Seòmar agus comataidhean

I was looking at the definition of trauma-informed practice. We have heard in evidence that many of the criminal justice agencies have started to bring in trauma-informed practice without legislation being in place. When we heard from NHS Education for Scotland, it suggested that there would be benefits in extending the definition. What are your thoughts on that? If we do not get the definition right, will we run the risk of organisations only working up to the letter of the law and not going above and beyond that to keep finding new ways to improve?

I agree with that, but putting it into practice will have an initial cost. We have your letter that came to the committee last night, and all through that letter there is reference to financial constraints. Those are why a lot of previous legislation has not been implemented. I would be concerned that, because of the costs of implementing the bill, there could be unintended consequences from other things getting left on the side, and we could end up inadvertently causing more trauma to victims.

I have a final question, on the Parole Board for Scotland. The Parole Board said that it was not confident that the bill would change the traumatic experience of victims going through the Parole Board process. Do you have any plans to make more specific provisions relating to the Parole Board in the bill in order to change that?

Thank you. You have actually answered one of my other questions—I was going to ask whether you are concerned that there is not a sufficient number of solicitors who are willing to be included on the register. You seem to be doing work to recruit solicitors, so that answers that question.

I go back to the cost. You referred to the letter that you sent to the committee last night, which says that

“there are budgetary pressures in relation to implementing the Act in full”

amounting to

“£15 million a year.”

It goes on to say:

“The Vulnerable Witnesses (Criminal Evidence) (Scotland) Act 2019 ... has not yet been implemented beyond Phase 1”.

Again, in relation to implementation of aspects of the Domestic Abuse (Protection) (Scotland) Act 2021, the letter states that those

“all have associated resource implications.”

It also says that implementation was affected

“due to resourcing and other priorities following the Programme for Government”.

I wonder, therefore, whether we should look at some of the legislation that has not yet been fully implemented, rather than trying to batter on by bringing in even more legislation that will not be implemented unless we get the proper funding for it. The implementation of that previous legislation would have a huge impact on some of the trauma that victims and witnesses face.

As the letter notes, one aspect of the Domestic Abuse (Protection) (Scotland) Act 2021 was about allowing victims

“to remain in the family home”

by

“enabling a social landlord to transfer a tenancy to a victim/survivor”.

Again, ensuring that we have implemented some of the previous legislation would go a huge way towards making sure that we reduce trauma. Should we perhaps stop and look at some of the previous legislation, and put the funding in to get it implemented? As you have said, there is a will within the judiciary to undertake trauma-informed practice.

Maybe more.

I come back to the issue of costs. Some of the justice agencies, including the police and the prosecution service, have raised concerns about limited resources. What conversations have you had with those agencies about resources? Once the legislation is implemented, is there a risk that compliance with it will have unintended consequences? You mentioned unintended consequences earlier. Is there a risk that the focus on the legislation will have unintended consequences, given that the money and the resources will have to come from other areas?

My question might come under the topic of the need for a strategic review of the whole system. I have heard comments that the police are running an out-of-hours service, because it seems that, after 9 to 5 and at the weekends, a lot of their time is taken up in dealing with mental health issues. Did you recognise that when you were doing the report? Is enough work being done with other agencies to address that issue so that they can give police the support that they need out of hours?

Thank you. Brian McInulty mentioned the enhanced mental health pathway. However, I think that your report mentions that not enough calls are referred by the contact, command and control teams. Is anything being done to train people in CCC to ensure that they send calls in the right direction, to try to relieve police officers from getting involved?

I wrote down earlier that training is an issue. People are scared of doing something wrong—they want to protect themselves and the organisation. Is more work still to be done on training, not only for police officers but for command and control staff, so that they know the right pathway and have the confidence to take the right action?

Brian, do you want to come in?

Three years on, the special measures in the 2020 act are not yet in force. When does the Scottish Government aim to have part 3 of the bill fully operational?