and others, to overcome the last few obstacles and not kick this important issue into the long grass again. As the bill enters its committee stage, I hope that the UK Government seizes the opportunity to take forward this important issue. However, I compliment the UK Government on the good work that it has done with respect to FGM, and I am pleased to say that we will support the amendment in the name of Annie Wells.

Tackling FGM and indeed all other forms of violence against women under the guise of culture or religion—so-called honour-based violence—requires a response that extends protections to those who are at risk and holds those who choose to perpetrate this abuse to account.

Not that long ago, few people had even heard of female genital mutilation or forced marriage. Now we have legislation to protect people from honour-based violence and a national action plan to prevent and eradicate female genital mutilation. The plan, which runs until 2020, sets out an agreed range of actions and associated activities to be taken forward by the Scottish Government and its partners in communities, the third sector and the public sector to prevent and ultimately eradicate FGM. Actions from the plan are being taken forward under the guidance of a multi-agency national implementation group, which will monitor progress over the plan’s lifespan and give a sharp focus to the practical approach that we can take to realise our ambitions on this agenda.

There are no quick fixes to tackle FGM and honour-based violence. It is a complex and often hidden issue, and there is no single solution to end it. With that in mind, our approach to preventing and eradicating the practices has been informed by collaboration with faith leaders and community activists, who are uniquely placed to be at the very heart of work to effect significant social, cultural and attitudinal change. As such, I am also pleased to support Mary Fee’s amendment.

It is crucial that we collaborate with the organisations and agencies across the statutory and third sectors that are working to help us to understand the background to the practices. For example, we recently published “Understanding forced marriage in Scotland”. This research, which was commissioned by the Scottish Government, outlines nine recommendations and it forms part of our on-going work to bring together key agencies to protect those who are affected by forced marriage. I put on the record my thanks to the authors of this in-depth, insightful and very useful research.

Survivors identified the excellent support that they receive from third sector agencies, which provide first-class, trusted support. However, the research also helpfully identifies the barriers to accessing and receiving the right support and intervention at the right time, so we must seek to increase the confidence of those who need assistance and the confidence and capacity of those who need to provide it. We will be working in partnership with the multi-agency forced marriage network, which is facilitated by the Scottish Government, to look at how we take forward the recommendations from the research. That type of collaboration can support our aims, whether on forced marriage, FGM or the wider eradication of violence against women.

As part of a week of activity to mark the international day of zero tolerance for female genital mutilation, I am proud that I will be attending the Kenyan Women in Scotland Association’s national conference here in Edinburgh on Saturday, and I will also be meeting Waverley Care next week. Both organisations are respected for their work in tackling FGM and are key partners in our work to eradicate it. That joined-up approach will help to ensure that what we do—not only to protect those who are at risk of harm but to try to end the practice—is informed by co-operation, conversation and a collective will to bring about change.

I turn briefly to legislation. No doubt many members are aware that FGM has been unlawful in Scotland for over 30 years, with the Prohibition of Female Circumcision Act 1985. The Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation (Scotland) Act 2005 re-enacted the 1985 act and extended protection by making it a criminal offence to have FGM carried out either in Scotland or abroad, by giving extra-territorial powers. The Scottish Government worked collaboratively with the UK Government to close a loophole in the 2005 act and extend the reach of the extra-territorial offences in that act to cover habitual as well as permanent UK residents.

That was achieved by means of a legislative consent motion on the Serious Crime Act 2015. The 2015 act contains a number of provisions relating to FGM that have come into force in England and Wales. We have closely examined each of them, and we have taken a thoughtful and considerate approach to determining the best way forward for Scotland. To ensure that what we choose to do is informed by the best information that we have, the Scottish Government consulted across the statutory and third sectors, as well as among a cross-section of potentially affected communities, to gather their views on the provisions. We are now considering the feedback from that engagement, and we will consider how to take the matter forward in Scotland.

I will briefly address the issue of prosecutions. Understandably, much continues to be made of the fact that, although FGM has been illegal for more than 30 years, there has not been a single prosecution in Scotland nor in any other part of the UK. FGM, by its very nature, is a hidden issue, it may be underreported, and those who are affected may not be able to come forward or indeed share their concerns. That is why our work with communities is so important, in giving people both the understanding and the confidence to discuss, challenge and report the practice.

At the launch of Scotland’s national action plan on 4 February 2016, speakers from the statutory sector and from potentially affected communities all made the point that the law needs to protect those at risk and ensure that those who perpetrate this abuse are held to account. However, they were equally clear that prosecution should be part of an overall response that includes protection for those at risk and the provision of services for those affected.

Let me be clear that, although there have been no prosecutions in Scotland, every referral or child welfare concern that is brought to the police relating to concerns that girls have been at risk of having FGM performed on them has been fully investigated by Police Scotland, and no criminality has been found. Of course, we must remain ever vigilant.

I reiterate the Government’s commitment to preventing and eradicating FGM, so-called honour-based violence and all other forms of violence against women and girls. Our approach has been and continues to be one of working closely with all our partners, to whom I pay tribute here today. It is the commitment of professionals across the third and statutory sectors, who protect those at risk and respond to the damage that FGM causes, that enables many women and girls to live their lives free from harm or to rebuild their lives when harm is identified; it is also the commitment of the many unrecognised individuals working within affected communities who give so freely of their time and talents to raise awareness and to challenge the practice.

The desire, drive and determination to rid our society of violence against women and girls, in whatever forms it may take, must unite the Parliament. Together with our stakeholders, we can all help to end it.

I move,

That the Parliament recognises 6 February as the International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation (FGM); is clear that FGM, along with all other forms of violence perpetrated against women under the guise of gender, culture or religion, so-called honour-based violence, is a violation of the human rights of women and girls; acknowledges that a preventative, supportive and legislative approach is crucial to tackling, preventing and eradicating FGM; recognises that communities and individuals affected by honour-based violence must be at the heart of work to effect significant social, cultural and attitudinal change over the long term, and welcomes the positive engagement and ongoing partnership approach across the police, NHS, education, social services, third sector and community-based organisations, in taking forward the actions from Scotland’s National Action Plan to Prevent and Eradicate FGM.

15:23  

There can be no justification for female genital mutilation, and I welcome the Scottish Government’s efforts at home as well as the UK Government’s efforts abroad to tackle this awful crime.

I take this opportunity, as the cabinet secretary did, to raise awareness of the international day of zero tolerance for FGM, which is next Monday.

FGM, which involves the full or partial removal of young girls’ genitals, has no health benefits and, although it is carried out for a number of reasons, in many cases it is done solely to improve a daughter’s marriage prospects. It stems from a deep-rooted inequality between the sexes and can only be seen as a violation of the rights of women and girls, no matter their cultural background.

The ramifications, both physical and psychological, can be massive. FGM is commonly performed by people with no medical training and without proper consideration for hygiene. Complications can include severe bleeding, problems urinating, cysts, infections and infertility, as well as complications in childbirth and an increased risk of new-born deaths.

In 2015, a survivor of the crime who is now living in Glasgow spoke bravely about her experience to a local newspaper to raise awareness of FGM. Forced to undergo the procedure at the age of four in her home country of Gambia, she spoke of being locked in a house with 50 to 60 girls who were as young as three months old. She described the ordeal as destroying her life by affecting her mental health and her desire to form a relationship with a man; she also described the infections that she regularly picked up.

Worldwide, UNICEF estimates that at least 200 million girls and women have been subjected to the practice of FGM across 30 countries. I am pleased that the UK has been a key player internationally in trying to tackle it. The Department for International Development has allocated £184 million to a number of programmes that are tackling gender violence issues such as FGM, forced marriage and female infanticide. It has allocated £35 million specifically to reduce FGM by 30 per cent in 17 countries across Africa.

As we all know, however, the practice also takes place behind closed doors in homes across the UK. The UK Government estimates that 170,000 women and girls in the UK have undergone the procedure. In Scotland, it is understood that nearly 3,000 girls have been born to mothers who were born in FGM-practising countries.

I commend the work that the Scottish Government has done on the issue. The 2005 act, which updated Scottish legislation, increased the maximum penalty for the crime to 14 years and made it illegal for family members to take girls abroad to carry out the practice. “Scotland’s National Action Plan to Prevent and Eradicate Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) 2016-2020”, which was produced last year, went a long way in forming the preventative educational measures that are needed to raise awareness of FGM. Among those measures were letters and presentations to raise awareness among teachers and healthcare professionals, and the internal guidance produced by Police Scotland for officers who deal with honour-based violence. The Scottish Government also allocates money to a number of programmes and organisations for improving women’s rights as part of its violence against women and girls budget.

I will always support a consensual approach to issues such as FGM and other forms of honour-based violence. It is important that we get this right for every girl who is at risk in Scotland, and that we work together to build on the efforts and initiatives of the past. However, it would be wrong of me not to raise some important points and not to look at what is happening down south and at least bring to the debate initiatives that are taking place in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. In that regard, I welcome the cabinet secretary’s input about the report that the Scottish Government has received and will look into, which I will come on to. Those initiatives include the mandatory reporting by doctors, nurses and education professionals of FGM cases in females aged 18 and under, and FGM protection orders.

In December 2014, the Scottish Refugee Council published its report “Tackling Female Genital Mutilation in Scotland”, which the Scottish Government commissioned and which, as I have referred to, the cabinet secretary is going to review. Among its recommendations were that statutory bodies should report FGM cases and that a strong criminal justice message needed to be sent out.

As we see in the rest of the UK, court protection orders mean that potential victims can be protected, for example by the mandatory surrendering of passports so that families are not able to travel abroad. The UK Government has been actively encouraging all agencies, including local authorities, social workers, police forces and schools, to make use of those orders. The mandatory reporting of FGM cases involving females aged 18 and under by healthcare professionals and teachers has meant that the statistics are now more reliable when it comes to estimating the number affected. Underreporting exists, of course, which is why measures such as anonymity for victims who are at risk of being identified are so important.

It is important that we all question the lack of successful FGM-related prosecutions in Scotland and the rest of the UK since FGM became illegal in 1985—in fact, as we know, there have not been any. However, I welcome the information that all reports of the crime are being fully investigated by Police Scotland, and rightly so.

Comments have been made in the past about families travelling to the UK to have the procedure done due to a perceived leniency here. There is room for us to be tougher on this awful crime.

I end by noting just some of the efforts that are made in Glasgow to tackle FGM and other forms of honour-based violence. Rape Crisis Glasgow’s ruby project, for example, supports victims of sexual violence, including those who have suffered FGM.

I thank the Scottish Government for bringing this vitally important issue to the chamber today and for the renewed focus on tackling FGM. We must work together to build on the efforts of the past to prevent such abuse from occurring in the first place, to support those who fall victim to honour-based violence and to ensure that robust criminal sanctions are in place for those who commit abuse.

I move amendment S5M-03761.1, to insert at end:

“, and recognises the international work of the UK Government, which has allocated £35 million to reduce FGM by 30% in 17 countries across Africa.”

15:30  

I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Communities, Social Security and Equalities for her motion highlighting the important work that is being done to tackle and end female genital mutilation and so-called honour-based violence, and for bringing the motion to the chamber to allow us to debate the issue. Speaking on behalf of Scottish Labour, I am happy to confirm that we will support the Government’s motion and the Conservative amendment. I ask for support for our amendment. It might be small in detail, but it is hugely significant with regard to meeting our shared ambitions.

It is with regret and sadness that I note that we require this debate and that we need to have an international day of zero tolerance for female genital mutilation. I feel regret and sadness knowing that medieval, barbaric and horrific acts of violence and mutilation are still carried out in the 21st century, primarily against young women and children. There will be few countries, if any, in the world that are not affected in some way by female genital mutilation or honour-based violence. Therefore, it is right that the Scottish Parliament helps in the global fight to shine a light on such behaviours and to raise awareness of the dangers of the violence and cruelty that are involved in FGM and honour-based violence, in the hope of eradicating them.

I am sure that members across the chamber felt anger when reading the article entitled “An Agonising Choice” that was published in The Economist last June and which called for a new approach that supports minor forms of FGM. The author tried to argue that allowing minor forms of FGM that cause no long-lasting harm is better than

“being butchered in a back room by a village elder”.

Accepting that proposal would be a backwards step and would send the wrong message—that the abuse and mutilation of a child through FGM is somehow acceptable.

Campaign groups across the UK were right to quickly condemn the article, and The Guardian reported that the article gave ammunition to supporters and practitioners of FGM, who could claim that some in the west were on their side. Scottish Labour—and, I am sure, members across the chamber—will never give those ideas the time of day. Instead, we will continue to stand on the side of the women, girls and families who are affected by FGM, and endeavour to bring an end to this barbarity.

The World Health Organization estimates that more than 125 million women and girls are affected by FGM. The incidence of FGM tends to be concentrated in pockets of the middle east, across central Africa and, increasingly, in south Asia. Inspiration in tackling FGM can be taken from the work of non-governmental organisations in communities across the world. The work of Sponsored Arts for Education—SAFE—Kenya is an illuminating example of that. Female genital mutilation is illegal in Kenya, but is still widely practised in rural areas across the country as a rite of passage. SAFE Kenya has taken a community-based approach to tackling that gender-based violence, with three projects that are aimed at changing the cultural practices that normalise FGM. Before SAFE Kenya started working in the Loita hills in Kenya, the rate of FGM in the region was 98 per cent. After the promotion of an alternative rite of passage, the rate has dropped by 20 per cent.

The practice of FGM and honour-based violence is driven by the deep-rooted unequal power relationship between men and women across the globe. Education is key to tackling FGM and honour-based violence. A grass-roots approach that aims to alter cultural views on FGM might be a slow process, but it is a necessary one and an effective means in the fight to eradicate FGM across the globe.

It is important to teach young boys and men that FGM is an extremely dangerous procedure that is not a religious requirement, a prerequisite for marriage or a rite-of-passage ritual. It is quite simply an unnecessary, barbaric act that violates women’s and girls’ human rights.

It is estimated that 24,000 people living in Scotland were born in FGM-practising countries, and that 12 women in the United Kingdom each year lose their lives to honour killings. All women and girls, in communities the length and breadth of Scotland, must feel safe, respected and equal. It is the duty of this Parliament to make that ambition a priority.

Although we must continue to support the victims of FGM in Scotland, we must also contribute to the global campaign to eradicate the practice of FGM. The United Nations international day of zero tolerance for female genital mutilation is a prime opportunity for the global community to use the power of its collective voice to show its strength in condemning FGM as a barbaric act.

In closing, I repeat our support for both the Government motion and the Conservative amendment. I ask that we recognise the role that faith leaders, who are well respected by their communities, can play in eradicating FGM and honour-based violence. The Scottish Government’s national action plan is an important aspect of its commitment to ending FGM in a generation. I am happy to work with the cabinet secretary and the minister to take that plan forward.

I move amendment S5M-03761.2, to insert after “long term”:

“; further recognises that faith leaders of communities potentially affected by FGM and so-called honour-based violence have a role to play in working to change cultural attitudes”.

We now move to the open contributions. I remind members who wish to speak to make sure that they have pressed their button. I am trying hard not to stare at the people who have not.

I have a wee bit of time in hand to allow for interventions.

15:37  

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in such an important debate, as we look ahead to 6 February as the international day of zero tolerance for female genital mutilation.

FGM is a reprehensible and completely unacceptable, illegal practice that no child should have to suffer. It is easy to condemn, but it is less easy to eradicate. As has been mentioned, according to UNICEF, at least 200 million girls have been subjected to the practice of FGM across 30 countries, although the exact numbers remain unknown.

FGM is found in 28 African countries and in south-east Asia and the middle east. It is also found in Europe and elsewhere among communities originating from those parts of the world. Here, FGM is seen in some ethnic groups who have migrated to this country.

As the cabinet secretary said in opening, FGM is a complex, sensitive and often hidden issue for which there is no easy fix. It is rooted in what are, to many of us, alien and quite appalling traditions and, when it comes to engaging with FGM-practising communities, there are often language, as well as cultural, barriers to contend with. Thus, working towards its prevention and eradication demands working sensitively and with many different sectors. It also means working with and within the directly affected communities, as the only way to truly eradicate FGM is to eradicate the damaging attitudes and cultural traditions that underpin it.

I strongly welcome the national action plan that was published last year and its recognition of the scale of the challenges that are involved, as well as its realistic and robust objectives and its commitment to working with partners across the statutory and third sectors, from Police Scotland to Scottish Women’s Aid.

I also welcome the commitment to work with those directly involved. It is in communities that the problem exists, and that is where it must ultimately be solved. If FGM is to be eradicated in Scotland, long-term social, cultural and attitudinal change must be our goal. However wrong and appalling we find it, as long as FGM is accepted and considered to be important or necessary in some communities, it will be an issue.

The national action plan to tackle FGM is inextricable from the wider “Equally Safe” strategy on preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls. That is because FGM, at its most fundamental, is an extreme form of violence against girls and women and is rooted in gender inequality and discrimination. It is at the extreme end of a vast and varied spectrum of objectification of girls and women, which ultimately results in the abuse of their bodies.

While the horrors of FGM may be an alien practice to many of us here, it would be foolish to think that it is a problem for others. We are not immune to the discrimination against and objectification of women and girls in our culture, which are rooted in just the same gender inequality, damaging attitudes and cultural norms here. Far from it; the problem is endemic and manifests itself daily in our newspapers, on television, on the street, in the playground and even, as we saw recently, in the chambers of Parliament. It is everywhere, and on a scale that can feel pretty overwhelming.

Similarly, though the starting point is more extreme, the fundamental aims and objectives of the action plan to tackle FGM are the same as those of the “Equally Safe” strategy: a Scotland where women and girls live free from abuse and the attitudes that help to perpetuate it; where women and girls feel safe, respected and equal; where women are empowered and enjoy equality of opportunity, particularly with regard to resources; where positive gender roles are promoted; and where people understand what healthy and positive relationships are.

For that reason, we all have a role to play in tackling FGM, as we can and must all play our part in tackling the wider inequality that underpins it. Providing good services for victims and survivors is crucial, but we must also start recognising the context in which that violence takes place. A culture in which everyday sexism and the objectification of women are the norm is conducive to violence and must be challenged if we are to make a lasting difference to the lives of women and girls. We can start to make that difference here by all agreeing not to tolerate any objectification of women—in our own or any other culture.

I call Gordon Lindhurst, to be followed by Clare Haughey.

15:42  

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

“But we have no slaves in Scotland, and mothers cannot sell their bairns.”

So decided the Court of Session in Edinburgh almost exactly 330 years ago, on 13 January 1687, in the case of Reid v Scot of Harden and his Lady. For those interested in references, the quote is found in the case report in Morrison’s dictionary, page 14545. The case was about a lassie who was used by a travelling showman as a performing gymnast, until she fled and was given refuge by a couple. He raised an action in the court claiming that he had bought the girl from her mother and she must be returned. The court refused to countenance that argument.

Of what relevance is something from hundreds of years ago today? Sadly, that and other problems such as the one that we are talking about are still with us. A few days ago, I attended the Tumbling Lassie seminar, hosted by the Faculty of Advocates, which had a number of eminent speakers, including Alison Di Rollo, the Solicitor General for Scotland. The seminar was held to raise awareness of modern-day slavery and human trafficking, which, sadly, some think is entirely behind us. The issue is a real one, as we know from recent police investigations in Scotland. The price of liberty is eternal vigilance, and the price of freedom the constant review of the current state of affairs—otherwise we might have no need for politicians.

As has already been said, the practice of female genital mutilation has been illegal in Scotland since 1985, but we still know little about the numbers of people here who have been affected by it or who may be at risk. Such crimes, as well as other so-called honour-based violence, are often culturally based, devoid of any religious basis and shut off from mainstream society.

It has been reported this week that Scottish Government research shows that, between 2011 and 2014, 191 girls and women were forced into marriages in Scotland and that 10 per cent of them were aged between 14 and 16. That is another issue that, sadly, is still with us today.

As has also been said, because of the underground nature of these crimes, research into the issue is difficult, but it is imperative that we know more about it. Scotland’s national action plan to tackle FGM recognises the lack of available data about which communities in Scotland might be likely to be directly affected by the issue. The first annual statistical information for England was published in July 2016. We need corresponding data for Scotland to understand what resources need to be allocated to dealing with the issue and stopping the practice here. The question that I pose in the context of today’s debate is: will the Scottish Government follow the actions of the UK Government in that regard?

The issue might be more important in Scotland, going forward, than we have been aware of it being, given changes in ethnic diversity in the past decade. We need to know more about the potential for FGM and other acts of so-called honour-based violence to take place here in Scotland, what we can do to prevent them and how we can seek to help the victims and deal with the consequences.

The amendment from my colleague Annie Wells recognises the work that the UK Government has been undertaking internationally to reduce the occurrence of FGM. As has been commented on, it has allocated £35 million for action to tackle FGM on the African continent. Note should also be taken of the legislation in England and Wales in the Serious Crime Act 2015, which might be relevant and could inform the Scottish situation. For example, there is a mandatory duty on professionals to report to the police cases in which they believe that FGM has occurred, for which they are given statutory guidance to assist them. I have a further question, which is: will the Scottish Government consider taking similar steps or does it have plans to do so in future, and what is the timescale for hearing about such action being taken?

These are horrendous crimes that inflict physical and psychological pain on victims, and perpetrators need to know that the practice is unacceptable in Scotland, the wider UK and indeed around the world. On that basis, I am happy to support the motion and the amendments.

15:47  

The term “FGM” is a sanitised one that allows us to talk about female genital mutilation without dealing with each of those three words. Mutilation of young women leaves physical and mental scars that last a lifetime for the victims and for the communities that practise it. Let us be clear that FGM involves performing “surgery” on the genitals of young women and girls. Procedures can involve cutting off parts of the labia and clitoris or stitching up the vulva or vaginal opening. The procedures offer zero medical benefits; all that they guarantee is pain and suffering. They are performed by families who believe that FGM must be carried out, that it is the right thing to do and that FGM is the key to maintaining respectability and standing in their community. Often, the young girls themselves see it as a rite of passage from childhood to becoming a woman.

In reality, however, FGM is used to ensure that a woman is culturally acceptable, to uphold family honour and tradition and to ensure that a woman is seen as suitable for her permitted role as a wife. By damaging her genitals, a community can damage her ability to have sexual relationships and can ensure that sex, instead of being a natural part of human expression, is painful and unpalatable for her. In essence, it is a way of controlling women’s sexual behaviour. The young women who experience this violence suffer in painful and perhaps more obvious physical ways. They have difficulty urinating, sexual problems, problems in childbirth and wounds that become infected and lead to further complications.

What about the other wounds that are inflicted? Levels of post-traumatic stress disorder are the same among survivors of FGM as among those who have been subject to childhood abuse. Research has shown that anger, pain and sadness continue through later life for women and that on-going chronic stress, anxiety disorders and sleep problems are common in survivors.

A number of studies have touched on the impact on the survivor, but I want to consider the impact that the abuse has on the community as a whole. How many mothers who themselves have experienced FGM come to decide on FGM for their daughters? Violence affects not only the victims but the perpetrators. Those who arrange or are complicit in inflicting FGM on children have often experienced FGM themselves. It begets a cycle of abuse in which mutilation is the norm and the pain and suffering that are caused are less important than is being seen to fit in. FGM as a way of policing women’s bodies is a double crime: it is inflicted on young women; then those young women themselves become party to inflicting it on the next generation. How many of those are true choices, free of coercion by and the influence of the woman’s wider group?

When we tackle FGM—as we should—we should remember the full cost that we are asking young women to pay when they share what has happened to them. We are asking them not only to admit what has been done to them and to discuss their bodies with strangers and people from outside their community, but to admit that their community—their family—has been party to what happened. When we acknowledge a crime, by extension we acknowledge that those who committed it are criminals. For young girls who have experienced FGM, talking about it contributes to the huge burden of emotional and psychological damage that they already carry from the abuse.

Although the crimes are carried out to ensure honour, there is nothing honourable in violence and abuse. Underreporting of FGM is strongly suspected, which ties in with other forms of abuse that entwine fear, love, loyalty and propriety to create an emotional net that prevents women from speaking about what has been done to them. We need to empower women to talk openly about those threats and experiences, especially girls who are at risk and those in communities who know that girls are at risk of FGM. That is especially true, given that studies have shown that women who have experienced FGM tend to develop psychological conditions that make them withdrawn, uncommunicative or distrustful. The women whose voices we need to hear the most are those who are most likely to be silenced by their experience.

Committing FGM is a crime and I am proud that the Scottish Government has been forthright in condemning it. I am heartened today to hear so many members do that too. We need to consign female genital mutilation to history and we will do that by ensuring that the crime is policed and through joined-up thinking about public services and support for the women who are affected.

The Scottish Refugee Council has identified 24,000 people born in an FGM-practising country who live in Scotland, with nearly 9,000 of them living in Glasgow. Any such small communities will need support to adjust to life here in a country that has more developed and proactive public services. We must reach out and engage with all communities, but especially when there is the potential for FGM. We must communicate to women, young and old, that genital mutilation is wrong and that, whatever the practices of the past, it is not acceptable in Scotland.

We must also seek to amplify the voices of women in those communities who are already standing up against FGM and empower young women to support each other in their communities. I welcome the Scottish Government funding that projects such as the Kenyan women in Scotland association and Rape Crisis Glasgow’s FGM survivor support service are benefiting from to drive forward the equality agenda in 2016-17, and I welcome all steps that this Government takes to tackle all forms of violence that seek to control women’s bodies and police women’s behaviour under the corrosive banner of “honour”.

15:54  

Child marriage and honour killing are just two elements of the wider systematic subjugation, exploitation and domination of women and girls around the world, and, as we have heard, Scotland is not free of those things. Previous Labour Governments have legislated on them, and the Scottish Government is to be commended for leading on them today.

Womankind will not be free until we have made more significant progress towards protecting women and girls from the horrors of FGM, forced marriage—it is very often children who are forced into marriage—and so-called honour-based violence, which is murder and violence just the same.

Child marriage is often physically violent and in many cases is tantamount to rape. Jasvinder Sanghera, who founded the charity Karma Nirvana, which receives 850 calls a month, mostly from victims, said:

“Emotional blackmail is huge in these cases. Either you are going to be raped on your wedding night or you are going to be disowned by your family. Lots of young people are faced with that choice.”

Children who have been forced into marriage are having children when they are as young as 13 or 14 and have hardly had time to become adults themselves.

What is meant by “honour-based killing”? It is said that there is an unwritten code, known as “honour”. Girls are raised to believe that their purpose in life is to uphold the honour of the family, and that if they bring so-called dishonour on the family, they will pay the price with their lives. Many, many women have come to the UK from other countries to escape such violence, and some women have not escaped.

The killing takes place to erase the dishonour. The majority of victims of honour killings are girls and women, but men can also be victims. The perpetrators are usually men, but it is important to note that family members can be actively and passively involved in the killings. The majority of reported killings were carried out by family members. In the UK, 29 cases were recorded between 2010 and 2014. The UK police recorded more than 28,000 cases of honour-based violence, which included abduction, mutilation, acid attacks, beatings and murder.

As Gordon Lindhurst said, there have been 191 cases of forced marriage in Scotland over the past four years. We need more data on that.

I want to focus on the international picture. One in three girls in the developing world is married before she reaches 18. A staggering 700 million women who are alive today were married as children. If there is no reduction in child marriage, the global number of child brides will reach 1.2 billion by 2050. Niger has the highest proportion of child brides, at 76 per cent, but India has the highest number, with 26.5 million child brides.

According to research from the Women’s Refugee Commission in Ethiopia, Lebanon and Uganda, child marriage is regarded as a way of protecting girls or alleviating hardship caused by conflict. It appears that we need to add into the picture the fact that the current humanitarian crises in areas of conflict are working to increase child marriage and forced marriage.

As we heard, the practice is found to be cultural. Whatever and wherever it is, it is pervasive discrimination and violence against women and girls. Early marriage forces girls into adulthood and frequently motherhood before they are physically and emotionally mature. I have heard women say that they do not feel equipped to look after their babies and fear that something will happen to their babies because they are not old enough and mature enough to protect the lives that they have brought into the world.

The experience profoundly affects a girl’s life, not only because it substantially lowers her educational prospects but because it causes health complications and harms her psychological wellbeing. We know that the causality runs both ways. Child marriage reduces educational attainment, and girls who have less access to quality education are much more likely to marry early.

In Scotland, we must have a harsh message in our criminal law on all so-called honour-based crimes. We must review our law to ensure that it takes account of all aspects of such violence and covers not just the perpetrators but any family member or other person who is involved in the premeditated murder of a man, woman or girl.

Culture can be no excuse for violence and deep-rooted discrimination. We should never forget that there is much work to be done, including internationally, to achieve global progress for all women and girls.

16:00  

Yesterday, as part of the work done by small groups of members in the Justice Committee, my colleague Mary Fee and I took evidence from a gentleman in his 50s who described a whole childhood of abuse. In the previous session—when you chaired the committee, Presiding Officer—we took evidence in private from victims of domestic abuse and heard the harrowing details of what they had gone through. Likewise, in the previous session, the Equal Opportunities Committee held three evidence sessions on the issue of female genital mutilation and heard harrowing testimonies from individuals. It is important to say that those sessions took place in private with appropriate support and safeguards. I, for one, am full of admiration for those individuals for the strength that they have shown in coming forward to inform us, as lawmakers, about such complex issues—and there is no issue more complex than FGM.

The answer is not more laws, which is why we have the national action plan on the prevention and eradication of FGM. It is not an issue for Parliament, as many members have said, and for that reason we will support the Labour amendment, which recognises the key role that community leaders can play. It is not lost on many of us that those community leaders will be men and that the power that is an intrinsic element of this obscene practice lies with men—this is gender-based violence. I am amazed at the ability that humans have to abuse each other, and FGM is linked to abusive and coercive power, as members have said.

I have difficulty with the phrase “honour-based violence”, as does Pauline McNeill. I do not get that terminology at all. Similarly, to the overwhelming number of victims, the term “female genital mutilation” means nothing. Many euphemisms are used in front of those young girls and women. For example, they are told that they are going to a party or on a holiday. They are tricked by their family and community, which in itself is a huge breach of trust that resonates for a lifetime.

I acknowledge that there are cultural pressures, but let us be quite clear about how those pressures manifest themselves. They manifest themselves in a child being attacked, sexually assaulted, mutilated, restrained and detained, often for days. The most worrying thing is the psychological effect that that has on them, which is immeasurable, and the fact that their dignity has been stolen. I will not rehearse the various medical issues that follow FGM, but the reproductive issues are significant and the victims suffer many lifetime medical issues as a consequence of it.

The legacy paper of the Equal Opportunities Committee from the previous session says that

“problems identified could have been avoided if staff had been trained”.

There are issues there. That is not a criticism; there are issues around cultural sensitivities such as some women appearing at medical practices accompanied by a male and the challenges that people will understand. However, we have to get on despite those cultural sensitivities. I do not want a monoculture for Scotland—I think that Scotland grows from the growing diversity of our culture—and this is not an attack on any individual culture. It is entirely in line with the United Nations approach, which is to afford the utmost protection to all females and give the maximum support to those who seek to end this abhorrent practice.

It is not easy, but I can cite examples of where there have been sizeable changes both in the reporting of the practice and in the courts. There has been a wholesale change in the approach to domestic violence, including in police practices in courts and the support that is available. Likewise, there have been changes in how we deal with child abuse and sexual assault. Although there is some way to go on all those issues—we can all see that these things never happen straight away—progress can be made.

Education is vital in those challenging communities in which men often have undue sway. Training is important in raising awareness, particularly among health professionals. I am grateful to the British Medical Association for its briefing paper. It talks about those who are at risk and the assistance that the medical profession gives to identify them. The education authorities also help people who are returning to countries where their previous generation came from by raising awareness about what might happen at key moments in a young girl’s life.

I commend the professionals who have been involved. I also commend the volunteers, many of whom are unsung because, to be effective, regrettably, they must remain anonymous.

It is important to have international days and this is an international issue. We will support the Conservative Party amendment and—I need to take a deep breath to say this—I commend the UK Government for its support on the issue.

The reality is that we have an action plan. As others have said, it is tied into the equally safe strategy. This is about equality and it is about gender-based violence. We must have zero tolerance towards gender-based violence and, as the BMA says, we must break the generational cycle of FGM.

16:06  

I start with a declaration of interest: before I came to this place, I sat on the ministerial task force on violence against women and girls that was delivering the equally safe strategy.

I rise to offer the full-throated support of members on these benches for the Government’s excellent motion and the amendments. I welcome the consensual and respectful tone of the debate. The subject clearly unites the chamber, and I always welcome an opportunity to speak in such debates. However, the fact that we even have to debate the issue in 2017 is an indictment on where we are in our global striving towards modernity and the empowerment of women. It is a symptom of the mountain that we still have to climb in tackling this most gendered of all violence.

Each year, 3 million girls and young women are subjected to acts of barbarism and mutilation in the name of culture and tradition. That is a humanitarian outrage; it is an atrocity of eye-watering proportions.

Legislatures often walk carefully through the cultures and the traditions of other societies. We have to uphold and respect diversity, but where practices are involved that are dangerous, abhorrent and cruel, we must show willingness to tackle that head-on. I am glad to hear colleagues from all parties do that so eloquently in the debate.

As we have heard many times in this excellent debate—I highlight the words of Ruth Maguire, Clare Haughey and John Finnie—FGM may be an act of cultural acceptance or a rite of passage, but it has nothing to do with religion or faith. Nowhere in the scriptures, the sacred texts or the words of prophets are atrocities such as female genital mutilation laid out as articles of faith or commandment. Some communities have sought to ascribe a causal relationship between the two, but we must be in no doubt that, over the centuries in which that grotesque practice has been performed, it has been driven solely by the sexual jealousy and inadequacy of men.

The fundamental nature of FGM and honour-based violence is gendered, but its solution is not. As parliamentarians of all genders, we always have a duty to call out abuse, whether it be the cutting of girls and the beating of sisters or wives, and to say with resounding unity that such behaviour is criminal and obscene and has no place in our society. Together, we have made great strides in that agenda, and I commend the Scottish Government on its ambitious national action plan, which has our full support. It is a vital step in our collective response. It rightly elevates the issue to new heights in our national consciousness.

The plan sets out a blueprint for national and local government, the third sector, the police, schools and communities to work together to raise awareness and to share best practice, for example, on reporting. We need to learn from the lived experience of victims. By listening to those who would otherwise struggle to be heard in the first place, we can build interventions around the stories that they tell us on how they could have been helped or kept safe if a certain thing had happened or an intervention had been available to them. Those are the stories that we need to hear.

Right out of the traps, we need to foster in girls and young women an understanding of their rights enshrined in our culture and our laws. We need to build awareness of victimhood among those who may not even be aware that they are victims and foster safe spaces for them to disclose what has happened to them.

We must recognise that there are still frontiers in our society where we must answer the needs of equality for women. We must look at the attitudes to maternity rights and equal pay that exist in our board rooms. Such areas of commonplace discrimination add to a wider narrative that is ages old and, if they remain unchecked, they will ultimately feed the worst aspects of the barbarism and cruelty that we are discussing this afternoon.

I am heartily glad that the action plan is so grounded in a rights-based approach and that it roots policy on prevention and awareness raising firmly in article 24 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which calls for the prohibition of all traditional practices that are prejudicial to the health and wellbeing of women. John Finnie said that we do not need laws for this, but I take issue with that. I have stated many times, both in Parliament and outside it, that we will make rights real only when we fully incorporate the UNCRC into Scots law. Only then will children have access to justice and redress when rights of any kind are violated. That will have the societal effect of making rights real, because when, systemically, we are forced to consider the implications for children’s rights, we naturally foster a rights-based approach to public policy.

If that is how what I said came over, that is not what I meant; I meant that it is not exclusively a question of legislating. We can pass all the laws we want, but tackling FGM will take more than that. It will primarily involve education.

I welcome John Finnie’s intervention, and I recognise his contribution and our shared goals in this area.

It is only by incorporating the UNCRC into Scots law that a rights-based approach to public policy will be achieved, and it is only by adopting such an approach that we can ensure that we protect women and girls on our shores and, by extension, offer an example to the world of how rights matter.

Silent indignation on this matter is a futility that we can no longer afford or indulge. We need to protect and empower, and to bring justice to the guilty and the complicit. Coretta Scott King said:

“Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won, you earn it and win it in every generation.”

However, on this bloody tradition, no generation has ever seen freedom or satisfaction prevail; it is time that we let ours be the first.

16:12  

I am grateful to have the opportunity to participate in this afternoon’s debate ahead of the international day of zero tolerance for female genital mutilation, on 6 February.

I welcome the Government’s motion and the opportunity that it provides to discuss “Scotland’s National Action Plan to Prevent and Eradicate Female Genital Mutilation”, both of which show in their tone and their detail the correct approach to a challenging and complex issue.

It is only fair to acknowledge and welcome Annie Wells’s amendment. I am sure that Alex Cole-Hamilton will join me in indirectly acknowledging the work of Lynne—now Baroness—Featherstone, who as Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for International Development announced the funding, to which Ms Wells referred, at the UN Commission on the Status of Women in March 2013. That programme is set to end next year, and I hope that Annie Wells will urge her colleague Priti Patel, the UK Secretary of State for International Development, to build on the existing work, and that she will encourage her colleagues to support Eilidh Whiteford’s private member’s bill, which calls on the UK Government to ratify the Istanbul convention.

It is also only fair to acknowledge Mary Fee’s amendment, which highlights the need that is outlined in the national action plan to work with communities to break the cycle of violence. I acknowledge, too, the excellent speeches of other members, particularly those of Alex Cole-Hamilton and Clare Haughey, and the overall tenor of the debate.

The Government’s motion

“acknowledges that a preventative, supportive and legislative approach is crucial to tackling, preventing and eradicating FGM”.

We are making progress on all three aspects. It was only in 1985—the year that I was born—that FGM was made illegal in Scotland, through the Prohibition of Female Circumcision Act 1985. That legislation is relatively recent, but it is indicative of the progress that has been made that the term “female circumcision” is rightly no longer in common use and is nowadays probably far less known than “FGM”. That is reflected in the more recent Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation (Scotland) Act 2005, and the further strengthening of legislation in the Serious Crime Act 2015.

Legislative progress has also been made in tackling forced marriage, which can, like FGM, be associated with honour-based violence. The Forced Marriage etc (Protection and Jurisdiction) (Scotland) Act 2011 provides a specific civil remedy for people who are threatened with forced marriage and those who are already in such marriages. Indeed, in Scotland forced marriage was recently criminalised in section 122 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, which—crucially—states:

“A person commits an offence ... if he or she ... uses violence, threats or any other form of coercion for the purpose of causing another person to enter into a marriage, and ... believes, or ought reasonably to believe, that the conduct may cause the other person to enter into the marriage without free and full consent.”

The terms that are used in that act are important in their recognition of the various and complex ways in which people can be pressured into forced marriage.

It is clear that we have made progress in legislation on both forced marriage and FGM. I am also encouraged by the work that is already under way, or is imminent, as set out in the national action plan, and which constitutes the preventative and supportive aspects of the approach to tackling FGM. Measures that have been undertaken by the Scottish Government include issuing communication to police, education bodies and the national health service, and the national guidance for child protection being updated in 2014 to include a specific section on how to respond to concerns that a child might have been subjected to, or be at risk from, FGM. There is, moreover, now a standard operating procedure in place for Police Scotland.

FGM is perhaps the most overt manifestation of the patriarchy's attempts to dominate, control and possess women. Although, historically, FGM has not been a traditional cultural practice in Scotland, the fundamentally chauvinistic and misogynistic attitudes that underpin FGM and honour-based violence evince themselves in domestic abuse, rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment, stalking and commercial sexual exploitation. The same attitudes also evince themselves through sexual discrimination in the workplace and in the gender pay gap, as well as in the societal pressures and expectations that are placed on girls and women with regard to their bodies, their appearance and their role in society. Government, Parliament, community leaders and partner organisations all have an important role to play in the matter, but sustained progress will be achieved only when individual men address and abandon their own palaeolithic attitudes.

Writing in the mid-19th century, William Thompson wrote:

“As your bondage has chained down man to the ignorance and vices of despotism, so will your liberation reward him with knowledge, with freedom and with happiness.”

Liberty, knowledge, freedom and happiness are the rights of all human beings. Gender inequality denies those rights to one half of the population and gives the other the illusion of them.

We all have a duty to work towards a society in which we can all enjoy the same rights and opportunities, but achieving that will not be easy. Max Weber remarked that

“Politics is a strong and slow boring of hard boards. It takes both passion and perspective.”

However, he went on to say that we would

“not have attained the possible unless time and time again”

we

“had reached out for the impossible.”

As is made clear in the national action plan, eradicating FGM will be challenging and complex. However, it is a challenge that I have every confidence this Government, this Parliament and this country will rise to. In doing so, we will have taken another step towards creating a truly equal society.

I call Miles Briggs, to be followed by Kenneth Gibson. Mr Gibson will be the last speaker in the open debate.

16:18  

As other members have done, I welcome today’s debate and the significant degree of consensus that has been demonstrated around the chamber, which perhaps emphasises the importance of the issue. I also congratulate the cabinet secretary on the work that she has undertaken on the matter.

It is crucial that we, as a Parliament, unite to send out a message that we will not tolerate FGM and honour-based violence in Scotland. Those crimes must be tackled using the available provisions but, as has been said, it is of real concern that, to date, there have been no successful prosecutions for FGM.

The debate has also demonstrated that the Scottish Government and the UK Government must work closely together if we are to make progress towards eradicating FGM. I record my strong support for the significant work on FGM and on forced marriages that Prime Minister Theresa May undertook during her time as Home Secretary. In addition to criminalising forced marriage, she strengthened laws on FGM, including provisions on the mandatory reporting duty, which means that health and social care professionals have a legal duty to report to the police known cases of FGM involving under-18-year-olds. She also set up innovative national FGM prevention programmes, issued new guidance to raise FGM awareness among police officers, and instructed Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary to inspect the police response to honour-based violence, with a focus on FGM and forced marriage.

I welcome the positive engagement and the on-going partnership approach that “Scotland's National Action Plan to Prevent and Eradicate Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) 2016-2020” is achieving, and I welcome the “Equally Safe” strategy document. I hope that the Scottish Government will continually assess the effectiveness of the work that is being undertaken across the UK and in other Governments around the world on legislating and prevention, and that it will consider what more can be done to support people in Scotland. William Hague, the former Foreign Secretary, also undertook a great deal of excellent work in trying to tackle FGM abroad. We should remember his efforts.

My colleague Annie Wells is right to note in her amendment the continuing international development and support from the UK Government. The Prime Minister has said of FGM that

“legislation alone is not enough. We must do more to prevent these harmful practices ever happening in the first place. We must raise awareness, challenge social norms and protect those at risk.”

I agree. Sometimes that will mean ensuring that political or cultural sensitivities are not used as excuses to prevent uncovering of abuse. Although that might be challenging, we must make it clear that there can be no soft-touch approach and that the laws of this country apply to everyone who lives here, in every section of our society.

The Scottish Government’s motion states that

“communities and individuals affected ... must be at the heart of work”

that is done on FGM and honour-based violence. I agree with that.

There is increasing concern that FGM is being performed on young women outside the UK. In many cases, the girls and young women are taken to countries under the pretence that they are going on holiday or visiting family members in other countries.

Ahead of the debate, I again watched “The Cut”, which is an excellent documentary that was made in 2009 by the campaigner, film maker and writer Linda May Kallestein. She helped to spread worldwide awareness of the issues around FGM.

As has already been said, it is worth reflecting on the scale of the issue internationally. FGM affects around 200 million women around the world. Traditions are very strong in many cultures and, sadly, the cultural myths behind that 5,000-year-old African tradition have not been addressed by religious, community or official leaders in many countries around the world. We all have a responsibility to try to address that.

The debate has very much demonstrated the need to focus work and resources on at-risk individuals and communities, and on helping to educate community leaders on the long-lasting damage and on-going emotional distress that FGM can cause. I commend the work of local organisations in my region, including Shakti Women’s Aid and Scottish Women’s Aid, which have really important work to do and a really important role to play. Shakti Women’s Aid is an important source of information and advice for women from ethnic minority communities across the Lothians, and it offers a safe refuge for women who are at risk.

I encourage any constituent who fears that they might be at risk of facing FGM, or who knows anyone, including young girls, who fears that they might be at risk, to contact Scottish Women’s Aid to seek support, which they will get in total confidence. It is important that all elected representatives raise awareness of the support services that exist and help to get the message out to the ethnic minority communities that we represent in our regions and constituencies.

This is an important debate. The Scottish Conservatives will happily work with the Scottish Government and parties across the chamber to help to achieve the societal, cultural and attitudinal changes that we need in order for FGM and honour-based violence to be eliminated from Scotland. In doing so, we urge ministers to work closely with the UK Government and community organisations at all levels to ensure that the legal and criminal justice systems are appropriately supported to punish and deter the perpetrators of these abhorrent practices.

I repeat what Linda May Kallestein has said on FGM:

“The topic is not pretty. We are talking about ... long term suffering and death. Despite the disgust we feel at the very thought of it, we should not look away. Young girls, who are unable to defend themselves, are the victims. They suffer in silence. We can help by giving them a voice.

Help spread it to make this voice heard all over the planet. Support the victims even more by demanding that female genital mutilation must stop. Unlike many other problems our world suffers from, where there is a lack of resources and much needs to be done, here the answer lays in the simple solution of not doing something anymore. It simply needs to stop.”

I support Linda May Kallestein’s words and the amendment in my colleague Annie Wells’s name.

Before we move to the next speaker, I say that Ms Lennon has extra time and has up to eight minutes for her speech, and Oliver Mundell has a bit of extra time and has up to nine minutes to close.

Kenneth Gibson will be the last member to speak in the open debate, before we move to closing speeches. You know where it takes you if you are not in the chamber but spoke in the debate earlier. That is fair warning to anybody with a cup of tea in their hand.

16:24  

I, too, welcome the debate, which gives valuable time in the chamber to an issue that so many of us have long been deeply concerned about. It is 16 years since I lodged a motion in Parliament on so-called honour-based violence in support of UN resolutions 55 and 56, and it is more than 15 years since I lodged a motion condemning female genital mutilation. It is both shocking and distressing that, all these years later, it is still an issue that is faced by countless women and young girls around the globe.

In my 2001 motion, I said that FGM is

“a violation of the human rights of girls and women as it represents an attempt to control women’s sexuality and subordinate their status in society.”

That point stands as strong as ever today, and is something that we must bear in mind as we move forward to eradicate FGM.

In another motion that I lodged in 2012 on the international day for the elimination of violence against women, I stated that

“society is left all the more impoverished when it allows violence in any form to hinder any girl or woman from realising her full potential.”

Some five years later, I am sure that that message resonates deeply with all of us in the chamber. FGM, without a doubt, is a form of violence that hugely threatens so many women’s lives. It is thought—as we have heard from other members—that some 200 million women worldwide have been affected by FGM at some point in their lives, and that every year, another 3 million girls become at risk of that appalling procedure. Those numbers are so staggering that they are hard to comprehend. The sheer cruelty of FGM, combined with those figures, can make it an issue with which it is extremely difficult to come to terms. It is vital, however, that we do not shy away from this important issue. Only by facing it can we take action and move towards a safer and fairer place for women and girls all over the world.

Perhaps one of the most shocking aspects for us is that FGM could occur here in the United Kingdom. It has been suggested that the most common age for girls in Britain to go through the horrifying process is when they are between seven and nine years old. Girls who are forced through the dangerous and traumatising process, wherever it occurs, are then left to deal with life-long consequences. Of course, FGM causes many immediate dangers through mutilation, including haemorrhage and infection, particularly when the process is done in unsafe and non-sterile conditions, often without even anaesthesia for the young girls who are going through the process.

In the long term, there are many health risks and mental health problems that the girls go on to face for the rest of their lives. I am particularly concerned about the lack of available research and information about the psychological and psychosexual impacts of FGM. It seems to be obvious that there will be many long-term psychological consequences of what is, for many, childhood trauma. Because FGM is most likely to be inflicted by close family members of the young girls, they are likely to have to deal for the rest of their lives with problems of trust and confidence in their family. How could they trust anyone—no matter how close to them—who has inflicted such appalling violence on them?

Mental health issues arising from FGM, including psychosis, anxiety and depression, have been widely reported. There is much to be done to provide for women who have been through the trauma of FGM. We must try to understand it as best we can in order that we can offer young girls the support that they need so much. We must also offer it to them as they grow older and become women, because I think that the trauma of FGM will never go away, for those who have suffered it—it cannot go away. I am not talking about physical consequences, but about psychological consequences.

Although there is still a long way to go, over the past 15 years key steps have been taken here in Scotland and further afield, around the world, to improve the lives of women who have suffered such torture, and to prevent it from happening to others. Here in Scotland, FGM has been unlawful since 1985 and, over the years, further legislation has continued to improve our society’s approach to the matter. It was particularly strengthened by the Serious Crime Act 2015, and the Scottish Government has worked to improve the lives of potential victims since my motion way back in 2001.

I am proud to be of a country that is taking progressive and important steps towards eradicating gender-based violence. In June last year, the Scottish Government announced £20.3 million of funding to tackle discrimination across Scotland. That was divided among 224 projects across a variety of groups in order to help families, communities and individuals to address discrimination and inequality. In my constituency, that included North Ayrshire Women’s Aid, which is based in Saltcoats, and which carries out invaluable work to protect and support vulnerable women, including women who have suffered the atrocities of FGM.

For many women who have suffered this horrific torture, there may be feelings of shame and fear of speaking out about the terror that they have been through. Often, they face intense pressure from within their cultural groups, but there are many factors that can hold women back from speaking out and looking for the support that they so desperately need. They often fear the stigma that could attach to them if the issue were to be raised, and so they suffer in silence for much—or perhaps even all—of their lives.

It is therefore imperative that we take the opportunity of the international day of zero tolerance for female genital mutilation to make it clear to all those, of every age and background, who have been through such horrific torture, that they can find a safe place here in Scotland. We are a country of inclusivity and acceptance. It is vital that we continue to do everything possible, both here in Parliament and as a nation, to work towards being an even safer place for women to come forward and live their lives in peace and safety.

Thank you, Mr Gibson.

Before we move on to the closing speeches, I note that Gordon Lindhurst is not present for the summing up and closing speeches. I am tired of saying this. Presiding Officers are taking a note of offenders and we have ways of dealing with them: they might just find that they will not get to speak in a debate. We have that within our power. No doubt somebody will convey that to Mr Lindhurst. Perhaps somebody should have warned him in advance that this would happen. We are absolutely furious that it continues to happen. It shows disrespect for colleagues, for Parliament and—certainly—for the chair, and it will not continue.

Having said that, I am smiling at you, Ms Lennon. Would you like to close for Labour, please? You have up to eight minutes.

16:32  

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

I join colleagues throughout the chamber in welcoming the opportunity to recognise the international day of zero tolerance for female genital mutilation, and I reiterate Scottish Labour’s full support for the Scottish Government’s motion and indeed the national action plan. I also put on the record my recognition of the cabinet secretary’s strong leadership in the area. It is important that we have women in our Parliament, but it is equally important that we have feminists in our Parliament, and we have certainly seen that in action today from members throughout the chamber, male and female.

Female genital mutilation is unquestionably a complete violation of the rights of women and girls across the world. As the cabinet secretary said in her opening speech, it has no place in society. Ruth Maguire touched on the fact that it is the most extreme act on a spectrum of gender-based violence, but she also said that, although it is easy to condemn FGM, it is less easy to eradicate it.

I think that we all take the point that we have a responsibility to call out low-level sexism and misogyny. We were all horrified by the way that Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh was treated in the House of Commons when she was barked at. We have to call out the humiliation of women who are in positions of power and have a voice, and I am glad that people across the political spectrum have done so.

As we have heard today, female genital mutilation has no health benefits to women and girls, and the important briefing that we received from the BMA says that there should be no acceptance of its medicalisation. There is no mild form of FGM. It is barbaric and it is mutilation.

Clare Haughey touched on the physical and psychological trauma that is involved.

This concerns little girls. In Scotland, the children at most risk are aged between seven and nine, and the summer holidays can be the time when they are robbed of their childhood for ever. Annie Wells touched on that psychological aspect in her speech.

There is absolutely no place for FGM in our society, but the difficult thing is that we do not really know the extent of it, as it is such a hidden, secret practice.

What has struck me from today’s debate is that girls are victims not just at the point at which this barbaric practice is carried out, and that the cycle continues. We have touched on the point about survivors becoming perpetrators themselves.

Over the Christmas recess, I read “The War on Women” by the late Sue Lloyd-Roberts. The first chapter is entitled “The Cruellest Cut”, and it is absolutely relevant to what we are discussing today. It is so disturbing, but I will touch on her description of the experience of a mother in the Gambia who is involved in holding down her daughter while FGM is carried out on the child. The mum is about to become the cutter in the village, as another family member has moved on from that role. She says:

“Can you imagine holding down your five-year-old daughter, and they are cutting her and she is screaming and calling out ‘Mum’ and Mum is the one who is holding down your legs and there is nothing Mum can do? So, I was shaking my head and tears were coming to my eyes and I said to my mind that, whatever happens, I will never do this, I will never do the cutting”.

She keeps that to herself, however. She adds:

“This is when I regretted having a daughter.”

That is so tragic.

Other members have talked about honour-based violence and killings. Putting those words together and getting them out has been difficult for people—if ever there was an oxymoron, that is it.

The problem is overwhelming. We have talked about how complex and difficult it is, and we cannot solve it by legislation alone. It needs cultural change. That is why the national action plan is so important.

The international day of zero tolerance for FGM is an opportunity to highlight the actions that we in Scotland can take, doing all that we can to ensure that children in this country are protected from a practice that experts tell us will cause them to suffer serious, long-term physical and mental health problems.

I am very grateful for the support across the chamber for the amendment in Mary Fee’s name. We recognise that the problem is not one that women can solve alone. We need men and leaders in communities to take that responsibility. I am proud that we are united across the chamber and that we recognise the need to work together.

As I said at the beginning of my speech, Labour welcomes the Scottish Government’s work on this issue and its action plan. We also commend Annie Wells for her amendment. We recognise the contribution that the UK Government has made in trying to combat the problem internationally. The issue absolutely requires cross-party support and international co-operation.

There have been so many fantastic speeches by colleagues today. I do not want to miss anyone out. John Finnie spoke powerfully when he said that the issue is one of power—the power that lies with men—and he also touched on the importance of community leaders. It is important that so many men have spoken in the debate. Kenneth Gibson has enlightened me—I was not aware of his previous motions on the subject. It is scary to think that they date back 16 years, but that tells us that tackling this subject is something that our Scottish Parliament has been advocating about for a long time now. It is important that we do not give up, and that we keep going on these issues.

I realise that I have been given a bit of extra time so, in closing, I will say that it is important to bring people to justice for this crime. We understand that we are all committed to prevention, but it would send a strong message if we were able to bring prosecutions. People deserve to be punished for the abuse that is being carried out on the most vulnerable people in our society.

I thank all colleagues who have made contributions today. This is not going to go away; perhaps in another 16 years, someone else will bring forward a similar motion. However, on days like today, the Parliament unites to say, “Not in our name”, whether it be in Scotland, the rest of the UK, or anywhere in the world, the practice is a barbaric violation of human rights and the Scottish Parliament will not stand for it.

16:40  

I greatly appreciate the opportunity to close today’s debate for the Scottish Conservatives. We can all agree that it has been an extremely moving and powerful debate with strong contributions from members right across the chamber.

I am particularly grateful to Mary Fee for her contribution. She and Monica Lennon are absolutely right to emphasise the importance of avoiding the medicalisation of FGM. That would be unacceptable and a retrograde step, as the BMA said in its briefing for today’s debate.

Ruth Maguire was also right to re-emphasise the importance of community-based solutions, and I will talk further on that in my contribution.

I was also pleased with Gordon Lindhurst’s attempts to draw our attention to the harsh reality that lots of these issues are not new. I took some hope from his remarks because, when we look back at our history, we can see that we have made significant strides when it comes to the rights of women in Scotland. That job is far from complete and it is important to recognise that, with a combined effort, real progress can be made.

That takes me neatly on to Tom Arthur’s contribution. I think that we are getting used to his trademark powerful style, and he is right to bring together some of the other issues of gender inequality and recognise that FGM cannot just be tackled in isolation. When we make sure that women’s rights are fulfilled in every aspect of their lives across our society, it empowers people to challenge the abuse to which they have been subjected.

On that note, I welcome Kenneth Gibson’s long-standing commitment to the issue, which, like other members, I became aware of only during today’s debate. I was also interested to hear about his focus on the mental health and psychological aspects of this crime because, when we look at the issue briefly, it can be easy to somehow think that we are talking purely about physical harm and it is clear that that is not the case.

Miles Briggs was right to highlight the importance of having the correct support services in place, particularly when it comes to challenging the lifelong harm that FGM causes.

In her remarks, Monica Lennon was right to emphasise the importance of securing prosecution. If we could see just one person in the UK being brought to justice for this crime, we would see an awful lot more people coming forward and that would be of tremendous symbolic importance.

All those contributions, as well as the motion and amendments, go a long way toward sending out a strong and unified message, ahead of the international day of zero tolerance on 6 February, that female genital mutilation is abhorrent and unacceptable and has no place in our society.

That said, I have to be honest enough to admit that, as a 27-year-old male preparing for this debate and researching the issues around the topic, I have not found it easy to come to terms with the horror that these practices instil in victims and survivors or to understand the cultural practices that surround female genital mutilation. We cannot afford to lose sight of that challenge. The fact that something is alien to us and is not a problem that we have encountered at first hand does not mean that it is forgivable to stand by and watch while such practices continue. Not only in countries abroad but here in Scotland, in shadowy places, behind closed doors, victims are left isolated and feel that they cannot come forward. As many colleagues have pointed out, we must be willing to stand up to the cultural challenges and not be afraid to call out breaches of human rights. No matter how sensitive we must be to the beliefs of others, there are some things that are just wrong.

That said, I agree with John Finnie and some other members that law alone is not enough. That is why we on these benches welcome the effort that the Scottish Government has put into drawing together the national action plan and focusing on a multifaceted and interagency response that brings together all aspects of public life.

The motion recognises that, in order to truly prevent and eradicate female genital mutilation, we need to look to communities and individuals that are directly affected in order to break down the barriers, change attitudes over the longer term and ensure that people are willing to talk about what is a difficult, intimate and deeply disturbing and upsetting subject. However, we cannot leave the work to those communities alone. As many members across the chamber have graciously done, I welcome the international efforts of the UK Government on behalf of us all to try to tackle some of the cultural issues that are at the root of this matter, rather than waiting until events have taken place. We all need to reflect on that and look to see what more we can do to promote education and to change people’s minds.

Today, we have heard many statistics and have listened to examples of where these practices are going on and of some of the legal challenges that we face. However, I would not be doing this subject justice if I did not outline some of the testimony of those who have been personally affected. While preparing for today’s debate, I was truly moved by the words of a Somali girl who actually wanted to be cut. She said:

“I had absolutely no idea that this was wrong. I thought it was completely normal ... It was like a rite of passage, like something really wonderful was about to happen to you ... From a young age you were told girls who weren’t cut were promiscuous ... If you weren’t cut you were isolated. No child wants to be that girl who nobody wants to play with because they’re dirty and unclean ... It was a really big deal, something that I really wanted to happen to me.”

That, in itself, tells us how difficult an area this is to deal with and just what a challenge we have ahead of us if female genital mutilation is to be eradicated.

We have a plan of action, but the challenge will be delivering on it. There is a willingness across the chamber to take the issue forward, but we cannot just have a debate here and then forget about the issue or place it to one side. We need to keep a continual focus on the national action plan and ensure that it delivers and that it meets the changing challenges.

We on this side of the chamber fully support the Scottish Government in its efforts on the subject and recognise the need to do more in Scotland and globally.

16:49  

I thank everyone who contributed to the debate, which has been consensual and respectful, as Alex Cole-Hamilton said. There has been recognition across the political divide that collective endeavour is required on this matter.

I thank Monica Lennon for her solidarity with our colleague and friend Tasmina Ahmed-Sheikh, which is much appreciated. It is always encouraging to hear the commitment that exists across the chamber to tackling female genital mutilation and so-called honour-based violence and to supporting survivors of those practices at home and abroad. John Swinney has rightly said that it is important that we debate international issues in this place.

I enjoyed very much listening to Oliver Mundell’s summation. He gave a refreshingly honest account of his own reflections and how we all, at a personal level, need to contemplate change. It is the change that we make as individuals that leads to bigger political and organisational change. He is absolutely right. What matters now is how we turn debate into delivery and words into deeds. My own reflection on his contribution—over and above my shock that I am 19 years older than him—is that I have now had the very strong feeling on a number of occasions in the chamber that there is a feminist in him who is just bursting to get out.

Annie Wells started the debate with personal reflections. She spoke eloquently about the impact of FGM on women’s mental and physical health and about the lifelong scars and consequences of such barbaric action. She spoke about the difficulties and challenges that are associated with that form of violence being behind closed doors.

I give a reassurance to Annie Wells, as well as to Gordon Lindhurst and Miles Briggs, who raised the concern that there cannot be a soft-touch approach in Scotland. We are now looking closely at six provisions in the Serious Crime Act 2015, which is England and Wales legislation. One has already been implemented, subject to the LCM that I mentioned in my opening remarks. In principle, we could quite quickly come to an agreement on most of the provisions and see how they could have an impact in Scotland.

I say directly and honestly to members that we need to look closely and in a detailed manner at one or two provisions in the 2015 act. One is the mandatory reporting requirement for doctors and nurses. We are looking at, listening to and learning from the experience in England and Wales, where there has been controversy and difficulties in relation to data and there has been a bit of pushback on mandatory reporting.

As I said, we are giving all the provisions in the 2015 act full and serious consideration but, for the sake of transparency, it is important to highlight to Parliament that we are struggling with one or two of them. That does not mean that the legislation will not be examined fully. Of course, Parliament will also be given its place.

Mary Fee rightly said that we need to shine a light on the violence and cruelty and be absolutely clear about it by calling it what it is—the abuse and mutilation of children that is quite simply wrong. Like others, she spoke of the importance of educating not just women and girls but boys and men. She echoed the comment of Alex Cole-Hamilton and John Finnie that it is important that so many men participated in the debate.

As always, Ruth Maguire was insightful and thoughtful. She spoke of the objectification of women at home and abroad and about how that wider inequality underpins everyday sexism, which creates a culture that is conducive to violence.

Gordon Lindhurst, who has been mentioned so often in dispatches, Presiding Officer—

Not always happily, I think.

Gordon Lindhurst gave a unique historical perspective. At one point I wondered where he was going with his contribution, but he made some important points about modern-day slavery and the challenge of addressing human trafficking. I say to him and to Miles Briggs that we invest more than £700,000 in specialist agencies in the third sector—for example, Shakti Women’s Aid—that can give specialised and trusted support.

Clare Haughey spoke about the cycle of abuse and about how we need to overcome the barriers to reporting and seeking assistance. John Finnie and Monica Lennon made an important point that ran throughout the debate, which was about our discomfort with the phrase “honour-based violence”. I note that, yesterday, the Conservative MP Nusrat Ghani brought forward a motion for a private member’s bill on domestic violence that would stop the use of the term “honour killing”. She said yesterday that

“Language matters. The use of the term ‘honour’ to describe a violent criminal act—sometimes committed against a man, but more often against a woman—can be explained only as a means of self-justification for the perpetrator. It diminishes the victim and provides a convenient excuse for what in our society ... should accurately and simply”

be called

“murder, rape, abuse or enslavement.”—[Official Report, House of Commons, 31 January 2017; Vol 620, c 813.]

That summarises how we all collectively felt today in the chamber.

Female genital mutilation, along with other forms of so-called honour-based violence, demonstrates that even in the 21st century women are deprived of their most basic human rights just because of their gender. Our approach to tackling that imbalance of power is grounded in our gendered analysis of violence against women and girls. That approach recognises the complexity and the sensitivity that is required to make a difference to the lives of women and girls.

Our approach does not focus on just one area; it recognises the need to work in partnership to protect those who are at risk and to hold to account those who perpetrate the abuse. We recognise very much that communities have to be part of the solution. That point was made time and again during the debate, and our approach places communities firmly at the heart of what we are doing. Without engaging communities—men, women and girls—on so-called honour-based violence, and without empowering those who are affected to make their own choices while staying safe, we will not get anywhere. Only by learning from experts and ensuring that what we do is informed by the best level of community engagement can we hope to achieve our objective of a Scotland where FGM, forced marriage and all forms of honour-based violence have been consigned to history.

We do not underestimate how difficult it is for someone from a practising community to come forward. If it was easy, more people would have come forward and there might already have been prosecutions. However, as we know, looking at this complex issue through a narrow lens obscures the bigger picture, which is preventing people from coming forward. That makes our work to raise awareness among communities, to bring about attitudinal change and to encourage reporting of FGM by women, girls and men all the more important.

Although there have been no prosecutions in Scotland, let me be absolutely clear that anyone who is aware of FGM taking place has a legal and moral duty to report it. There is never any excuse for violence against women and girls, no matter how it is described. Those at risk will be protected and those who choose to perpetrate the practices will—rightly—face the consequences of their actions. Standing up to FGM and all other forms of violence against women is about much more than numbers; it is about the rights—the human rights—of women and girls at home and abroad.

We know that we need to work together with each other but, more important, we need to work with communities and front-line services. Whatever we do, it is important that it is the right approach for Scotland. I hope that the work that we are taking forward with our partners will help not only to prevent honour-based violence but to inform a response to the damaging consequences where it has occurred. Importantly, that work should also help affected communities to resist such violence and to understand that there is no good reason for women and girls to experience the harm that it brings.

I take the opportunity to thank again all our partners in all sectors who have worked so well in partnership with the Government. Their commitment and expertise are crucial. By acting together, we can contribute towards making a reality of the global aim of ending FGM along with other forms of so-called honour-based violence and all forms of violence against women and girls. I have absolutely no doubt that, in the Parliament, we have a desire for FGM and violence against women and girls in all its forms to be consigned to history. I thank everybody who participated in the debate.