Hansard

I concur with everything the Executive has set out in its motion. I am pleased that the debate is being conducted under the heading "Violence Against Women" and not under the heading of domestic violence. Regardless of who the violence is against, it is a crime. For far too long, because it was perpetrated by men against women, domestic violence has been looked on as a form of second-class violence. I have always had the notion—the absolutely correct notion—that violence of any kind is a crime and should be treated as such. We must not look on violence against women as anything less than that.

I admire the commitment that the Deputy Minister for Communities and the Minister for Communities give to the issue and to the sincerity of that commitment. I share Carolyn Leckie's view of the minister. She did not say that he is her favourite minister, but mentioned his sincerity. Johann Lamont is also sincere in her commitment; I know that for a fact. Both ministers are passionate about the subject.

I applaud Carolyn Leckie and Cathie Craigie on their contributions; they were spot on. I have never understood why someone's past relationships or what they wear should be used to tarnish their reputation, particularly when the attacker is set free as a result. Rosemary Byrne referred to the tragic case of Lindsay Armstrong. Some weeks ago, I met Mrs Armstrong. Not all members may agree with the proposal, but consideration should be given to changing court procedures.

The debate has been excellent and every speech merits a response. I will attempt to pick up on all of them, but members will forgive me if I do not manage that. We have debated the subject of violence against women since 1999, at which time the debate was billed domestic abuse. Since 2003, the Parliament has held an annual debate on the issue. I welcome that. I also welcome the many projects that aim to stop this terrible crime that have been launched and the money that the Executive has made available.

As Christine Grahame said, violence against women has increased over the years. We have to ask why. Cathy Peattie and Nora Radcliffe, among others, touched on possible answers, including the fact that women are more aware of what is happening and where they can report the crime. Another possibility is the upsurge in lad mags, lap-dancing clubs and the accessibility of some forms of pornography. We need to look more deeply into why violence against women is not diminishing but increasing. The figures speak for themselves.

Many members, including Shiona Baird and Rosemary Byrne, talked about funding. I agree with their comments. The SNP amendment mentions funding for refuge places. Some women are lucky enough to have relatives they can stay with, as Bill Aitken said when he talked about refuge places in Glasgow, but many women do not. There should be refuge places for such women and funding is crucial if we are to help them.

I remind the minister that Ranald Lindsay, who is the convener of the Law Society of Scotland's access to justice committee, has talked about the emergence of legal aid deserts. As a result of a change in how civil legal aid is paid, many victims are unable to access lawyers to take on their case. He said:

"Our consciences are basically being exploited by the Executive on this. They know that it's difficult for us to turn away Mrs Jones who's been battered black and blue, saying that we're not being paid enough."

The minister should consider the problem of people's inability to secure representation, which happens not just in Glasgow, but in Edinburgh, Stirling and elsewhere.

Other members talked about the lack of long-term funding, which causes serious difficulties for people who are trying to do their best in organisations that cannot access funding that lasts longer than two years. I received a letter from the Glasgow presbytery, which is part of the interagency working group that is funded by the Executive and Glasgow City Council. The initiative provides a fantastic support network for women before, during and after court cases, but it has to submit a bid for funding every two years.

Many other groups are in a similar situation and do not know whether they will be funded in two years' time. That is unsettling. I have written to the minister to ask him to consider how such groups can secure long-term funding. In his speech, he said that money is available, but it does not seem to filter down to the many agencies that need it. Perhaps he can consider how they might access funding.

Cathy Peattie and Shiona Baird made valid points about the international situation. They referred to Afghanistan and other countries. It is imperative that we do not take an insular view of violence against women by talking only about domestic violence or violence that takes place in Scotland and Great Britain. The problem is international. Trafficking of women and abuse of children is taking place abroad, for example in Russia and its neighbouring states. We should consider how to alleviate the problem. If we cannot provide money, as Shiona Baird suggested, we can surely contribute by highlighting the problem. Operation pentameter tackled trafficking and was a great success. We need more such forward-looking action to prevent women from being trafficked to this country, as well as action to protect women from violence in their home countries.

Stewart Stevenson and other members, including Shiona Baird, made important points about violence that takes place behind closed doors, which has a seriously detrimental effect on children. As Rosemary Byrne said, we do not know what is going on in the lives of children who come to school. I have no doubt that exposure to violence at a young age sends a message to kids that it is okay to be violent. There are education programmes, but we must improve education for children so that we send a clear message that violence is not acceptable. If we emphasise that message to male schoolchildren, perhaps it will filter through.

As everyone else has said, this has been a good debate. I hope that we will not have to debate violence against women next year, because that will mean that it has been eradicated. However, like others, I think that it will be a long time before that happens. As far as I know, this is the only Parliament that has raised these issues year after year since 2003 to keep them on the agenda and which funds projects such as Scottish Women's Aid to deal with the problem specifically. I hope that the funding goes from strength to strength and is made more long term.

Every one of us here hopes to eradicate violence against women, which is a crime against humanity, not just against women. I look forward to the day when we do not have to debate it, because it has been eradicated. Thank you for the opportunity to speak in the debate, which has been excellent, because lots of good points have been raised.