Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you. The concern is that only a small number—a small percentage—of victims have been notified in the past, and many victims would like to be notified but have not registered, for whatever reason. It is often because they are asked only at the beginning of the case, when it is not necessarily something that they are focusing on.

Can you explain that figure of 3,057 and whether it is significantly different? I understand that you do not have the figures in front of you, but is there any reason to believe that there is going to be a significant increase in the number of victims who get notified when there is a significant change in future?

No; I am asking about the figure that you have just given us.

Can you point to any particular policy areas that have been challenging?

Good morning, cabinet secretary. In what ways has the act helped to ensure effective work to tackle child poverty across all policy areas within the Scottish Government? Have any particular policy areas been more challenging to include in the cross-government approach?

Do you agree that the problem that parliamentarians have in this area is the lack of evidence? Due to the Contempt of Court Act 1981, we do not really have any jury research in Scotland—we do not know what the split in juries is. It might be that the changes to jury size and majority would make very little difference to conviction rates, or they could make a considerable difference in specific cases.

I do not necessarily expect you to know the answer to this question, but it would be really useful if you could provide any information. With regard to other jurisdictions, are you aware of any evidence on jury splits where there is a not guilty outcome? In cases in which a unanimous decision is required but the jury cannot reach that or a supermajority, there will be a split. It might be that the split is such that there is a majority in favour of conviction but that, because of the system, that does not lead to a conviction. I appreciate that this is not your day job and that you would not necessarily look at this, but have you been able to get information on jury splits when you have been considering the issue? I suspect that the information might not be available.

That is the question, really—whether we should take the decision before we have more evidence.

Yes. I was at that meeting.

That suggests that the changes would not make a significant difference. However, we simply do not know because we do not, because of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, have evidence. Is that correct? We are being asked to proceed on the basis of a guess rather than on the basis of evidence.

Yes, that is right.

We covered all this at stage 1.