 Can I remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place and that face coverings should be worn when moving around the chamber and across the Holyrood campus? The next item of business is a debate on motion 2306, in the name of Keith Brown, on justice and the 16 days of action. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to please press the request to speak buttons. I call on Minister Ash Regan to speak to and move the motion around seven minutes, please. Men's violence against women and girls continues to be a plague on Scottish society. Women and girls remain the victims on a spectrum of violence, ranging from misogynistic conduct to violent sexual crimes. It's one of the most widespread, persistent and devastating human rights violations in our world today. Today's debate falls within the United Nations 16 days of action campaign. It represents an opportunity to take stock of our progress and then consider what more can be done both from the justice perspective but also by everyone in society. We approach today's debate and year-end reeling from a series of public and disturbing examples of extreme violence against women, set within the context of the Covid-19 restrictions and consequent increases in many forms of gendered violence. We find the spotlight firmly focused on these issues and our responses. Society is quite rightfully asking questions on prevalence, on the attitudes of men, on cultures of organisations and the role that the justice system plays in addressing those issues. The question of whether gender matters to the justice sector is also relevant to this debate. Is justice blind when women's experience of crime are gendered? Achieving gender equality includes an obligation to address the underlying causes and structures of gender inequality, including discriminatory norms, prejudices and stereotypes. The justice system has a prominent role in setting out the parameters of what is expected from a modern, progressive society. Our vision is for Scotland to be a country where women and girls have equal rights, where they have equal access to power and resources and that they can live their lives free from gender-based violence. We believe that Scotland can demonstrate international leadership by its commitment to equality. The murders of Esther Brown, Sarah Everard, Sabina Nessa and the Sisters of Biba Hengie and Nicole Smallman and many more are painful examples that, despite our collective efforts, we are faced with a sobering reality that women are still dying at the hands of men. The latest UK Femicide Census found that, on average, a woman is killed by a man every three days. It is not a surprise that generations of women are unconvinced by our efforts to tackle perpetrator behaviour, nor do they feel safe. The recent outcry from women regarding spiking and boycotting of nightclubs demonstrates that women will not accept that. Equally safe our prevention strategy for gender-based violence makes the causal link between gender inequality and violence against women and girls. It has been credited as the basis for the groundbreaking Domestic Abuse Scotland Act which came into force in April 2019. Recent figures showing that 84 per cent of court proceedings are leading to a conviction that the act is living up to its global gold standard reputation. Our programme for government includes several ambitious commitments. It recognises the unique opportunity of this Parliament to consider justice system transformation to benefit victims of gender-based violence. We are pressing forward with the consideration of Lady Dorian's review, including the introduction of specialist courts and measures to enhance victims' rights. In the recommendations is a pilot supported by the Scottish Government, Justice Partners and Rape Crisis Scotland, which reduces the trauma associated with going to court by pre-recording police statements for later use at trial. That initiative represents a fundamental shift in how evidence is captured and it puts victims at the centre. It continued throughout the pandemic and we are now scaling that up with operational partners so that more people can access its benefits. Incremental changes are not enough. The justice system is historically designed around the needs of men and not women. I think that we would all agree that women deserve better. I am pleased to be leading new work to develop a strategic approach to women in the justice system. This work will invest in developing an evidence base that demonstrates how the experience of the justice system differs depending on gender and intersectionality. It will improve outcomes for women and build a case for system change where women are being failed. It will align with efforts to tackle system inequality and disadvantages experienced by women made worse by the pandemic. Poverty, social security and housing access are issues that are layered throughout accessing services. They impact on women's abilities to move forward. Lived experience is central to understanding that. Earlier this month, we put out the first national tender to gather qualitative evidence to inform service design in relation to those involved in prostitution, a marginalised group that experienced multiple barriers to support during the pandemic. We are also committed to setting in place the right legislative environment to support and protect women. Our aspiration as a global leader in human rights includes a new human rights bill that is incorporating four UN human rights treaties into Scots law. That includes the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, CEDAW. CEDAW compels us to take all appropriate measures to modify social and cultural patterns in the conduct of men and women, where those are based on the idea of inferiority or superiority of either of the sexes. It also obligates us to take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to suppress all forms of trafficking and the exploitation of women through prostitution. That is highly relevant as we move forward with plans to design a new model for Scotland to challenge men's demand for prostitution, a behaviour that strengthens and emboldens male entitlement and misogynistic attitudes. We must do all that we can to root out misogynistic behaviours in society. It cannot be allowed to go unchecked or to exist in plain sight. Baroness Helena Kennedy-QC is in the process of looking at this very issue, exploring whether a stand-alone offence to tackle misogynistic conduct is needed. That work is of vital importance and we stand ready to consider her recommendations and act swiftly. In conclusion, if I have time, Presiding Officer, I thank the minister for taking the intervention. Could the minister provide any update on the likely timeframe for that? It was always going to be ambitious but, obviously, time is of the essence. The cabinet secretary and I spoke with Baroness Kennedy just last week and she confirmed that she is on track to meet the committee's deadline of reporting to ministers by February of next year. In conclusion, despite our best efforts to eliminate men's violence against women and girls from society, it remains a daily occurrence. We must relentlessly work to challenge all the behaviours that facilitate and enable it. My vision of Scotland is one in which women and girls are treated with respect and not one in which we turn a blind eye to things such as abuse, violence or sex trafficking. I am determined to work across the chamber and with our stakeholders to realise that. I formally move the motion. I now call on Jamie Greene to speak to and move amendment 2306.3, up to six minutes please, Mr Greene. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I thank the minister for the opening comments. It reflects the fact that their times in this Parliament works well when it tries to put its traditional partisan politics aside and work constructively as we should to tackle important issues of society. We saw that in how we tackled the coronavirus situation. We saw it when we worked together on the historic address bill. We saw it last week in what was an excellent debate in this chamber on international day for the elimination of violence against women. I know that the issue of eradicating gender-based violence is one of those issues that unites us, but as united as we are perhaps on the generality of it, politics does play a part, because politics identifies gaps perceived or otherwise in legislation and it is politics that acts as a lobbying catalyst for change where we see fit. As we have seen with the volume of amendments that we are submitting today, violence against women and girls has no place in our society, in any society. The Government rightly points that out. It must be prevented and eradicated. It is the prevention bit, which is so important. We know that it exists. We know how widespread it is just before the debate today. I was reading an article online about the television industry that I used to work in. I saw it first-hand the way that many women were treated in the workplace. The comment that the report mentions is that 39 per cent of women in that industry have been harassed at work—39 per cent. We know how widespread it is. Since moving to politics, I have been quite taken by the amount of correspondence that I have had from female constituents and the absolutely harrowing stories that they have shared with you, either through surgeries or through casework. They have been on the receiving end of abuse, both mental and physical, and those who feel that they have really been let down by the justice system. Those who, for example, have got a phone call from a court or their lawyer to tell them that their accused had been released or had been found not proven, for example, in a high-profile rape case, or those whose court case has simply fell apart, even on the day, on a technicality or an error, are the people who feel let down by the justice system. They have been saying it for years. I feel that history is repeating itself in today's debate. Previous parliaments have heard this time after time from women. It is time that this Parliament focused our attention on this issue. Where parliaments tried and perhaps failed to address it, to make those necessary or even difficult changes that had to be made, I think that this Parliament needs to have that conversation both with itself and with the public. These are difficult conversations. They are difficult decisions for the Government. Whether it is the issue of the not proven verdict that we know results in so few successful prosecutions of sexual crime and rape, be it the heated or the controversial discussion around corroboration, hate crime legislation, on how or if we define misogyny in law, on jurialist trials, on domestic abuse courts or even how we even speak or define the term sex in gender in a way that is respectful in a debate that has become so toxic. I know by Ernest Kennedy, who some of us met recently, will leave absolutely no stone unturned in her working group on misogyny. Surely she also knows that changing the law and changing society are two very different things. One does not necessarily follow the other. Change will not be easy nor will it be universally welcome, but if there ever was a time for this Parliament to show what it is made of, then now is that time. Why is that? Last year, we saw the highest number of domestic abuse incidents on record in Scotland—over 65,000 reported incidents. We also saw the largest year-on-year rise in reporting. The charity Refuge said that they were getting over 13,000 calls a month during lockdown, and a quarter of those women felt suicidal at one point. No one should have to live in fear of violence, assault or abuse. As we know many cases, lives have sadly been lost. We all know those names. We speak of them in the chamber, but they are the names of mothers and daughters and sisters and aunts and friends, and they are all women suffering at the hands of a man. It makes me ashamed, but we can do something. Over and above the reforms that I mentioned, those difficult ones, there is more that we can do right now to help the criminal justice system. We must, in my view, send a stronger message to the perpetrators of crimes against women that it is not acceptable. I am afraid that that means having a good look at ourselves around issues such as the presumption against short sentences or the issue of automatic every early release. How many perpetrators of violence against women have benefited from those decisions? How many women feel that they have been let down as a result of them? I also believe that those who violently murder women and girls should spend the rest of their life in jail, not 19 years of their life. On a less controversial note, perhaps one more, consensually there are practical things that we can and should do. We should boost the uptake of the victim notification scheme. We should take a more proactive approach in that regard. We can expand victim statements to courts, to parole hearings and the writing exclusion zones is an area of exploration. I imagine not knowing in my closing remarks, if someone who had abused or attacked you is due to be released from prison and the anxiety and worry that might cause you to bump into them in the supermarket. When I launched my member's bill in a few short weeks' time, I will ask politely and helpfully that all parties will review the content therein. I would ask you to consider my proposals to strengthen the justice system for the victims of crime, but specifically women victims, because 16 days of action might be the slogan, but 365 days of action should be our mission. I know that it will be mine. I move the amendment in my name. We cannot let another session of the Scottish Parliament pass without making a serious improvement to the lives of women and girls. It is up to us. In last week's excellent debate, we agreed to a person that men's violence against women is deeply ingrained in our society, and that there is almost a watershed moment here in knowing that the action that we must take must be decisive and effective. In the work that I will do, and Katie Clark will do, representing Labour in this Parliament, it will be a priority for us. We will also make this commitment on behalf of Scottish Labour as we will work constructively with the cabinet secretary and the minister if for justice on this really important issue. I welcome the announcement that was made today by the minister. We must make this the Parliament that reverses the trend of violence against women and girls. The amendment in my name clearly sets out what we have always said, is that we believe that there is a gap in the law and that sex should be a protected characteristic in the hate crime legislation. We think that it is incomplete without it. We do await with strong interests the findings of Helena Kennedy's working group on misogyny, and we have confidence in Helena Kennedy's working group that she will bring something forward that this Parliament can work with. As Jamie Greene said earlier, we had a meeting with her last week that I found very encouraging. The amendment does not seem to seek to pre-empt the report of what she might do. We want to discuss what the law changes recommended are, but we are clear that there is a gap in the law. We know that two thirds of cases waiting to be heard in the High Court are sexual crimes, and that backlog is hugely disproportionate affecting women and girls. However, we need to find some solutions that provide an urgency to that. In Scotland, the vast majority of violence against women comes in the form of domestic violence. We have debated it many times in this Parliament, but today's figures show that 65,251 incidents of domestic abuse in this year means that it is the fifth year in our role showing an increase. That is the work that we have to do. Domestic abuse, as we know, occurs in homes, and most incidents go unreported, is a hidden crime. Approximately one in four women in Scotland experience some form of domestic violence or sexual violence, with one out of five children live with it. I have said in previous debates that the human is described as a shadow pandemic. In my closing couple of minutes, I just want to address some practical issues that I would like to discuss with ministers going forward. Legally, there is meant to be a demand-led system. The Justice Committee heard some evidence on that, but I do not feel this operating in practice in a way that does help victims of domestic violence. I believe that thresholds should be looked at. 90 per cent of women who experience domestic violence should be noted to experience financial abuse, so when we are looking at their ability to pay legal aid fees, it is important to bear that in mind. It is also important that there is a regulation of legal profession under way to review the current barrier to allowing organisations such as women's aid to be able to employ lawyers directly in order that they could give direct advice. I do not think that there is a disagreement on it, but it is worth talking about some of the practical issues that we could bring forward. Law centre models that deal with domestic abuse could be considered perhaps a national provision of funding for law centres, specifically aimed at projects that help to give advice and representation to women fleeing violence. I believe that we must commit to meaningful change to the law and to legal support and advice where that makes sense, to ensure that women and girls who are escaping violence in their life, we must give them the opportunity to have a better life, we must remove the barriers that change their experiences to give them a better life. I declare I am a local ambassador for the White River in Scotland in Orkney. I add my congratulations to all those who took part in last week's excellent debate on ending men's violence against women and girls. There were many powerful contributions, but the courage and candour of Michelle Thompson and Alexander Stewart in sharing their own personal, painful testimonies are worthy of note. All in all, I think that it was Parliament at its best. Afternoon, though I am conscious, I have only got four minutes, so let me try and rattle through a few issues that I think are most relevant to this debate. Today's motion outlines much of the good work that has been carried out on a genuinely cross-party basis over recent years. I think that Jamie Greene was right to highlight. During my time on the Justice Committee in the last session, I think that the progress that we made in relation to domestic abuse was significant, notably the criminalisation of coercive and controlling behaviour. Recognising to the impact that such abusive behaviour has on children within a relationship or household was an important step forward. I am proud too of the cross-party work that led to increased protection of vulnerable witnesses, including measures to allow evidence to be pre-recorded or provided by Videolink. There is more work still to be done to ensure that those measures are applied routinely and consistently. More work, too, in providing legal protection of the anonymity of survivors of rape and sexual assault, as is the case in England. However, there is no doubt at all that progress has been made. At a local level, we also now have arrangements in place that allow forensic assessments to be made without adult survivors having to fly south for examinations. I pay a warm tribute to Orsas, Women's Aid, Orkney, NHS Orkney Police Scotland and others, including Justice Secretary's predecessors, who made that possible. We now need to say the same applied for younger survivors of assaults. Firmly, on the to-do list, is work to improve the chances of cases of sexual assault and rape coming to court and being prosecuted. Speak out survivors and others campaigning on this issue deserve enormous credit. While simply re-running earlier debates about ending corroboration should be avoided, I am confident again through further cross-party working and challenge we can identify improvements to be made. Reducing the number of women held in our prisons, notably on remand, must also be a top order priority alongside delivery of a modern female prison estate. Ways need to be found to allow women subjected to coercive control and better access to legal aid, especially where debts have been run up by perpetrators in the woman's name. That is a point rightly referred to by Pauline McNeill, who's amendment also refers to the current law on hate crime. My party's support for recognising misogyny as a hate crime is a matter of record. During the passage of the bill, I accepted the case made by women's aid and indeed rape crisis to see those issues addressed through Dame Helena Kennedy's fast-tracked working group. I also look forward to its report and hope that Parliament can act with urgency in due course. The Scottish Liberal Democrats will be supporting both Pauline McNeill's amendment and Jamie Greene's amendment this evening. I appreciate that I've only scratched the surface and missed out many very important issues. However, I welcome this short debate. I hope that the cross-party approach that is characterised and underpinned the progress that was made in the last session will continue into this so that we can make further inroads into creating a justice system that genuinely works towards ending gender-based violence. Today, we mark 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, a reminder of the global effort to ensure women and girls in all their diversity live a life free from violence and coercion. I pay tribute to every survivor of gender-based violence, their children and families, and to practitioners who protect women and girls. I extend my sympathies to everyone affected by the death of a woman or girl lost to gender-based violence. Thankfully, our response has evolved from an era where a domestic incident was diminished to just an argument and certainly not a police matter. The definition of rape was on a front to women. The Domestic Abuse Scotland Act 2018 criminalises coercive and controlling behaviour. Protection orders offer victim space to seek support and collaborative responses offering victims routes out of danger are in constant high demand. However, access to justice arising from women's inequality still evades many victims. This session, the criminal justice committee has taken evidence on the challenges the justice sector continues to face, and I would like to highlight two particular issues. Dr Marcia Scott described how the pandemic has given women fewer choices and perpetrators more tools for controlling and abusing them. One of many consequences of the pandemic has been the backlog of court cases. In her evidence, the Lord Advocate voiced her acute concern for those highly vulnerable victims of serious gender-based violence, predominantly women and girls whose cases are backed up by the system of prosecution. Sandy Brindley of Rape Crisis Scotland echoed her comments expressing serious concern about the impact of court scheduling on the safety, wellbeing and confidence of women. The Scottish Government commitment of £50 million to support recovery across the justice system, including a courts recovery programme, has been absolutely vital. In our budget scrutiny report, the criminal justice committee has placed clearing the backlog of cases front and centre of justice spending priorities for 2022-23. As Dr Scott stated, justice delayed is justice denied. Our committee has also taken evidence on the issue of conviction rates in rape cases, which remain stubbornly low. In its briefing, Rape Crisis Scotland highlights rape and attempted rape cases have the lowest conviction rate of any crime type and not proven verdicts account for a significant proportion of acquittals. In her evidence, Sandy Brindley challenged the notion of insufficient evidence as a factor in cases not proceeding, reminding members that to get to court in the first place, corroboration is required and highlighted cases where, despite evidence of injuries or an incident recorded on audio, the verdict was acquittal or not proven. Low conviction rates is an issue considered in Lady Dorian's review of the management of sexual offences. I truly believe that the recommendations in her report would transform justice responses through the establishment of a specialist domestic abuse court extending use of recorded evidence and affording victims greater protection from scrutiny and identification. I am very pleased that the Scottish Government is to consider the recommendations, including the piloting of judge-led trials, that I hope will address the concerns that remain around jury decision making. The historical challenges faced by the justice system are not new and not without solution. Rather, they go to the heart of efforts to restore the confidence of survivors in a trauma-informed system that exists to protect and empower them, not to re-traumatise them and fail them. I look forward to working with the cabinet secretary, the ministers and others across the chamber to take this important work forward. Sharon Dowey, to be followed by Collette Stevenson. As Jamie Greene and others have said, violence against women and girls has no place in our society. I think that we can all agree that our justice system must make punishing those who commit violence against women and girls a priority. But one thing that has become quickly apparent is that our current system, in many cases, has done nothing of the sort, giving neither dignity, fairness or respect to the women or girls looking to our courts for justice. For several months now, I have been in contact with a family in my constituency. As per their wishes, I will keep their names anonymous, but they have asked that I share their story. Women and children have suffered at the hands of this man for over a decade. From 2005 onwards, this individual has terrorised multiple families, including three of his own biological children. In the space of four years, this man has abducted one of his own children, having abused his partner. He then went on to assault the mother of his second child, leading to severe anxiety for the child and a permanent non-contact order. He then entered a relationship with another woman, resulting in another permanent no-contact order with his third child. To any reasonable individual, it is already clear at this early stage that this man is a menace, assaulting multiple partners and traumatising his own children. Yet he was given community service, probation and counselling, no jail time and nothing more than a slap in the wrist. Of course, none of this had an impact on his behaviour. He then went on to breach the terms of his probation by entering into a relationship with my constituent, the coming step-parent to her children. His campaign of abuse escalated. He moved on to throwing the children along hallways, grabbing them by the throat, throwing items at them, grabbing them by the hair or dragging them upstairs by the ears, all while also attacking their mother, who was forced to flee to her neighbours for safety. For this, he was charged with six counts of child abuse. You may have thought that that would have been the end of the matter, but no. The only punishment that he received was another non-harassment order and an order not to contact the mother or the children. He was then released in bail. We already know this man's record with non-contact orders. He ignores them, which is exactly what he did. Last year, he attacked their home, had accomplices break the windows and stalk their mother, all before breaking his own bail conditions to contact the children. Once again, the family were forced to flee their home, this time for a safe house. The result? For six counts of child abuse, the sentence that the abuser received was little more than a 12-month non-harassment order and a ban on contact with any child under 16 or entering a relationship with a female. Members following closely will recall that the individual has broken every non-contact order placed on him over the past 15 years. That is not justice, and it does nothing to protect this family or others. Families like that need more. The system has done nothing for the victims, but it creates a cycle of abuse and pain. There is cross-party consensus, and we must work together to eliminate violence against women and girls. The 16 days of activism to end gender-based violence is such an important initiative, but 30 years after it started, so many issues remain. Women and girls are verbally abused, murdered, assaulted, raped, trafficked, harassed every single day. I will focus today on the justice sector's role and how it could be transformed, particularly in dealing with sexual violence. Firstly, front-line services and staff do so much to tackle and deal with the effects of gender-based violence. Staff and the police, the Crown and the courts are working hard to support victims of crime and tackle the backlog of cases caused by the pandemic. It is right that the third sector is recognised for its great work too. Organisations such as Talk Now and Women's Aid in East Kilbride support survivors of trauma and abuse and can provide advice, counselling or temporary accommodation. In terms of criminal justice, rape crisis Scotland's briefing makes for some stark reading. Thousands of people come forward every year in Scotland to report rape and attempted rape. They put their trust in the system and they try to get justice. However, figures show that, for the first few cases that proceed to court, not even half of them end in conviction. The Government motion mentions the Lord Justice Clerk's review group report and proving the management of sexual offences cases. Many of the issues that they considered could, and I quote, be resolved by the establishment of a specialist court for sexual offences. Importantly, such a court should be trauma informed and build on the pilot project that the cabinet secretary highlighted on pre-recording complainers' statements. Those moves could ease some of the burden in what must be such a difficult experience for complainers and it is an idea that I believe could work well. I hope that the group tasked with examining this will be able to give an update as soon as practically as possible. The survivor reference group report, led by a group of survivors of rape and sexual violence, focused on the police side of things, but it is important to compare the similarities of its recommendations with those of Lady Dorian's review group. Both reports highlight the need for trauma informed services, a consistent named point of contact for survivors and increased use of pre-recorded statements. At the heart of all of this is making sure that the entire system treats every complainer with dignity and respect. We need to make it less painful for people coming forward. As a member of the criminal justice committee, I have heard from women who reported sexual violence. I listened to their experience of the second violation, feeling like they were getting looked about, having to constantly repeat their story and defence lawyers delaying the procedures. The wellbeing of complainers going through this process has to be paramount. They should not have to go through that second violation. That is critical. It is heart wrenching for somebody having to go through all of that again. We cannot be complacent about the risks women face every single day. It is not for women and girls to change their behaviour to stay safe. We need to prioritise prevention, challenge unacceptable attitudes and behaviours to avoid escalation and ensure that our justice system recovers, renews and transforms with the victims at the heart of it. We expect our justice system to protect all citizens and the case of Sharon Diwethe Constituent shows us that it really does not. Despite progress made by this Parliament, which started with Maureen Macmillan piloting the first committee bill through the Parliament, providing more protection for victims of domestic abuse, we still find that our laws and justice system are letting women down. Women who are exploited in prostitution still face sanction, a criminal record while the pimps and managers evade sanction, the sex buyers who create that demand face no sanction at all. Neither do online websites such as Viva Street that sell women face sanction, a practice that is legal in Scotland today. This business is so lucrative to them that they fund organisations that lobby to decriminalise managers and pimps in order to ensure that they will not face sanction even in the future. This has to change. Our law needs to catch up. We need to live in a country where women are equal and are not for sale, a country where those who would exploit them are brought to book, a country where those whose sense of entitlement and power leads them to buy another human being to ensure that they are punished. We also need to help those who find themselves exploited in this way, help them to get out, help them to rebuild their lives and help them to recover from the harm that has caused. By the way in which we stop this happening in the first place is to ensure that women are truly equal. Sadly, they weren't when the hate crime bill was being debated here. How many women have been murdered by misogynists since then? We also allow those who abuse their partners to continue to exercise power over them. Women who have escaped domestic abuse are forced to interact with their abuser by the family courts. Courts that value an abusive man's rights to access his children more than a woman's right to safety. It is not just the women who are harmed by this. It is also the children who become pawns and weapons to inflict the greatest amount of harm and control preventing a victim from becoming a survivor. Our courts are actively pulling them back into that cycle of abuse and despair. No parent who is an abuser should have rights of access to children of that relationship because, by their abuse, they have demonstrated that the welfare of their children does not come first. It is only when they can demonstrate that they have changed their behaviour that they should be granted any access at all. Those two issues that I have highlighted are caused by women's inequality. Women are an equal in society and therefore pay the price. We need to legislate on those issues to stop men, and I would stress that a minority of men abuse women. In doing so, we must redouble our efforts to create a truly equal country where the work done by women is valued to the same extent as that done by men, where women can leave their home any time, day or night, and not feel unsafe. If we do that, we will eliminate violence against women. By the United Nations, it has been described as the shadow pandemic, as one of the most prevalent human rights violations in the world that knows no social, economic or national boundaries. Without doubt, a global collective effort is required to address it. Gender-based violence against women and girls is ruinous to our society, and I welcome the 16 Days of Action campaign and the opportunity that it provides to galvanise our efforts to discuss actions to eradicate this scourge. At the beginning of October, and in the wake of the murders of Sabina Ness, Sarah Everhard, Nicole Smallman, Beba Henry and sadly, countless other women, a constituent contacted my office. She admitted that she had tried to write to me several times, but each time the words failed her. In asking what the Government plans were to tackle misogyny in Scotland, she said, I cannot continue to live in a society that forces me to live in fear of such violence. To live in a state of constant vigilance is exhausting and I am tired. In the same month, another constituent and a member of the Scottish Youth Parliament alerted me to reports of multiple drink-spiking incidents, and yet again, the sense of depletion was palpable and the sheer prevalence of the problem exposed once more. When we follow this fatigued change of causation, we find that gender-based violence towards women and girls is a brutal and often fatal consequence of gender inequality, unchallenged attitudes and abusive male power and privilege. It is therefore crucial that we have a system in Scotland that prioritises prevention, ensures that justice for survivors is swift, consistent and offers robust, accessible support services. I welcome the Scottish Government's plans to focus on establishing positive gender roles and healthy relationships between young people through a review of personal and social education and the equally safe delivery plan, as well as the pledge to invest over £100 million to support front-line services and focus on the prevention from school onwards over the next three years. £5 million has also already been directed to rape crisis centres and domestic abuse services in recognition of the need to reduce waiting times and increase accessibility. For those who are navigating the criminal justice system, the adoption of a trauma-informed approach will mean that the creation of a new framework designed to equip staff with the necessary skills to assist victims more mindfully and the appointment of a victims commissioner will provide an additional layer of support, placing victims' voices at the heart of these difficult proceedings. The working group on misogyny and criminal justice in Scotland, chaired by Barness Helena Kennedy, has also been established to independently analyse how the Scottish criminal justice system deals with misogyny and will ensure that any legislative gaps can be considered carefully. Yet, despite those actions and despite early successes with the Scottish Government's groundbreaking 2018 domestic abuse act, we know that there are no quick fixes. Confrinting such entrenched attitudes and such complex spectrum of abuse is going to require relentless efforts by all our institutions, by all our political parties and by all of our communities. I am also tired, but I will never give up. We will never give up. We can work together to ensure that progress is made. That form of violence is not inevitable and must be eradicated once and for all. All too often, violence against women and girls takes place in the shadows. The 16 days of activism are so important because they help to shine a light on the most shocking violation of human rights. As Parliamentarians, it is our duty to look at the levers available to us to prevent this violence, to punish those who perpetrate it and to protect victims from further abuse. On prevention, we must do more to address the root causes of violence against women. There is a huge amount of work to be done to tackle gender inequality, which remains stubbornly and unacceptably persistent. On punishment, women who have been victimised must have full confidence in the criminal justice system. Many, sadly, do not. As Audrey Nicholl highlighted, we know, for example, that sexual violence is worryingly underreported. According to the most recent Scottish Crime and Justice survey, only 22 per cent of victims of rape reported it to the police. Collette Stevenson mentioned Rape Crisis Scotland's recently published report from the survivor reference group, which describes in stark terms the experience of survivors of rape and sexual crimes as they engage with the justice system. It highlighted, and I quote, attitudinal issues among the police, feelings of powerlessness during investigations and re-traumatising experiences in court if the cases progress that far. The system is supposed to protect victims, but too often it neglects them. Earlier this year, the Scottish Parliament passed the Hate Crime and Public Order Act, legislation that crucially failed to afford women the same legal protections as other groups. The working group led by Helena Kennedy QC is welcome. As we know, this working group is looking separately at how the Scottish criminal justice system deals with misogyny. Yet it meets behind closed doors, with no detailed minutes in the public domain. Its deliberations are drip-fed to the media. Women feel as though they have been pushed to the periphery of a process that should put them at its heart. Lord Brackadale's review on hate crime, including misogynistic harassment, was published in 2018. The Hate Crime and Public Order Act was passed in 2021. The misogyny and criminal justice in Scotland working group will not report until 2022. Every year, we say that more must be done to end violence against women, but it feels as though progress cannot keep up with rhetoric. One way we can make progress and protect victims' subjective violence is the implementation of a robust and well-administered victim notification scheme. Last week, it emerged that only 37 victims of violence and sexual crimes out of a possible 4,500 had been informed when the offender in their case will be released from prison. It is clear that the current system is not fit for purpose. The Scottish Conservatives have also called for the introduction of whole-life orders for the most heinous of crimes, including violence perpetrated against women. It is a call that other parties have regrettably resisted to date. The cross-party consensus around eliminating violence against women and girls is to be welcomed, but there is a great deal more that we can and should do to protect their safety. No woman should ever have to live in fear. I refer colleagues to my register of interests. I used to work for a rape crisis centre. I have spoken before about what I think our justice system is for. Fundamentally, I think that it should exist to correct imbalances of power, and we do not have to look far to find power inequalities in our society, never mind our justice system. Earlier today, we discussed the response to deaths in prison custody review. Our prison system is necessarily a system with entrenched structural power imbalances. We accept that, but that does not mean that anything goes or that we do not need to put safeguards and structures in place to ensure that power is wielded responsibly and compassionately. Today, on the sixth day of the 16 days of activism against gender-based violence, we discussed the role of our justice system, the role it should play in correcting the imbalances of power that are so deeply embedded in our society that violence against women and girls is just something all of us women live with every day. It is not inevitable, however. Gender-based violence is on the rise. Sexual crimes are up 12 per cent on last year's figures. The pandemic has allowed domestic violence to flourish. We continue to see not just disappointing but quite frankly outrageously low conviction rates for sexual crimes in our courts. That is on top of the eye-watering delays and backlog of cases, many of which will involve survivors of gender-based violence, women and children bearing the brunt of those power imbalances. Those delays negatively impact not only on our justice system but also on survivors, increased stress, poor mental health, repeated retraumatisation, increased attrition and so on. None of that gives confidence in the system, making it less likely that survivors will report crimes or seek support. I ask the cabinet secretary in his closing to outline how we can tackle the backlog in our courts. Seventy per cent of cases in the high courts are serious sexual offence cases, predominantly affecting women and children. The Lord Advocate at a recent criminal justice committee meeting stated that she considers sexual crime as different from other forms of crime, being rooted in and perpetuating gender inequalities. They therefore require a distinct response. She stated support for judge-led trials and encouraged a more radical approach. Indeed, we have a moral obligation to consider alternative actions that allow for recovery and renewal. I think that the speaker directly to the question that the minister posed in her opening is justice gender-blind. I think that we can all agree that our justice system does not yet get gender. Implementation of the recommendations in Lady Dorian's report cannot come soon enough, and I look forward to the report on misogyny and criminal justice in Scotland working group next year. I do not wish to pre-empt its findings, but we must find a way of dealing with misogyny effectively. Last week, I raised Red Crisis Scotland's survivor reference group report on police responses to survivors. I think that it shows just how far we still have to go to tackle institutional and societal sexism in misogyny and spread awareness and understanding of the importance of trauma for both justice and for recovery, a point made in the response to death's incustody review, too. We have heard much about the training and awareness raising that police officers and other workers in our justice system do or should have, but it is clear that, despite trauma-informed training being available, survivors of sexual crimes are still treated very poorly by people who should know better. Culture change is needed, and leadership is needed for this culture change to be catalyzed. We all have a role to play. In closing, I want to say to all those who are currently experiencing gender-based violence, you are not alone. Help is available. You can call the domestic abuse and forced marriage helpline 24 hours a day on 0800 027 1234, and you can call Red Crisis Scotland's helpline every evening between 6pm and midnight on 0808 801 0302. We now move to closing speeches. I call on Katie Clark up to four minutes, Ms Clark. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The statistics on violence against women and girls make somber reading. Sexual crimes, including rape and attempted rape, reported to Police Scotland, have gone up 114 per cent over the last 10 years. And since 2010-11, other sexual crimes, including internet-based crimes such as communicating indecently and taking and possessing and distributing indecent photographs of children, have increased by 238 per cent. According to Rape Crisis Scotland, on a typical day in 2019, the number of survivors of sexual violence who were waiting for access for what they call life-saving rape crisis support in Scotland had almost doubled from the year before, and only 43 per cent of rape and attempted rape cases led to a conviction compared to 88 per cent for other types of crimes. Very disturbingly, at least 40 per cent of all sexual crimes recorded in 2019-20 were related to a victim under the age of 18. Of course, many more women will never report their abusers, but for those who do report their crimes, they experience a legal system that fails them and many speak of the further trauma caused to them by their treatment by the police, the courts, the legal profession and the wider judicial system. Domestic violence also against women and girls is endemic, and we have heard the figures that were released today that show that, for the fifth year in a row, there has been an increase in the incidents of domestic abuse that are reported to the police. Specialist domestic violence courts have been trialled and we ask that the Scottish Government provide an evaluation so that we know how those courts have worked. We need to know whether those who have suffered domestic abuse have experienced those courts in a way that they feel deals with cases better. I would be happy to take an intervention. I agree with much of what she said, but would she acknowledge that the proposed introduction of domestic courts is only a decision for the Lord Advocate that it is not something that the Government can bring in? I am grateful to the cabinet secretary. What I was asking for was information to MSPs about how the Scottish Government evaluates how those trials have worked, and in particular how victims and survivors feel that it has worked for them, but also whether those specialist courts have dealt with cases better in other ways, what impact those courts have had on sentencing, whether the sentencing outcomes have been the same in specialist domestic courts as opposed to the more traditional way that cases have been dealt with, and whether cases have been dealt with more speedily. Violence against girls and women needs to be looked at, of course, in the context of wider gender inequality. The last Parliament passed hate crime legislation in relation to other groups, and we need to look at how our legal system works and what more can be done to create criminal offences that tackle misogynistic behaviour. I hope that the misogyny working group comes forward with recommendations as to how the law can be changed, but we have to recognise that, although there have been many changes in how the courts work in recent years, in many ways the courts are just the same and operate in a very similar way as they did a century ago. Therefore, we need to look at radical ways in which we change our legal system, because women who are victims of such offences still feel and know that the justice system fails them. It is our responsibility to ensure that we create a justice system that recognises the power relationship between men and women in society, the widespread sexist and misogynistic attitudes at which they exist, and provides a way of delivering justice for women and girls. Violence against women and girls is truly a global problem, and it is clear that there is a growing global determination to tackle those horrors. Here in Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom, women have fought long and hard for equality, but nobody suggests that their job is done. We have already heard from Jamie Greene about pitifully low rates of conviction for sexual assaults and rapes. We also know that the number of domestic abuse incidents is the highest on record. Many women share a belief that Scotland's justice system does not always live up to the values that it likes to espouse. I am sure that we are all familiar with the accounts of being revictimised and degraded by the impersonal criminal justice machine. Sharon Dowie's powerful account is still the reality for far too many. Today, we remember women who have been killed by men this year. One of those is Esther Brown. Yesterday, I spent just over 10 minutes listening to Esther. An audio recording of her is on the website of a community garden beside her home in Glasgow's Woodlands area. Punctuated with warm laughter, she speaks about her passion for gardening and the outdoors. Having moved to the area in 2008, she says that she feels more at home there than anywhere else. In May this year, Esther Brown was raped and murdered in her own home. Registered sex offender, Jason Graham either tricked or forced his way inside to commit unimaginable acts. Esther, who was age 67, lay dead for days. Her killer's long history of offending includes the rape and brutal assault of another woman in her own home. For that heinous crime, Graham was sentenced to seven and a half years in prison. That meant that he was automatically released after just five. I met a group of Esther's friends. They are grieving, they are scared but they are also angry. How they want to know was a sex offender who was being monitored by police free to kill. What were the terms of his supervision? Was he living under a different name? Did he breach parole conditions? What went so catastrophically wrong? They asked me to put these questions in others to Police Scotland, which I did, when I got the response back, not a single question was answered. Instead, they were told that a significant case review was under way. Esther's family will be told the outcome, although only, quote, where appropriate, whatever that means. I do not blame the officer who wrote this letter, but I do blame a culture in which victims are treated with a casual disregard. Women cannot just be phobbed off with glib assurances that lessons will be learned. They also deserve to know exactly how long violent criminals will serve in prison. In the most extreme of cases, Scotland's judges should have the option to impose whole-life sentences. Two years ago, the Parliament rejected my colleague Liam Kerr's attempt to bring Scotland into line with the rest of the UK. Jason Graham will spend at least 19 years in prison, at which point he can apply for parole. Compare that with the murder of Sarah Everard, whose killer Wayne Cousins was given a whole-life tariff in England. I think that most of the people we represent share the belief that some criminals are just too dangerous to ever be set free. We should be honest enough to admit that. More immediately, the authorities must be open and honest when the system so badly fails. Rest in peace, Esther. I now call on Keith Brown, cabinet secretary, to wind up the debate up to six minutes. Today's debate has been an opportunity to discuss one of the most serious human rights violations and that is violence against women and girls and to highlight the strong cross-party consensus around the issue, not on every part of the issue, but on the fundamentals of it. I thank everyone for their contributions across the chamber. I also thank and pay tribute to the front-line service workers, who work tirelessly to ensure that women and children can access vital help advice and support during these times—rape crisis Scotland, Scottish Women's Aid, Assist, Victim Support Scotland and many others who support victims of gender-based violence, demonstrated incredible resilience and adaptability during the height of the pandemic. I put on record our thanks for all the work that they do. We are here to discuss a different type of pandemic. It has been called by a number of members a shadow pandemic in our society, and that is men's violence. I listened carefully to the contributions to last week's debate, led by Shona Robison, speaking on the same issue, and I echo all the sentiments that are expressed by her and other colleagues in the chamber. That is a man's issue, and it is men's responsibility to change. From my part, I am prepared to do everything in my power as justice secretary to ensure that all forms of men's violence against women and girls is eradicated in our society and that women's human rights are upheld throughout our justice system. It is past time that men look closely at their behaviours and challenge those of their peers. The point was very well captured, I believe, by Police Scotland in that guy campaign, a powerful message that I would commend. I will try to address, if I can quickly, some of the points that have been raised. Jamie Greene mentioned and is right that there is broad-based support across the Parliament for many of the measures that we might take forward. We might differ in some particulars, but there is a great deal of support for many of the measures that could be considered. I would suggest that it is a general cultural change, which we have to look at as well. We can make all the changes that different parties want, but I do not think that that in itself changes the fundamentals of men's violence against women and girls until we make it a culturally unacceptable part of society. I could mention one thing that has not been mentioned, and that is veterans. I am Cabinet Secretary for Justice in veterans. I am well aware of the experience of women and the armed forces. I opened a veterans facility in Fife recently, in one woman there who had been one of the first women to go from the Rhines to serve on ships. Her experience was absolutely horrendous, and we will see more of that coming out along with the treatment of LGBTI people and the armed forces as well. The treatment of women and the armed forces is something that we also have to look at. There are difficult reforms, many of which we are looking at. I do not think that we are going to get agreement on the presumption against short sentences. I should say that the last case that was mentioned by Russell Finlay was under previous legislation, which this Government changed, so that early release would not have taken place for that individual. It did take place during this Government, but the previous legislation applied at that time. There are things on which we will probably disagree. In relation to Pauli McNeill, she raised the point about legal aid, and the minister has taken forward a review of legal aid, and I am sure that she heard the points that were made, and those will be taken forward. Liam McArthur acknowledged that progress had been made. He also mentioned things such as anonymity, and we will be taking action in relation to that. Audrey Nicholl and Maggie Chapman both mentioned the backlog, which is a huge issue. Maggie Chapman in particular asked me what we can do about it. First of all, I am not making a political point, but we have no Covid consequentials to deal with anything related to Covid from the settlement that we have from Westminster. The challenge that we have is to find the money to continue the work that we have done—for example, remote duries and so on—and some of the innovations that we have carried out in terms of recording evidence. We have to find the money to do that. Over and above that, I would just reiterate the point that we are more than willing to listen to any other suggestions. The point was made, I think, by—might have been in Cockab Stewart—just as the lad is just as denied. Just as the lad is also just as degraded. Over time, people forget the evidence and we have to make sure that we can limit any backlog that is there. I should also say in relation to the point that Tess White made in a very good speech. We have never drip-fed anything from the misogyny working group—not that I am aware of it—anyway happy to be challenged on that, but we have not done that. We do have regular conversations with Baroness Kennedy and the Parliament agreed that she would report back by February as a Ministers confirmed. We expect that she will do that. The backlog has to be dealt with. The other issues have to be dealt with. I should also say, though, that in relation to the Tory amendment in the spirit of trying to find consensus, we will accept—there are things that give us some concern—that we will accept the Conservative amendment. I cannot accept the Labour amendment. I think that we have been here before for the reason that I was trying to draw out when I spoke to Katie Clark. The constitutional position—I said the Lord Advocate—it is actually the Lord President that has the direction over the courts. Much of what is said in the Labour amendment and what has been said by the speakers, we would certainly agree with. I hope that we can continue to work together on how we take those things forward. I should just say that victim-blaming misogyny and patriarchal commentary have no place in a modern progressive Scotland. It is men's behaviours that need to be held to scrutiny. I have said this a number of times, but it bears repeating. Harassment, unwanted physical and verbal attention threats, invading women's space and so many more actions that men routinely inflict on women must stop. If I am honest, we all grew up at a certain time for me, the realisation of the extent to which my daughter, my mother and my sisters would have changed their behaviour right from the point when they were small girls. It is only just now, I think, that in the last few years it has been made more obvious to me the way that women have to change their behaviour. It is men that have to change their behaviour to start to unravel that. Education is an integral part. I will leave for half time yet. The cabinet secretary is in the last seconds of closing. I will just jump forward and give him what is being said. I think that the fundamental point is that there are some really important issues, not Provence mentioned them. We will have that discussion, corroboration and, in the meantime, many of the things that we can change. At its root, we have to first of all have a justice system that, end to end, is trauma informed. That is a buzzword just now, but we have to make that a reality and one that is victim-centred. All of the changes that we could collectively make will not be sufficient. It will have to be a cultural change, and for that we all, especially all the men in this chamber and throughout the rest of Scotland, bear a huge responsibility. I would ask Parliament to restate our collective ambition to make that change and to support the motion. Thank you. That concludes the debate on justice and the 16 days of action. It is now time to move on to the next item of business. There are three questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first is that amendment 2306.3, in the name of Jamie Greene, which seeks to amend motion 2306, in the name of Keith Brown, on justice and the 16 days of action be agreed. Are we all agreed? The amendment is therefore agreed. The next question is that amendment 2306.2, in the name of Pauline McNeill, which seeks to amend motion 2306, in the name of Keith Brown, on justice and the 16 days of action be agreed. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed, therefore we will move to a vote and there will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.