Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 16 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 567 contributions

|

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Pre-budget Scrutiny 2026-27

Meeting date: 26 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

We can broadly apply that across the justice portfolio.

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 26 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

We have certainly been sent evidence from the Swedish jurisdiction that would suggest that there has been a substantial reduction. I am not arguing against that, although we did have evidence from the Police Service of Northern Ireland that suggested that what they have done in Northern Ireland has had a limited impact.

The figures that you have set out are appalling. Any rational person would understand that. However, you have made the point yourself, as did our very first panel of witnesses, that, even with the bill, we will never be able to make the selling of sex truly safe. The bill will not make it truly safe, but the question is, will it make it less safe? I have heard your perspective, which you have set out very clearly. You have talked about all the stakeholders that you have engaged with. When you have engaged with those who are opposed to your bill, and in whose perspective it would increase the likelihood of selling sex being less safe, what have they said?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

That is helpful to understand.

10:00  

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Pre-budget Scrutiny 2026-27

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

There is a figure of £5 million. Approximately how many prison officers would that pay for?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Pre-budget Scrutiny 2026-27

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

Good morning. I have asked this question of everyone who has come before the committee to give evidence for budget scrutiny, so I will ask you the same question. What has been the impact on your organisation as a consequence of the United Kingdom Government’s decision to increase employer national insurance contributions?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Pre-budget Scrutiny 2026-27

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

Is that to 2031?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

I would like to pick up on the issue of safety, which has been a substantial concern for me and, I think, all of us on the committee. In one of our evidence sessions, someone made the point—which I was very taken with—that you can never make the selling of sex truly safe. The fundamental question for us is whether the bill makes it less safe for those involved. There has been conflicting evidence but concerns about safety have definitely been expressed—at the very least, there is a perception that the bill could make things less safe. Is that your uppermost concern?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

That is certainly my uppermost concern. It has been difficult because of the conflicting evidence that we have heard, as you said, but that concern has definitely been expressed.

Before I turn to your remarks about the need for substantial amendments, I would like to pick up on Liam Kerr’s questions. The bill is predicated on reducing demand, and he asked about the international evidence in that regard. In your letter of 29 July, you cite the Irish experience and the fact that the Irish justice minister set out that their review highlighted that demand had not decreased under the model. Has there been engagement and dialogue with other jurisdictions to try to understand what their practical experience has been?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

I have one final question. You mentioned concerns about the provisions on quashing convictions. I know that other colleagues want to ask about that, but I have a specific question. A contrast will be drawn with the situation regarding the Post Office’s Horizon system. I want to better understand what you meant in your letter of 29 July, when you said, in relation to the Post Office case, that those convictions

“could not be considered as safe”.

Perhaps I can set out my understanding and see whether that tallies with what you have said. Putting to one side for a minute whether we think that there should be convictions under section 46 of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982—of course, that is the fundamental question, but it is the law as it stands—is your position that convictions in those cases can be considered safe?

Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]

Prostitution (Offences and Support) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 November 2025

Jamie Hepburn

My question is a follow on from the answer that you gave to my question about what types of substantial amendment would be required. Minister, you mentioned the type of assistance and support that should be provided for in the bill. There has been widespread support for on-going support and assistance for those who are involved in the selling of sex so that they are able to exit the selling of sex. It has not always been clear precisely what that should constitute, beyond its having to be available evenly across the country. I take the point that it is largely for the member in charge of the bill to answer about what is intended, but do you have any sense of what that support should look like—perhaps informed by the support that is available through operation begonia, for example?

I have an associated question. We all understand that the provision would be predicated on trying to get women out of the selling of sex. However, a perspective has been articulated—including by those who oppose the bill and by one or two people who have given evidence who support the bill—that support should be available for those who are not immediately leaving the sale of sex. Do you agree with that as well?