Seòmar agus comataidhean

The report refers to hidden populations. The first of those includes those who are housed in forensic learning disability services and the second includes autistic people who are simply not identified in the data. Last week, we heard from people with learning disabilities, many of whom felt that they were let down by the system. In a previous evidence session, one witness said that they felt that they are at the “bottom of the pile” when it comes to the Scottish Government’s priorities. How do you propose that your concerns about the hidden populations should be addressed?

Good morning. Thank you for your very powerful and honest statements, Jan.

The Scottish Human Rights Commission’s report states that significant data gaps make it impossible to accurately measure progress. Data gathering is very important—first, to identify problems, and secondly, to come up with the right solutions. I have seen that personally while working on my proposed domestic abuse (prevention) (Scotland) bill—to prevent domestic abuse, we need to see which populations are affected more than others.

The same can be said about people moving from care settings to independent living. Jan, you said that the Government needs to produce an action plan. However, you also know that there are continuing issues of poor data collecting. Is the Scottish Government doing enough to improve data collection? If not, what else should the Scottish Government be doing?

I want to ask about data collection. One issue that was brought up during a private session last week was that people from the black, Asian and minority ethnic community face much discrimination. For example, a person could be autistic and face discrimination or stigma, but they could also be a person of colour, and, as we were told last week, they would not know whether they had been discriminated against because of their colour or because of their disability. Is any data collected on that? We were told that a lot of BAME communities are more affected because of the layers of intersectionality. Do you think that there are issues with the collection of data about people from different backgrounds? Obviously, we cannot have a one-size-fits-all solution. Solutions have to be tailored to cultural backgrounds, especially if those concerned have other things going on—for example, if they are a person of colour or if they have more than one disability. What is your view on that, Cathy?

Thank you, Cathy. It is shocking that, in some of the areas that you spoke about, there is very weak or not enough data collection. Have there been any conversations with the Scottish Government about that, especially since things are not even marrying up to the human rights duty that you have to fulfil? Will they have to fulfil that duty? I want to probe a bit more into whether there have been any talks on the matter. It is a serious matter that there is not enough data collection. How can you find solutions, and how can you create an action plan like the one that Jan Savage mentioned if there is no data—or, I should say, a lack of data?

Thank you very much, Cathy. If you want to add anything later, you can send it in. That would be appreciated.

Good morning, committee, cabinet secretary and officials.

Amendment 85 would introduce a mandatory requirement for the making of non-harassment orders in the sentencing of sexual offenders. Having spoken to survivors of sexual crimes and domestic abuse, it is clear to me that non-harassment orders are vital to their safety. Survivors might feel safe when their abusers are in prison, but what happens when they are released?

Amelia Price, who I understand has contacted the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs and the Minister for Victims and Community Safety, was raped and assaulted by her ex-partner. He is currently serving time in prison but is due to be released later this year. The judge in the case was required under law to consider imposing a non-harassment order. However, Amelia was told that he did not impose one because her abuser had not contacted her since she reported him and she no longer lived in Scotland. My amendment 85 would ensure that such orders are issued automatically.

Amendment 241, in the name of my colleague Sharon Dowey, would extend those protections to cases of domestic abuse. The amendment is extremely important, as there has been an epidemic of domestic abuse in Scotland, with the number of cases rising. A freedom of information request showed that, in the financial year 2023-24, non-harassment orders were granted at sentencing in only 38 per cent of domestic abuse cases, so almost two-thirds of survivors live in fear that their abusers could contact them. That is why I urge members to support amendment 241.

Amendment 242, in the name of Maggie Chapman, would also extend the criteria for making non-harassment orders in sexual crimes, and I urge colleagues to support it.

I move amendment 85.

In light of what the cabinet secretary has said, I am happy to work with her before stage 3. Therefore, I will not press amendment 85.

Amendment 85, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendment 88 not moved.

Going back to what you said about ethnicity data, you are probably aware that women of colour are more disadvantaged. They are also further away from the labour market and, when they are in that labour market and working, they sometimes come across many prejudices. Culture plays into that as well. Are you doing anything around that? You mentioned the mainstreaming strategy. Are you doing any work on how areas such as culture affect women of colour, especially when they are working or looking for work?

You said that further work is needed on the drivers. Is that work being done?

I also want to touch on race, and the fact that people of colour—women, especially—are more disadvantaged in terms of the gender pay gap. Can you say anything about that? You said that work needs to be done in general, but is any work being done in that area?

I want to probe that point. You talk about dignity and respect, and in one of your answers, you said that, as you are a woman of BAME background, like me, you know when an issue is affected by certain religious aspects.

Last week, I said that Governments and organisations were on the one hand giving rights to prayer rooms but, on the other hand, taking away a right to single-sex facilities. As a woman of colour and religion, you know that before a person goes into a prayer room, they have to visit the bathroom. If you are going to a single-sex space, that is fine, because you have respect and dignity, but when that space is up for question and becomes a unisex space—people out there, who are listening to this session, are very confused on this—what happens then? You will not need the prayer room because you cannot go in to the bathroom and do your wudu steps before prayer. What is the use of providing something but then taking away a right somewhere else?

You are right—it is not a competition—but there has to be a fair balance. Right now, I do not think that women of colour—even women and girls who are out there, in general—are finding that balance, because there is no respect and dignity in sharing a unisex toilet or facility with a biological male.