Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you for that information. I have one final quick question. It is worrying that you say that, although this committee and the Social Justice and Social Security Committee have heard evidence on it in the past two weeks, not everybody knows that the means test has those levers to help vulnerable people, especially women. I am sure that men go through the process as well, but a lot of women are in that position and I am concentrating on the majority. We are many years on with this, but you say that we still need to raise awareness that means testing can help those women.

Organisations such as Scottish Women’s Aid have also come in to tell us about this issue. I am surprised and very worried by evidence that although the system has been in place for many years, if anything it needs to be renewed, which is what we are discussing today. You have just said that many solicitors and organisations are not aware of the allowances that can be made. We should think about how many domestic abuse survivors, especially women, might have been let down by the system because there is an awareness and education issue and people do not have guidance on that aspect.

It is surprising to me that you have said something very different from what other witnesses have said. Why are we taking evidence on raising awareness when the issue should have been resolved earlier, which would have meant that those vulnerable women might not have gone through what they did?

We heard from Colin Lancaster earlier that sometimes there are levers to help survivors. However, as we discussed, there is quite a worrying gap there, especially when it comes to eligibility. I said earlier—and another member touch on this, too—that solicitors and organisations are not fully aware of what legal aid has to offer.

We know that the law that is in place is very complex and could be simplified, but what work is being done to ensure that lawyers and organisations get information about that? We have come only this far in so many years; it is shocking that this big issue was not identified years ago and that we have let the situation go on when a lot of vulnerable victims could otherwise have had the help that they needed.

You heard Colin say that the system does not allow SLAB to action any of that work and that it needs more to be done; my colleague Tess White pointed out that it could do a lot more work with the Law Society. I am asking you not only about awareness but about why it took so long for the issue to be identified, and how we can move forward. I know that you are doing the reform, but it will take time. How can we move forward to help vulnerable victims now?

At times, the partner holds all the financial records and controls the finances. Women especially may not hold all the information and may have to be means tested.

I have one more question. You said earlier that the model of legal aid for women and children in Scotland is not fit for purpose and is not demand led. Fiona McPhail spoke about the system in England, which is not means tested. Do you think that we should have such a system for domestic abuse cases here?

Good morning. I thank the witnesses for the information that they have provided so far. Last week, I brought up the issue of abusive partners controlling all the household finances. In many cases, the abused person, which is usually the woman, does not know the household annual income. Therefore, the victim risks their application for legal aid being turned down either because the household income is too high or because there is no clear indication of what the household income is.

Survivors of domestic abuse come from all walks of life and all socioeconomic backgrounds. Witnesses at last week’s evidence session called for the removal of the criteria for accessing legal aid in certain cases, such as those brought by parties seeking civil protection orders and by survivors of domestic abuse. What changes need to happen to ensure that a human rights-based approach is taken to resolving legal disputes?

Does anybody want to add anything?

Good morning. Thank you for the information that you have provided so far.

We recently became aware of the case of a woman who was turned down not by one, not by two, but, shockingly, by 116 law firms that would not take up her divorce case. As you know, it takes a lot for a survivor, especially a woman, to come forward, let alone to seek legal aid. This woman was assaulted by her husband and had to find legal aid, and then was turned down, which added extra layers of stress.

However, that is not the only such case. Last week, we heard evidence from JustRight Scotland that people sometimes contact 30 to 50 law firms before their case gets picked up. Scottish Women’s Aid has said that survivors of abuse sometimes face the challenge that local solicitors are representing the abuser, which leaves them having to find a solicitor in another part of the country, which makes things even more complicated.

I have spoken to many survivors of domestic abuse as part of my Prevention of Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill, and all I can say is that many of those women are extremely vulnerable. What should be done to make their lives a bit easier?

Dr Scott, you have already said that it is not only access and resources that are the problem—the model is also not fit—so it would be good to hear what more can be done. I know that you have already covered some of that.

I have one more question for Dr Zazai about the cultural side of things, because that issue was raised last week.

You spoke about language barriers. Many women—because it is usually women—are left in a no-man’s-land in cases of domestic abuse that involve housing. They do not have access to information and they cannot communicate. You said that sometimes it is hard to even read and interpret a solicitor’s letter. Do you agree that there are not only language barriers but cultural ones?

In the evidence that we took last week on cultural barriers, we heard that sometimes—in fact most of the time—solicitors do not have the time or the resources to understand people’s background or the cultural aspects of their situation. I know that when you speak with those from different backgrounds you are sometimes dealing with a whole family—sometimes a whole community—and not only with the person who has been domestically abused. What would you say about the fact that legal aid solicitors do not have training in culture or the resources to access that?

My next question is about bureaucracy and access. Dr Marsha Scott, who was on the previous panel, said that even the United Nations has raised the issue of the depletion of legal aid lawyers in Scotland. How can we talk about a human rights approach to administering legal aid when we have many layers of bureaucracy, as you have just mentioned; a lack of solicitors who are willing to take on cases at legal aid rates; women who are not eligible to access legal aid because they do not know their household incomes; and difficulties with understanding cultural and language differences, which we heard about from the previous panel?

Thank you. That was some really good detail, Professor Boyle. Dr Christman, would you like to add anything?