Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 16 March 2011
16 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill
The bill addresses a serious matter to which the Parliament has devoted quite a bit of attention over the years since 1999 and which calls for serious politicians. Rhoda Grant has shown herself to be very much a serious and committed politician in bringing the bill to finality today. I join other members in congratulating her, not just on her expertise and skill, but on her determination to achieve the result.
There is probably a united view throughout the Parliament that domestic abuse is not satisfactory or tolerable in the sort of society that we want in modern Scotland. We have to consider the remedies and protections that are available. Domestic violence is one of those issues that remains underrecorded and underreported. One aspect that is probably also underreported and which does not get much mention, because domestic abuse predominantly involves women and children, is that of abuse against male partners.
The point has been made that domestic violence issues often emerge from a power tussle in relationships of one sort or another. That point has a considerable element of truth in it. We have protections in the criminal law against domestic abuse. When matters are serious and result in physical violence and things of that sort, we clearly hope that the police will deal with them. The police are much better at dealing with such issues than they were in the past, when there was a view about not interfering in domestic relationships. These days, the police are much more sensitive and attuned to the issues and deal with them much more appropriately. The more major issues should be dealt with through the criminal law, and rightly so.
There is also a necessity to deal with the not-quite-so-serious episodes—“lesser” would be the wrong word—many of which are on-going and harassing. Those are the issues on which the civil law can give a degree of assistance. When one looks back over the progress on the issue and considers the Matrimonial Homes (Family Protection) (Scotland) Act 1981 and the interdicts that go with it, it is perhaps surprising that the remedy that we have ended up with—in effect, that of making breach of interdict a criminal offence—was not arrived at in the beginning because, in a sense, it is the obvious way of tackling the issue. In the march of history, all the other mechanisms that we have had over the years, such as contempt of court proceedings, breach of interdict proceedings or the limited power of arrest, can manifestly be seen as staging posts along a line to something a bit better.
The bill originally attempted to introduce a number of provisions, but the ones that have got through at the end of the day are the right ones—the extension of the harassment definitions and the breach of interdict with power of arrest. I disagree to an extent with Rhoda Grant’s comment that, in the legal aid system,
“the needs of the perpetrator take precedence over those of the victim.”
I understand where she is coming from, but the legal aid system must have at its heart an equality-of-arms approach. That was clearly brought out in the committee’s stage 1 report and in the approach that was taken on the proposals. As the minister rightly said, none of that means that we cannot make improvements or deal with sensitivities and problems in the system that perhaps lead to people not getting legal aid in circumstances in which they need it. The evidence to the committee suggested that, at worst, that applies to a not very large percentage of people. However, there might be an issue of underreporting and underapplication that has to be dealt with.
On the matter of a definition, I believe that we have left ourselves with difficulties. The definition will need to be interpreted by the courts. The phraseology, although it will perhaps do the trick for the moment, has some difficulties, which I tried to point out in my examination of the issue earlier. Having said that, the bill is worth while and decent and will have an effect of value. I join other members in welcoming the bill and the work that has been done in bringing it about.
15:49
There is probably a united view throughout the Parliament that domestic abuse is not satisfactory or tolerable in the sort of society that we want in modern Scotland. We have to consider the remedies and protections that are available. Domestic violence is one of those issues that remains underrecorded and underreported. One aspect that is probably also underreported and which does not get much mention, because domestic abuse predominantly involves women and children, is that of abuse against male partners.
The point has been made that domestic violence issues often emerge from a power tussle in relationships of one sort or another. That point has a considerable element of truth in it. We have protections in the criminal law against domestic abuse. When matters are serious and result in physical violence and things of that sort, we clearly hope that the police will deal with them. The police are much better at dealing with such issues than they were in the past, when there was a view about not interfering in domestic relationships. These days, the police are much more sensitive and attuned to the issues and deal with them much more appropriately. The more major issues should be dealt with through the criminal law, and rightly so.
There is also a necessity to deal with the not-quite-so-serious episodes—“lesser” would be the wrong word—many of which are on-going and harassing. Those are the issues on which the civil law can give a degree of assistance. When one looks back over the progress on the issue and considers the Matrimonial Homes (Family Protection) (Scotland) Act 1981 and the interdicts that go with it, it is perhaps surprising that the remedy that we have ended up with—in effect, that of making breach of interdict a criminal offence—was not arrived at in the beginning because, in a sense, it is the obvious way of tackling the issue. In the march of history, all the other mechanisms that we have had over the years, such as contempt of court proceedings, breach of interdict proceedings or the limited power of arrest, can manifestly be seen as staging posts along a line to something a bit better.
The bill originally attempted to introduce a number of provisions, but the ones that have got through at the end of the day are the right ones—the extension of the harassment definitions and the breach of interdict with power of arrest. I disagree to an extent with Rhoda Grant’s comment that, in the legal aid system,
“the needs of the perpetrator take precedence over those of the victim.”
I understand where she is coming from, but the legal aid system must have at its heart an equality-of-arms approach. That was clearly brought out in the committee’s stage 1 report and in the approach that was taken on the proposals. As the minister rightly said, none of that means that we cannot make improvements or deal with sensitivities and problems in the system that perhaps lead to people not getting legal aid in circumstances in which they need it. The evidence to the committee suggested that, at worst, that applies to a not very large percentage of people. However, there might be an issue of underreporting and underapplication that has to be dealt with.
On the matter of a definition, I believe that we have left ourselves with difficulties. The definition will need to be interpreted by the courts. The phraseology, although it will perhaps do the trick for the moment, has some difficulties, which I tried to point out in my examination of the issue earlier. Having said that, the bill is worth while and decent and will have an effect of value. I join other members in welcoming the bill and the work that has been done in bringing it about.
15:49
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson)
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-8136, in the name of Rhoda Grant, on the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill. I repeat that we are very tight ...
Rhoda Grant (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Lab
It gives me great pleasure to open the debate. The bill has taken a long time to bring forward, and there were times when I thought that we would never get h...
The Minister for Community Safety (Fergus Ewing)
SNP
I am grateful for the opportunity to outline the Government’s approach to the bill.In one unfortunate respect, the bill is timely, in that the incidence of d...
Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I join all those who have commended Rhoda Grant for bringing before Parliament this important legislation to tackle domestic abuse. She can be proud of her w...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con)
Con
Instances of domestic abuse in Scotland remain stubbornly—indeed, disgracefully—high. There were 51,926 incidents of domestic abuse in the last recorded year...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
The bill addresses a serious matter to which the Parliament has devoted quite a bit of attention over the years since 1999 and which calls for serious politi...
Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I begin where Robert Brown left off by saying how much I admire the work that Rhoda Grant has undertaken on the bill. It is not easy to take through any memb...
Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab)
Lab
I welcome the opportunity to support the motion in the name of my Labour colleague Rhoda Grant. I offer her my unreserved congratulations on bringing to the ...
Nigel Don (North East Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I congratulate Bill Butler on that exposition of what Parliament is about, with which of course I entirely concur. I also congratulate Rhoda Grant on introdu...
Mike Pringle (Edinburgh South) (LD)
LD
Like all other members who have spoken in the debate this afternoon, I congratulate Rhoda Grant on getting the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill through to stag...
Bill Aitken
Con
I thank Mike Pringle for his kind remarks, which I appreciated.I hope that when the bill is passed, Rhoda Grant does not feel that because of what happened t...
James Kelly (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab)
Lab
I, too, congratulate Rhoda Grant on what I am sure will be the passing of the bill later this afternoon. As Mike Pringle said, navigating a member’s bill thr...
Fergus Ewing
SNP
Maureen Macmillan was referred to earlier in proceedings, and I am delighted to see that she is in the public gallery witnessing the debate. I recall from st...
Rhoda Grant
Lab
I thank all members who took part in the debate for their kind words—in fact, their words were so kind that when Roseanna Cunningham came into the chamber sh...