Hansard

I remind members of my entry in the register of members’ interests, which notes that my wife is a sergeant with Police Scotland.

The cabinet secretary knows that she has the numbers. She has worked hard with some parties to get the bill over the line. On Monday or Tuesday this week, we knew that the Greens would support it, before we discussed the 160 amendments that Jamie Greene referred to.

The bill will be passed but, having sat through yesterday’s stage 3 amendments and looked at the work of the Criminal Justice Committee, I cannot help but feel that it is a missed opportunity. There was an opportunity for the cabinet secretary to have not just a majority in favour but a unanimous decision of the Parliament to support a bill that really made a difference for victims and witnesses.

We all want an improvement for anyone who goes through the horrific and horrendous experience of being a victim of crime, and the bill concerns some of the most serious crimes that we could ever imagine. We all want to make it better for people to be involved in the justice system—to be a witness and give evidence. Some of the most harrowing cases that I have ever had to deal with as a constituency representative have involved those who went into the legal system as a victim or a witness and came out of it almost more traumatised by that experience than by the crime itself.

With the bill, there was an opportunity to make a difference that all of us could get behind and support. I gently say to Jamie Greene that he cannot shame Opposition members—I do not think that he was absolutely doing this—for opposing the bill when there are good elements in it. There are undoubtedly elements in the bill that I support. I know that there are families in the chamber who would like all MSPs to back it because of the individual elements that they have rightly and fiercely campaigned on for so long, but that does not mean that we can ignore the elements that I believe could have been improved if the justice secretary had gone a bit further yesterday in the stage 3 amendments or at stage 2.

As Liam Kerr said, the Conservatives have made the bill better with the amendments from Russell Findlay, Sharon Dowey and Pam Gosal. However, I still cannot understand or get my head around the fact that the opportunity was not taken in the bill to launch a national inquiry into grooming gangs. We see that issue all over the news and all over the media. The Labour Government at Westminster originally tried to do the same thing and tried to refuse such an inquiry, but it eventually had to U-turn because of public pressure. I am pretty sure that in a number of weeks, months or perhaps years—sadly, if it gets to years, it will be far too late—an incumbent Scottish Government will have to do the same thing, so why not take the opportunity under the bill?

On amendment 112, which I spoke to yesterday, I understand that there are disagreements on sexual offences courts. Some members believe that that is the right approach, and some believe that it is the wrong approach. I have to say that the cabinet secretary’s response to the alternative proposals that were put to her was dismissive. She believes that her option is the only option but, as Pauline McNeill said yesterday, that is not the case.

The proposal will cost a lot of money. That money could be better spent on changes in the current justice system. I understand that Lady Dorrian does not agree with specialised units or divisions in the High Court, but she also does not agree with the approach that the Government has taken forward on the sexual offences court. I believe that that is another missed opportunity.

I would genuinely have been pleased to be able to vote for the bill at decision time, but I cannot, and it is with a heavy heart that I cannot, because it could have been so much better and done so much more for victims and witnesses across Scotland. Sadly, I believe that it is a missed opportunity.