 yn ôl i'r cymdeithasol i niwr. Y next item of business is a debate on motion number 1434 in the name of Michael Matheson on domestic abuse law. Can I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request to speak buttons now? And from the offset, can I tell you? I just watched my lips. Time is tight! There's no spare time! I call on Michael Matheson, cabinet secretary, to speak and to move the motion. Mae ddimesdig y byw yn y peth o blos arfawr cyllid cyfryd, oedd yn gwneud lle theor y byw, a oedd yn gwneud flasgrwliau arfer y llwyr afael hynny. Felly, mae'n cyfrifio'r peth yng ngôr ac y fydd yn fawr. Ond mae'n byw yn cyfrifio brydiaidd yn cyfrifio. yn 2014-15, mae'n cael 60,000 ddimesdig ei byw sydd wedi'i rebwyr i llwyr Cymru. Felly, mae fathrwch i'n ddifwrdd y nifer o'r ddwyll, oherwydd ddifrwch o'r ddwyll. Y 2014-15, ymateb o'r crlynau a'r ddysgwm ysgrifennu, fe fydd iawn y ffifth o'r ddwyll yw'r cyfan gwaith ymgyrchu'r ddwyll yn y gweithio'r 12 mlynedd yw hynny ymddangos y cyfodd o'u gwilio'r ddwyll yn y cyfodd yma ar gyfer y gwaith gwaith ymgyrchu. Maint iawn yn fawr y pam 14% o adahau wedi bod ei fêmeu amser ar gyfer gwaith arian gyda 16%. 3% o adahau peitio arian yn fêmeu amser ar gyfer cwylwyr 12 mlynedig. Milyddiol, gallwn i'n ffawr i'r cyflwylliant i gyda gwn i amddangos i'r mwynd yn iawn o'r hunain iawn i'r ffórau ar gael, yn felly i gydig i gyrwm iawn i'r bach aio'r dymes ychydig. Felly i'n ffawr i'r hanfainach i'r hunain iawn i'r organisation I'm very grateful for them sharing their experience with me. Women are disproportionately likely to be victims of domestic abuse. Twice as many women report having experienced partner abuse in the previous 12 months as men. An instance with a female victim and a male perpetrator represent 79 per cent of all instances of domestic abuse reported by To The Police in 2014-15. That is why tackling domestic abuse is a core part of Equally Safe, the Scottish Government's strategy for preventing and eradicating violence against women and girls. Supported by the Equally Safe Justice Expert group, the Scottish Government is developing a delivery plan that will deliver improvements to the justice system for all victims of abuse, including women and girls. We are also taking immediate steps to improve the justice system's response to domestic abuse. In March last year, the First Minister announced an additional £20 million over the period of 2015-18 to tackle all forms of violence against women and girls and put in place better support for victims. That money has already been put to good use. For example, it has allowed additional investment to boost resources for our courts and prosecutors by £2.4 million each year to ensure that there is no undue delay in court waiting times for domestic abuse cases. In last week's programme for government, the First Minister confirmed that a domestic abuse bill will be introduced in this forthcoming parliamentary year, which will make Scotland one of only a handful of countries around the world that have criminalised psychological abuse and coercive control. I want to set out how we arrived at this point and why we think this new comprehensive domestic abuse offence will improve the justice system's response to domestic abuse. As members may be aware, at the Crown Office's Domestic Abuse Conference in 2014, the then-slister general Leslie Thompson QC called for the Scottish Parliament to consider the creation of a specific offence of domestic abuse. The case that she made for a new offence was compelling and I pay tribute to her and others such as Scottish Women's Aid and Assist, who have been at the forefront of building support for a new offence. In her speech, Leslie Thompson said that, in her experience of prosecuting domestic abuse, the existing law does not always reflect the experience of victims of long-term domestic abuse because it focuses on individual instances of threatening behaviour or assault and does not reflect the fact that domestic abuse is often experienced as a pattern of abusive behaviour that is sustained over a period of time. In March 2015, the Scottish Government published a consultation paper that sought views on whether a specific domestic abuse offence would improve the ability of the police and prosecutors to tackle domestic abuse. The response was clear. The vast majority agreed that the current law does not reflect the experience of victims who experience on-going coercive and controlling behaviour by partners and ex-partners. The collective view of respondents was that a specific offence could improve the justice system's response to domestic abuse. The kinds of cases that consultation respondents highlighted as being difficult to prosecute using the existing law are those in which anabuser may not necessarily use physical violence against their partner or even over threats but behaves in a highly controlling and abusive way towards their partner over a long period of time. Examples of what abusers may do to humiliate their partners are horrendous. For example, abusers may force them to eat food off the floor, control access to their toilet, repeatedly put them down and tell them that they are worthless. Abusers also try to control every aspect of their partner's life by, for example, preventing them from attending work or college, stopping them from making contact with family and friends, giving them no or limited access to money, checking or controlling their use of their phone and social media. However, where this is not accompanied by physical violence or over threats, which can often be the case because, for example, the victim is in so much fear that their partner does not believe that they need to exert any threats through control. It may be very difficult to prosecute using the existing law in this area. Even where a prosecution is possible, the conviction for that offence may leave the victim feeling that the court process and the sentence imposed does not reflect the reality of their experience of abuse. The perpetrator will have subjected his partner to years of abuse but may only have been convicted of a single instance of assault or threatening and abusive behaviour. Although the vast majority of consultation respondents supported the principle of having a domestic abuse offence, there were a wide variety of views on how such an offence could operate, especially in relation to how coercive and controlling behaviour and psychological abuse in a relationship could and should be defined. Although some behaviour is such that any reasonable person would consider it to be abusive, the point at which, for example, belittling comments or an unequal approach to financial decision making within a relationship can be said to amount to psychological abuse or coercive and controlling abuse will depend on the wider context in which that behaviour occurs. We have worked closely with stakeholders to develop an offence that seeks to appropriately and effectively criminalise the kind of pernicious, coercive and controlling behaviour that I have described. We are not inadvertently criminalising what might be described as ordinary arguments and friction that can occur in many relationships. The approach that we have taken in the draft offence is to provide for a course of conduct, offence that covers the whole range of behaviour that can make up a pattern of abusive behaviour within a relationship. That enables the perpetrator's whole course of abusive behaviour to be liable in a single charge, allowing the court to consider the totality of the abuse that is alleged to have taken place. That means that the courts can consider both acts that would be criminal under the existing law such as assault and threats and psychological abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour, which can be difficult to prosecute under existing law. The offence is committed when three specific conditions are met. The first condition is that the perpetrator engages in a course of behaviour that is abusive of their partner or ex-partner. The second condition is that a reasonable person would consider the behaviour that the course of behaviour would be likely to cause their partner or ex-partner to suffer physical or psychological harm. The third condition is that the perpetrator either intends to cause the victim to suffer harm or else is reckless as to whether the course of behaviour causes the victim to suffer harm. The draft offence provides a definition of abusive behaviour. That includes behaviour directed at the victim, which is violent, behaviour directed at the victim, which is threatening or intimidating, behaviour directed at the victim or any other person, which has as its purpose or that would be likely to have one or more of the following effects. Making the victim dependent on or subordinate into the perpetrator, making the victim isolated from friends and relatives or other sources of support, controlling, regulating or monitoring the day-to-day activities of the victim, making the victim feel frightened, humiliated or degraded or punishing the victim. That part of the definition is intended to cover the kind of psychological abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour that it may not be possible to prosecute under the existing law. The second condition is that a reasonable person would consider that the course of behaviour would be likely to cause the victim to suffer physical or psychological harm, sets the threshold for the offence to be committed. The third condition is that the accused either intends by the course of behaviour to cause the victim to suffer such harm or else is reckless as to whether the course of behaviour causes such harm ensures that a perpetrator cannot argue that they are not guilty of the offence solely because they claim that they did not intend to cause harm to their partner. We are considering the responses that we have received to the consultation and Scottish Government officials have met with a number of stakeholders in recent weeks to discuss the terms of the offence. One key issue raised by a number of stakeholders has been that the draft offence does not reflect the impact that domestic abuse can have on the children of an abused partner and the extent to which children can be, in effect, secondary victims of partner abuse. We are considering very carefully what changes may be needed to reflect that feedback. We think that it is important to remember that it is a long-standing offence for any person to abuse or neglect a child in their care. Alongside the existing offence, we want to ensure that the new offence operates so as to ensure that the impact of domestic abuse on children is fully recognised. Some stakeholders have also highlighted the need for additional protections for victims, and we are also considering what more may need to be done in this particular area. We are seeking to introduce a domestic abuse offence, which will put Scotland among one of the first countries in the world to criminalise psychological abuse and coercive control of a partner or ex-partner. We think that the benefits are clear on bringing forward a new comprehensive domestic abuse offence, providing clarity for victims and sending a clear signal that what their partners or ex-partners have done to them is not only wrong but is criminal, improving the ability of the police to intervene in specific cases and changing societal attitudes towards what amounts to domestic abuse, not only physical violence but psychological abuse, exerting total control over your partner's every movement and action, forcing your partner to live in constant fear as criminal and unacceptable in our society. I will listen with interest to the contributions that are made here this afternoon. I look forward to working with Parliament to ensure that the offence is as effective as it can be in tackling the scourge of domestic abuse in Scottish society. I move the motion in my name. I now call Douglas Ross to speak and move amendment 1, 4, 3, 4.1. Mr Ross, nine minutes please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am pleased to open today's debate for the Scottish Conservatives on the Scottish Government's proposal to introduce a criminal offence of domestic abuse. I hope that the positive remarks that have come from these benches and indeed all benches since the announcement in the First Minister's programme for Government that there is strong cross-party support for this legislation are listened to by people perhaps sitting at home today who are victims of domestic abuse, that they can see that their Parliament is standing up for them, that often an offence which takes place behind closed doors can give them some strength, that they have backers in this Parliament and indeed across the country to overcome many of the fears that they have experienced at the hands of a domestic abuser. This is a monstrous and, as the cabinet secretary explained before me in his opening remarks, a multi-fastered crime. It is the ultimate betrayal of trust between two people who are intimately involved, one more vulnerable than the other and its destructive effects can continue to reverberate long after the abuse has come to an end. On that point I welcomed the comments made by the cabinet secretary about the impact on children. They are never forgotten by people in these relationships, but clearly the law looks at the person who has been abused and not necessarily the impact that that has on people who are often in the room at the time, who are, as we heard in some of the briefings, often used as a tool in the domestic abuse, that the child is put forward to be a threat to someone to be removed, to be used to encourage this form of domestic abuse by others. I think that that is an terrible scenario to go through. I really do look forward to seeing how we can use this debate and indeed our debates in committee going forward once the legislation has been put down to ensure that we protect children in as best a way as we can. Scottish Government figures demonstrate just how many victims are suffering at the hands of their abusers across the country. In Scotland 59,882 in 2015, our eyes have almost a third since 2005-06. In my own area of Murray the number of victims has almost doubled over the course of one year, from 377 in 2013-14 to 749 in 2014-15. In Highland Council area the number of recorded incidents of domestic abuse has risen by 55 per cent since 2005-06. I applaud the excellent work done by Murray Women's Aid. The cabinet secretary mentioned how he had visited Edinburgh Women's Aid earlier. I know that Murray offers excellent support to women and children who are experiencing domestic abuse at his facility in Elgin. However, I know that there are concerns raised by Rhoda Grant about the future funding of that facility, so I think that we must ensure that organisations such as Murray Women's Aid and organisations of length and breadth of the country continue to receive our support so that they can continue to give their support to those who need it most. I met with members of Murray Women's Aid at Kishaw recently, and they were doing some fundraising there. I look forward to a visit with them in Murray and the community quite soon to ensure that we can do as much as we can to allow them to continue the great work that they do. As the cabinet secretary has himself said, the crime is far too prevalent in our society. While those statistics underscore the willingness of more victims to come forward, there is also a stark reminder that there are potentially many, many more people suffering behind closed doors across the country. The message must therefore ring out loud and unequivocally clear from today's debate that in our modern society, physical and psychological abuse will not be tolerated, and it is absolutely right that we explore the ways to ensure that our criminal justice system is equipped to handle and prosecute such complex cases. To that end, I note the publication by the Scottish Government of Equally Safe Reforming the Criminal Law to Address Domestic Abuse and Sexual Offences, which ultimately led to the introduction of the Abusive Behaviour and Sexual Harm Bill, the final piece of legislation that the chamber passed during session 4. While Scottish Conservatives did not agree with every provision contained within it, we very much welcomed the help and the hope that it will provide to domestic abuse victims. As members will be aware, the Abusive Behaviour and Sexual Harm Bill introduced a statutory aggravation for domestic abuse as part of a multi-pronged approach to tackling the issue. During the bill's stage 1 scrutiny, the Crown Agent confirmed that, as a result of the aggravator, abusers will likely get a tougher sentence. However, it also means that serious individual offenses, including physical, sexual assault or stalking, will be prosecuted with the addition of a domestic abuse aggravator where appropriate. I believe that an important recognition of domestic abuse manifests itself in so many different ways. However, as a broad cross-section of stakeholders have recognised, there is a gap in the law that means that the coercive control, a term adopted by Professor Evan Stark, is not criminalised under Scots law, despite how damaging such behaviour can be for its victims. I understand that section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015 in England and Wales creates a new offence of the controlling or coercive behaviour in relationships and I am glad to see that the Scottish Government is making similar strides with that. The proposed law that we are debating today could provide a clear message to perpetrators of psychological abuse that society will not tolerate this kind of behaviour, but we need to ensure that we get our approach absolutely right. I therefore note with some concern that Catherine Dyer, the former Crown Agent, told the Justice Committee that the statutory aggravator or domestic abuse is the correct approach rather than a specific offence. She continued that and I quote, The issue is that a domestic abuse surrounds particular actions and is not an offence in itself, which makes it difficult to establish. It is appropriate that it is an aggravator. The approach of attaching a statutory aggravation rather than trying to define domestic abuse is probably the way to go. I understand that 96 per cent of the respondents to the Scottish Government's equally safe consultation supported the possible introduction of an offence of domestic abuse. It is somewhat troubling that the Crown Office, responsible for prosecuting under the proposed law, is on record as not being fully convinced of its utility. I would therefore be grateful if we could get an update perhaps on the Minister when she closes regarding the new Crown Agent's position on the Scottish Government's proposals. I am sorry, I have about two and a half minutes, and we can perhaps— I will come back to it if I have time, but I do have quite a bit to get through. Turning to the structure, it was the Crown Agent that I was asking about if that helps the Minister. Turning to the structure of the proposed law itself, I extend enormous thanks to the 59 stakeholders who the cabinet secretary mentioned, who took the time to respond to the Scottish Government's second consultation on the draft offence to ensure that it is robust as possible. There is much food for thought in the analysis of the consultation responses, and I look forward to exploring the terrain in greater depth following the introduction of the draft legislation in Parliament. In the time available to me, I would like to focus my remarks on the proposed law to the definition of abusive behaviour within it. While introducing any law, it is vital that it provides clarity and certainty, but some behaviours such as coercive control do not fall within fixed neatly delineated parameters. Along similar lines, in its response to the consultation, the Law Society of Scotland highlighted that any offence extending beyond physical abuse or offensive behaviour currently forbidden by criminal law should be capable of definition and explanation, and that it appears essential that the commission of such an offence requires appropriate men's rare. A workable definition will therefore be key to the law's successful implementation. This is so important because figures from the Scottish Government show that only 54 per cent of almost 60,000 incidents of domestic abuse recorded by the police last year resulted in conviction, just over half of 60,000 cases resulting in conviction. As I argued during First Minister's questions earlier today, we must ensure that the Crown Office and the Procurator Fiscal Service is sufficiently resourced to cope with the increasing domestic abuse caseload. A crime—the Scottish Government, along with Police Scotland and the Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service—has made a priority, but which is inherently complex. There are many, many more things that I would like to say today, and I would hope that some of my colleagues—I know from the Scottish Conservatives that we will mention Claire's law and some of the other points that we added into the motion today, which I hope our amendment will gain enough support from others. We have to ensure that we get this right. It is an important piece of legislation that people will be looking at for many years to come. I welcome the fact that the cabinet secretary has launched this in a consensual way. He wishes to hear the views and opinions of people from throughout the chamber. I look forward to the rest of the debates and discussions that we can have on this as part of our debate today and as it progresses through the Parliament. I anticipate that this will be broadly consensual debate and I look forward to hearing contributions from across the party benches. I move on to the amendment in my name. I will now call Clare Baker to speak to and move amendment 1434.2. Ms Baker, seven minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. 2016 marks 40 years since women's aid in Scotland was established, bringing together the network of local organisations across the country. Local women aid groups were providing support and refuge for women and children fleeing domestic abuse in their communities. The national organisation then gave a focus for pushing for political and social change, working to challenge and prevent domestic abuse. A significant part of that change has been in how the legal system, the courts and the police have all changed their response towards domestic abuse. It was such a significant change that it was one that really needed to happen in families, in communities and in workplaces. No longer could there be an acceptance that domestic abuse was a private matter, that it was the women's aid that she could leave if she really wanted to. It is in those areas that the work of women's aid and other campaign groups have been instrumental in shifting societal attitudes. It can be easy to forget that this was a struggle and often it is still a struggle turning a private problem into a public and a political one, but campaigners fought tirelessly to put domestic abuse on the agenda and bring perpetrator to justice. The establishment of the Scottish Parliament in 1999 gave a political focus to tackling domestic abuse in Scotland. It has played its part in changing attitudes in Scotland and modernising our legal system to respond to the challenge. The Government's intention to introduce a criminal offence of domestic abuse is to be welcomed. We look for the new offence to improve the ability of the police and prosecutors to tackle domestic abuse. The consultation and responses raised questions for debate, such as the extent of the bill and the definition of reclass. We will scrutinise and look for opportunities to improve the bill as we get into the legislative process, but we are in principle very supportive of introducing the new offence and of the intention to include those who commit psychological abuse and engage in coercive and controlling behaviour. While the Government motion highlights that the majority of cases are a male perpetrator and a female victim, the law will provide protection for all adults in an intimate relationship. A similar law has already been introduced in England and Wales and we should look to learn any lessons from that process. While the legislation is important, it also gives us an opportunity to reflect on what more can be done to end domestic abuse in Scotland. Labour's amendment today highlights the progressive work of the domestic abuse courts and asks how we can extend this service. If we are introducing this specific offence, it seems to me that an extension of specialist courts could be a logical conclusion. We have also seen concerns raised over recent cases in court decisions. I am aware of cases where the alleged victim has been sentenced to prison for their reluctance to answer questions in court. Scottish Women's Aid expressed anger over the summer over a recent case of a surgeon who, after spending four nights in custody facing six domestic-related charges over a space of three years, was granted an absolute discharge when he changed his plea before trial and admitted one charge of threatening and abusive behaviour towards his wife. There was no criminal conviction. In response to the case, the Scottish Women's Aid chief executive, Dr Marcia Scott, said, that we need to end the postcode lottery of justice that women and children experience in Scotland depending on where they live and how justice is performed in their community. It could be judged that, if cases like those had gone through a specialist domestic abuse court, the outcomes might have been different. The extension of specialist domestic abuse courts would also look to better reflect the new offence, and I urge the Government to work with relevant agencies to make progress on that issue. The legal process is only one part of the process for victims of domestic abuse. Advocacy, refuge, accommodation, counselling, vital one-to-one support, critical emergency out-of-hours services are all crucial to supporting victims. The cabinet secretary will emphasise the resources that the Government has put into those services, but he must also recognise the pressure that the services are under, and I have received reports of victims being turned away from support, which is the situation that none of us wants to see, but it is a consequence of a squeeze on local authority funding, and I make a plea to the Government to enable local authorities to protect those vital services. It was good news today that the UK Government has agreed to defer the application of LHA rates to supported housing until 2019-20, with the intention of introducing a new funding model. The impact of that on refugees will be to develop further options to protect short-term accommodation, providing the same protection as supported housing in general, and I would like to recognise the work of all the campaigners in achieving that positive result. We also know that domestic abuse can have serious and long-term consequences for children, as mentioned by previous speakers. Children who witness domestic abuse have an increased risk of experiencing mental health problems, of developing alcohol and substance abuse problems and entering into abusive relationships. As we progress the legislation, we need to consider the issues that are raised by Barnardo's Children First and NSPC and the potential for the bill to address some of those concerns. Crime is at a 40-year low, but the trend for domestic abuse is upwards. The most recent figure of incidents recorded by the police shows a 2.5 per cent increase, and while the figures on requests for information through Claire's law show that the law is effective, they are worrying. I accept the improvements in police response and increased awareness and confidence in reporting, and the presumption towards prosecution all provide explanation or some explanation for that. However, when other crimes are on a downward trajectory, we all want to see domestic abuse to be going the same way. That is where we need to see more investment and commitment to preventative work. I met the violence reduction unit recently, and established at a time when gang culture and knife crime were increasing, the focus of the unit is changing and their work on challenging notions of masculinity, working with young men and families is important in addressing some of the root causes of behaviour that is complex and cultural. I want to see perpetrators brought to justice, and that proposed law aims to increase confidence in convictions. However, I also want to see fewer perpetrators, and we must do more to root out the deep causes of domestic abuse that remain in our society. I move the amendment in my name. My apologies. I was giving you my signals, and it is seven minutes so on. My apologies to Ms Baker. I will need to get my glasses on more often. I will now move to the open debate in a call-cape forum, followed by Margaret Mitchell. Ms Forbes, six minutes please, are there abouts? Thank you, Presiding Officer. To every individual in Scotland today whose home is a torture chamber who conceals physical and psychological scars and who live in fear of a tyrant who threatens, intimidates and hits, who controls and isolates, who humiliates and degrades, who controls what is spent, what is watched and what is worn, and who makes another human being feel like nothing and nobody. For those who are subjected to such abuse, I hope that our debate today and the Scottish Government's domestic abuse bill is a loud and strong message that that behaviour is not just a wee spat, it is not just a wee mistake and it is not just a wee one-off, it is criminally wrong and utterly immoral. I can quote the numbers of reported domestic abuse incidents in Scotland, nearly 60,000 last year, but when only a fifth of those who experience partner abuse actually tell the police, we can safely assume that that figure is not correct. Quoting numbers doesn't tell you the individual stories either. Last month, I met with Llechabr Women's Aid, who do an incredible job and who chaired details of specific women that they've helped. I was so angry to hear of the cowardly and creatively dehumanising cruelty of the perpetrators, but at the same time the admiration for the women who relive their experiences in an effort to get justice as they give evidence to police, the courts and support groups and who care for children as well as themselves. I was also frustrated where the current law does not provide police, prosecutors and courts with sufficient powers to bring perpetrators to justice and, most crucially of all, give confidence to victims to come forward. That is why we need this Government's radical and groundbreaking proposals and why we need cross-party support. What do I welcome in this new proposal? First, the new offence will improve the ability of the police to intervene in specific cases and that the Scottish Government promises to work closely with Police Scotland to ensure that training is in place. Training is absolutely vital. In one part of the Highlands, every student community nurse is given at least an hour's training with the local women's aid group. They are briefed on some of the big issues—how to identify potential signs of domestic abuse in women, men and children—and, most important, to make contact with the women's aid groups who are at the coalface of caring for and representing victims. Currently in the police, new recruits are given some training as part of their induction at Tullialen, but I would love to see refresher courses, particularly in the more remote areas of Scotland, and a strong encouragement to work collaboratively with local women's aid groups and other support groups. Secondly, the bill will develop a more joined-up approach and provide police, prosecutors and the courts with sufficient powers to bring perpetrators of abuse to justice. As in a recent Scottish Government consultation, more than 90 per cent believed that that was not quite happening under the current law. In my discussions with women's aid, I was shocked to hear that on many occasions those who have been abused can sit in that centre on the day of a trial, sometimes from first thing in the morning until the end of the afternoon, and are none the wiser whether the abuser has been found not guilty, whether they are out on bail or whether they have been sent to prison. I know that that is not the case everywhere, but we have to get the basics right. There should be an agreed communications plan from the court, procurator fiscal or the police to the victim, and it is an utter travesty to have vulnerable women anywhere in this country, agonising over whether or not they will bump into their abuser. Thirdly, the new offence will give the courts the powers they need to impose tough maximum penalties on perpetrators. Here, I would like to touch on domestic abuse courts, as has already been mentioned. I would like to see a travelling domestic abuse court, which could visit various rural locations for one or two days a month with a sheriff who specialises in dealing with domestic abuse cases to ensure that cases of abuse in the Highlands get justice. That heinous but hidden crime of domestic abuse is a national issue, so any changes to the law must account for remote and rural Scotland so that it is not a postcode lottery. Legislation is, of course, not the only answer, but it sends a very loud message to perpetrators that their actions are inexcusably immoral, and I hope that it will go some way to giving victims greater confidence in the justice system to come forward and make sure that justice is delivered. For that reason, I welcome the debate and I strongly welcome the Government's priority to make sure that a domestic abuse bill is carried forward in the early stages of this Parliament. Thank you. Margaret Mitchell, to be followed by Fulton MacGregor. Presiding Officer, when I was first elected to the Parliament in 2003, one of the first debates that I spoke on was on domestic abuse. I referred to a song by Charlie Rich, written in 1973, which contains certain lyrics that neatly sum up the problematic and complex nature of domestic abuse, namely that no one knows what goes on behind closed doors. That was 43 years ago and, sadly, the problem is very much still with us today, although progress has undoubtedly been made. That progress has included Police Scotland focusing on crime as a priority and adopting a proactive approach to tackling it. That makes sense on two levels. The first is to send out an uncompromising message about the gravity of the crime and to deter perpetrators. Secondly, on a practical level, seeking to reduce instances of domestic abuse by adopting early intervention has proved an effective preventive to spend, cutting as it does the approximately six hours on average it takes officers to do with those cases. In addition to that, the establishment of a specialised domestic date abuse unit within the Crown and Procurator Fiscal Service has helped to ensure that more prosecutions can be secured. However, the union representing Procurators Fiscal has noted during the previous two years of budget scrutiny sessions that the complexity of domestic abuse cases is having a subsequent adverse knock-on effect in the courts and in the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. Another welcome measure was Claire's law, introduced in Scotland in 1 October 2015. That allows those who have any doubts or reservations perhaps about new partners' behaviour to apply to the police to see if the partner has a history of domestic abuse. However, it makes sense that the Government continues to make victims and potential victims aware of the law, which crucially could be a preventative measure. Most recently, the abuse of behaviour in sexual ham Scotland bill was passed in March. The act introduced a statutory aggravator that allows judges to take into account any domestic abuse circumstances when deciding on an appropriate sentence, which could then result in perpetrators of domestic abuse receiving tougher sentences. Here, the law society expressed reservations that I shared about the aggravator applying to a first offence as opposed to second and or subsequent offences for behaviour that is categorised as reckless. Whether that statutory aggravator will result in secure prosecutions in cases of recklessness, only time will tell. However, domestic abuse, as many other of the contributions today have said, manifests itself in many forms. The most tangible form being violent behaviour resulting in physical abuse. More elusive and difficult to establish is verbal abuse. That is often coupled with financial and or emotional manipulation and control. If that latter aspect is the psychological aspect of abuse, which is often the most insidious and which the proposal to create a specific domestic abuse offence seeks to address, that is a laudable objective and one that we on this side of the chamber support in principle. However, as evidenced by the responses to the Scottish Government's two consultations on the draft offence to deal specifically with psychological abuse and engaging in coercive and controlling behaviour, the devil is, as always, in the detail. There were, for example, conflicting views and a number of provisions within the consultation, including the reasonableness test and whether it is open to manipulation, prosecuting a course of behaviour as opposed to a single event, providing the defence of intent being well intentioned, how to evidence harm caused, the definition itself being non-exhaustive, the 10-year penalty whether this is sufficient to reflect the seriousness of a charge brought in indictment, and, already referred to by the cabinet secretary, the absence of any reference to the impact on children. The list goes on, so suffice to say that there are real concerns that the draft offence would not be robust enough to have legal certainty of a prosecution and criminalisation if this insidious aspect of domestic abuse is to be dealt with. The concern was coupled with questions about the sufficiency of resources to ensure effect of prosecution. Clearly, there is much to be done before there is confidence that this new offence will be fixed for purpose. In the meantime, I urge the cabinet secretary to address any potential problems and raise awareness about the ways victims of domestic abuse can protect their anonymity and identity when registering to vote a fundamental freedom that is often denied for fear whereabouts may be known. I should be grateful if the minister would look at that specific point in her closing remarks. I welcome the proposed legislation and believe that it is a huge step on the way to tackling the true nature of domestic abuse. Domestic abuse, as many other speakers have already said, is traditionally thought of as an issue that involves physical violence. However, non-physical forms of abuse such as emotional abuse, controlling behaviour and coercive behaviour can have deeply damaging impact on families. Up until now, it has been considered difficult to prosecute those who are involved in those types of behaviour in that point that has been made already by the cabinet secretary, meaning that often abusers are not brought to justice. With this bill, I believe that victims will be much more likely to have their voices heard by the justice system and perpetrators will no longer find it possible to simply slip through the net. The investment of £20 million over the period between 2015 and 2018 has been vital in ensuring that those suffering from all forms of domestic abuse are given the support that is needed. I have witnessed initiatives such as the Change programme being run in South Lanarkshire, proved very effective and made a real difference to victims, perpetrators and families. That extra investment has also provided additional community-based sentencing options to the courts, and it has helped to make it clear that no form of domestic violence will be tolerated. With the changes in law and the new support given to the police and prosecutors, this Government will be helping to change the lives of many women and children who have been living with abuse for so long. Around 60,000 instances of domestic abuse are reported to the police each year, a figure that we have already heard, and of which 79 per cent involve a female victim and a male perpetrator. We must bear in mind that, although many women and children experiencing domestic abuse are now reporting incidents of abuse to the police or accessing the services of brilliant organisations such as Women's Aid, Eva and Assist, many do not feel in a position to do so and continue to suffer in silence, often with highly damaging and tragic consequences. As it currently stands, Women's Aid groups in Scotland are dealing with somewhere in the region of 25,000 new cases of women, children and young people each year who are in need of support after experiencing domestic abuse. That breaks down to around 475 new cases every week, which shows both the prevalence of domestic abuse and the impact that it is having on so many lives. Let's stop to think about that for just a wee second. 40, 475 previously unidentified women are approaching just one charity organisation every week to seek support. That's a startling figure and another reason why I welcome that legislation. For the women and children who do not come to organisations such as Women's Aid, it is not just emotional sport that is needed. Assistance with practical issues such as housing, safety planning, financial assistance and legal protection are vital. Those issues often present barriers to women looking to move away from the abusive situation. Leaving an abusive partner can have so many implications for women. Many lose their homes, are forced to move around, are alienated from support networks and friends, lose access to childcare, are forced to disrupt their children's routines and education and often incur financial hardship to name just a few. Earlier this week, we had a debate in chamber about the Government's pledge to build 50,000 new affordable and social homes. That is a much needed commitment that so many people experience in homelessness. I mention that because we know that almost three quarters of people declaring themselves as homeless are women and that the third most common reason for homeless applications in Scotland is due to violent or abusive disputes within the household. In my experience as a social worker, many women and children risk a lot just by leaving. They can often become homeless, lose their possessions and suffer financial destitution and abid to escape the everyday terror of their abusers. While a figure of 79 per cent shows an overwhelming number of victims are women, it is important that we take the time to recognise, as other speakers have done, that men can also be victims of domestic abuse. Figures from the Male Domestic Abuse Support Service, which is part of the abused men in Scotland organisation based in Edinburgh, show an increase in the number of men seeking support over the past two years. My own area of North Lanarkshire has seen the number of men seeking support almost double in the past 12 months. It is worth noting that, although male victims are even less likely than female victims to seek support, I encourage more investment in raising awareness in that area. I recently met with Munklands Women's Aid to learn more about the work that they do within my constituency to support women and children whose lives have been affected by domestic abuse. While there I met victims of domestic abuse, including some who had used some of the three refuge centres across Colbridge and heard of the horror of their experiences and of the on-going support that Munklands Women's Aid seeks to provide. Many women were not initially aware that they were in fact victims of abuse due to the controlling and isolating actions of their partner, and I welcome that the new offence will provide clarity for victims that what is happening to them is a criminal act. When we discuss domestic abuse, we forget that there are other victims in the household. Although it has been mentioned today, when an adult suffers at the hands of their partner, any children in the relationship suffer also. Even just witnessing physical or mental abuse of a parent can have a long-term negative impact. Many children who are in this position are referred to the children's reporter, social work and may even be subject to child protection regulation. In my time of social work, I worked with a lot of families where the children had experienced domestic abuse. Well-good progress has been made. It is clear that there is more to be done. In changing the perceptions of what constitutes domestic violence, psychological abuse, exertion of control and overall aspects of a partner's day-to-day life is completely unacceptable, and I welcome those proposals to ensure that that will now be a criminal offence. I am grateful for the opportunity to debate domestic abuse and how we improved the legislation to better protect victims. It was disappointing that the Scottish Government was unable to complete that in the last session, but it is welcome that it is bringing it back so early in this session. I believe that it is essential to legislate to make all aspects of domestic abuse a crime, not just the physical violence but the emotional abuse, the controlling behaviour that perpetrators display. As part of that, we must deal with how the state is used to continue this abuse, especially when the victim has taken steps to protect themselves. Far too often, I have cases where the court rules that an abusive parent should also have access to their children, and it takes no account that this access can be used to control their victim further. Neither does it take any account of the damage that domestic abuse does to children. A number of members have mentioned this, and we have had an excellent briefing from Bernard Rose's Children First and NSPCC. We all know that children do not thrive in abusive environments. It affects their ability to concentrate because of the fear that it generates, but it also impacts on their self-esteem, meaning that it can go on and have a negative impact on them throughout their lives. The Scottish Government accepts this because it funds children's workers for young people who have witnessed domestic abuse, yet it still allows the courts to give the abusive partner access to those children, enabling them to continue that abuse to both victims and children. Obviously, when physical abuse happens to the children and it can be proved that child protection issues come into play, but it is not the case for emotional abuse. A child on a contact visit, even if it is carried out through a contact centre, can be applied for information about their other parent. I have had numerous cases where the mother has had to move repeatedly because the father has forced children to divulge where they are living and has then used that information to put the families in a state of fear and alarm. The impact that that has on the child is huge. They are guilty for having divulged that information in the first place, but they also suffer the insecurity of having to leave friends, school and the like while their mother tries to make them all safe again. It is clear to me that an abusive partner should not have access to their children until a time that they can prove that they are no longer a threat to their ex-partner or indeed those children. The same is true of schools. I had a case where the head teacher told a mother that if she really cared about her child, she would put her own needs aside and attend a parent's night alongside her abusive ex-partner. I find that absolutely unbelievable, but it is a sense of the scale of ignorance of domestic abuse that is prevalent in our society. If we are going to tackle domestic abuse inquires of control, the state's role as a tool in this abuse needs to be dealt with, too. We have seen the real difference that domestic abuse courts make when dealing with victims and perpetrators in such cases. Those involved have a real understanding of abuse, and they are not so easily fooled by a smart lawyer or a manipulative client. We really need that expertise rolled out to all courts, even if that is only having certain days set aside for domestic abuse cases alone. That would allow organisations such as Women's Aid to be their support in their client but also to give them the ability to reach out and support others who have not accessed their services before. At the moment, Women's Aid groups can have different staff members at courts every sitting day supporting just one client. Although they are in court, they are unable to help others, and being able to be there only one day would make more efficient use of the resources that they have, freeing them up to do the work that they are there to provide. When we have funding cuts for Women's Aid groups, that is even more important. It also allows prosecutors and sheriffs to gain an knowledge of domestic abuse, which is sadly lacking in many quarters. It also allows arrangements to be made to keep victims and their families separate and for them to be accused and theirs to avoid chance meetings, which can be particularly terrifying for victims and provides the opportunity for the perpetrator to undermine the victim. In my final moments, I just want to say that I am disappointed that the Government has not come forward with a bill to give legislative strength to all aspects of Equally Safe. We are all signed up to the strategy, but at times the Scottish Government hardly pays lip service to the provisions within it. I speak specifically of commercial sexual exploitation, which is recognised in the strategy as violence against women and girls, but it is left unfettered in Scotland. Can I ask the Scottish Government to take a serious look at protecting some of the most vulnerable people in our country, many of whom have already been let down by the state? If we take the strategy seriously and act to put measures in place to protect women against violence, we will all be the better for it. Thank you very much. I think that the phrase domestic abuse has become a bit of a fig leaf. Society has pulled a veil over the reality so that it does not upset us too much or make us feel too uncomfortable, but we must not fall for that get-out. We must face it front. The fact is that men, for the most part of it, men—79 per cent, as I have heard—are treating their partners with a level of violent physical and mental abuse that is not only evil but soul and family destroying. Do not let us lose sight of the reality, because around one in five and probably much more will be victims of this kind of physical and emotional attack. I ask you all to just think for a second, regardless of your gender or your orientation, to think for a moment what the term domestic abuse means to you. We will not have a right to come back to that right now, but I want you to just take a bit of time in your mind's eye to think about domestic abuse and what it means to you. Is it the drunk football supporter coming home after a football match where his team is lost waving a knife drunkidly and his wife's face threatening to give it? Or is it the child abused in her bedroom by an apparently doting relative? Presiding Officer, inequality is at the heart of this issue, and for women that can start as early as when the midwife says, it's a girl. It's happening now, it's shocking us all, and it horrifies us, but it's the tip of an iceberg. The real story lies in the thousands of homes across Scotland with no social or wealth boundaries where women are physically and mentally assaulted, alarmed, distressed and trapped continually, where they are too frightened to take any action so threatened by the fear of more of the same that they just seem to hang on. That's the catch-22 that we're caught in. We are aware of the headline Gramin grabbing major attacks, but we have no real sense of what or how much takes place behind those closed doors. The Scottish Government equally saved publication last October that authors emphasised why that specific new offence is required. As the then Solicitor General Leslie Thomson called on this Parliament to create a bespoke offence of domestic abuse, we agreed with her. I agree with Leslie Thomson, and so there are many of the organisations in the cross-party group for men's violence against women, and I very much welcome Claire Baker to fill the substantial issues of Malcolm Chishol, but I learned a lot from Malcolm. I'm looking forward to working with her on that, but I do agree that they need a specific offence that would provide the recognition of the impact and the consequences of the types of abusive behaviours, including non-violent tactics of control and abuse, and would make clear to the public and to law enforcement that such conduct is not acceptable. That new bill sets out to tackle the underreporting of abuse across its different faces, something that we all welcome, but there is a growing understanding of the damaging impact that comes from controlling and coercive behaviour that eats into the mind. Women have no control of their finances, even what they wear, their friends, when and whom they go out, or even if they get to go out. The impact on health and self is deep and profound. As we have heard, women's aids group in Scotland are dealing with around 25,000 new cases of women, children and young people needing that support. The true figure, as we know, may be much, much higher. As well as the women themselves, the impact on children, as we have heard, is huge. We have to have a compassionate and caring system with access for women who are often literally forced onto the street with their children. There is a whole, invisible sea of knock-on effects far beyond the immediate crisis. The withdrawal of the threat on refugees from the UK Government is very welcome indeed, but we need to keep an eye on that. While the voluntary organisations that women's aid and rape crisis centres do everything they can, the system remains disjointed and often unsympathetic to the victims. We need proper, specific housing options to be made available for families fleeing violence. I suggest something similar to the courtesy that is given to our veterans when it comes to housing. The model is already there. Let's see if we can use it for this. The women and children must have accommodation where they feel safe and secure, because safety and security are paramount. We need disimproved legislative framework that singles out a specific domestic abuse offence and holds criminals convicted under it in the public eye. That, in conjunction with the sexual harm act, will achieve a great deal, but it is a vital additional weapon to the on-going fight against the brutal and criminal abuse of women. I look forward to working with all across the chamber and bringing this about. Gordon Lindhurst, followed by Gil Paterson. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. Domestic abuse carried out against anyone for any reason is something that we no doubt all agree is wrong. People who carry out domestic abuse give love a bad name. It is a serious subject but certainly not a simple one, nor are the answers. We are here today to discuss the Scottish Government's intention to bring forward a bill to create a specific offence of domestic abuse. That means, of course, an act of this Parliament intended to criminalise certain behaviour. It is important to set this in context. Let me put it bluntly. The law on its own is a blunt instrument by which to bring about change in an individual's undesirable conduct. The law or a specific act of Parliament may have an intention, but that does not mean that it fulfills its intention once it becomes law. Perhaps one of the most important things to remember in a civilised country is that individuals need to treat others as they would like to be treated themselves, to put it simply to love their neighbour as themselves. It is important to keep such basic principles in mind. As a framework, at the same time as we recognise there is a problem that may need to be addressed in a specific area. As someone who has both prosecuted and defended in the courts of Scotland on many occasions, including in cases involving domestic abuse, I know that simply making a law is not enough. How often is a prosecution brought only to fail to succeed before the court for a variety of reasons? Because the circumstances are not clear? Because the victim does not give evidence? Because the law is unclear? These are all questions which need to be asked and answered. There need to be the resources available to the police in dealing with any new offence, to the prosecution service to prosecute and to the courts and prison services to deal with the cases that come to them. That is an issue that has already been raised by others. The question arises, could those resources be better spent elsewhere in support for the victims of domestic abuse and in seeking to change the attitudes and actions of the offender? A victim of abuse, as has already been eloquently put by a fellow MSP, may not give evidence in court, having made the call months before to the police, because of a fear of losing a person and a relationship that they have long since returned to because of a much deeper emotional reliance. Will the creation of a new offence help if adequate support in the circumstances is not available to victims? By that I mean support outwith what the law seeks to provide in terms of the criminal offence. That is surely one of the most important issues in the whole matter. If victims do give evidence, they need to know that they do not do so in vain, that the law is clear so that a conviction will follow when an offence is proven. But, of course, there must always be a balance. The law must be fair to alleged offenders as well. Clarity in the law is one of the first steps in this, but equality of treatment for all individuals should also be evident. According to the motion before this parliament, figures from 2014 to 2015 show that 79 per cent of the incidents of abuse are related to a male perpetrator and a female victim. Although there is therefore an understandable focus on female victims, which has already been evident in some of the speeches, male victim and female perpetrator cases have reportedly risen from 11 per cent back in 2005 to 6 to 18 per cent in 2014 to 15. This is an aspect which should not be forgotten in the discussions on this issue. All of these issues and many, many more, of course, play an important part in getting the approach to domestic abuse right. If there is a new law all that we need, I think that most people would agree with me that it certainly will not be enough. But if there is to be a new law, as has already been said, we need to get it right. The proposed draft offence that is set out in the Scottish Government's criminal offence of domestic abuse consultation is, of course, just that, a draft. But detail is important. Before anyone's eyes glaze over at the thought of legal detail, as indicated, I am an advocate if that needs to be declared as an interest, but I was not involved in the Faculty of Advocates response to the consultation document. I agree, at least in part, with the position of the Law Society of Scotland, specifically when it has said that new legislation will require clarity to ensure that it can be effectively implemented in practice. And it is precisely that which seems to me to be lacking in the draft offence set out in the consultation paper. It contrasts sharply with the careful wording of its English equivalent in section 76 of the Serious Crime Act 2015. Now, laugh not for definition as the stuff of statutes as engineering formulae may be the stuff of bridge building. I would not seriously suggest that I as a non-qualified engineer be put in charge of the new fourth bridge. But as a lawyer, I think it is important that any new offence should be clearly defined so that it fulfills its intended purpose, rather than failing and resulting in the disappointment of those it is meant to protect. There are many examples in the draft, but let me conclude by saying this. I have made my point. We need to remember that when it comes to statute, it is not enough to say a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Language matters. The detail of the language of this law will matter. As you close now, please, Mr Lindhurst. If we fail to get it right, this Parliament will give law a bad name. Gil Paterson, to be followed by Monica Lennon. Many thanks, Presiding Officer. This Parliament, and indeed Scotland, can be proud that in nearly every session since this Parliament was reconvened domestic abuse and its different forms have been addressed by members. More importantly, it is a topic that tends not to be used as a political point-scorer because of the broad consensus that the answer to domestic abuse does not only require a political solution but a social one. Importantly, working with key partners and the agencies, attempting to ensure that everyone who experiences domestic abuse knows where to go, knows that they will be listened to and, ultimately, hopefully, to know action will be taken. Furthermore, the politics in this can be removed further when you look at all of us in this chamber today. It is likely that we know someone who has been in this difficult and distressing situation, but the manner of the abuse may be somewhat different. Presiding Officer, it is recognised that domestic abuse is not carried out exclusively by men. Women have and do engage in violence in the home. However, that said, it is without a shadow of a doubt that the vast majority of incidents are carried out by men, and, crucially, the level and severity of physical attacks on women and children is significantly higher. Therefore, my main focus today is directed at men's behaviour. We must remember that abuse does not require bruises or physical marks to be so. Abuse can be hidden and abuse can be long standing. There can be other victims too who may not be the target for the abuse directly. Children can become involved whether it is witnessing the abuse, being a secondary victim as part of a wider abuse or, in respects to today's debate, being used in some way as part of the mental abuse on the mother. The introduction of this new offence has positive implications for children in other ways. Section 672f of the Children's Hearing Scotland Act 2011 makes a ground for a child to be reported to the children's panel if that child has or is likely to have close connection with a person who has carried out domestic abuse. Therefore, winding the definition and recognising of domestic abuse protects our children using our already established and well-renowned children's hearing system. Touching on already established systems, last year we saw the national roll-out of Police Scotland on its disclosure scheme for domestic abuse, and the additions of modern abusive factors in the future will improve the scheme, empowering those who use their right to ask with important further information on their partner. Today, I believe that we are seeing the beginning of a new chapter in Scotland's fight against domestic abuse and our understanding of it. The introduction of domestic abuse law attempts to recognise the modern issues surrounding abuse. That abuse can be beyond physical involving psychological on their partners. Perpetators can use a range of tactics to psychologically abuse victims, including controlling their finances, what they wear and their use of social media, and threatening to harm others, including children. Such an offence will also have a significant impact on how society views domestic abuse, by ensuring that there is clarity about what is unacceptable under the law. The new offence will help to change societal attitudes towards what amounts to domestic abuse. That it is not only physical violence, but also psychological abuse, exerting total control over your partner's every movement and action, forcing a partner and children to live in constant fear, which is criminal and unacceptable. I understand that it is currently challenging to use existing laws to prosecute psychological abuse, such as coercive and controlling behaviour. That new offence will help the Scottish Government's justice partners, such as Police Scotland and the Crown Office, to more effectively deal with domestic abusers. The new offence will bring clarity for victims and let them know that the justice system is focused on their needs. The Scottish Parliament has already started to address the wider and growing modern issues around domestic abuse. In March, the Parliament passed the Abuses, Behaviour and Sexual Harm Act, which will create a specific offence of sharing private intimate images without consent. That is often referred to as revenge porn. The act also introduced a new statutory domestic abuse aggravator to ensure that courts take domestic abuse into account when sentencing an offender, and statutory due directions for certain sexual offences, which I have very much support of all. The introduction of the new offence will be adding to our understanding and recognition of modern challenges of domestic abuse. I very much welcome and support that motion. I welcome the motion in Michael Matheson's name. I am encouraged to see that the Scottish Government is committed to tackling domestic abuse as part of a wider strategy of preventing violence against women and girls. I also hope that the Government will consider clear baker's amendment to the motion regarding extending the provision of domestic abuse courts to ensure that cases can be dealt with as a priority and that survivors receive the support that they need through the justice system. Creating a specific criminal offence of domestic abuse is a bold move, but it is also one that is much needed. A widespread consensus exists on the need for a specific domestic abuse offence to be created. Too often, the types of behaviours that constitute abuse cannot be effectively pursued by the justice system under our existing laws. A narrow definition of domestic abuse, one that accounts only for physical harm or threats, fails to capture the sad and disturbing reality that there is a wide spectrum of controlling behaviours that are used by abusers and have a devastating impact on the lives of women and their children. Coercive and psychological abuse might not always leave bruises or physical marks, but that does not make it any less damaging. Is it therefore appropriate that the justice system should gain the powers that it needs to tackle such harmful behaviours in the same way that it is able to prosecute physical assault? That has been long recognised by support services such as Scottish Women's Aid, who play an integral role in supporting survivors of domestic abuse in Scotland. Although the creation of a new specific offence is to be welcomed, eradicating domestic abuse requires an approach that reaches beyond the legal system, an approach that also encompasses and recognises the role that support agencies play. I learned through my work as a local councillor in Hamilton of the vital but stretched services provided to survivors of domestic abuse. Women's Aid, South Lanarkshire and East Renfrewshire provide immeasurable support to survivors from the refuge service to receive their projects, which provide longer-term support to children and families affected by that. I was able to organise a small fundraiser for them last year by hosting a screening of the film Suffragette at Hamilton Cinema. Unless I was pleased, it could help in a small way. Frontline staff consistently raise the continuation of sustainable funding to enable them to deliver the level of service that is required as a major priority. It is therefore concerning that cuts to local authority budgets are negatively impacting their ability to identify and deliver support to women and children at risk of abuse. I hope that the Government will take note of that when taking forward the legislation. Nevertheless, the creation of a specific offence for domestic abuse is an important step in the right direction, especially due to the way in which society views domestic abuse. The 2014 Scottish social attitudes study conducted a study on public attitudes towards violence against women. On the issue of coercion of control, only half of respondents thought that it was very seriously wrong for a man to try to stop his wife or partner from going out with friends. Only 39 per cent thought that it was very seriously wrong for a man to get his wife to change her clothes before going on a night out. Only 27 per cent thought that such actions would cause a great deal of harm to the women. Those figures are worrying, and it shows that there is a long way to go before we reach broader understanding about the harmful impact that coercive control can have on the lives of domestic abuse survivors. To live in a truly equal society in which women and girls can live free from gender-based violence, we must go much further than giving the justice system the levers it requires to go after abusers. We must also be working at every level of society to dispel harmful gender stereotypes in order to prevent violence from ever occurring in the first place. Violence against women and specifically domestic abuse does not occur in a vacuum. It is a disturbing and most extreme end result of misogynistic behaviour and attitudes. The recent report getting it right for girls, published by the EIS, reveals the extent to which this problem still persists here in Scotland in 2016. EIS focus groups reported worrying examples of misogynistic behaviour in schools, including examples of casual misogyny, such as girly, being used as an insult, using the word feminist negatively, and assumptions that women and girls should have responsibility for domestic chores. The link between those damaging early preconceptions and gender inequality later in life is undeniable. Research from the World Health Organization indicates that men and boys who hold preconceived traditional notions about gender and role of women are also more likely to have victim-blaming and hostile attitudes about women. That presents a real pressing problem. The vision shared by Scottish women's aides that it is possible for us to create a world without domestic abuse and eradicate violence against women is one that I share, but it can only be achieved if we are doing more to tackle sexist attitudes at every level of our society, including in our schools. I therefore hope that the minister will keep in mind the recommendations of the report from the EIS and Zero Tolerance when taking forward the legislation in order to ensure that we are doing all that we can to tackle violence against women at its roots. John Finnie to be followed by Rona Mackay. The Scottish Game Party welcomes the bill and tackling domestic abuse is rightly a priority for the criminal justice system. It is a priority for society and certainly a priority for those affected overwhelmingly female victims and their children. If we get this right, I hope that we do, we will go some way to addressing gender-based violence and a little way to gender-based inequality. It is not my gender that is suffering that inequality. I think that for too long male-dominated society, this is an issue that was not discussed and I welcome that we do have discussions out in the open and particularly the complex area around psychological abuse and coercive control. Societal action is required, too, and that can bring very many challenges with confronting certain groups in society and I would say that it brings geographic challenges. I would say that nothing would identify an individual case but I dealt with a victim of such appalling psychological abuse and coercive control, whose male partner was a highly respected member of the community and very alarmingly someone to whom perhaps victims would turn. There are particular challenges for rural communities that I think we need to be conscious of. It is important that we move the discussion along and on a foreign basis, and it is important to say that this sort of behaviour is not restricted to one socioeconomic group, it is across society. I am grateful for the various briefings that we have received from one mosaic and a number of members have talked about the pivotal role that they have played in progressing this agenda and the informed background that they can bring to us. A number of people have talked about the abusive behaviour and sexual harm bill, which myself and my colleague Margaret Mitchell were responsible for scrutinising in the last session. We took evidence in private from a woman who, and it was important that it was done in private, who faced fear, alarm and lived under effectively psychological siege in her own home. An appalling situation, this woman was extremely grateful to the police for their diligent investigations, their support and their very thorough work. Her partner continually breached bail and she would have found herself at court and often he would be at the home, he was banned from the home but in that vicinity before when she returned. The system had failed her and it had failed her system. If we are going to get this right, we need good law. The Law Society has talked about certainty in law and I think Gordon Blin, her contribution was extremely helpful. Margaret Mitchell talked about the complexity at the moment and that is a lot more complex circumstances that we are seeking to deal with. The perpetrators of this sort of behaviour are highly manipulative. For that reason, there is no role for mediation in any of this. Advocacy, yes, for the victims. Scottish Women Aid talks about, I quote, understanding of the dynamics and impact and the role of training for decision workers. That is decision workers throughout the system and I think that that is very important. Getting it right for every child, a lot of people have talked about the children involved in this and it is absolutely vital their needs are met in the cabinet secretary talked about the impact being recognised. I think that there is a potential if we look and I know that there has been some very primary discussions if we look at the Nordic model of noting statements from child victims in an agreed manner that there might be no need at all for them to be at court and certainly not to be cross examined and I hope that that is something that can be followed up. Indeed, opportunities with new personnel in place to be looking at the possibility that the only things that are being challenged at court are the non-agreed facts. People have talked about the use of domestic abuse courts and certainly the Green Party will be supporting Claire Baker's amendment. Along with Roshur Women's Aid, I have been involved in discussions over a period with the sheriff principal about the role and Kate Ford's suggestion of some sort of roving role for domestic abuse courts. The public may think that this is new buildings. Of course, it is about case management, it is about the opportunity to bring professionals together and I think that that is very important. It would build up judicial expertise and a sufficient cohort of cases would mean that very practical. People have talked about funding too and it is absolutely vital and I acknowledge the £20 million that the Scottish Government put in. However, if we are really committed to this, we cannot have all the various groups lobbying us with no certainty about their future. If that means a different source of a different way of looking at the funding, I think that that is important. Also, the issue of legal support is very important. In that particular case, I alluded to that because of the geography and because of a number of other reasons, the appropriate legal support was very, very hard to get, so I think that we need to look at that. It is palatable for some, but we must also look at the statutory defence that is being suggested and the legal burden placed in the accused. The Scottish Law Society remind us of the presumption of innocence and the obligation of the prosecution to prove guilt of the accused and they have proposed an amendment. I think that it is important to say that, certainly in the information that I have, a number of proposed amendments have come in. Russia Women's Aid, for instance, suggests that that particular defence is open to manipulation by perpetrators and that there will be frailties for it connected with women with disabilities with the abusers, the carer, for instance. It does not fully cover behaviour directed at children, pets or property and it is very clear to you that penalties are not sufficient and, once again, talk of non-harassment orders. I think that it is the linkage between the criminal and civil that is very important. In closing, Presiding Officer, this is about gender violence and this is about inequality. I look forward, as part of the Justice Committee, to thoroughly scrutinising that to ensure that we get a good law in place. This is a debate that I sincerely wish we were not having in the chamber today. Domestic abuse is repugnant at every level and that is why I am pleased that the Scottish Government is introducing the Domestic Abuse Bill to show just how seriously we take our zero-tolerance approach. It is an important part of the Government's approach to tackling violence against women and children as set out in the equally safe strategy. It will ensure that the true nature and severity of domestic abuse is recognised at every level, physical and crucially emotional and psychological abuse. Until recently, there has been a common misconception that domestic abuse is just physical abuse. We have all seen the posters of battered and bruised women in the campaigns over the years. That is why I am pleased that the Scottish Government has recognised that abuse can be psychological too, which conceals bruises that are just as painful but far more difficult to detect. Domestic violence exists in all sections of our communities across all levels of society. Abusers and victims can be male or female, any race or religion, and from all types of background. As we have heard, some 60,000 incidents are reported to police in Scotland each year, of which 79 per cent involve a female victim and a male perpetrator. Shockingly, the number of women in prisons who have suffered brain injuries is almost double to that of men, and it is known that domestic violence is to blame. Mental and emotional abuse includes threats, including threats of violence, criticism of appearance and intellect, name calling, controlling what you do, where you go, how you dress and who you speak to. The cowardly abuser knows no bounds. They will threaten your children, isolate you from friends and family, accuse you of being unfaithful, threaten to out your sexual orientation to family, friends and employers, and much, much more. It is all about control, controlling by fear, and children are often the forgotten victims of domestic violence. Children who cry when they hear someone laugh because they think that fighting has started again, children's innocence stolen by a brutal, inadequate coward intent on expressing themselves through violence. Research has shown that children in a home where the mother is being abused are also at greater risk of being abused themselves. The ways in which children can be harmed by domestic abuse are wider than simply witnessing the abuse itself. The trauma is long-lasting and far-reaching. Giving evidence in domestic abuse cases or in any court setting can be extremely stressful and traumatic for children, and I am fully supportive of children first manifesto to radically change the way in which they do that. That is something that my colleague John Finnie was alluding to. However, the subject merits an entire other debate, which I hope will have in the chamber sooner rather than later. However, there are measures that we as a Government can take to help adult victims of domestic abuse by giving them greater access to justice. As the cabinet minister outlined, the Scottish Government is making huge changes to the status quo through the work of the Equally Safe Justice Expert Group, which is developing an action plan that will look at both medium and longer-term improvements that can be made to the justice system for all victims of this type of violence. Today's news that the UK Government has confirmed that refugees will be exempt from changes to the housing benefit cap until 2019 and from the 1 per cent rent reduction, which will ensure that refugees remain financially sustainable and crucially open for women and children fleeing violence. The Scottish Government has committed a welcome boost to tackle the surge of domestic abuse across Scotland. The funding has allowed additional investment to boost resources for our courts and prosecutors by £2.4 million each year to ensure that there are no undue delays in court waiting times for domestic abuse cases. Of course, with excellent organisations, we have been talking about today who offer support to victims such as Women's Aid, Scottish domestic abuse helpline, Rape Crisis Scotland, to name but a few. Incidentally, visit any of their websites and you will see the chilling statement. Click here to leave this site quickly, and that surely speaks volumes about fear and control. In Eastern Bartonshire, for example, Women's Aid offers support information and advice on welfare rights and benefits, housing options and legal issues. They offer refuge accommodation for women and their children and outreach service for children and young people and follow-on support for women after they leave the refuge. Women's Aid groups throughout Scotland are dealing with around 25,000 new cases of abuse and help children and young people through the crisis every year, and that is a chilling statistic. As my colleague Fulton MacGregor highlighted, homelessness is also exacerbated by domestic abuse. 46 per cent of women have been made homeless more than once because of domestic or sexual abuse, 39 per cent more than twice. When women left their family home, they often moved house multiple times, which leaves them feeling isolated from friends, neighbours and belongings, and they often have to cope with huge financial debt. The abuse often continues even after they have moved out of their home, but most women do not feel they have a choice about moving out because, like all refugees, it was unsafe for them to stay. Women's Aid would like to see the honest put on the perpetrators of violence to move out of the home rather than the women and children, which I have to say that I agree with. You cannot put a price on what those organisations do for the victims of domestic violence. Scotland is leading the world with the work now being done on tackling domestic abuse. I know that, realistically, our work may never be done, but I am convinced that our determination to tackle this vile problem will have a positive impact as we work to rid our country of this hateful crime. Annie Wells, followed by Ruth Maguire Thank you, Presiding Officer. There is no doubt that everybody deserves protection from our abusive partner, and I welcome the Scottish Government's commitment to enacting and enforcing a law that aims to ensure physical and psychological security in the home. The Scottish Conservative Party is sympathetic with the Government's intention to create a new domestic abuse law, but it is determined to be vigilant of possible complications, something that I will talk about later. As Douglas Ross pointed out in his speech, we need to be inclusive of all victims of domestic abuse, and that includes LGBT community as well as men. In Scotland, it is estimated that as many as one in four LGBT people may experience domestic abuse, something that I want to raise specific awareness of today. I am pleased to see the work of LGBT Youth Scotland in carrying out a specific LGBT Youth Domestic Abuse project, identifying that that is a rarely spoken about in the community. Its website identifies LGBT-specific warning signs, which might include the threat of outing to family, friends and work colleagues, or isolating the victim from the LGBT community by not allowing them to become integrated into the scene. I was concerned to see from research by the project that 79 per cent of young people believed that someone who had witnessed domestic abuse in their family or home would feel less confident to come out as a result. I welcome the motion. It also includes ex as well as current partners in a modern world where we are bound to social media all hours of the day. We now see cases of abusive and threatening behaviour online, even after our relationship has ended. That is why I congratulate the work of Women's Aid for its research and action on domestic abuse. Worringly, that research highlighted that a third of those experiencing online domestic abuse from a partner or ex-partner experienced the use of GPS locators or spyware on their phones or PCs. For a third of those experiencing this abuse, the threats were carried out. The charity has subsequently produced information on how to identify such behaviour and how people can protect themselves online. In my home town of Glasgow, the community has made great strides in contesting domestic violence and providing aid to victims. We have all spoke about Women's Aid, an example that has, for the last 35 years, been supporting women and children's suffering from domestic abuse. It provides a number of support services for victims, which include giving advice on housing issues and providing letters to housing associations. Of which, 12 per cent of the 4,000 homeless housing applications last year in Glasgow, 12 per cent were from people who suffered from domestic violence in their home. They also offer financial advice, and that is very welcome when people need that, when they are facing such other difficulties. I was also very pleased to see the work of the Hemic Grief Women's Aid, a charity-based in Glasgow family to provide the specific needs of Asian, Black and minority ethnic women who may experience domestic abuse influenced by culture and tradition, such as honour-based abuse or forced marriage. The charity has been providing safe refuge accommodation for over 30 years in the city, assisting women with emotional and practical support. Organisations and charities in Glasgow are making a concerted effort to combat the effects of domestic abuse, but I also like to raise a point regarding prevention. As Douglas highlighted in his amendment today, the Scottish Government should continue to raise awareness of Claire's law, a law that allows people to identify those convicted of domestic abuse before forming a relationship. I also think that it is important to look more broadly about societal issues such as mainstreaming of pornography and the easiness at which that can be accessed online. Some charities such as Women Aid have pointed out that representation of women in media can influence the way young boys and young girls not only think of themselves but think of others and can create problems further down the line. To revert back to my original point about the potential complications in implementing this law, I should highlight the issue of corroboration and the requirement that two pieces of evidence should be required in criminal justice cases. I would like to see further discussion of that point in the chamber so that we can get the law achieves what it is set out to do. I would also like to raise the need to provide further education on what we deem as domestic abuse, particularly when it comes to identifying coercive and controlling behaviour, something that the Home Office raised before the introduction of the United Kingdom Government Act on coercive and controlling behaviour last December. To conclude, I welcome the Scottish Government's commitment today to making domestic abuse a specific statutory offence, and its broadening of what we deem as domestic abuse to coercive and controlling behaviour has been mentioned. I would still like to see further debate about how we can best implement such a law. I welcome the opportunity to speak in this debate and would like to begin by commending the Scottish Government and, indeed, Parliament's commitment to improving how the justice system responds to violence against women. The importance of this law, which will criminalise psychological abuse, control and coercion, cannot be emphasised enough and will create clarity for survivors and potential victims of domestic abuse and improve the ability of the police and the justice system to intervene. Although I welcome the new law, I acknowledge that there are other issues in the legal system that must be addressed. Today, I would like to touch briefly on court-mandated contact. There is a real danger that, if it is not handled in a holistic and child-centred way, that this contact causes harm to children and risks continuing abuse to both the survivor and the child. The potential consequences of that cannot be overstated. In January of this year, Women's Aid published a disturbing report called 19 Child Homicides. The report tells the stories of the cases of 19 children, all intentionally killed by a parent, who was also a known perpetrator of domestic abuse. Those killings were made possible through unsafe child contact arrangements, formal and informal. Over half of those child contact arrangements were ordered through the courts. It is crucial that domestic abuse is identified and its impact fully considered by the family court judiciary. Child contact arrangement orders must put the best interests of the child or the children first and protect the wellbeing of the parent that the child is living with. To quote Lord Justice Wall, it is, in my view, high time that the family justice system abandoned any reliance on the proposition that a man can have a history of violence to the mother of his children but nonetheless be a good father. The bill is an important signal of our determination to tackle violence against women in all its forms and makes an important contribution to our aim of achieving true gender equality. As well as ensuring that coercive and controlling behaviour can be dealt with more effectively, the new bill will also help to shape public attitudes by explicitly acknowledging that psychological abuse is both unacceptable and criminal. That is important because preventing and addressing violence against women and domestic abuse demands a fundamental change in societal attitudes. As well as raising awareness of and promoting an attitude of zero tolerance towards domestic abuse specifically, it also requires us to tackle the wider issue of gender inequality, which underlies all forms of violence against women. Attitudes can be changed. Until just a few decades ago, it was accepted, as it had been for centuries before, that a man had the right to rape his wife. It was only in 1989 in Scotland and 1991 in England that the courts abolished the legitimacy of marital rape. We should take heart and courage that just over two decades later, for the vast majority of our society, marital rape is considered as unacceptable and contemptible as rape by a stranger. Domestic abuse, however, remains far too familiar, with roughly one in four women experiencing some form of domestic violence during their lifetime. Chief Constable of Police Scotland has said that more than 20 per cent of all police operational time is spent dealing with domestic incidents. On average, a domestic incident is reported somewhere in Scotland every nine minutes, as well as the women directly involved. It is estimated that around 100,000 children in Scotland live with domestic abuse. To get to a stage in which those figures are as unthinkable as a woman being legally raped by her husband, we need to accept our collective responsibility as a society in ending the scourge of domestic abuse. That is just the thing. Women cannot do it on their own. If we could, we would have sorted it out by now. We need everyone—women, men, adults, children and young people—to work towards creating a society where the protection of women from violence is everybody's business, in the same way that child protection is at the moment, where the right of a woman to be safe in our home and community is as deeply embedded and unquestioned as that of a child. We need to create a society where men, women, adults, young people and children know and understand what a healthy relationship is and where to get help for themselves or their family, members or loved ones, where they have concerns. I take real heart from the thoughtful contributions from men and women on all sides of the chamber today, and I look forward to us working together to make a real difference. Thank you very much. I call Kezia Dugdale, followed by Richard Lyle, Ms Dugdale, please. Often when I speak to journalists outwith of Scotland, the first thing they ask me is, what is it like to be in a Parliament where three of the parties are represented by women in their leadership? Does it mean that you talk more about gender equality? Does it mean that different issues come to the fore? I think that it probably does, but I often think that sometimes we can be quite complacent about how we talk about gender equality in Scotland because we have three female leaders. I have never felt more of a duty in my life to try and deliver for women because I am in this position of leadership, and that is why I felt a responsibility to speak this afternoon. Listening to speakers around the table read statistic after statistic, easy for me to say, it is clear that we have a long way to go to achieve gender equality yet. I am listening to Kate Forbes speak about how distant this Parliament can feel to a working-class woman in Lochaber who is trying to flee a violent part now and what that must feel like in the stories of why this Parliament is so powerful. I want to say first and foremost that I completely support the Government's objective to legislate in this area. Indeed, we could get the judicial system 100 per cent right. It could be the perfect experience for a victim of these crimes, but it would not address domestic violence and abuse. It would still exist in our society for as long as women are unequal in our society where we are going to have domestic abuse, which is why I want to broaden this out and explore some of the other issues that Rhoda Grant raised around commercial sexual exploitation of women and, indeed, everyday sexism, because this is ultimately about power and control. For as long as we live in a society where women are unequal, we are going to face these challenges. Rather than repeat some of the points that have been made, I want to make three potentially new ones. I want to say something about austerity and the impact that that has on women. I want to talk about the sustainability of services, particularly the advocacy services that are mentioned in the motion, and finally something about tendering and the way that we are looking at organising our services for women going forward. First and foremost, we have to accept the impact that continuing austerity has on women. It is forcing more and more women into a position of crisis. That is caused by cuts to social security and welfare system, but it is also perpetuated by a culture of insecure work where women are held in low-paid work and they cannot escape that cycle. The less financially independent women feel, the harder it is for them to flee of violent relationships, and there is no escaping the real brutal reality of that. But austerity also leads to substantial public service cuts. We know that, and a few speakers from Fulton MacGregor to Christina McKelvie reference the impact on housing, and particularly temporary accommodation. I have been an MSP across the Lothians now for the best part of five years. I have spent a lot of time exploring some of the issues around homelessness, and I would not let a dog sleep in some of the temporary accommodation that I see in my own capital city. I say that not to make a party political point, because I am immensely proud that we have a Labour and SNP councillor in Edinburgh. It is a thoroughly good thing, because 80 per cent of the citizens in the city have a council administration that they voted for. That is good politics, but the reality is that we are failing women in temporary accommodation because of the situation that we leave so many of them to sleep in. That is fundamentally about how we fund our public services and the impact of austerity. The second point that I want to make is about the sustainability of funding in general. How many times in this chamber have we talked about the fact that we need three-year funding for vital public services like this? I was in the Edinburgh Rate Crisis Centre over the summer months, and they are on a one-year funding cycle. Do you know what that means? It means that for three months of the year, they stop providing the vital services that the women need, because all of the workers in that organisation get a redundancy notice at Christmas. It is now standard—that is what happens. They find out two weeks before the end of the financial year that they are back on the payroll, but they will not bring on any new clients or speak to any new women in that three-month period between Christmas and the end of the financial year, because they are worried that they will not be able to give them that 12-week support package that they need. They stop doing what they are doing. We do not have a one-year service there. We have three quarters of the year service, because we will not give them the guarantee three-year funding that they desperately need. I hope that that can be addressed going forward. We also have to recognise some of the services that exist to support BME women in particular. Shackty, Reddenborough, Amana and Glasgow, even organisations such as Sikhsand Jogh and Leith Walk, who give Sikh women in particular avenues out of the family home to go and do things that will let them escape the types of relationships that we are talking about today. It is much broader than just funding services directly for domestic abuse. It is fundamentally about how we fund services to help vulnerable women full stop. The final point that I want to make is about tendering. Again, this is something that I see happening in Edinburgh and across Scotland. I watched this happen to homelessness services in Edinburgh, where we had lots of little homelessness organisations who were doing tremendous work in their own communities. The council decided that, to save money, they would tender these services out. What happened is that all those individuals at homelessness organisations were set against each other to fight for the contract to deliver the service. They disappeared altogether. Edinburgh City Council, Labour and SNP, are about to start to tender for those services for vulnerable women. We are going to end up closing down some of the best services that we have and housing associations are going to pick them up because they will be able to do it cheaper. We should not be providing services for vulnerable women on the cheap. It is fundamental to giving every woman the best possible start to escape those violent relationships. There is a duty on everyone in the chamber to recognise that, whilst we get the justice system right here, there is so much more we have to do to help women who are affected by domestic abuse. I have to say that it is refreshing to hear somebody speak who does not normally get in debate. I move on now to call Richard Lyle, followed by Liam McArthur. Thank you, Presiding Officer. What is domestic abuse? For many initial thought, it is physical abuse or even sexual abuse. For many abuse victims, it can be emotional, mental or even financial abuse. The Government may wish to look at the wider implications of abuse. I would encourage them to do so, especially to children and changes needed in the family court. Who is subject to abuse? The highest majority are women, but we must not forget that men are not excluded. When it comes to children, is it not sad that they are often described as the forgotten victims of domestic abuse? Children living within a home environment witness direct abuse. Children then become at a higher risk of being abused. That can occur by physically witnessing the abuse or even being in the arms of their mother to be protected as the mother is being physically assaulted. They can be subjected to extensive emotional abuse when they are listening to what the abuser is saying and to verbal threats. For a child's ears to hear that their dad was going to kill them, how could that not have an effect on a child? When we think about domestic abuse, we must not forget the children. Children who are often being subject to much as the person who is being abused are therefore welcome to the comments by the cabinet secretary. Domestic abuse clearly poses a serious threat to children's emotional physical wellbeing, the same way as it does for the victim of abuse. For a child being subjected to domestic abuse, we must not forget the trauma impact that it can have on them. There is a film removed that is about a young girl who witnessed abuse and herself being a subject to abuse. Her opening lines are, sometimes someone hurts you so bad it stops hurting at all until someone makes you feel again and then it comes back every word, every hurt, every moment. This children's story developed into her being placed place with uncare. It echoes back to the children who witnessed abuse and being abused herself. Domestic abuse does result in having a massive impact on a child. For many women who are then able to seek the help and support, they are often left in a place where they have to relive the experience to a number of different professionals. For those who seek the help of emotional abuse, they can often fail let down, as when they gain the confidence to speak out, often the abuse continues, with the partner or ex-partner claiming the opposite. Many studies are showing that abusers question the mental health of the individual who is being abused. For many mothers who are able to leave the abuser and start rebuilding and nurturing and caring home for their children, the feeling of stability and safety can often be short lived. What does that mean for mothers? The same mothers who have been subject to abuse then have to attend family court, a court system where no physical support has been given to those subject to abuse, who they now find themselves having to go to a court and sit across a table from the very person who abused them with only their lawyer by their side. No one to hold their hand, a simple act to give them the courage that anyone will need when they are asked to state why they do not believe that contact between the abuser and the child is in the best interests. Where they then have to vocalise what traumas they have been subjected to with their abuser sitting less than 10 feet away from them, a court where the abuser's lawyers will argue everything that a mother has just said was completely wrong, a court where the abuser is also allowed to speak against the mother once again, leaving them feeling failures, questioning their own abilities that fear their anxieties. In my opinion, the way that family courts are run allows abuse to continue, and that must be urgently reviewed to meet the needs of the child. I also agree with Ruth Maguire's comments through courts. The family court system should be mindful of all times of the rights of the child to feel safe and secure, not to feel a subject of any form of abuse, ultimately getting it right for every child. The whole process should be child focused, yes, but for this many families are subject to domestic abuse and this is not the case. Attempts to discredit a mother during a child contact process is an indication that fathers are not engaging with their children. Weir adds what is happening in reality is clear focus, set upon the rights of the father, exercise his rights to have parental responsibility. The very child that is witness domestic abuse and most likely to be subject to abuse, sheriffs should be mindful when a case is being brought in front of them, where it is documented that abuse has taken place in relation to a way in which a case is handled. The manner in which they also question the mothers also leaves them feeling back in that place where they are being abused. Not everyone who leaves an abused partner has the strength to speak out. Not everyone is capable to need to be back in the same room as their abuser. Not everyone is in a position to feel safe or speak out. For many having been subjected to domestic abuse, often leaves them in a position of fleeing a home and any friends that they have in an attempt to ensure their safety, yet the court process takes no note of that. When it comes to the children, the forgotten victims, when a mother does not have the strength to highlight concerns, it has been reported on a number of occasions that sheriffs make comment that abuse was at the mother, not the child. When mothers have the strength to update what is happening to the child, a child being reserved, a child lashing out, a child does not want to leave her mother, does not want to go into a contact centre, they can only cry out. Family courts ask the father how they feel contact has been, they report, oh, it's going very well, when in fact the child is so scared not to go. Domestic abuse then repeatedly continues for the family. Who listens to that child? Who will support that child? I want this Government to do so and I want this Government to take time and study this carefully. Liam McArthur called by Clare Adamson, who will be the last speaker in the open debate, will move to winding up, and all people who took part in the debate should be in for winding up speeches. This is my first justice-related speech. I acknowledge the contribution of my predecessor Alison McInnes, who I know enjoyed a great deal of respect for the work that he did on justice, human rights and civil liberties issues. I know that she will be paying close attention to our deliberations today. She, like me, will give a warm welcome to the Scottish Government's commitment to bring forward legislation to create a specific criminal offence of domestic abuse and in particular encouraging us to look beyond simply physical abuse to ensure psychological abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour are tackled too. That is part of sending out a strong signal about the kind of society that we wish to be one in which domestic abuse in all its forms is simply not tolerated. Progress has been made but, as I think most colleagues have already acknowledged, we are a far way from getting where we need to be. There has been a steep rise in the number of reported cases and yet I think we all accept that there is a severe underestimation of the number of actual cases, whether that is through fear and intimidation, a lack of confidence in being believed or simply the fact that an individual is anewed to the abuse. The impact on victims can be devastating, it can be obvious, it can also be insidious and pernicious. The victims, I think it is right to, Fulton MacGregor and Douglas Ross and others, were right to highlight the fact that there are male victims but I think we cannot lose sight of the fact that predominantly the victims of this abuse are women and the gender approach is the right one to take. It is also important, as many speakers have said, that we do not lose sight of the impact of the abuse on children. The effects can be wide-ranging, as Barnardo's NSPCC and children have first pointed out, from the exposure to the abuse, to the undermining of attachment, to the addiction issues, to the heightened risk of physical and sexual abuse of the child. I think that that really does need to be picked up in the legislation as we go forward. I welcome the robust cross-party consensus that there is on the need to tackle this issue. I think that it helps to send out the clear message and shows the determination to give effect and force to that message that the domestic abuse is simply not acceptable in our society and will be rigorously pursued and prosecuted. However, there are risks with that consensus, particularly in the area of law that is as complex as that. I am sure that the cabinet secretary would agree that the Parliament and the committees must now fulfil our duties to robustly scrutinise and test those proposals, just because we all wholeheartedly agree on the objective and want it to be effective in the action that we want to take. We must also be challenging so that we and the public can have confidence that the steps that we are taking will have the desired effect. As Clare Baker pointed out, south of the border, we now have a domestic abuse law, which came into effect last year. Regrettably, it is probably too early to draw many conclusions from that. Although we should proceed as best we can in circumstances that befit our legal system and our requirements, it is clearly going to be worth looking at the deliberations that have taken place south of the border. Obviously, the attention has been rightly focused on the way in which the legislation will address psychological abuse and coercive behaviours. It is absolutely fundamental to the new legislation. However, it presents challenges in terms of the clarity of the law. The law society pointed out that no one should be punished under the law unless it is sufficiently clear and certain to enable him or her to know what conduct is forbidden. I think that the reasonableness test seems to me to be a sensible approach, but, even here, there is concern about how that could be open to abuse by perpetrators. John Finnie mentioned the exploitation of the vulnerabilities of women with substance or health problems, for example. As a finalist, I wanted to raise the resourcing of the system that we want to see. Again, a number of colleagues across the chamber have picked this up in various guises. I will not comment on the proposal to have a maximum sentence for 10 years, as opposed to five. However, I think that we cannot lose sight of the need for perpetrator programmes. They may need further funding, along with the advocacy support organisation refugees that we have heard so much about in this debate. I want to put on record my gratitude to Women's Aid Orchney for the excellent work that they do. I think that Kate Forbes made a very salient point on what I thought was an excellent speech about the specific challenges of tackling domestic abuse in rural and in island areas, I would have to say. However, the prevalence of domestic abuse in our society shames us all for too long. It has been hidden, ignored or even, I am appalled to say, accepted. That simply cannot continue. I am delighted in my first contribution in this chamber, as my party's new justice spokesman, to offer my wholehearted support and that of the Scottish Liberal Democrats to the proposals being brought forward by the Government. We must ensure that those proposals are workable and effective, but I firmly believe that they will send a powerful and unmistakable message about our determination as a society to put an end to domestic violence, however, it is perpetrated. Clare Adamson, in the last speaker in the open debate, Ms Adamson. On Monday of this week, I visited my local police Q division domestic abuse unit in East Kilbride. I would like to thank Police Scotland and Detective Inspector Scott Douglas for his time and comprehensive briefing on the work of the unit. I believe that this is an outstanding example of a modern approach to domestic abuse. Uniformed officers can pass on any concern to the specialist unit, where detectives will investigate thoroughly. It is a mark of how far we have come in tackling domestic abuse. It is a model that I hope the minister and the cabinet secretary will consider when they look for those centres of excellence and rolling things out across the country to ensure that everyone is getting the same service from our police as we go forward in this area. What is absolutely clear is intelligence gathering and sharing with partners was absolutely key. I know that Scottish Police service has gone some way to ensuring that the database is available to allow comprehensive data collection and for that information to be stored and used where appropriate by the detectives to ensure that perpetrators are caught. One of the most disturbing things on the day was to hear about perpetrators, their serial abusers, who go from one partner to another and how important it is that any information is gathered and held, which could be useful further down the line in catching someone who is a serial perpetrator. Many people have mentioned some of the things that I have mentioned in my speech this afternoon at Fulton MacGregor. I mentioned how closely the police work with assist and Eva, women's aid and in my own area, Lanarkshire rape crisis, in supporting victims, because it can be a really long process. Building that relationship with a victim can take several visits, often not to the victim's home but organising to meet a victim in a neutral place so that that level of trust can be built up to such a point that they feel confident that they can give their evidence to the police and allow them to take forward their information. What DI Douglas said to me more than anything is that he doesn't want to be a detector of domestic abuse, he wants to be a preventer of it. I think that as of going forward, that legislation will provide the final tool in the box that completes the necessary legislation to ensure that all forms of domestic abuse, including control and coercion, can be reported and investigated and where appropriate criminal charges brought against the perpetrator. I think that this is the way forward, is prevention and that involves, as many people have said, societal change. I too would like to thank Women's Aid for the comprehensive briefing for today, which highlighted the many types of abuse suffered by domestic abuse victims and their children. It also highlights the societal support mechanism that can be in place to help victims. Like Rona Mackay and the First Minister this afternoon, I welcome that the UK Government has reconsidered its change to housing benefit, which would have capped supported living accommodation and meant that many of the refugees could have been unsustainable going forward. However, there is a bigger issue here. Although that has been reversed, I have to question how much of an equalities impact assessment is done when we bring forward new legislation, because, of course, it was not just the effect on women's refugees, but there is concern about universal credit and the payment to a single person in a family. Thankfully, with the new powers coming to this Parliament, we will be able to build a social security system that does not, that has the flexibility that hopefully will allow payments to be made to several members in a family. However, I do have concerns for the rest of the UK who do not have that flexibility in the new United Kingdom. We have heard that financial control is one of the big issues that people will face with an abuser. I would like to take an opportunity. Many people have mentioned societal change. I think that that is a huge issue going forward, but I would like to highlight some of the work that everyone can do and that we can all do. As we said, this used to be the hidden crime, the thing behind closed doors, but it is now all our responsibility to deal with domestic violence. I highlight the work of Dr Barbara Grebert, who, from the University of California, started some work with dentists in our area. That was about asking about clients about abuse, when the dentist suspected that a damage to the teeth had been from a violent action, validating the message documenting and referring victims on to domestic abuse specialists in the community. I am very pleased to highlight the Domestic Abuse Veterinary Initiative, which is a Scottish initiative by Medic Against Violence. It was launched in 2014, and the people involved train veterinary vets and the veterinary support workers to identify violence because there is a pattern quite often, as has been said. It is not just abuse of the person, the pet and the family can also be a victim and a use of control. That is a really positive area of progress. The last time I spoke to Christine Goodall, the founder said that they were rolling it out to hairdressers and support workers. That is how we need to go forward. That is society's problem, and it is all our responsibility. Thank you very much, Colin Mayer. If he had to wind up for Labour, it must be up to seven minutes. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. In closing for Scottish Labour today, I would like to thank all who have taken part in what has been a very worthwhile debate and emphasised to the Government that we fully support their aims in creating a specific domestic abuse law. Today, we have heard many thoughtful speeches in support of the Government, and although we will vote in favour of the Government motion tonight, we ask for support for our amendment, which seeks to roll out domestic abuse courts across Scotland. My closing remarks tonight will reflect and echo many of the issues that have been raised already. We currently have specific courts dealing with domestic abuse cases in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Midlothian, and those have proven to be very successful in dealing with very complex and sometimes quite delicate cases. Ensuring that victims of domestic abuse across Scotland are supported to come forward and have the support that they need is a must for this Parliament in the coming months and years. When the First Minister outlined her programme for government, I welcomed the announcement that the Government will tackle domestic abuse and revenge porn and repeat my support for that today. Creating a specific criminal offence of domestic abuse received wide support from the organisations and individuals responding to the equally safe, reforming the criminal law to address sexual abuse and sexual offences consultation. On behalf of Scottish Labour, I would like to thank all those who took part in the consultation. I hope that, when the bill is presented to Parliament in its final form, it mirrors the aspirations of the organisation and the needs of the victims of domestic abuse to seek justice. The Government motion states that almost four in five victims of domestic abuse are women. That alone does not mean that all cases of domestic abuse involve heterosexual couples. Domestic abuse in same-sex relationships is a problem, as highlighted to me by the equality network. Due to the delicate nature of domestic abuse generally, the need for domestic abuse courts grows when you take in cases surrounding same-sex couples and transgender victims due to the sensitivity and the greater support that they may require. 3 per cent of domestic abuse reports are from people in same-sex relationships with women who are more likely to report emotional abuse and men who are more likely to report physical abuse. Trans people are particularly at risk of domestic abuse. 80 per cent of respondents to a recent study by the Transgender Alliance reported partner or ex-partner abuse and emotional abuse was suffered by 73 per cent of respondents. LGBT Scotland reports that 61 per cent of young LGBT people suffer abuse within their families. Those are shocking statistics. We as a Parliament must ensure that the legislation works for all victims of domestic abuse. Prosecuting psychological abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour will be a delicate matter for the police and courts to take on, and we must make sure that the right guidance and structures are in place to make that achievable. This form of abuse and manipulation will also have a devastating impact on children, young people and vulnerable people who are involved or our witnesses to such behaviours. As we progress further with the debate in the coming months, I look forward to working with the Government to ensure that the right support is available to all victims and witnesses of domestic abuse. This leads me on to calls made by Scottish Women's Aid, who in advance of today's debate distributed a briefing of key issues. As well as detailing what the Scottish Women's Aid believes the new law needs to address, it has outlined other key issues on domestic abuse prevention and the effects of domestic abuse, such as homelessness and poverty. One particular area that gives me cause for concern, and it was something that has been highlighted already today by Kezia Dugdale and Monica Lennon, is funding. We as a society, and especially as politicians, depend on the compassion, creativity and dedication of our third sector organisations to provide valuable and reliable care and support. We must ensure that for organisations such as Scottish Women's Aid to continue delivering the support that they do, they need stable, long-term, adequate funding to reflect their strategy and their ambitions. We look forward to the Government publishing the draft legislation and I would like to repeat Scottish Labour's offer of support to legislate for an effective and robust new domestic abuse law. I would like to quote the US vice-president Joe Biden's recent comment when commemorating the 22nd anniversary of the Violence Against Women Act. The true character of our country is measured when violence against women is no longer accepted as society's secret, and we all understand that even one case is one case too many. I think that this quote reflects Scotland's ambition to become a more equal and a more fair country by tackling the stigmatisation and the abuse of all victims, regardless of gender or sexuality. Thank you, Ms Svie. I call Oliver Mundell to wind up for a Conservative party. I start by reflecting on today's debate. When we look at the issue that we are seeing, it is a real strength of feeling across the chamber. It is also just a recognition of how far we have come on this issue. When you hear Clare Baker talk about 40 years of women's aid and Ruth McGuire refer to the relatively recent criminalisation of marital rape, you see what momentous steps have already been taken. The proposed legislation is best seen not as a simple solution but the next step in that journey. The remarks that the cabinet secretary made at the start certainly outlined his commitment to see the legislation through. As a still relatively new MSP, I have to say that today's debate has gone a long way to restore my optimism on the work that we do here in this chamber. At times, we have been unable to find consensus highlighting the very decisive nature of our politics, and it has left me wondering how we can all hold such passionate and strong but yet so different views on the future of our country. I think that most importantly of all today's debate sends out a really clear message on this important and most sensitive topic that our Parliament stands united and is ready to act. That is why, on this side of the chamber, we particularly welcome the early opportunity to debate the Scottish Government's proposed bill. It is also in that spirit that our amendment in the name of my colleague Douglas Ross seeks to strengthen the message that Parliament sends out. As we have already heard in this debate, the fact that domestic abuse is still on the rise in Scotland, we certainly cannot afford to be complacent. Indeed, as we heard earlier, recent figures show that offences are up by 2.5 per cent between 2013-14 and 2014-15. In my Dumfrieshire constituency alone, figures show that, in 2013-14, there were 1,411 incidents of domestic abuse reported to the police. In Scotland as a whole, as the motion states, there were almost 60,000 incidents of domestic abuse in 2014-15. As we heard from Monica Lennon, some of the statistics and research on attitudes towards coercive and controlling behaviour do make for shocking listening and reading. However, it is not just the hard facts that demand action but also the changes that we have seen elsewhere in the UK and in some of the handful of countries where people have already legislated on the issue. When we look at the UK Government's act that was implemented last December, I think that it is right that the Scottish Parliament is now looking at a law that will treat domestic abuse as a specific statutory offence and will recognise that controlling and coercive types of behaviour are absolutely unacceptable. I will touch briefly later on some of the concerns that have been mentioned by colleagues, not just in my party, but across the chamber around some of the issues regarding implementation. First of all, I want to echo some of the sentiments that we have heard in the chamber that we should avoid stereotyping those who are considered to be victims of domestic abuse. The motion acknowledges that 79 per cent of such incidents have a male perpetrator and a female victim. However, as I believe our amendment rightly points out, men can also be victims of domestic abuse. I think that we should be taking a zero-tolerance approach and really making that very clear. When you are talking about 21 per cent of potentially 60,000 people and more, that takes a number of men affected by this issue over 10,000. I think that it is really important that for those men, we are seen to speak for them today as well. I welcome the First Minister's announcement last year of the additional 20 million to raise awareness of domestic abuse among the public and improve the justice system, as the cabinet secretary referred to. That money was specifically targeted at women and girls. We need to take a holistic view and make sure that every single incident of domestic abuse in Scotland is stamped out. I am pleased to see the existence of a number of charities in Scotland, such as abused men in Scotland, who seek to address that gap in service provision and who campaign for men to be fully included in our view of who is considered to be victims of domestic abuse. I welcome further work in that area, but I point to comments from domestic abuse groups that there appears to be a gap in up-to-date research concerning male victims. Particularly when we are looking at expanding what the law considers to be criminal, we may find that there are other factors that affect men that have not fully come to light today. Furthermore, as my colleague Annie Wells pointed out, we need to look at some of the issues. I think that Mary Fee touched on it as well, around trans and LGBT issues more generally. We need to be really clear again that whatever type of relationship and whatever circumstances that domestic abuse takes place is unacceptable. We also have to be conscious, as Gil Paterson said in his remarks, that, in a modern society, the internet creates new opportunities for abusive behaviour from Xs, as well as current partners, and there are communities for which there are very specific forms of domestic abuse, as was mentioned by Kezia Dugdale. More generally, I am very pleased to hear the number of excellent examples of services that are working really well throughout Scotland. I think that there is a lot of heart that we, as a Parliament, can take from that. More specifically, in my constituency, I am pleased to see that there are services for victims of domestic abuse provided across what is a large and challenging rural area, most notably through Dumfries and Sturtrary Women's Aid, who are based in Dumfries, and also the Dumfries and Galloway Domestic Abuse and Violence Against Women partnership, which brings together a number of different organisations and expertise and uses a working partnership. For example, working with White Ribbon Scotland, an organisation involving men to tackle violence against women, and working with Queen of the South Football Club to promote positive relationship messages. In 2004, during a special White Ribbon game, Queen of the South players wore White Ribbons and more than 3,000 were passed out to fans and supporters while announcements were made about the campaign. There are lots of good things going on, and it is important that we see legislation in that framework as a chance to improve things further still. Central to the whole policy is ensuring that the population is educated as to what determines coercive and controlling behaviour. If we are going to tackle some of the points that have been made and ensure that, as Kate Forbes said, confidence for victims to come forward is there, we need to be very clear about what the definition is going to be. Prevention, as Margaret Mitchell highlighted, through Claire's law, is still going to be important no matter what point we reach. I would also highlight some of the professional expertise that we have heard both from Gordon Lindhurst as an advocate but also from Fulton MacGregor through his experience of social work. If we are going to genuinely tackle domestic abuse, we need to be inclusive with regard to who we see as victims. We need to listen to all the views of all the different stakeholders who are working so hard on the issue. Most importantly of all, we need to go beyond rhetoric to ensure that the law's implementation is effective. Thank you very much. I call on Annabelle Ewing to wind up for the Government Minister till five o'clock. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I would start just in case it is required to refer members to my register of interests entry where members will find that I am a member of the Law Society of Scotland and I hold a current practicing certificate. I would wish at the outset to welcome the very positive contributions from right across the chamber to what has been a very reflective, interesting and informative debate this afternoon. I hope that I am not introducing any individual member here, but I think that what I can say is that the debate has shown that the Parliament agreed that we should do everything that we can to challenge domestic abuse and to tackle domestic abuse effectively. Indeed, many parties have concluded that that means responding by way of the new proposed defence of domestic abuse in order that we can deal with long-term psychological abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour. Some of the points raised by members today highlight the fact that framing a law on domestic abuse that covers coercive and controlling behaviour and psychological abuse is indeed challenging, but, hopefully, by working constructively on a cross-party basis and a lot of work to do in the Justice Committee, we can come up with a statute that is workable and will meet the needs of victims right across Scotland. We have taken a very inclusive approach. I would say to Mr Mundell that, thus far, we have had two separate consultations, one on whether there should be a new offence created and a second one more recently on what that should look like. Of course, we are still reflecting on the results of the second consultation and, together with our continued work with stakeholders, with the contributions of the members who have spoken today, we will continue to reflect on how we shape the bill to be the best that it possibly can be and to be effective, because that, of course, is what the victims want and that is what they are entitled to expect. I would say that, picking up a point that was raised about the position of the Crown Office, I have been handed by officials, a very clear statement from the Crown Office, to say that, indeed, they remain very supportive of and fully welcome the Scottish Government's proposal to create a specific criminal offence of domestic abuse. They do make reference to the comments of Ms Dyer, but they make the point that they were made by the previous current agent in the context of consideration of the creation of the domestic abuse aggravator, so I hope that that is helpful to Mr Ross. Of course, it was, indeed, the insolistor general. I think that I would make a bit progress. I do not recall Mr Ross taking an intervention. I believe that it was the insolistor general herself at the time, in 2014, as the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport, to write and highlight at Lesley Thomson QC, who called, indeed, for this Parliament to consider the creation of a specific offence of domestic abuse. It is important that we are confident that the offence includes, within its scope, the many different forms that domestic abuse can take and that we have heard about in horrific detail this afternoon from many members. Of course, at the same time, and a point rightly raised by other members, it is important that the offence provides sufficient clarity about what amounts to criminal behaviour so that people know what behaviour would or would not amount to a criminal offence. Before trying to respond briefly to some of the other points raised in the debate, I would like to confirm that the Government will be happy to support Clay Baker's amendment today. We acknowledge, indeed, the valuable role that domestic abuse courts can play as part of an overall effective court-programming approach to dealing with domestic abuse cases. However, at the same time, members will be well aware that it is the statutory responsibility of the senior judiciary to arrange court-programming within their areas, including whether domestic abuse courts should be established or whether clustering of domestic abuse cases should operate. I would point out to the chamber, and to Kate Forbes, who might be very happy with the piece of information that, indeed, the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service will be working with justice partners and the sheriff principal in Grampians and Highlands to explore whether a new panic domestic abuse court can, indeed, be established in Grampians and Highlands. I hope that that is good news. On the issue of specialist sheriffs, it is important to say that sheriffs and summary sheriffs across Scotland are well equipped to deal with domestic abuse cases and, indeed, intensive domestic abuse education to all sheriffs through a range of dedicated courses is provided and, in addition, domestic abuse features in the induction training of all new members of the judiciary. I thought that that was important to make that point. Also, we, the Government, are happy to support Douglas Ross's amendment today. The draft offence that we consulted upon and the bill that will come forward containing the new offence will, of course, apply to all victims of domestic abuse, both female and male. It has been said that we know that the latest figures show that nearly 79 per cent of all recorded domestic abuse incidents in 1415 have a male perpetrator and a female victim. Although our new offence will benefit all victims, it is the case, as many members have highlighted, that the disproportionate effect is borne by women in terms of this heinous conduct. The amendment that is put forward by Douglas Ross also mentions the importance of Claire's law. The Scottish Government fully supports the Police Scotland run disclosure scheme, which allows anyone who is concerned about being at risk of abuse from their partner to ask the police for information about the partner's background. The Scottish Government provided additional funding to Police Scotland to help to raise awareness of the new scheme when it was launched last year. Of course, we will continue to seek to raise awareness, which I think was the key ask in Mr Ross's amendment to ensure that people who feel that they may be at risk of domestic abuse—I am afraid that I really do not have time. I am sorry, but I have got very limited time to continue to try to respond to the points raised, so that people who may feel that they are at risk of domestic abuse know that they can seek information from the police about their partner. Many other issues were raised, and I see that I have very little time left. We are very conscious of the issue of clarity, and equally we are very conscious of the desire to ensure that we frame and offence in such a way that we capture the controlling and coercive behaviour that causes such psychological damage. We are still reflecting on the final drafting, and, as I said, the contributions from all members will be very helpful in that regard. A mention has been made of the position south of the border. My understanding is that what we are proposing to do here in Scotland is more comprehensive in its scope, because we seek to bring within the one offence both elements, the physical and the psychological. Issues have also been raised in connection with the position of how corroboration will work with the new offence. Of course, it is not required to corroborate every piece of the specification in the charge if the core elements of the offence are corroborated, which is the case with other course of conduct offences such as stalking. It has also been raised today the important issue of how the offence deals with children and secondary victims of domestic abuse, an issue that is raised by many members, including Rhoda Grant and Richard Glyll. Of course, the cabinet secretary has indicated that we are carefully considering what changes may be needed to ensure that the offence reflects the impact that domestic abuse can have on children of an abused partner. I might interest members to note in the position of children giving evidence that work streams will be under way to look at pre-recorded evidence for children in child witnesses. Issues have also been raised about the position of ensuring that all victims of domestic abuse achieve support. In that regard, it was just to point out that, indeed, there are various advocacy services available to male victims as well. Also on the issue of what we are doing to help or to deal with perpetrators, Mr MacArthur may be aware of the Caledonian system. It has recently been subject to an independent evaluation, and that will be published, I hope, in the course of this month, so we can reflect on that further. Finally, issues have been raised concerning wider support and funding. Indeed, the £20 million funding that the cabinet secretary referred to includes many strands in the scope of that funding stream. I would point out that it is over a three-year period, and to reply to Kezia Dugdale's point about trying to seek to have a three-year funding stream in general, I can assure the member that we intend to lead by example and introduce three-year rolling funding where that is possible. I hope that that is good news for Mr Dugdale. In conclusion, when the First Minister announced our programme for government last week, Dr Marsh of Scotland, the chief executive of Scottish Women's Aid, said that domestic abuse encompasses a great deal more than physical violence. It is right that the patterns of coercive and controlling behaviour are reflected in Scottish legislation. That is what we seek to do with the new offence. As has been clear from the debate today, it is a complex area of the law, but it is heartening indeed to know that we have support right across the chamber to work hard and constructively together to make this new domestic abuse offence as effective as it can be, because we have a duty to do so in order to protect victims, to bring perpetrators to justice and, indeed, to help to deliver the societal change in attitudes that are needed to ensure that we can find and consign domestic abuse to the dustbin of history. That concludes our debate on the domestic abuse law, and we move to decision time. There are three questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is that amendment 1434.1 in the name of Douglas Ross, which seeks to amend motion number 1434 and the number of Michael Matheson on domestic abuse law, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. The next question is that amendment 1434.2 in the name of Claire Baker, which seeks to amend motion 1434 in the name of Michael Matheson, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are all agreed. The final question, therefore, is that amendment 1434 in the name of Michael Matheson, as amended, be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are all agreed. That concludes decision time. One second, Ms Hawke. Sorry, we'll just wait for a second to get your microphone up. It's clear, Hawke. Under rule 7.3, can I seek your guidance on the comments made by Ruth Davidson during FMQs this afternoon? Ms Davidson quoted a warning from a representative of the society of acute medicine that there would be pockets of milk down in the NHS this winter. What Ms Davidson failed to mention was that this assessment related to a report from the society that examined 94 hospitals with only three in Scotland, 87 in England. As a new member, perhaps the Presiding Officer could advise me if it is possible for Ms Davidson to be given the opportunity to correct her remarks, to make clear that the warnings of milk down are aimed squarely at the Tory Government's terrible handling of the NHS in England for the purposes of the official report. Thank you, Ms Hawke. I would consider that a debating point rather than a point of order, but you've made the point. Parliamentary business is now closed.