 Rwy'n gynnwys, y dystau'r cyfnodd cymaen nhw, ar y dyfynidol yn ystigwr i'r drws o ffrinwyr Pwg 1, 695, yn ynddeddf i Christián Graeme, o'r Sgoltaiddau Llywodraethol yn fawr o gwzreiddau cyfnodd cyweld. Fy llawr i ddweud o gychwyn i gwyniwn i'r bwfedd â'r ei ddweud fel Llywodraedd hwnnw, a chi'n ffrindwyr Christián Graeme fel ar MACL fordwyr yng Nghymru yn ddwyd ym mwyntau I'm opening this debate on behalf of the Justice Committee and I would like to say therefore that my speech will be measured, which is perhaps not my usual tenor. I'm pleased that with human rights on our remit, yet again I see the cabinet secretary in front of us for social justice so I don't know if we're going to continue in this role but never mind. The Justice Committee agreed to engage with Scotland's national action plan for human rights or SNAP to give it its snappy title, the clerk put that bit in. I was glad when we appointed John Finnie as rapporteur to the SNAP process and I'm delighted that we have secured this debate on SNAP's first annual report and John will be summing up on behalf of the committee. Let me start by emphasising that human rights is not something separate or academic or something to concern us only in countries where we consider rightly or wrongly that these are abused. Human rights, the founding principles for example of that right to dignity should permeate all areas of Scottish life and especially our public services. That's why the leadership, the membership of the leadership's panel is as it is. For example, and at random, a former convener of the SCVO Executive of the Care Inspectorate, John Scott QC, VC Justice Scotland, chair of the Scottish Refugee Council, chair of engender, Deputy Chief Constable of Police Scotland, Deputy General Secretary of the S2C, the director of integration and development at COSLA and others but across the range of the public services are part of that leadership panel. Based on evidence gathered over a three-year period, the SNAP process was launched on 10 December 2013, International Human Rights Day. It sets out a framework of shared responsibilities and steps to address gaps in good practice. It has been described as a road map, again not my words, I find metaphorical road maps and landscapes cluttered or otherwise cliches a step too far. However, a road map in quotes for the realisation of all internationally recognised human rights. The SNAP vision is of a Scotland in which everyone is able to live with human dignity. I'm sure that's a vision we all share. In responding to the current political and economic context in Scotland, the SNAP process pursues three outcomes supported by nine priorities and these outcomes are better culture, better lives and a better world. It promotes a human rights-based approach, emphasising participation, accountability, non-discrimination, empowerment and legality, panel yet another acronym. This has several proven benefits, upholding the rights of everyone, supporting person-centred services, helping good decision making, improving institutional culture relationships and finally ensuring legal compliance and promoting best practice. Let's take helping good decision making, for example, as a report says, putting people at the heart of decisions where the impact of a decision on people's rights is properly assessed before it's made. So that, for example, policies like the bedroom tax, manifestly unfair and disproportionate and vulnerable and disabled people will not, as a report says, get off the starting blocks. Now, those are progressive yet challenging outcomes. To achieve them, the SNAP process is overseen by a leadership panel, which I've given you some of the names of, chaired by Professor Alan Miller. There are 26 leaders from the different sectors across the whole spectrum of public life, including the legal profession. Professor Miller told us, the Justice Committee, that there are over 40 organisations playing a role in implementing SNAP. The panel receives regular reports from a number of action groups, which in turn include representation from different sectors. Now to the annual report, which I have in my hand, and an excellent production. Alison McInneson was quite right in saying that, in fact, it's a well-presented report that you can actually read and doesn't put you to sleep, is properly presented and easily understandable. So congratulations, whoever did that, they know how to make a report informative, understandable as well as attractive. It reflects in successes in year one, such as the Glasgow Commonwealth Games becoming the first games to have a human rights policy, and the commitment that SNAP has achieved from partners to embed human rights into the integration of health and social care across Scotland. We all know of cases where, perhaps in particular, elderly people or vulnerable people are not given the dignity that they deserve in some of our social and health services. The report also describes challenges that are likely to be faced by SNAP in year two, such as increasing people's understanding of their human rights and their participation in decisions that affect them, increasing organisations' ability to put those rights into practice and increasing accountability through human rights. There are no human rights based laws, governance and monitoring. Professor Miller told the Justice Committee that that will include implementing the Scottish Human Rights Commission's action plan on justice for victims of historic abuse of children in care, after and reviewing the first couple of years of Police Scotland from a human rights perspective. areddoedd. As the Justice Committee, we have engaged with the SNAP process by pointing John Finnie, or I already referred to as our rapporteur. Mr Finnie receives an update from Professor Miller twice a year and reports back to the committee and we are also, as you can see, sponsoring this debate. The committee and the Justice Subcommittee in Policing have also sought to promote human rights principles in our day-to-day work. For example, in yn ddadwodol ag i Minot owner, cynlluniau, nywetwch, dilluio, yn ni'ch helicopter sydd gwaith iau iawn. Felly, i gŷn' ich ond yn gwyllustol iawn roi'n bestio fynd13tau'n gwylliant하� villages o odref nhw, mae'n iq SUV a sut mae hi'n c espach gyda phobledwg yn ffiant nopein oanken. The sub-committee also scrutinised Police Scotland over inappropriate use of stop-and-search because these are issues of infringement of civil liberties. That led to change. More recently, last Tuesday, the Justice Committee took evidence and the Scottish Government's changes to the arrangements for inspection, monitoring and visiting of prisons. We had evidence about, for example, compliance with OCAT. That is the optional protocol to the Convention against torture. We will pursue those issues with the cabinet secretary when we hear from him on 16 December. I put him on notice. Whether it is protecting access to legal aid, a fair hearing, a right to freedom of movement or expression balanced as ever against individual responsibilities in a democratic country, our human rights and those of our neighbours and communities permeates every corner of our lives. We often take them for granted until they are threatened, eroded or even withdrawn. We should always be on red alert about protecting those rights and the rights of others. Even when anyone asks, when does the Parliament consider human rights issues or, more particularly, when does the Justice Committee consider them, I would reply all the time, because access to justice, whether civil or criminal, is at the core of a civilised justice process. However, as a committee, we are also a critical friend of the SNAP process and perform a scrutiny role. That is why our rapporteur is not a member of the leadership panel. While noticing the achievements of year 1, we also note that there is work to be done as the report acknowledges. We will continue to scrutinise the leadership panel and hold them to account for delivery of the SNAP objectives through the work of our rapporteur, through evidence sessions and through debates like this. Through our rapporteur, we also champion human rights in this Parliament and continually think of ways in which rights are promoted and protected in the work of this institution. I look forward to listening to members' contribution to this reflective and positive and non-confrontational debate about SNAP. I note that the distance travelled so far and the successes there have been, but I note also that there is some distance to go. I congratulate the leadership panel on a successful first year and I trust that it will ensure that good progress is made in meeting the objectives of SNAP by 2018. I repeat that I also commend the leadership panel on an excellent first annual report. I have said that it is clear, accessible and user-friendly. As a committee, we acknowledge the hard work that has been put in to make it so. I therefore have pleasure, Deputy Presiding Officer, in moving motion, S4M-11695, in my name. Thank you very much indeed, Presiding Officer. I say that Christine Grahame is becoming very expert in consensual speeches in the chamber and I'm sure that everybody welcomed that indeed. Can I say that I warmly welcome the opportunity to debate human rights and my new role as Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Communities and Pensioners' Rights? Members will be aware that, as part of that, I have taken on portfolio responsibility for ensuring that the Scottish Government plays its part in the creation of a modern, inclusive Scotland that protects, respects and realises the human rights of all our citizens. That ambition is central to the Scottish Government's efforts to tackle inequality and achieve social justice, and I'll come to that later. Next week is 10 December, March 1, since the launch of Scotland's first national action plan for human rights, or SNAP, for short. Around this time last year, Nicola Sturgeon described SNAP as, quote, an important milestone in her journey to create a Scotland that acts as a beacon of progress internationally, end quote. A year later, I would echo those sentiments. SNAP has provided a framework and coherence to our collective ambition to build a better country. It has created a collaborative partnership between government, public bodies, business, the third sector and rights holders that seeks to drive forward the promotion and protection of human rights right across Scotland for the benefit of all. SNAP demonstrates that human rights are more than mere legal instruments. They are the fundamental freedoms and rights to which everyone is entitled, and they are built on universal values such as dignity, equality, freedom, autonomy and respect—all profoundly Scottish values. I want to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the work of the Scottish Human Rights Commission over this period. They have played a key role in driving forward progress and I look forward to meeting Professor Alan Miller in my new role to discuss how we can build on the strong working relationship between government and national human rights institute. I commend the first annual report of progress made to date. The report recognises that Scotland is alive with discussion and dialogue about the future of our country. Those discussions have gone beyond the traditional parameters of party politics and brought to the fore the importance of social justice, equality and fairness within our society. Deepening and strengthening the participation of people in how our country is run will be a priority for me as part of our democratic renewal agenda. I note the strong synergies of that ambition with the international human rights framework as an internationally agreed road map of values and principles. In terms of rights, we have made substantial progress since 2007. Devolution has enabled us to adopt Scottish solutions to Scottish problems, to protect our health service, to mitigate the UK Government's welfare reforms and to design a justice system fit for the 21st century. Shortly this Parliament this afternoon will debate violence against women, which is a fundamental breach of human rights and which we are all working hard to eradicate from our society. However, there still remain gaps to be filled. Too many people in our country live in poverty. There are persistent failures by public bodies to respond to individuals with a sufficiently human rights-based approach. Stigma and discrimination continues to be an everyday experience for too many of our minorities. Fundamental inequalities within our society require to be urgently tackled. That is why this Government has argued for the maximum possible devolution of powers so that we can begin to tackle the real challenges in Scotland. There is also much more to do to ensure that the people of Scotland understand those rights and feel empowered to claim them. That is why I am pleased to announce today that the Government will work with the Commission and others to support the development of an awareness-raising campaign designed to help to achieve a greater understanding amongst the population at large of why rights matter and empower them on how to claim their rights and ensure that we achieve our objectives. In its first year, letters recognise the progress SNAP is beginning to make in contributing to tackling many of those issues through bringing organisations together to identify best practice, exchange experience and identify solutions for tackling the big human rights challenges in our society. Through the creation of opportunity for people whose rights are affected to shape the way things are done, through the interrogation and challenge of existing ways of doing things and seeking to embed a common understanding of human rights in all that we collectively do and learning and participating in the international global drive to extend human rights to the whole of humanity, because far too many people in today's world do not enjoy the basic human rights, let alone the additional ones that we now take for granted in our own country. We have a major part to play both in Scotland and internationally in making human rights a reality for all our citizens. Ilein Murray, maximum five minutes please. Last month, the Parliament voted by a large majority to reaffirm its support for the Human Rights Act 1998 and its incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into this devolution statute. Today, we celebrate the first annual report of the Scottish National Action Plan on human rights. We look forward to the work that it intends to progress, and we highlight the benefits of a human rights approach to policy development and the provision of services. The requirement to abide by ECHR by legislating and the UK ratification of seven of the 10 core international human rights instruments does not mean that human rights are embedded into our culture, far from it. As the cabinet secretary said, we face many gaps in human rights in Scotland, systematic poverty and social exclusion, economic and health inequalities, discrimination on the basis of gender, ethnicity, disability, mental health, and socioeconomic background. The rights of clients, patients and hospitals, care homes and in the care system in general are too often not adequately protected. Later today, we will debate violence against women. Domestic and sexual abuse are examples not only of abuses of human rights but of failure to embed human rights in our culture. There is much to do and much progress to be made. However we legislate, however we attempt to lead by examples. Governments and parliaments cannot do that alone. For example, equal representation of men and women in Parliament in cabinet is a worthy aim. A female First Minister is an excellent role model, but unless all this is accompanied by change of culture, it will not result in the equal of opportunity for girls and women. It will not prevent almost one in five women in Scotland suffering sexual assault and a similar number of suffering domestic abuse. It will not reverse the underemployment of qualified women and STEM employment. We only need to look across to America for an example of how, leading by example, though important is not enough, a black president in his second term of office, but African Americans still suffering disproportionate disadvantage. We have seen very recently the lack of value that is placed on their lives by the country's law enforcement and legal system. SLAF is unusual and welcome in that it is not government-led. It involves more than 40 other organisations, and its delivery will be overseen by leadership panel, as we have heard, of 27 representatives from a wide range of public and third sector organisations. One of the five groups set up within SNAP aims, unsurprisingly, to embed human rights into our culture. People understand human rights, involving the provision of better information and the introduction of human rights education in schools. I was interested to hear the cabinet secretary's announcement this afternoon. The media far often denigrates human rights to some sort of offenders or terrorist charter, but human rights are fundamentally about equality, defending the rights of us all and addressing the inequalities and injustices to many of our citizens suffer. Human rights can illuminate our approach to a whole range of equality's issues, gender, sexuality, disability, racism, poverty and sectarianism, to mention a few. A human rights approach to health and social care should inform how young people leaving care are supported, should shape the support that carers themselves require, and should recognise the right of all to independent living and to dignity. The Action Group on Better Lives is considering developing a network of local champions working to create a bottom-up approach to a person-centred policy development. The report notes that there is currently limited understanding on how a human rights perspective can be used to view the problems of poverty and inadequate living standards in Scotland. Those issues are the focus of an innovation forum next week, which will include, importantly, people with personal experience of poverty, as well as representatives from civic society, the public sector and government. The connection between justice and human rights may be more widely recognised, but nevertheless many people in Scotland still experience limited access to justice and therefore aim to improve access to justice for children, for people on low incomes, disabled people and the survivors of sexual and domestic violence and abuse, including the survivors of historic sexual abuse. I would ask the cabinet secretary to reconsider the request for an inquiry into historic sexual abuse. Police Scotland has a commitment to embed human rights in its structures and in cultures, but issues such as stop and search and the now reversed, thankfully, routine deployment of armed police suggest that there is still some way to go in embedding the culture into our law enforcement. Staff, importantly, also recognises our international obligations. It requires a greater understanding of an engagement with the obligations imposed on us by the United Nations treaties, which the United Kingdom has ratified. Labour welcomes the first annual report. We look forward to progress and to actions that truly embed human rights into all that we do, into all the legislation that we pass and all the policy that we develop. Thank you. I now call on Margaret Mitchell, maximum five minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Scotland's national action plan is a very well-crafted and structured report and one that belongs to dozens of organisations. I pay tribute to the numerous individuals and organisations that have contributed to it in its first year. However, the plan is particularly impressive, not just for its successes over the past 12 months, but for its inclusive and collaborative approach. There is therefore a tangible sense of ownership as various stakeholders take responsibility for devising and delivering activities in their area of expertise under the guidance of the leadership panel. This is no top-down devised report, which, after completion, is merely going to gather dust on a shelf. It is a live, vibrant plan, which, from inception to completion and on to implementation, has at its very core the co-operation, inclusion and collaboration of over 40 organisations throughout Scotland. In addition to that, in drawing together of the Scottish Government's departments, third sector organisations and companies, there is no mean feat, as is the bringing together of stakeholders to participate in the process of constructive accountability and independent monitoring. Crucially, the plan focuses on outcomes rather than processes or recommendations for recommendations sake. Significantly, of the 14 or so EU action plans, all except Scotland, are government-led. As such, Scotland's national plan has deservedly attracted international recognition, even in its infancy, and it will no doubt continue to do so as it gathers steam in its second year. This is a justice committee-led debate, and the plan has an important part to play in helping the committee to carry out its monitoring and scrutiny of vitally important issues. Although it is not an exhaustive list, those include access to justice, a fundamental human right that needs to be recognised in the budget and sufficiently resourced to respect the rights of communities and individuals. Corroboration, a central tenant of Scotland's law, designed to safeguard against miscarriages of justice, is now under threat. Stop and search, a tool that must be used sensibly and proportionately, and the arming of police, a policy that, in its implementation, must be open, transparent, accountable and, again, proportionate, while at the same time ensuring the public's protection. The justice and safety action group forces on training and accountability in policing are there for extremely welcome, while its other priorities will help to inform the justice committee's work going forward. The plan does, however, go beyond the structures and culture of policing by identifying ways to improve access to justice for children, survivors of violence and abuse. Sadly, that is very much a live issue, given the allegations of historic abuse that have been made in Scotland, including those of former pupils at the Roman Catholic Fort Augustus School in Loch Ness, as well as another of the house in Aberdeen and Larch Grove Boys' home in Glasgow. Rotherham has dominated the public consciousness since it emerged earlier this year that 1,400 children were sexually exploited between 1997 and 2013. During his evidence to the Justice Committee in February this year, Professor Miller indicated that an apology law is very much a part of the draft action plan concerning victims of historic child abuse. I sincerely hope, therefore, that my proposed Apologies Scotland Bill, which is currently with the Scottish parliamentary drafters, will make some progress in that regard in the context of civil litigation. To conclude, I look forward to year 2 of the Scottish national action plan and confirm having added my signature to the motion that the Scottish Conservatives are pleased also to support the motion. Many thanks. We will now have a short open debate. Speeches of four minutes please. Roderick Campbell, to be followed by John Pentland. Thank you, Presiding Officer. May I refer to my register of interests as a member of the Faculty of Advocates and also a member of Amnesty International. I welcome the opportunity to speak in this short debate. Human rights remain an integral part of this Parliament and long may that remain so. Whatever the intentions of the Conservative party, I believe that there is a very limited appetite in Scotland to replace the European Convention with any type of British Bill of Rights. Indeed, the findings of the UK Bill of Rights Commission in their final report dated December 2012 made that clear. However, human rights do not exist in a vacuum. They are there to protect individual citizens. In convention terms, political and civic rights rather than economic and social rights, there is no doubt that, as a living instrument, the jurisprudence of the European Court in interpreting the convention has responded to the changing needs of society over the past 60 years. Indeed, we should not just think of rights in terms of fair trials, freedom of expression and the right to resist arbitrary arrest, important as they are, but we should recognise the wider role. For example, in relation to article 3, the provision prohibiting torture in human integrating treatment, we should accept its relevance to conditions in care homes, as indeed the Scottish Human Rights Commission does. Scotland has a proud record in protecting and promoting human rights. Both the UK Equality Human Rights Commission in respect of reserve matters and the Scottish Human Rights Commission have a role to play. As Christine Grahame has indicated, the Scottish National Action Plan for Human Rights is a recognition that this Parliament takes human rights seriously. A year ago, we debated the launch of SNAP, the first such action plan in the UK. A road map, cliched or not, as the convener suggests, for the realisation of all internationally recognised human rights, which is perhaps better described as the Scottish approach. SNAP has three identified outcomes—better culture, better lives and better world. In relation to better culture, as Amnesty International say in their helpful briefing, quote, the design and delivery of SNAP has been engaging, participative and innovative. A wide range of organisations and individuals have been involved from the very beginning of the process. The very act of bringing together a diverse group in this way is already starting to have an impact on how civic Scotland views human rights. Indeed, the fact, as Amnesty International goes on to state, is that so many organisations and individuals that have devoted time and resources to SNAP demonstrates a great deal of commitment among civic Scotland to human rights, something that I hope that this Parliament reflects. In relation to better lives, this is clearly a very wide area, but in the area of health and social care, embarking as it is at present through an important journey of integration, there can surely be no better time to demonstrate the importance of a human rights framework. I welcome the creation of the SNAP Health and Social Care Action Group, one of five such action groups set up to date. There does it seem to be a far greater acceptance of the need for a person-centred approach to care. As a corollid to that, it would seem to me that attempts to build a career structure in the care sector would substantially improve the likelihood of successful outcomes for patients concerned and reinforce respect for them. However, there are, of course, real issues for disabled people and others that are not being recognised. As Inclusion Scotland points out in its briefing, the current programme of welfare reform is having a devastating and disproportionate impact on disabled people. It suggests that the prime motivation behind the replacement of DLA has not been about empowering disabled people to the same freedom, choice, dignity and control as other citizens, but rather it has been about cutting the welfare budget. The justice and safety group will be developing a human rights-based strategy on violence against women and will no doubt be looking carefully at human trafficking. In relation to a better world, the Scottish Human Rights Commission has, of course, a crucial role. It has warned of the dangers of the Conservative proposals to repeal the Human Rights Act, jeopardising the rights of the people of Scotland and stressed the importance of opposition from the Scottish Government and Parliament on that issue. Clearly, in any event, SSHRC has pointed out that this is an important year for the UK and indeed Scotland in international human rights terms, as the UK will examine civil and political rights in the UK. Presiding Officer, SNAP has made a good start. Let's wish it well for the coming year. Many thanks. I now call John Pentland to be called by Alison McInnes. Presiding Officer, it doesn't seem like very long since I last stood in this chamber to talk about human rights, but then it is an important issue and deserves it second out in a month, especially when we now have a new cabinet secretary for social justice who may be less keen of excluding Scotland and withholding funding from the UK Supreme Court. I am still not sure why the previous cabinet secretary thought that it was a good idea to bar Scottish people from using this channel to protect their human rights. For who knows where that would have led. Of course, the previous cabinet secretary was not the only one who has proposed tinkering with their human rights. The Tories have launched an offensive, rooted in their distrust of all things European, such as the Court of Human Rights, which it accuses of missions creep. They also blame Labour for extending human rights, and I am happy to help to shoulder such blame, but having referred to Labour's proud record in the previous debate, I think that we can just take that as red and spare you the details this time. I suffice to say that I fully support our continued membership of ECHR, and while the Scotland Act prevents the repeal of the Human Rights Act in Scotland, I oppose any attempt to undermine it in the UK and indeed any attempt to undermine human rights anywhere. The focus of this debate is the Scottish national plan for human rights, also known by its snappier title, SNAP. SNAP will be one-year-old on 10 December, which of course is human rights day. Indeed, it is something of a season for human rights, with the 16 days of action against violence against women, which is the subject of the next debate, and just two days ago it was international day for the abolition of slavery. With human trafficking propagating modern slavery in Scotland, we need legislation to tackle this, and I look forward to the Government's bill promised as a response to Jenny Marra's bill. The Scottish Human Rights Commission and SNAP's leadership panel are to be congratulated on the development and progress that they have made with this plan. As the other organisations who have been involved with its forums and action groups, there is no shortage of challenges in the field of human rights inequalities. For example, the Scottish Human Rights Commission highlighted in its briefing that there is a recognised need for existing resources to be directed towards delivering the commitments that are made in SNAP. The challenges are far reaching, and this is reflected by the five action groups that are tackling SNAP commitments to building a better human rights culture, improving social, economic, health and justice outcomes, and fulfilling our international obligations. I hope that the ideas that they have contributed and the issues that they have highlighted will be taken on board by the Scottish Government and that they will lead to further action, whether it be guidance, policy or legislation, as appropriate. There still remains the question of SNAP's future status, and I would welcome the Scottish Government's clarification about how it plans to consolidate the work of SNAP and ensure that it continues to. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. SNAP has made an impact and good progress, I think, in the first year. It is good to have an opportunity to debate it today ahead of International Human Rights Day on 10 December. Members have already spoken about the practical value of SNAP in raising awareness, understanding and respect for human rights throughout government, public service and communities. The report notes that there is still a lack of understanding among decision makers and, indeed, front-line workers about the value of human rights, so I welcome the cabinet secretary's announcement earlier of an awareness-raising campaign on why rights matter and how to claim those rights. It is vital, because the Scottish Human Rights Commission stresses that good intentions do not always translate into good practice. There is no better example than stop and search, as the year 1 report suggests that it has proven an early test for SNAP. Last week, I chaired a meeting of the cross-party group on children and young people focusing on the impact of that tactic. Representatives of the Scottish Human Rights Commission and the Commissioner for Children and Young People told Police Scotland, in no uncertain terms, that the use of voluntary stop and search was indefensible from a human rights perspective. Every encounter, every purposeless unwarranted search of the public is a distinct intrusion, incompatible with article 8 of the convention. On any level, let alone the current industrial scale, it is intolerable. I am still astonished that this Government permits the police to conduct hundreds of thousands of these violations each year. It is even more baffling because they do not need much time. The police possess a range of legitimate statutory search powers, rightly based on intelligence and suspicion of wrongdoing, and even the SPA concluded that there is no robust evidence that voluntary stop and search prevents crime. I will be pressing the new justice secretary to reflect on that and back my efforts to ensure that all searches are regulated, accountable and rooted in law. Given that all three organisations play a leading role in the developing and enacting of SNAP, the difference in views between the SNP, the Children's Commissioner and Police was telling. It reminds us just how much more work needs to be done, conversations to be had, procedures changed before we can hope to realise our ambition of a mature democracy that truly respects and protects the rights of all. That is why effectively measuring progress, identifying tangible targets, is key to understanding year-on-year advances. I am welcome that the monitoring progress group has been established to do just that. I was interested to read that their focus in 2015 will be to involve those whose rights are directly affected by SNAP. That is admirable, but those whose rights are most frequently infringed are often disenfranchised, vulnerable or unrepresented. We are talking about vulnerable elderly subjected to medical restraint through prescribed drugs. Children are exposed to so-called justifiable assault, despite UN calls to remove the reasonable chastisement defence. The 202 young people who last year received treatment for mental health problems in non-specialist wards, those waiting over six months to access essential cancer treatment, as occurred in half of the NHS boards. People like Fiona, subject to a guardianship order, recently told me that she is incredibly frustrated that she is not supported in taking those decisions that she is capable of. Instead, all rights to control her life have been removed. It will not always be easy to identify such people, let alone make contact and have the opportunity to listen to them. However, doing so is critical to understanding and enhancing the impact of SNAP. It will help to build public support for human rights through demonstrating that those are remote or obstructive legal concepts. It will help to ensure that SNAP makes a difference to the lives of people across Scotland. Many thanks. We now turn to closing speeches. I call on Margaret Mitchell. Maximum four minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am pleased to close this short debate for the Scottish Conservatives. In the chamber this time last year, members expressed their cross-party support for Scotland's national action plan on human rights. One year on, it is clear that the consensus remains. Not only that, I am pleased to see that the plan has made its mark and significant progress since its inauguration at the international human rights day last year. Britain has a proud tradition of human rights and they remain a central part of what this country does to promote good practice around the world. In his remarks to the Justice Committee in February this year, Professor Al Milne highlighted that Scotland's national action plan, although in its infancy, has already attracted considerable international interest, as well as support from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva. That is indeed a testament to the work of the Scottish Human Rights Commission, the plans leadership panel and all its stakeholders. However, it would be doing a great to service to this debate if we were not to highlight the difficulties human rights legislation can find itself in so far as the public perception on human rights is concerned. Two YouGov polls carried out within the last four years found that over 70 per cent of the public believed that human rights legislation was being manipulated to favour criminals and that its scope was being too widely applied in a manner never intended. Here, the inclusive approach taken by Scotland's national action plan and the addressing of wide-ranging issues from health to justice, all of which matter to people in Scotland, will, I believe, go some considerable way to redressing this balance. Further more, Presiding Officer, there is a need to ensure that when an issue is being scrutinised, all the relevant information is made available. For example, when acute concerns were raised over the use of stop and search, that led to an inquiry being undertaken by the Scottish Police Authority, which published its findings in May this year. Amnesty International, the Quality of Human Rights Commission and the Scottish Human Rights Convention, when initially on the list of witnesses, however, they were ultimately not invited by the SPA to give evidence at the same time. Advocates of the policy, including Police Scotland, the Police Federation and the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents, all provided substantial input. Clearly, what happened here was certainly not in the spirit of the collaborative approach of the Scottish national action plan. Finally, and on a more positive note, Police Scotland has committed to contribute towards the implementation of the plan, which should help further to embed human rights within the structures and culture of policing. As we move to year 2 of the plan, I am sure that the committee will look forward to monitoring not only Police Scotland's progress in implementing the plan, but all the other justice-related bodies' implementation as well. Many thanks. I now call in Graham Pearson, maximum four minutes, please. Presiding Officer, thank you very much. First of all, I welcome the cabinet secretary to his new duties and responsibilities and look forward to seeing an energetic response to the issues around human rights. It is often fashionable to record that Scotland reflects human rights as one of its traditional values, and I know that the cabinet secretary said that in good faith. In truth, although at the highest level, we would reflect that in all we seek to do, in reality we would not need a SNAP plan, we would not need committees to oversee those matters if we had reached that development in our society where human rights were taken as a matter of course and no longer thought about. The fact that so many examples have been given during the debate today, hopefully in a non-contentious fashion, indicates that there is much work to be done here and that work needs to be led by this Parliament and by the groups involved. Second, can I thank the Justice Committee and the authors of the plan and the 40 organisations involved in developing the plan, the work that they do in our name and in our behalf. The work is absolutely vital if each of us are to be allowed to play our full part in what our modern Scotland is to be in the future. Human rights are easily identified when each of us considers the rights and the entitlements that we see for ourselves as inalienable. The cultural and other challenges come to be faced and are clear when we visualise what limits we would seek to put on other people's rights. The disabled, children, prisoners in our custody, migrants, asylum seekers, victims of crime, those who suffered historical abuse as children and still await a public inquiry. I remind the cabinet secretary or tell him if he is unaware that we were promised by the cabinet secretary for education a commitment from the Government before December a break on whether or not there is to be an inquiry into those matters and survivors wait with bated breath on that outcome. Each of those categories, the idea of human rights, can cause the heckles to rise in some part of our community. That challenge is what we need to face and use evidence to ensure that they realise in reality it is poverty, it is the weaknesses that we apply in our approach to gender and ethnic background, which play a major role in determining the opportunities that people can access in delivering on their own future. Mr Neil indicated that there are gaps to be filled and I encourage him in filling those gaps and will give him every support and the efforts that he makes in doing so. If I can recommend to him that he re-analyzes our national approach to freedom of information and the way in which information is granted to citizens and to those who represent citizens, the difficulties that each and every one of us face when we make those applications, the way in which data protection legislation is in actual fact felt across the country in its administration. It is not a delivery of response in terms of the words of the legislation that we should seek in Scotland. It is a delivery of response in the spirit of the legislation, an openness to evidence and openness to facts, so that we can trust citizens, we can trust the authorities in making rational decisions on the basis of all the information that is available to them. When we arrive at that state of being, then we know that each and every one of us can access all that Scottish society can bring to us and we can be a stable and forward looking society. Thank you. We support the motion. Many thanks and our colonalex Neil. Maximum six minutes please cabinet secretary. Thank you very much indeed, Presiding Officer. Since it has been mentioned a couple of times, let me just confirm that Angela Constance is the cabinet secretary for education and lifelong learning. We will return to the chamber before the Christmas recess to update the chamber in relation to historic survivors of child abuse. I am sure that through the bureau a specific time will be set aside for that, Deputy Presiding Officer. Can I also say that I think that this has been quite a good shot albeit a very short debate? Although it has been broadly consensual, there have been one or two barbs but that is always the case and that is the sign of a healthy debate. However, I slightly disagree with what Graham Pearson said in the opening part of his final remarks when he said, hopefully, there will come a day when we do not need commissions, we do not need watchdogs and all the rest of it. I think that with human rights it is one of those areas where no matter who is in power, no matter how much is written into legislation about human rights, I think that we all need to be continually on our watch, both individually and collectively, to make sure that there is no erosion and continuing enhancement of human rights. The point that I poorly made was that I would like to see a state of grace where human beings, as a matter of nature, acknowledge each other's human rights without the need for governments of any colour to intervene. I think that we would all agree with that. I am very much reminded by Albert Camus, who is a tremendous philosopher and who had the theory about rebellion. His view was that no matter what shape the Government, even if it appears to be your Government, the best way and the best source of progress in making sure that the rights of the citizen are protected, is always to have one or two rebels to challenge government and to challenge parliaments. I actually think that Christine Grahame might be related to Albert Camus in terms of that. That extends into wide ranges of areas of policy. As an MSP for a constituency that has got many pockets of deprivation, I, for example, see many aspects of the operation of housing policy which, quite frankly, does not meet the human rights of tenants or the human rights of potential tenants in some of housing situations. It is another example of the many areas in which we have all got to be very much on our guard and take whatever action is necessary or whatever level is necessary to make sure that the human rights of our citizens are being promoted and protected. I do think that there is a distinction, however, between what is happening in Scotland and their overall attitude on a consensual basis and the approach of at least some UK politicians. David Cameron's speech to the Conservative Party conference earlier this year committed his party to scrapping the human rights act and replacing it with the so-called British Bill of Rights and responsibilities. I would place on record again the Scottish Government's strong opposition to the idea of a British Bill of Rights to replace the human rights act, because we believe that that would be a cover to scale back protections that currently exist. Indeed, last month, the Parliament united around the principle of that consent being refused. However, part of the Council of Europe, which of course predates the European Union by a considerable period—at least 10 years, 47 countries across Europe have committed themselves to democracy, human rights and the rule of law through the Council of Europe. As the cabinet secretary of responsibility for human rights, I will stand shoulder to shoulder with the Scottish Human Rights Commission and others to ensure that the human rights act remains on the statute book in our country and that we continue to be part of the convention system that upholds our fundamental rights on a daily basis. When I am next in London next month, I intend to seek meetings with human rights organisations so that I can make that position clear, as well as establish closer co-operation and cross-border issues in relation to human rights with some notable organisations at the forefront of the human rights agenda. We are not unique in the values that we hold, but we are no more precious than anyone else and in the commitments that we display. However, as I have implied, those are features of many of our closest European neighbours who I think would take us very similar if not identical approach to human rights and the retention of the role of human rights acts throughout Europe in protecting the rights of our citizens. We have something probably called the Scottish approach. It is not necessarily better than everybody else's approach, but it does fit in with our approach in terms of how we serve our communities. That is on focusing on achieving outcomes and delivering real improvements. The approach is grounded in an assets-based response to the challenges that both individuals and communities face and seeks solutions through co-production. Those are all part of a human rights view of the world, one that puts real people at the centre of everything that we do and which wants to empower and include and enable. That perspective is one of the fundamental strengths of SNAP. It is a co-produced response to the challenge of delivering in human rights for everyone in Scotland, not a top-down approach to human rights from Government or Parliament. Ultimately, it is for nations themselves, through their institutions and their public services, to ensure that human rights are protected, respected and realised for our citizens. SNAP will play a central part in turning the values and principles of the legislation into a practical reality for the people of Scotland. We are committed to playing our part in that journey. I look forward to returning to the chamber annually to discuss the progress that we are making in pursuit of SNAP's ultimate vision of a Scotland where everybody lives with fundamental human dignity. When we next return, I hope that we will have made even more progress on a whole range of the issues that have been discussed here this afternoon. Thank you, Cabinet Secretary. I now call and join Finlay to respond to the debate maximum eight minutes, please, on behalf of the committee. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I refer to my register of interests as a member of Amnesty, please. I welcome this opportunity as the Justice Committee's rapporteur to the SNAP process to close this debate on behalf of the committee. Like our convener and other members, I am pleased that the committee is engaged in the SNAP process and I am delighted that we have secured this inaugural debate, coming as it is a few days before international human rights day. I, too, am glad that the SNAP process is up and running. I congratulate Professor Miller and the SNAP leadership panel on a first year that has been very productive, and I commend the panel on a first-class annual report and echo many of the member's comments about its user-friendly nature. Perhaps there is a note there for other public bodies to act on. It was particularly encouraging to hear from Professor Miller last week that the human rights approach taken in Scotland is perceived internationally as being one of the most collaborative in Europe. I know that, having spoken to Professor Miller earlier today at another meeting, he has just returned from Ukraine. I think that it is great that Scotland's position with regard to human rights is viewed on the international stage very positively. Indeed, securing this debate has been an extremely positive development and I have enjoyed listening to the speeches that we have heard. I will turn to some of those now. We have heard from the convener about the comprehensive resume of SNAP and the role that the Justice Committee plays in relation to that. Of particular significance was the phrase, all the time, because we consider human rights as regards all aspects of our undertaking. I welcome the cabinet secretary's new role in his portfolio. I commend the words he used, protects, respects and realises. That is terribly important. He has certainly outlined values that everyone in the chamber would sign up to, not least democratically, renewably referred to and the gaps that are to be filled. I particularly welcome the announcement, as others have, that raising awareness is terribly, terribly important. Elaine Murray talked about the Human Rights Act and the recent vote that we have, and commented that the human rights are not embedded and listed some of the challenges that that gives rise to and the need for cultural change, particularly with a gender perspective around a number of women's issues. I thought that that was important. Margaret Mitchell referred to the plan as being inclusive and collaborative in approach, and I think that that is entirely right. I am going on to say that the effect that that had on the ownership of it, describing it as a live, vibrant plan, laid out some of the criminal justice challenges that come with human rights, and I commend the Apologies legislation that Margaret Mitchell alluded to. Indeed, I welcome Conservative Party support for the motion. Rod Campbell talked about the need to protect the individual citizen and the wider role that human rights play in that, particularly in reference to care homes. I think that the suggestion of a career structure for workers in that important industry is terribly important. He also talked about something that is equally important, and that is the commitment of civil Scotland to human rights and the approach that we have seen. John Penlant, if I noted him correctly, said that, commendably, he would oppose any attempt to undermine human rights anywhere. I hope that we would all subscribe to that. He talked about the significance, the connection with violence against women and slavery, and, like him, I hope that there is support for Jenny Marra's hard work that has been done in that particular field. Alison MacKinnon has talked about why rights matter and the awareness there, and the issue that has certainly exercised a number of committees in that is the issue of stop and search and the voluntary versus strategy nature of that. Perhaps in that particular example highlighted the competing elements of that, the rights-based approach. He talked about the measuring process, and, importantly, the rights of the disenfranchised, citing patients and mental health, and that is our occurring theme, the challenge for people. I am aware that the Public Petitions Committee, which is the honour of convening, has recently had a petition that argues that the lack of legal aid for defamation cases reaches human rights. Would you agree? John Finnie? I think that access to justice is a fundamental human right, and there are challenges around the financing of that, and there are competing demands, but, yes, access to justice is a right denied, if not achieved, is a right denied. Graham Pearson talked about the freedom of information that is summing up and the fact that the citizen needs to trust the authorities, and I think that that is very important, too. It is a bold and holistic vision covering a number of policy areas that have been looked at, and health and social care has been mentioned where the rights there are used to justify the safety of individuals. I think that the work being done to ensure justice for victims of historic child abuse is particularly welcome, as is the development of a comprehensive human rights-based strategy on violence against women. I think that we will hear more of that later this afternoon. The action that SNAP has taken to embed human rights and structures and cultures of policing is, perhaps unsurprisingly, of considerable interest to the justice committee and the sub-committee on policing. We will watch developments there with interest, particularly as they consider issues of stop-and-search and armed police that Alison McKinnis and others have alluded to, and we certainly welcome the SNAP focus on those key areas. The Justice Committee's involvement in SNAP is a committee that we have sought to consider human rights in our everyday work. As I have said, we have asked difficult questions of decision makers on issues such as police complaints, investigations, prison monitoring and visiting arrangements, women offenders, modern slavery and, of course, stop-and-search. As we are considering the forthcoming prison control of the Police Scotland Bill, human rights considerations will be at the forefront of our minds. As they will be when we consider the human trafficking legislation and the legislation in fatal accident inquiries. As a rapporteur, I will continue to meet Professor Alan Miller to discuss progress with SNAP, and as a committee we will continue to gauge constructively on those issues. As our convener said, we shall be a critical friend of the process, supporting the leadership panel in delivering SNAP but holding them and their partners to account to ensure that its objectives are indeed delivered. It was the second Secretary General of the United Nations, Dag Hammershawld, who said that, and I quote, "...freedom from fear could be said to sum up the whole philosophy of human rights." As a Parliament, we want to help to build a Scotland of confident and fearless citizens who are able to reach their potential free from fear, free from barriers and free from discrimination. With the European Convention of Human Rights incorporated into Scots law under the Scotland Act 1988, this Parliament has human rights embedded in its DNA. I very much enjoyed today's debate and I welcome the SNAP annual report. I welcome the fact that there has already been tangible results. I welcome the fact that SNAP is gaining international renown and I welcome SNAP's ambition for a sustainable human rights culture in all areas of our lives. I hope that we as a Parliament, a Justice Committee and individual members and citizens can help to turn that ambition into reality by 2018. I conclude by indicating my support for the convener, Christine Grahame's motion. Many thanks. That concludes the Justice Committee's debate on Scotland's national action plan for human rights. It is now time to move on to the next item of business, which is a debate on motion number 11789 in the name of Michael Matheson on violence against women. Could members who wish to speak in this debate please press the request-to-speak buttons now? I call on Michael Matheson to speak to and move the motion. Cabinet Secretary, maximum 10 minutes please. On behalf of the Scottish Government, I am pleased to open this debate on such an important issue as working in partnership to end violence against women. It is intolerable that violence against women is still a feature of Scottish life and that thousands of women, children and young people are affected by it. It has no place in the Scotland that we all want to see. This debate is timely, coming as it does during the annual 16 days of action, a global campaign to raise awareness of the need to eliminate violence against women. The global 16 days of action is welcome as it assists in providing a focus on this important issue. What is already happening in Scotland, of course, is 365 days of action as day in, day out, the police, prosecutors or courts, advocacy groups and other key stakeholders tackle the blight on our society that is violence against women. Presiding Officer, I welcome the opportunity of this debate to do two things. To set out to members our proposals for tackling violence against women in the coming year, and an opportunity to highlight the excellent work that is being done to help to overcome violence against women within our communities. I also want to pay tribute to our many police officers who are doing their utmost to keep our communities safe and to bring the perpetrators of these crimes to account. I also want to take this opportunity to pay particular tribute to our specialist advocacy and support services such as Women's Aid, Rape Crisis Scotland and Assist. Those organisations are giving support, advice and comfort to women, children and young people at a time of great need. I also want to say that those organisations and also a great many others such as Zero Tolerance, the Women's Support Project, White Ribbon and Engender to name a few. Those organisations over many years have helped to raise awareness of and influence and shape our understanding of men's violence against women. I would like to take a moment to reflect on what has been accomplished this year. Having effective laws in place and enforced is a crucial part of our strategy in this area of policy. That is why we have strengthened the law to make forcing a person into marriage a criminal offence, adding to the existing civil protection of forced marriage protection orders. We have launched equally safe Scotland's strategy for preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls. We have begun an extensive programme of work to tackle female genital mutilation, including strengthening the existing law to ensure that individuals who are not permanent UK residents can still be tried in the Scottish courts, establishing a short-life working group to make recommendations to strengthen our approach on female genital mutilation and providing £20,000 to the Scottish Refugee Council to undertake a range of research activity, including on best practice in other parts of the UK and Europe. We have also worked with Police Scotland on the development of their disclosure scheme for domestic abuse in Scotland, alongside partners including the Crown Office, Scottish Women's Aid and Assist. The scheme, which is commonly known as Claire's Law, enables people in relationships and their close family and friends to ask for information about their partner's background if they suspect that their partner has a history of violence. The two pilot schemes in Aberdeen and Dershire began last week, and I am very hopeful that, following the successful evaluation, we will see that the scheme rolled out right across Scotland. We welcome the excellent work that Police Scotland has undertaken on domestic abuse and rape and sexual assaults and the focus and energy that they have given to tackling those crimes. Police Scotland has improved the investigation of rape and other sexual crimes, setting up a new national rape task force and rape and sexual crimes external advisory group, which now operates across Police Scotland to inform and to improve rape investigation. Last week, I visited one of Police Scotland's specialist rape investigation units, based in Livingston, where I met Detective Superintendent Pat Campbell to hear more about the vital work that this unit undertakes. In setting out our programme for government last week, we announced that we would consult on the introduction of a new specific criminal offence of domestic abuse. We intend to do this in early 2015, and I want to explain why. We have listened to those who deal with domestic abuse day in, day out, such as prosecutors, advocacy groups such as Scottish Women's Aid and Assist, who have said that our current law does not properly reflect the experience of those who experience domestic abuse. We have a range of current law that can be used to prosecute domestic abuse, including the common law of assault and the statutory offence of threatening and abusive behaviour. However, those laws tend to focus on the prosecution of individual instances of criminal behaviour, such as an assault or a threat, for example. However, we know that the full seriousness and impact of a particular incident can only be truly understood when we recognise and understand how it sits within a broader pattern of control, coercion and abusive behaviour, whereby an abuser attempts to exert control over every aspect of their partner's life. In some cases, an abuser may never resort to physical violence. So strong is their control over their partner and their fear that their partner has of that control. The dynamics of domestic abuse are very complex, and we appreciate that there is no simple solution or easy fix. However, we think that the time has come to seek views on whether a new specific offence of domestic abuse—one that reflects how it is actually experienced by victims—will enable our justice system to better respond to domestic abuse and ensure that victims are able to tell their whole story of what has happened to them when their case comes to court. Last week's programme for government also announced that we will bring forward work to create a specific offence to deal with revenge porn. This is the malicious distribution by a person of intimate images of their partner or former partner. It is often, but not always, motivated by an act of revenge for the end of a relationship. Organisations such as Scottish Women's Aid, as well as Members of the Parliament, including Christiana McElvie and Alison McInnes, have highlighted that this is a growing problem, especially as we become increasingly tech savvy and social media becomes an intrinsic part of our life and relationships. In July 2013, Scottish Women's Aid launched the website Stop Revenge Porn to raise awareness of the issue and provide a forum for women who have been victimised in the way and await the same way to allow them to share their story. The Scottish Government's position on this issue is clear. It is completely unacceptable for anyone to breach the trust of another person in this way by posting intimate personal photos online. There are already offences that can be used to prosecute the conduct, and many of the perpetrators have been brought to justice, but there is evidence to suggest that victims often do not come forward because they do not know that a crime has been committed against them. A new offence will help to raise awareness, and I believe that I will send a very strong and clear message to everyone who might be tempted to share those kinds of images without consent. Proceed and you will face the full force of the law. It will also enable us to better monitor the scale of this particular problem. The desire, drive and determination to rid our society of the scourge of violence against women has united this Parliament since its very early days. One of the first member's debates in this Parliament, when it was re-established in 1999, was a member's debate that was brought forward by the Labour MSP Maureen Macmillan, which was on the issue of domestic abuse. I do not believe that that passion and commitment to tackling this issue from all parties in the chamber has, in any way, diminished over those 15 years. If ever an issue that transcended party politics is it, and together, I believe, sign officer, we can make a difference. I move the motion in my name. I have to tell the chamber that there is no extra time in this debate. I am afraid, I call in great impatient, to speak to move amendment 11789.1, maximum seven minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First of all, I welcome the cabinet secretary to his new duties and indicate the support for the Government motion and would seek to engender support from across the chamber for the amendment in my name. Let me begin by acknowledging all that the cabinet secretary said at the end of his speech and reflect the value of the words that were contained there. I will take the opportunity today to dedicate what I say this afternoon to a woman that I first met 43 years ago. The week before Christmas, unfortunately, I could not help her. She was unfortunately my first homicide inquiry, which turned out to be the culmination of two years of domestic abuse. The reason for the violence on that day is that, in the absence of her partner, who was the father of one of her children, she had the temerity to purchase some Christmas presents for the children, but on return from the pub, the partner was so enraged by this action that not only did he decide that he was going to beat this woman, but he took his shoes off, put on a pair of boots in order that he could deliver the blows more effectively and proceeded for the afternoon to kick her, stamp her, slap her, punch her to death. The reality of that is rehearsed today because, in the 43 years since, there have been thousands of women in Scotland have faced the same kind of behaviour and have died. Behind that are hundreds of thousands of women and girls who suffer psychological abuse—what we would call minor physical abuse—all with the view to demeaning and to controlling their futures by primarily men, unfortunately. In the last year that we have records, over 60,000 incidents of domestic abuse recorded in Scotland. It is a matter of record that women suffer that abuse often more than five times before they make an official report. Once that report is made, the women and the children that they seek to protect are left in limbo as they try and deal with the outcomes that arise from the abuse that they suffer. It is interesting that, in the past, the authorities have often encouraged those who are being abused to move away and to leave the home that they share with their abuser. In the last year's figures, the numbers of incidents where ex-partners and ex-spouses have abused a victim have risen from 32 per cent to 44 per cent. The notion that we merely separate people in order to bring a conclusion to the abuse is limited in its impact and, as a result, the services need to consider how they offer best support. There are matters to be considered by our cabinet secretary in relation to the way in which the justice system responds to reports. The domestic abuse cases going through our courts in Glasgow and Edinburgh are delayed. A family who are left in a situation having made a complaint about an abuser can ill afford delay in the way that justice is delivered and some form of respite offered to them. I would urge the cabinet secretary to look at the reasons for those delays and where he can to intercede in ensuring that delays are kept to an absolute minimum. The significant funding that is required, particularly for third sector organisations, is best utilised. Victim support, women's aid, rape crisis and many other agencies operate very effectively in those circumstances, but together they can only do so much. I seek in the amendment to open up our minds further to considering the efforts that the Government can make and should make in its contribution to change the nature of relationships between men and women in this country, to create within the education environment a new ethos that seeks to deliver respect between boys and girls, men and women. I am happy to take it. I am very grateful to the member for giving way. I wonder if he would acknowledge also the role that the media has to play in this, in particular some media outlets that encourage and sexual objectification in particular of women. You beat me by a heartbeat in making that comment, because my next bullet point is to indicate that the media and internet have an impact in this environment. I have no doubt that the cabinet secretary through United Kingdom authorities, Europe and United Nations, we need to address how we might best turn the corner to ensure that the culture that I would call a page 3 culture is rejected as a way of life in Scotland and that the contents of a report which seeks to deliver strategy in terms of gender equality, which deals with some of those issues, should be considered by the cabinet secretary and where appropriate implement. I would indicate that class has no bearing on those who suffer this kind of behaviour, and that often those who are more affluent and middle class protect themselves from the embarrassment that comes with reporting domestic abuse, and we need to bear that in mind. The provision of support for victims needs attention. There is no doubt that budgets are stretched, but the cabinet secretary would do well to identify those elements that work effectively and deliver on behalf of victims and their families and invest what funds we have in what works and ensuring long-term delivery. Too often, those organisations spend years looking at how to get funding rather than delivering their services. The court provision that I have mentioned and the procurator fiscal service that lies behind it in servicing the courts is an important element that we need to deliver on going forward. Finally, I welcome the consultation for domestic abuse legislation and also revenge porn, and I look forward to contributing to the outcomes that we achieve in relation to that. I now call Annanette Milne up to five minutes, please. Can I first of all formally congratulate the cabinet secretary on his new role, as this is the first time I've faced him in the chamber since his promotion? In his previous role as Minister for Public Health, he responded to many a member's debate on health-related issues that I participated in, and I will miss his contributions there. I'm pleased to be taking part in this debate and to support the motion, which I'm sure will have crossed-party consensus, because we all want to see an end to violence against women and to support those women, children and young people whose lives are blighted by it. I'm also happy to support the amendment in the name of Graham Pearson because there's no doubt that women are often portrayed as sexual objects by some media and other channels, and this is not acceptable in the 21st century. In passing, I'd also like to acknowledge the plight of the increasing number of men who are the victims of domestic abuse, often forgotten because they're very much in the minority, although their suffering, particularly psychological, is no less than that of female victims. Domestic abuse is largely hidden and unreported, but it does take place right across society and takes many forms, both psychological and physical, and causes untold misery not only to the immediate victim but also to children who may witness assaults on their mother on a regular basis, and the mental scars that these children bear last a lifetime. It's encouraging that an increasing number of women are finding the courage to report domestic abuse, but it's disturbing that 30 per cent of people who have prosecuted for this crime as recently as two years ago were let off without any punishment. That surely cannot be tolerated, and perpetrators of violent and sexual crimes against women must be penalised for their actions, so we welcome the forthcoming consultation on specific legislation for domestic abuse. There are, of course, many forms of violence against women, apart from domestic abuse, including rape and sexual assault, stalking and harassment and commercial sexual exploitation, which includes human trafficking. Jenny Marra did a great deal of work to expose this abuse of women, and I'm pleased that the Scottish Government has given support to her efforts by promising to introduce a human trafficking and exploitation bill next year. Some other forms of violence against women are largely restricted to some ethnic communities within our society. Honor crimes, for example, are known to account for the deaths of 12 women a year in the UK, although that is likely to be an underestimate. Over 1300 cases of forced marriage were dealt with last year by the UK Government's forced marriage unit, of which around 3 per cent originated here in Scotland. I want to focus on female gentle mutilation, which is a brutal act of violence against young women and children. It's often performed without anesthetic, with dirty makeshift and shared implements, and it can lead to immediate and long-term physical health problems and psychological consequences that can ruin the lives of many victims. It's been rife for many years in parts of Africa, Middle East and Asia, but it is increasingly found in the western world among immigrant and refugee populations. It's deeply embedded in the culture of practicing communities, not because of religion, but because it's not a requirement of any religion, but rather as a right of passage to womanhood and a requirement of acceptability as a wife. And sadly, the custom is often perpetrated by the older women in our community who have undergone FGM themselves and see it as necessary, as a necessary indeed a loving ritual, which will secure the best future for their daughters and granddaughters. The practices kept very private within communities, and because relatives are often involved, statistics are hard to come by. But a study in England and Wales as far back as 2007 estimated that nearly 66,000 women aged between 16 and 49, living in the UK, had undergone FGM, and over 24,000 girls were at risk. I was a member of the Equal Opportunities Committee just before the passage of the FGM Scotland Act 2005, and I well remember the harrowing evidence that was presented to us very secretively at the time. I'm appalled that there have been no prosecutions in the nine years since the passage of the act, and that the Equal Opportunities Committee is again having to take evidence from the communities where the practice is rife. Obviously, it takes time and education to overcome such a deep-seated custom, but this really needs to be backed up by enforcing the legislation that is in place. A debate like this can only scratch the surface of an issue as diverse as violence against women, and I've dealt with only a very small part of it. However, I welcome all the steps that are being taken by the Scottish Government and the various organisations mentioned in the motion to try and stamp out violence against women and to support those affected by it. Much clearly remains to be done, but I particularly welcome Police Scotland's disclosure scheme for domestic abuse, or Claire's Law, as it's known, currently being piloted in my home city of Aberdeen and in Ayrshire, which provides a formal mechanism for women worried about a partner's past record of abuse to make inquiries about him. I welcome the work being undertaken by the FGM short-life working group as I step forward in eradicating that atrocity. I look forward to hearing all the contributions of this debate, which no doubt will be as diverse as the range of violent behaviours that blight the lives of many women, children and young people in Scotland. Of course, I support all efforts to eradicate them. Thank you. We now move to open debate. Very tight for time today. Four minutes. Speeches call on Sandra White to be followed by Rhoda Grant. Up to four minutes, please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I also welcome Michael Matheson to his new poses. I would like to begin my contribution by thanking the many organisations in the gallery here today, locally, nationally and internationally, for the work that they carry out on behalf of women's suffering, abuse and violence and support that they give to them. I was particularly struck by the net mill's contribution in regard to the international aspect of FGM and trafficking. It is something that is very important. I look forward to looking to inquiries in relation to FGM. I also thank the minister for his very, very worthwhile commitment to what has been put forward in the Scottish Government's plan of action and programme, which he explained a lot better than I could in a bit more time. We know that the programme has four key commitments for tackling abuse and revenge porn. The specific offence of committing domestic abuse legislation to address revenge porn, as the net mill has already mentioned, brings together leading academics to look at the causes of domestic abuse. That is something very, very important to look at the causes, to look at how we can share the evidence and what we can do to prevent domestic abuse and reduce the harm. That is probably one of the key aspects of that as well, and Clare's law, which has already been mentioned, too. I want to touch on Graham Pearson's amendment, which I also fully support. I think that Graham has touched on a number of issues, not just the page 3 commitment, but also trafficking, human trafficking. The way that they project women as sex objects, and it is not just women of a certain age, you have seen it the way that society treats young girls, expecting certain things from young girls, and I think that that is a real one. It is a cultural aspect, and I think that if we are going to tackle it, we have to tackle it as far as that. If I could just draw the attention to page 23 of the equality report, I think that that practically sums it up, and it is not in my words, it is in the words of the people who wrote the report on behalf of the Scottish Government and COSLA also, and it mentions that the media, too, has a powerful influence in neither reinforcing or challenging the attitudes and norms that contribute to violence against women. Numerous studies link sexualised violence in the media to increases in violence towards women. Rape myth exceptions—that is an important one—and anti-women attitudes. That is particularly worrying when the images used are of very young women. I hope that the media is listening to all aspects of the media. It is something that we have to get across. Women are not sex objects to be looked at. They are equal with men and should be treated exactly equally the same. I do support Graham Pearson's amendment. I think that it is something that we really have to look at. I know that we are tight for time, so I will finish just now, Presiding Officer. Thank you. Excellent. If others follow Sandra White's example, then we will get everyone in. I will now call on Rhoda Grant to be followed by James Dorn up to four minutes, please. Thank you Presiding Officer. I would also like to welcome Michael Matheson to his post and indeed welcome the publication of Equally Safe, the Refreshed Violence Against Women Strategy. There are no great changes of direction with the strategy, and other than that includes violence against girls. The test as always will be what we do in practice, whether more people are accountable for their actions, whether we change attitudes towards perpetrators and whether we change attitudes to the victim of that violence as well. I want to raise two issues in particular in the short time that I have. Firstly, sexual exploitation of women and girls. This is a growing problem. Many of those in prostitution as adults have already been abused or exploited as girls. Therefore, the change in definition at Equally Safe is very welcome. Those who exploit girls can be held to account, but, as we have seen in Rotherham, it is not always easy, as exploitation and grooming is not widely understood. I remember listening to a comment made by someone involved in that case that really struck home. They were saying, how do we stop a child escaping to the hands of an abuser? It shows how effective grooming can be. It also says something about our care system, where children find more affection at the hands of an abuser rather than at the hands of the state. I think that that is a debate for another time, but it is something that we really have to tackle. I welcome that Equally Safe continues to recognise prostitution as violence against women and girls. However, we need to do more than recognise that fact. We need to do something about it. The Scottish Government can deal with this by criminalising the purchase of sex acts, by decriminalising those who are exploited and making support available to them, being exploited and providing them with routes out and the support that they need to get their lives back together again. It would show real courage and commitment to make this step change. It has happened in Northern Ireland. I applaud their vision, but I would have to say that I am disappointed that Scotland, which used to lead the way in the whole of the United Kingdom, with steps taken to tackle violence against women, is now lagging behind. In the time left, Presiding Officer, I want to turn to domestic abuse and the issue of parental contact. Where a parent has been violent to their partner, it causes untold damage to the child and reports state that that damage is the same as the child being abused. Our justice system then continues to force further abuse by granting contact. That has to change. The accepted position has to be that an abusive parent never gets contact unless they can prove that they have changed their behaviour. Contact enables a parent to continue to perpetrate the abuse using the child as a weapon. I have numerous constituency cases where that has happened. Contact visits are being used to control the mother by changing the times, bringing the child back early or late, or indeed grooming them against their mother. I have also had cases where the child is being abused itself, but the mother is forced to continue to force her child to make that contact or be in contempt of court. I have had cases where there are restraining orders in place, but contact has been used to force the child to divulge where they are now living so that the abuse can continue. That not only means numerous moves for the family, but it also leaves the child feeling responsible for this and, again, being damaged. I have also had head teacher write to me telling me that, if the mother loved their child, they would attend parents' nights along with their abusive ex-partner in spite of being in fear of their life. We also make domestic abuse training for professionals in every field that deals with children and families. It should not be just the police, but also for those in the justice system and health and education professionals. We are rightly proud of what we have achieved from Maureen Macmillan's first speech, but we have got an awful long way to go to free women and girls from violence. Colin James Dornham, to be followed by Malcolm Tism. Violence against women under any circumstances is wrong, and it is clear that we all agree with that. Clearly, it physically hurts those attacked, but often the psychological scars that leads can be even worse. In many cases, the worst kind of violence is domestic violence. Just think how awful it must be worrying about what will set him off tonight. Despite some of the emails that we have been receiving, it is almost always a hymn. Wondering if he is drunk, had a bad day or just feels in the mood for taking out on you, what way is that for anybody to live? That is why I want to talk today about the Daisy project that is formerly known as that domestic abuse project in my constituency. It is one of the many great groups across the country doing invaluable work to support women and their families who have been affected by domestic violence. They recognise that domestic violence does not just happen in a vacuum, and it can have both long-term and wide-ranging impacts. They know that there is no one-size-fits-all solution and that each family has different needs. Based in Casemalt, in my constituency, they are easily accessible to those who require their assistance. Over the past three years, they have helped 300 people in the south-side of Glasgow to address domestic abuse issues. Their services include one-to-one support, small-cell group work, personal development, training, access to services and agency assistance. They have also set up the self-help group Women Against Violent Environments, Waves, led by extraordinary Bessie Anderson. Waves empowers women to address local issues, including domestic abuse, and to overcome the drawbacks of poverty, including the lesser-talked aspects of isolation and self-esteem, and to help them to regain control of their lives. They are supported in their aims by local housing associations and nurseries, who act sensitively when issues of gender-based violence are raised and try to do what they can to ensure that the women and children are housed and educated appropriately. I feel privileged when I get the opportunity to meet and support organisations such as this, but the truth is that I wish I did not have to. I have seen how difficult life can be for some of those families, and I wish they never had to go through that. I have heard of how kids become withdrawn and how long it can take to get them to come out of their shell. I have seen so often that the behaviour of the male perpetrator can leave a family near financial destitution with all the problems that that can bring. Every year, I run a Christmas toy appeal in my constituency, and people are invariably responsive, generous and kind. Those toys are then passed on to local churches and groups in the constituency, including Wales. It broke my heart when I was told for the first time that, for some of these kids, it will be the only substantial present that they get over the festive period. That is not because their mum does not love them, but it is because of the mayhem created by violence against a woman. It is a sobering fact, which is why I am behind my whole hearted support for the Government's violence against women strategy, Equally Safe, which was published in June. When it was published, Lily Greenean, manager of Scottish Women's Aid, said that publication was a significant step towards addressing and preventing that violence, as publication was also welcomed by the police, solicitor general and other local and national bodies, including assist. We know that violence against women is at heart an issue of power. It is accepted that one of the primary causes of domestic abuse and biggest barriers to tackling it is persistent and consistent gender inequality between men and women, which we all have a responsibility to address. I was pleased with the message that the First Minister sent out when we ended up with Scotland's first 50-50 Cabinet. Bankie Moon said that there is one universal truth applicable to all countries, cultures and communities. Violence against women is never acceptable, never excusable and never tolerable. It is clear that across this chamber we agree with his universal truth and his considerable political and civic will in Scotland for domestic violence to become an issue of the past. However, until it is, and I hope that day comes soon, I thank goodness that we have such important organisations as a daisy project and waves to assist the victims of this insidious crime. Many thanks. I now call on Malcolm Chisholm to be followed by Christina McKeldrick. Presiding Officer, I welcome the motion today and also the Equally Safe document that was produced this week. As the document itself said, it is not a delivery plan but a strategic framework, so we need to see a robust action plan with clear and measurable outcomes and timescales, as was promised at the launch. It seems that the timetable for that has slipped a bit, so it would be good to get an update from the minister on when that will be developed. I was very pleased to see the document to restate the position of this Parliament since its start that gender-based violence is a function of gender inequality and an abuse of male power and privilege. I was also pleased to see the emphasis that it put on primary prevention, obviously addressing those systematic inequalities, but also the attitudes and assumptions that give rise to violence and abusive behaviour. In that connection, I also welcome the Labour amendment, which emphasises the cultural context for this and the way in which the objectification of women and misogyny is fostered by the media and the internet. The whole question of pornography on the internet is a massive issue, which is very difficult to deal with, but we must certainly do something about, because it is poisoning the attitudes of so many young men and men in general towards women and sexual relations. Prevention is crucial. Obviously, the work of zero tolerance should be closely studied in that regard, because it has done superb work for over 20 years in that area. Over and above prevention, we also need the provision of services. Priority 3 talks about women and girls accessing relevant, effective and integrated services. The motion is quite right to praise Scottish Women's Aid, rape crisis Scotland, women supporting women, and many others could be mentioned. For example, in my constituency, is the Edinburgh Women's Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre, whose work is unfortunately more necessary and indispensable than ever. Last year, referrals to that centre were up 20 per cent, and indeed the long-term support and counselling services that it runs currently has a 12-month wait. That is why I hope that its application to the violence against women and girls fund that it is putting in will be successful. All rape crisis centres have had a rape crisis specific grant for 10 years, set at £50,000 in 2004 and £50,000 still. We welcome the continuation of that fund, but clearly it would be desirable if it could be increased to some extent. The third area after prevention and provision is, of course, protection. Priority 4 in the document says that we want women and girls affected by violence and abuse to be supported by a sensitive, efficient and effective justice system. In many ways, there has been great progress. For example, the police attitude to that has improved immeasurably, and we should praise the work of Police Scotland in this area, the rape task force, the domestic abuse task force, and in terms of the justice system, the work in particular of the Solicitor General and the Crown Office reference group. Sometimes women are not getting the protection that they need. In fact, in just the last week, I have had two women in my constituency who have approached me because they are not getting the protection that they need. Obviously, I am taking up their particular cases, but, of course, recently all over the newspapers was the problem of the outstanding writer Janice Galloway in relation to the stalking laws. I am glad that the Scottish Government is looking at the operation of non-harassment orders because there seem to be some loopholes in that regard. Laws may need to be amended, as well as new laws made them. We certainly welcome all of us the new laws on domestic abuse and revenge porn. Finally, two points. The court service must also prioritise this area. It is great to have the domestic abuse courts, which again started 10 years ago, but we have to do something about the weights for those courts. Finally, recording is an issue, too. We have no figures on the number of rapes reported to the police that end up in a conviction, and it would be very useful and important to have such figures. Christina McKelvie to be followed by Leigh MacArthur Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I, like others, welcome this debate and the motion and the amendment in this, the 16 days period that we all look and reflect and remember. I would love to see a day when we do not need to talk about violence against women, when it is just an historic idea. It would be fantastic to live in a world where Saturday nights after the football are not littered with battered bodies of wives and girlfriends, where brilliant organisations like Women's Aid are no longer needed. More than any other area of social and criminal justice domestic violence legislation is the one that I would love to be able to say we no longer need. But back from Utopia and into daily realities, the Scottish Government has set a clear framework on which we welcome detailing its approach to tackling violence against women. It has been welcomed by all the leading third sector organisations working in the field, and it is worth noting particularly today that the white ribbon campaign to involve men in tackling violence against women has welcomed the Government's approach to it. At lunchtime today, along with Malcolm Chisholm, the First Minister, the Cabinet Secretary, many MSPs, including all the party leaders, were more than happy to sign the white ribbon statement of intent. The cross-party campaign, back in our violence against women strategy, is an important element to the equally safe approach. Men are part of the problem, but the assured part of the answer to men talking to other men will probably have a greater impact than women talking to men. The key to all of this, of course, is change in social attitude and no legislation will ever create that on its own. The way to change social attitudes is to make the behaviour completely unacceptable, with decent education at the earliest stage possible. It might seem a trivial comparison, but look at the moment at how unacceptable smoking has become. The legislation kicked started that, but it has been behaviour that has turned that law into very good practice. Another law that has been mentioned today that is seeking to change the cultural environment is Claire's law. The legislation gives the right to anyone, and I stress anyone, not just those directly involved, to seek information from the police when they feel that they see a potential victim or a perpetrator. You do not need to be the heterosexual partner, as some people have asked me questions. You could be in a same-sex relationship or it could be a friend or it could be a relative, a neighbour or even the child who is realising that they are concerned about someone. Anyone can apply, and I really welcome the pilots. I do not have a lot of time to go into the full process here, but the bottom line that is, if you are concerned that someone could be a potential victim of domestic violence, then this is the mechanism that will allow you and that potential victim to find out more about a potential perpetrator's background. Most of you all know, as has been mentioned, that there is a six-month pilot of Claire's law in Ayrshire and Aberdeen. I will be watching it closely, and I sincerely hope that it would lead to full roll-out of the scheme across Scotland. That will be another step on the way to outlawing an apparent but daily practice. I do not have time to go into the issue of revenge porn, but I wish to make my colleagues aware of the current consultation that is running now by Women's Aid Scotland. It is running until January, and I welcome any future legislation on that topic in particular. In the meantime, let every one of us follow White Ribbon's personal pledge. The pledge is most of his sign today. If you have not signed it, you can contact Calum, and he will make sure that you get your copy of the pledge to sign. That pledge says, I pledge never to commit, condone or remain silent about men's violence against women. I commend the motion and the amendment. Thank you. I congratulate Michael Matheson on his promotion and reward for a constructive approach that he has taken in his ministerial duties thus far. I also welcome this timely debate, the pertinent amendment and powerful contribution from Graham Pearson. I also welcome the gender equality in this debate, but also the publication of the strategy Equally Safe. I add my thanks to the police, to the very voluntary and third sector organisation for the contribution that they make. I think that there is no doubt that, without the work that they do in day and daily to help in very practical ways, Scotland would be a much lonelier, more dangerous place for women and girls facing violence. We must support our voluntary sector to continue to do the excellent work that they do. I would be interested to understand the implications, for example, of funding for violence against women work in Orkney being around half of what was requested. I do not really know what the implications of that are, but it strikes me that it is worth exploring. The third sector also, I think, is due recognition for the enormous input that they put into policy making in this area. Their direct experience of working with women and girls is invaluable and their determination to see change is to be commended. It is clearly a determination that we all share in this chamber and that is reflected in the strategy and in the measures from the programme for government to tackle domestic abuse and revenge pornography, which I very much welcome. However, there are no quick fixes. Legislation can help, it can highlight an issue, but moving it up the political agenda is not a remedy in itself, as Christina McKelvie rightly observed, because gender-based violence is sadly still too deep-rooted a problem that requires a major cultural shift. In the brief time that we are debating this today, I understand that at least nine women in Scotland will have suffered violence at the hands of their partner. In 2012-13, there were over 60,000 incidents of reported domestic abuse. The increase in reporting is welcome, but the scale of the problem is self-evident and many incidents that we know go unreported. To achieve the vision that we need to bring communities with us, we need to instill mutual respect in each and every individual in Scotland. That starts in our homes and in our schools. The packs of materials available from Zero Tolerance and others for primary and secondary schools I think are an excellent resource, as these early years are entirely vital. As others have observed, we need to look more widely at this issue. It is one that blights societies across the globe and I think it is only fair to acknowledge some of the work that the UK Government, particularly my colleagues at Lynn Featherston and Jo Swins, have taken, not just in the UK but further afield, including the investment of £25 million in a new violence against women and girls research and innovation fund to support new programmes to tackle the problem worldwide. Also campaigning for Zero Tolerance on female genital mutilation mentioned by Nanette Mill and others. It is a practice that serves no religious or cultural or medical purpose and can be extremely harmful and even fatal. Even as a novice to this debate, I am conscious that it is impossible to do justice to the complexity of the issues that we are considering in such a brief debate but I very much welcome the fact that it is taking place. I very much welcome the extremely strong and united message being sent out by this Parliament and I will conclude by repeating the comments from Bankie Moon quoted by James Dornan earlier when he said, there is one universal truth applicable to all countries, cultures and communities. Violence against women is never acceptable, never excusable, never tolerable. So yes our vision and the strategy is ambitious but aspiring to anything less is unacceptable and I support the motion on the amendment in Graeme Gerson's name. Presiding Officer, looking over some of the briefing papers that were sent to me regarding the debate makes some depressing reading. 58,976 incidents of domestic abuse were reported during the year 2013-2014 that equates to officers from Police Scotland attending a domestic abuse incident every nine minutes. While this figure shows a decrease in the number of incidents reported from the year before, it still is a shocking figure and shows that more is needed to be done if we are to eradicate this from our society. Figures obtained by Scottish Women's Age shows that the reporting of domestic rape increased by 81 per cent over the same period. 3 per cent of adults had experienced serious sexual assault since the age of 16, but this varied by gender with 4 per cent of women experiencing serious sexual assault since the age of 16, compared with 1 per cent of men. The overwhelming majority of serious sexual assaults have been carried out by men. Figures show that this is to be as high as 94 per cent. Over 83 per cent of victims actually knew the offender with 54 per cent saying that the abuse was carried out by a partner. Therefore, it has to be acknowledged that progress is grindingly slow, but that is not a criticism towards the Scottish Government or our Parliament. I have got the greatest respect for the present Government, for the effort and the resources that it has provided to tackle this massive problem. My respect extends to all previous Administrations in this Parliament who took this matter deadly seriously as well. In fact, since the re-establishment of our Parliament to the present day, the attitude and effort has been outstanding. While we have a difference across the chamber on various issues, it is pleasing that all parties are committed to working together to tackle this issue. Men's violence against women and children and, indeed, I do say children, is deep rooted in our society. It comes from millennia of men's power over women and the lack of equality. The less equality there is, the more likely is that the women will be abused. You only need to look at the plight of women worldwide to come to that conclusion. I am pleased on two fronts that Scotland is and has been seriously tackling and challenging this issue, while at international level, Bank of Moon, as previously stated, made a very strong declaration. In my view, I would make a suggestion that equal rights for women and children should also fit into that great declaration. That, in itself, would make a massive impact on men's violence against women and children if it was enacted and became a reality in terms of rights for women worldwide. Closer to home, I am also of the opinion that, by tackling gender inequality through eradicating differentials and job opportunities, wage gaps, positions of rank, and so on and so forth, that violence against women and children would reduce. In other words, equal status across genders will equate equal power and the end of men's power over women and children. I commend this motion and the amendment to the Parliament. Excellent, thank you very much. Now I call on Cara Hylsdon to be followed by Christine Grahame. Today's debate brings home the fact that, despite the progress in recent years, we've still got a lot to do to achieve our goal of eradicating violence against women and girls. To ensure that every women and girl in Scotland can not only live free from fear but can also live their lives to the full and achieve their dreams. I don't think that we'll ever achieve true equality in society unless we end the abuse of power and control that is at the root of domestic abuse and violence and which continues to affect too many women and children across Scotland. As MSP for Dunfermline, I'm very conscious that I'm only here in Holyrood today because of the offences that my predecessor committed against the women in his life and the fact that those women were finally brave enough to come forward and report the domestic abuse. A shock in one in four women will experience domestic abuse at some stage in their lives and, as Graham Pearson has already commented on, two women every week are killed by an abusive partner or former partner. Domestic abuse happens in every community. There is no age cultural barrier to abuse. In five last year, 4,646 incidents of domestic abuse were reported to the police. 84 per cent of those were reported by women, yet that is only the tip of the iceberg. Many women continue to stay silent, never finding the courage to speak out, never mind the strength of the confidence to make sense of the abusive, controlling or violent behaviour or to regain control of their lives. A few months ago, I attended the launch of Sage Scotland, which is based in Fife, and Sage has secured big lottery funding and has rolled out its groundbreaking freedom programme, which provides emotional and peer support to women living with domestic abuse and violence. Empowering women to regain control of their lives, equipping them with a self-accomference and self-esteem to ensure that power is back in their hands where it belongs. This work is absolutely vital, because many of the women that Sage Scotland are helping before they got the help did not recognise that their relationships were harmful or abusive, and it could be really difficult for them to make positive choices when they are mentally broken, when they know where to turn. As colleagues have alluded to, the way that the media continues to report stories involving male violence and women generally really does not help the situation at all. Having met some of the women participants on the freedom programme, their stories are truly inspiring. It is a programme that changes lives. Janet Henderson and Sally Sinclair, who run the project, are doing an absolutely brilliant job, and I encourage the minister to visit Sage Scotland to find out more about the valuable work that they do in the way that they empower women to regain control of their lives. The Government's motion today congratulates White Ribbon Scotland on its eighth anniversary, and yesterday Fife became the first area in Scotland to be awarded a partnership award in recognition of Fife's achievements in promoting this brilliant campaign, encouraging men to take the pledge never to commit, condone or remain silent about violence against women. With a quarter of all pledges across Scotland being made in Fife, a healthy male speaker's network, a proactive social media campaign and five White Ribbon lessons in our high schools, Fife is certainly leading the way, and this is also the case with projects like Cedar and Marec, which unfortunately I'm going to have to cut out my speech because I'm running out of time. We are seeing positive developments in an issue that is continuing to make an impact on too many women and children in Fife and across Scotland, but more needs to be done if we are to achieve a more equal, fairer, more just society that we all aspire to. The Scottish Government's equally safe strategy is extremely welcome, but we now must see concrete action to put this into practice as quickly as possible, and I hope that across the chamber we can work together to tackle domestic abuse, to support victims and to end the gender-based violence that continues to destroy life, destroy self-esteem and destroy the freedom of too many women and children right across Scotland. As others have said, domestic violence knows no bounds from the demeaning to death and no boundaries on gender, age or class, and almost entirely takes place behind closed doors, whether it's lace curtains, in housing schemes, leafy bungalow land or even mansions. The Police Scotland statistics show that for 2012-13, as others have said, there were 60,080 recorded incidents, and I think that this increase of 20,000 from 2003 is in part due to more confidence in reporting those incidents and, indeed, greater police training. I commend Chief Constable for Stephenhouse in prioritising attacking the issue of domestic violence. I want to focus on age, because the Police Scotland statistics 2012-13 showed that in the age group from 41 to 50 there were over 8,000 incidents recorded and 51 to 60 nearly 2,500. In fact, it's a matter of fact that in the age range of 41 to 50 it peaked, almost matching the peak of recorded of those in the age range of 26 to 30. I think that all those statistics understate the actual position, but I think that it may understate it more in the older age groups. I'll tell you why I think that. I think that quite often it's not presumed to take place in established relationships. What looks like a long and happy marriage may not be that. Publicity campaigns are very welcome, but the image usually is of a younger woman with a younger man who threatens, cows or abuses her as he comes home. That reinforces that stereotype. The older woman may indeed have a different view of whether or not she has been subject to domestic abuse because of her generational perspectives. It may be a heightened sense of shame, particularly if everyone thinks that she is in a happy and secure marriage. There may be apprehension and reaction of other family members if she says anything about it, indeed even to the level of grandchildren. She may feel that if she does, she is being disloyal to the family's view of a great father figure. She may even alienate them, fear she alienates herself from the members of her family. She may even think that this is the way it has to be because it's always been like this and because domestic abuse can quite often be incremental. Starting with small things about the way you comb your hair, the way you dress, what you say, how you eat your food, where you go, when you will go, how you will spend the money and grows and grows until the person is really not aware that, in fact, they have been diminished by this power treatment of a partner. I can't be the only person in here who has been saying a supermarket and witnessed an older man shouting at his wife or companion with language vulgar, distasteful demeaning, with no sense of shame that he is doing this in a public place. What crosses my mind is that, if he can do this in the middle of a supermarket with people listening, what on earth is he like at home? The other thought that crosses my mind is why is she taking this? Why is this what she expects to happen to her in a public place? I say Cabinet Secretary in your new position and I have welcomed it before. In those publicity campaigns, can I suggest that, just on occasion, you show an older woman who is being abused in a public place with language like that, so that they too will recognise that their human rights are being abused or just debated it, and they too are entitled to dignity and what they are being subjected to is domestic abuse. I welcome this opportunity to speak in this debate today on violence against women, particularly since North Ayrshire, the area that I represent, has one of the highest recorded incidents of domestic abuse in Scotland. Violence against women is wide-ranging and covers sexual offences, forced marriages, trafficking, prostitution and honour crimes, as well as domestic abuse, and I am sure that everyone in the chamber is concerned that many of those crimes are increasing. First, I would like to welcome that Ayrshire was selected as a pilot area for Clare's law and, hopefully, that will prove to be a positive new development in the protection of potential victims of violence from men. Returning to North Ayrshire, where between 2003 and 2004 and 2011-12 domestic abuse incidents attended by the police increased by 90.5 per cent, from 996 to 1,897, a truly shocking figure. That resulted in the creation of the multi-agency domestic abuse response team, or MADART. That comprises of the council, police, NHS Ayrshire and Arn, North Ayrshire's women's aid and members of the North Ayrshire violence against women partnership, which has since reduced incidents in North Ayrshire by more than 4 per cent. That was in 2012-13. There have also been key improvements in other areas, such as 33 per cent increase in the direct support to victims with children and reductions in the time taken to respond to incidents involving victims with children from an average of around 10 days to three days. MADART shows that the benefit of organisations pooling and sharing resources to address the needs of victims, resulting in improved communications and information sharing, but most of all providing effective support and better targeting of resources and services to the victims. My understanding is that this is currently unique to Ayrshire and perhaps other local authorities should adopt that approach, too. However, while I welcome the reduction in incidents since MADART was established, it is clear that we need to keep the momentum going and build on that work, which is the foundation for a long-term programme that needs to be supported. With all that in mind, I was appalled to learn that the SNP-held North Ayrshire council is proposing to replace the holistic service that North Ayrshire's women's aid provide and replace it with a watered-down version, minus services for children and minus women with addictions, and also cut the funding to that reduced service by 20 per cent. I will be keeping a watchful eye on the outcome of Clare's law and anticipate that the assessment of the pilot will show that some women have been prevented from becoming involved with known violent men and that will then be rolled out across Scotland, as the cabinet secretary has said. I also commend the MADART initiative for its role in driving down domestic abuse in the Ayrshire area and hope that it continues to be supported as schemes like this should be replicated across Scotland. However, most of all today, on behalf of the women in North Ayrshire, I ask if the cabinet secretary will intervene in the proposals by SNP-held North Ayrshire council to cut the holistic services and funding of North Ayrshire women's aid in an area that desperately needs to protect women from abuse in their homes. As a man, I am part of the problem. I have not always spoken out. I have not always intervened when people have been making comments or acting in a way that perhaps ought to be challenged. I think that there are many of us who would acknowledge that sometimes that is the case. Sometimes you take the option that the quiet life is the easy life and you allow those attitudes to permeate. I have done that in the past. I remember many years ago ending up on the deck on Union Street in Aberdeen when I intervened in a situation and at the time I felt it was better that I was the one who took the punch. However, I resolved today when I signed the statement of intent that I will do better and do more. I will not stand by and allow some of those attitudes to be put out as what is seen as banter, but all too often continues to perpetuate a sinister element in society. I welcome the remarks by the cabinet secretary because in the debate on the programme for government I raised the issue around the psychological element of domestic abuse. Violence, absolutely physical violence, sexual violence must absolutely be stamped out and must be tackled, but the psychological element is often in place for a great length of time before it manifests in physical or sexual violence. If we are able to tackle that psychological element, we can often prevent women from falling into the situation where they are abused physically or sexually. On the control and coercion element, often you see comments where a woman has gone back to the man who is abusing her and there are questions around why she is doing that, why does she go back, and it comes back to the psychological control and coercion. In many instances the woman has been made to feel that she is deserving of the treatment that she is receiving. Christine Grahame summarised that very eloquently, that she believes that it is her fault that she is on the receiving end of the abuse, and that comes down to the psychological element. The Government has my full support in trying to tackle that. I recognise that there will be difficulties around that, but I think that it is absolutely important that that is tackled as well as the physical element. I also welcome the roll-out of Claire's law in my home city of Aberdeen, and I hope for its success, and I will certainly be looking forward to seeing how that is assessed at the end. I will end on the issue around media perceptions. I think that there has been some of that brought up, and I agree entirely with Graham Pearson when he talks about page 3 culture. Page 3, frankly, should have gone a long time ago. Now is the time for page 3 and other outlets that propagate that kind of approach to using women in their publications. That should end. However, there is a wider issue around objectification as well. Many of us will have been horrified by the decision of ITV2 in the first place to broadcast the comedian, and I use the term loosely, dapper laughs, a character, apparently, of Daniel O'Reilly, a comedian, who based his entire show on making light of sexual assault, essentially, of women and sexual abuse of women, that that could even find its way on to the schedule of one of our major broadcasters, I think, is utterly abhorrent. I welcome the belated decision to cancel the show. I also welcome the decision by Theresa May, and it is not often that I find myself welcoming decisions by Theresa May, but I do welcome her decision to refuse a visa to Julian Blanck, the supposed pickup artist from the United States, who wanted to come over here and again spread the notion that somehow sexual assault and sexual abuse of women was just banter, but I think that we also have to ensure that the strongest representations are made to broadcasters and to OFCOM that this kind of thing has to be stamped out before it even gets on to our screens. Many thanks. Now for Alison Johnstone, after which we'll move to closing speeches. Presiding Officer, I'm pleased to take part in this important debate today, as to openly debate and discuss the subject is a way to help reduce society's tolerance of violence against women. I thank all those organisations who have provided briefings for today. In the face of proliferating violence, it is difficult not to feel that progress has stalled or indeed reversed. Scottish Women's Aid highlighted a case where a woman who's suffered domestic abuse says, your confidence goes, it's a gradual thing and grinds you away until there's nothing left. However, the organisation, too, has much experience and expertise and says, we believe that a world without domestic abuse is not just a dream, it's a possibility, never doubt it, changing attitudes changes lives, zero tolerance to tell us that change is possible and that we must make it happen. We as a Parliament can play a leading role in changing those attitudes and we must. Violence against women is a human rights violation of worldwide significance. White Ribbon tells us that at least one in five women in Scotland will experience domestic violence in their lifetime and that a domestic violence incident is recorded every 10 minutes in this country. Violence against women and girls is endemic in conflict areas, where it's often a strategy of combat, but wherever it occurs, in other corners of the globe or in our own streets, it terrorises and humiliates. But violence against women doesn't take place in a vacuum, it takes place in a context where globally only 21 per cent of parliamentarians are women, it takes place in a context of gender-biased austerity which disempowers women. In 2012, the Treasury admitted that of nearly £15 billion raised in cuts, £11 billion came from women. It takes place in a context where some national newspapers include a picture of a topless young woman alongside news and where that picture will feature far more prominently than that of any prominent woman in the field of business, sport or medicine. This media portrayal is very significant indeed and I will be happy to support both the motion and Graham Pearson's amendment today because this media portrayal normalises the objectification of women and it shouldn't be forgotten that gender equality is a fundamental human right, but yesterday we learned that almost 60 per cent of girls say they've been sexually harassed by boys. According to the Girl Guiding Scotland survey, girls as young as seven are being subjected to sexual taunts and grow up with sexual harassment as a normal part of their everyday lives. This is unacceptable and we must challenge it. Every day our young people are bombarded with sexualised, sexist and often violent imagery. In zero tolerances briefing on the sexualisation of young people in the media, we hear how, and I quote, violence against women and exploitation in the sex industry is frequently trivialised in video games. Grand Theft Auto San Andreas enables players to beat a prostituted woman with a baseball bat complete with screams for help. The incredible realism now possible with such games means that players can feel that they are really committing this act. Citizens often reduce the role of consumer can make a difference and Australian chain store has banned Grand Theft Auto 5 due to complaints about its depiction of violence against women. The cabinet secretary is right to say that there's no simple solution or easy fix. Our knowledge of what interventions are most effective for the prevention of gender-based violence is growing. Documentation, evaluation and legislation are key. We in Scotland will continue to call for and campaign for change and there's clearly whole-hearted cross-party consensus on this issue. I, too, congratulate the cabinet secretary on his promotion, indeed in closing. I would be grateful if he could update the chamber on the formation of a violence against women joint strategic board and on funding for multi-agency risk assessment conferences. I also welcome the tone, which I felt was very welcome in this consensual debate. We are supporting the Government motion today and indeed the Labour amendment. We're pleased to know that the Government has included White Rib in Scotland for their campaigning to ensure that men are part of the strategy. I would also like to mention the good work of Amos here in Edinburgh, which I know is supported by Jim Eadie. Although the debate is entitled, Violence Against Women, I believe that we need to include the focus on all children in household and all forms of domestic violence, as several others have said, whether it be same-sex couples and females against men. My first point relates to all children brought up in a household witnessing domestic violence. All colleges of psychiatry state that boys can become aggressive and disobedient, start using violence to try and solve problems and may copy the behaviour that they see within the family. Older boys may play truant and start using alcohol or drugs, both of which are stated as a common way of trying to block out disturbing experiences. All colleges also state that girls are more likely to keep their distress inside, becoming withdrawn, anxious, depressed, thinking badly of themselves, more likely to harm themselves by taking overdoses or cutting themselves and, most worryingly, they are also more likely to choose an abusive partner themselves. UNICEF's Key Findings on the Impact of Domestic Abuse and Violence confirms that there is a strong likelihood that this will become a continuing cycle of violence for the next generation, stating that the single best predictor of children becoming perpetrators or victims of domestic abuse later in life is whether or not they grow up in a home where there is domestic violence. That is based on studies from throughout the world. Given that the impact on children is known and it is fully acknowledged, I would like to ask the new cabinet secretary what is being done to ensure that the children are also taken care of, what support is given to them, boys and girls. I had a cross-party group on mental health at lunchtime, I apologise for not signing Malcolm Chisholm's motion, but that issue was raised there in terms of child and adult mental health. Equally safe is for preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls, but I would hope that it would also be for all children, given what I have said, including boys. My second point talks about the strategy in a reddit cover to cover. It consistently talks about the need for full engagement of local authorities, etc. Of course, my time is nearly up. It is really just to say that there needs to be strong leadership on community planning partnerships. My third point is a point that Malcolm Chisholm raised, and that is on delivering outcomes targets. They are just not there. After 15 years, we are still told that we will be developing a measurement framework. That is not good enough. We need to do more. Finally, when you read about the perpetrators of domestic violence, you can expect the full force of the law, and yet in response to questions from my colleague John Lamont, the Scottish Government stated that out of 10,500 prosecutions, 8,500 convicted of those convicted, 12 per cent given custodial sentence, 25 community sentence, 30 per cent were admonished. It is not really the full force of the law, but I welcome what the new cabinet secretary has said and look forward to the new proposals. I thank the cabinet secretary in his thanks to the many specialist advocacy and support agencies. Those are the national ones that are mentioned in the motion, but we also heard good examples of local initiatives such as Daisy, which James Dornock told us about, and Madder, which Margaret MacDougall told us about. As has been said, the debate sits well with this afternoon's previous debate on human rights, as violence against women is clearly a human rights issue. The Scottish Human Rights Commission includes all gender-based violence in its definition. That must be rape. It is forced marriage. It is, as Rhoda Grant said, prostitution and the purchase of sex. It is trafficking, it is female genital mutilation, it is sexual harassment, it is domestic violence. Preventing violence against women is not only a domestic priority for Scotland. It is a legal duty set out by several international obligations. Over the years, Scottish Governments have taken action on violence against women on female genital mutilation on forced marriage this year and next, hopefully, on human trafficking for which my colleague Jenny Marra is due recognition for her role. I, too, look forward to the consultation on making domestic abuse a criminal offence and, indeed, on its focus on the patterns of abusive behaviour and also the work that will be done on reverse pornography. A number of contributors, Leigh MacArthur, Gil Paterson and Christine Brayham, made reference to the statistics on sexual offences and domestic abuse, and the increase in reporting of domestic abuse and sexual offences, which we hope, of course, is due to people feeling more able to report and to the work that is being done by Police Scotland. However, it is important, as both Kara Hylton and Christine Brayham told us, that we need to recognise that those figures are going to be too low. There are still many reasons why people do not dare to speak out or why they are under report, because, somehow, they feel responsible for the abuse that is happening to them. Alison Johnstone made reference to the girl guiding survey, and I think that that this week has been the statistics that have shocked me most. One in five girls aged 7 to 12 have experienced sexual comments from boys. What a shocking statistic. 59 per cent of young women aged 13 to 21 have experienced some form of sexual harassment. The media plays a part in this, as Mark McDonald and Kara Hylton pointed out. The statistics that the girls said about the media were also very revealing. 58 per cent of young women feel that the media blames rape victims' behaviour on their behaviour or their opinions for their attack. More than half of those young women dislike the disrespectful attitudes that are shown towards women in music videos, and that silly exhibitionist Madonna, who apparently is taking her breasts out for her photographers, does a total disservice to women by continuing to collude with that objectification of women. That sort of behaviour needs to be condemned, because that is doing women no good whatsoever. It really does illustrate how much that survey, how much work needs to be done, because despite all the advances made over the last almost a century on women's rights and representation, I think that women are as disrespected as they ever have been, possibly more so. Mark McDonald made a good point about the problem of access to pornography through the internet now, which normalises the view of sexual violence to young men in particular. Sandra White referred to that role of the media, which is seriously damaging in terms of the way in which women are presented in the media. I do not think that anybody touched on the issue of women offenders, because we know also that violence against women impacts on the justice system. In Scotland, more than half of women offenders in prison have experienced domestic abuse, one-third have experienced sexual abuse and past abuse was recognised by the commission on women offenders as a significant part of the profile of women offenders. Evidence of the link between women's experiences as a victim and subsequent offending led the commission to recommend that services for women offenders should take their previous histories of abuse into account and should provide counselling to deal with the trauma. Women of all economic groups suffer domestic abuse, as many have said, and women of all economic groups suffer sexual abuse, but the link between poverty and the inability to escape abuse, or to seek redress, has to be recognised. A number of people, Christina McKelvie, Kara Hilton and others, have mentioned the importance of the White Ribbon campaign. I was very pleased to hear last week, as I drove home about the initiative in Dumfries and Galloway between the Domestika Abuse and Violence Against Women partnership, the Dumfries and Galloway Council, Queen of the South football club and White Ribbon Scotland, which, as we have heard, encourages men and women to pledge never to commit condona or remain silent about all forms of violence against women. That campaign will be taken to football fans at the Queen of the South versus Rangers match on 12 December. That will be a White Ribbon match, and it is part of the 16 days of global action against violence against women. The Domestika Abuse and Violence Against Women partnership also instigated a songwriting competition for young people, which I believe is reaching its final stages, with members of the public being invited to vote online for one of five songs that are considered to be most relevant to the topic. We are seeing a consciousness being raised by a number of means in various localities. When it comes to violence against women, we can have all the good intentions in the world, as with human rights, but unless there is a fundamental change in the ingrained cultural attitudes, real progress will not be made. The cornerstone of education has to be respect, it has to be the right to refuse to take part in activities that you do not want to take part in, and the right of respect for that decision. Until we allow that to be done, that becomes part of our education, particularly of young men. We will not make real progress on this very important human rights issue. I think that this has been a very good debate. The chamber is absolutely united in what we have been saying about violence against women, women and how we can tackle it and do more to stop it in our society. I think that it is important that we are all absolutely and should remain united in this. This is one issue above everything else, as the cabinet secretary said, that we should be absolutely united in. We have had very good contributions from around the chamber with some of the more horrific ones, such as Graeme Pearson, when he started the debate, in describing how he had to attend a case of a woman that had been kicked to death. For me, that was quite—just even thinking about that was quite horrific. The other contributions that we have had about the local agencies in all our communities and the national organisations and how we cannot tackle this without their support, how they are supporting our constituents and people on a daily basis. Our new First Minister has made clear her commitment to tackling gender inequality, and I certainly see violence against women as a cause and consequence of that inequality. Alison Johnstone mentioned that. It is not to say that men are not affected by domestic abuse, as Mary Scanlon mentioned, or do not suffer the horrific experiences of it, but as we know they do and will always work to ensure that this Government will always work to ensure that male victims receive the support that they need through our public and specialist services. I would say to Mary Scanlon that we will always protect children who are in a family where there is domestic abuse. I might say a bit more about that later. There is no suggestion whatsoever that children, whether male or female in a family where there is domestic abuse, are not going to get support and assistance from this Government, because it does impact on them for the rest of their lives, as I think Mary Scanlon pointed out. However, we have to have a gendered analysis of violence against women in order to address it effectively, and we must work collaboratively with all our key partners to ensure that long and lasting change. A number of speakers in the debate supported, and I welcome that implementation of Equally Safe Scotland's strategy for preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls. I know that there has been some concern from a number of people about a delay in bringing that forward. We hope to take it to the next stage in early in the new year, but the Government is keen to ensure that we get the arrangements right for this. It is ambitious and it is an important programme of work, and we do not want to rush at it with speed. We have made progress in some of the early commitments, and the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary announced that we will be consulting very early next year on the proposed new offences of domestic abuse and revenge porn. I think that Graham Pearson and someone else talked about the delay in the court system, and of course we do not want to see delays in the court system. We are pleased that more people are coming forward. There are more people coming forward that are subject to domestic abuse now. They have been supported to come forward. The police are much more proactive in it and treat it much more seriously as well, but in saying that, we do not want to have unnecessary delays. The Government has given the court system £1.4 million to try to assist with the delays in the court system and will continue to work with the agencies through the national justice board and criminal justice board to monitor the overall levels of demand in that. However, it is important that we recognise that there are more people coming forward that are subject to domestic abuse. We have talked a lot about the organisations that work tirelessly to give them advice and support, and I think that James Dornan, Kara Hilton and Margaret MacDougall mentioned organisations and their constituencies who work to give that absolutely essential advice and support to women and children who are at an extremely vulnerable point in their life. Sometimes the Scottish Government contributes funding to those organisations. We give funding of £34.5 million for violence against women, and that is how important we treat it. However, sometimes it is easy to forget the input that the Scottish Government funding has on real families suffering violence and abuse, and certainly the agencies out there can tell us about it. However, I was told of one survivor who has spoken of her experiences. It is not always easy for people who have suffered domestic abuse to speak about their experiences, but she wanted to speak about the support that she received from what she described as an amazing special service. It is a woman who was experiencing domestic abuse, and she received support for herself and her children. It was in Monkland's women's aid service, and she said that the service, women's aid, in my opinion, has helped my boys to be children again. Instead of worrying all the time without this service, I do not think that they would be in the happy place they are now, and I think that that tells us very much how we need these services. I know that there has been concern from a number of speakers about funding for the services. We are currently at the ending of coming to the end of the spending review, and what is happening is that officials are currently in discussion with the organisations about funding and the way ahead. We do not want to have any delays in that. We know that there is uncertainty out there, but we want to ensure that that is resolved as soon as we can and get that resolved. The support services have many allies in this chamber. For example, today we had Christina McKelvie and Malcolm Chisholm with their white men against violence, women against—men's violence against women group and the white ribbon group and the cross party group. I think that today I was certainly pleased to go along there and see so many people from this chamber as I am going in meeting them all coming out in the corridor who had been in there to show their support for this, because I think that it is important that this Parliament leads on it. However, as we come to the end of 2014, I think that this is a momentous year. It has made us all focus on what kind of Scotland we want for us and the next generation. I believe that this debate actually cuts right to the heart of this, and I think that Liam McArthur and James Dornan talked about the message. I think that the message from this Parliament, as they mentioned, should be very loud and clear and that violence against women is, it is never normal, it is never acceptable, it is never legal and it should never ever be tolerated or justified. I think that that is the United Message that we take today. It is clear that all of us across this chamber want to see a Scotland where no one experienced abuse or violence, where no one is ever afraid to go home or afraid of someone else coming home, where no young people have to hear or see their mother being abused, a Scotland where men and women are truly equal and where violence against women is finally a memory that is something in the past. Thank you. That concludes the debate on violence against women and it is now time to move to the next item of business, which is decision time. There are three questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is that motion 11695, in the name of Christine Grahame, on Scotland's national action plan for human rights, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are. The motion is therefore agreed to. Second question is that amendment 11789.1, in the name of Graham Pearson, which seeks to amend motion number 11789, in the name of Michael Matheson, on violence against women, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? The amendment is therefore agreed to. The third question is that motion number 11789, in the name of Michael Matheson, as amended on violence against women, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are. The motion is therefore agreed to. That concludes decision time and I now close this meeting of Parliament.