Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you, Cathy. It is shocking that, in some of the areas that you spoke about, there is very weak or not enough data collection. Have there been any conversations with the Scottish Government about that, especially since things are not even marrying up to the human rights duty that you have to fulfil? Will they have to fulfil that duty? I want to probe a bit more into whether there have been any talks on the matter. It is a serious matter that there is not enough data collection. How can you find solutions, and how can you create an action plan like the one that Jan Savage mentioned if there is no data—or, I should say, a lack of data?

Thank you very much, Cathy. If you want to add anything later, you can send it in. That would be appreciated.

Good morning, committee, cabinet secretary and officials.

Amendment 85 would introduce a mandatory requirement for the making of non-harassment orders in the sentencing of sexual offenders. Having spoken to survivors of sexual crimes and domestic abuse, it is clear to me that non-harassment orders are vital to their safety. Survivors might feel safe when their abusers are in prison, but what happens when they are released?

Amelia Price, who I understand has contacted the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs and the Minister for Victims and Community Safety, was raped and assaulted by her ex-partner. He is currently serving time in prison but is due to be released later this year. The judge in the case was required under law to consider imposing a non-harassment order. However, Amelia was told that he did not impose one because her abuser had not contacted her since she reported him and she no longer lived in Scotland. My amendment 85 would ensure that such orders are issued automatically.

Amendment 241, in the name of my colleague Sharon Dowey, would extend those protections to cases of domestic abuse. The amendment is extremely important, as there has been an epidemic of domestic abuse in Scotland, with the number of cases rising. A freedom of information request showed that, in the financial year 2023-24, non-harassment orders were granted at sentencing in only 38 per cent of domestic abuse cases, so almost two-thirds of survivors live in fear that their abusers could contact them. That is why I urge members to support amendment 241.

Amendment 242, in the name of Maggie Chapman, would also extend the criteria for making non-harassment orders in sexual crimes, and I urge colleagues to support it.

I move amendment 85.

In light of what the cabinet secretary has said, I am happy to work with her before stage 3. Therefore, I will not press amendment 85.

Amendment 85, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendment 88 not moved.

Good morning, minister and officials. Thank you for the information that you have provided so far.

Last week, we heard from Jatin Haria from the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights. When it comes to reporting on the gender pay gap, he said:

“the numbers are stark enough to suggest that somebody is not doing their job.”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 11 March 2025; c 15.]

When I asked him to go into more detail, he said that this extends to both the Scottish Government and the EHRC. I said that I would ask the Scottish Government about it, knowing that you were coming in today, minister. How do you respond to the comment that the Scottish Government is not doing its job?

You will be glad to know that I have only two more questions.

The Scottish Prison Service policy for the management of transgender people in custody allows for some men and trans identities to be housed in the women’s estate. That includes violent men, providing they do not have a known record of violence against women. In its equality and human rights impact assessment, the SPS says that it is public sector equality duty compliant. Is the Scottish Government confident that the SPS is PSED compliant?

Please do discuss them, because the situation right now is not very fair for women and girls out there. They do not have their dignity, respect or fairness right now, because they have to share single-sex spaces and services in many places. I hope that the Government will provide some clarity on this issue.

Good morning, and thank you for the information that you have provided so far.

John Wilkes, last week we heard from Jatin Haria from the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights. On the issue of reporting on the gender pay gap for women, he said:

“the numbers are stark enough to suggest that somebody is not doing their job.”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 11 March 2025; c 15.]

When I asked him to go into more detail, he said that the issue extends to the Scottish Government and the Equality and Human Rights Commission. What is your response to that?

Thank you for providing clarity. There is fear about how people are interpreting the law for their organisations and fear that many more legal cases will be spurred on, because people are unclear about what should be done. As a member of the Parliament, I can see that people are unclear, so it was important that I asked you the question about how the EHRC perceives the issue, which is about how people are interpreting the law. You have guidance, which, I take it, any organisation can approach you for. Your doors are open, which is a good thing.

We live in hope.