���˿���

Part of me wonders whether some local authorities—perhaps smaller local authorities, which are in locations where such permissions might be being sought—feel that their own resource is such that it is easier to say no than it is to say yes, because saying yes involves them in the administration of certain matters for which they feel that they currently do not have the capacity to take forward. That might be, in part, what underpins their views. I would be interested to know whether COSLA felt that there was any substance to that consideration.

Therefore, with the various suggestions that have been made, we will keep the petition open. Although we accept some of the evidence that we have received, and the comment from the Scottish Government, there are issues here that it would be useful for us to explore.

The second of our new petitions, on which colleagues will note that they have a late submission on the table before them, is PE2064, which has been lodged by Julie Mitchell. The petition calls on the Scottish Parliament to urge the Scottish Government to ensure that under-16s who are charged with rape are treated as adults in the criminal justice system. The SPICe briefing explains that certain offences for children over the age of 12 and under the age of 16 must be jointly reported by the police to the children’s reporter and the procurator fiscal. Rape is considered to be an offence that requires joint reporting, and the procurator fiscal decides whether prosecution will proceed in the adult justice system.

Regarding the sex offenders register, where a case proceeds in the adult criminal justice system and results in a conviction for rape, the notification requirements apply regardless of age. However, the length of the notification period is reduced for those under the age of 18. The Lord Advocate is reviewing diversion from prosecution as it relates to sexual offences, to consider whether it is being used appropriately. The Scottish Government’s response to the petition notes that its policy position is to keep children out of the criminal justice system wherever possible and appropriate. However, it recognises

“the need to strike a balance between supporting children who come into conflict with the law and ensuring that our communities are safe and that victims are supported.”

Do members have any comments or suggestions for action?

Are we content to take forward Mr Torrance’s recommendation and to combine that with the issues that are raised in PE1947?

Some people are even driving camper vans these days.

Good morning, and welcome to the third meeting in 2024 of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee.

Our first agenda item is simply to agree to take in private agenda item 4, which relates to evidence that we will hear this morning. Are members content to do so?

Members indicated agreement.

Our academics suggested that the historical territorial gangland violence among young people is less of an issue than it once was and that the pattern of violence and the way in which it occurs are different.

The committee is particularly concerned about younger people. The victims of violence we met were 12 or 13 years old. One was the subject of violence on a school bus. One was a slightly withdrawn individual who was artificially befriended and more or less invited by appointment to be assaulted. We might have a chance to look at some of that in more detail later. The victims were girls and they were attacked by other girls. The committee heard about horrendously despicable acts involving people of a relatively young age, egged on by the peer group in attendance. Are those two examples uniquely awful or, in the pattern of trends, is there a trend of growth, however small, in youth violence in that age group?

One of the parents said that they were slightly aghast that the remedy was to put in place a series of actions to support the perpetrator of the violence, to try to take them out of the culture of violence, but that the victim of the violence had received virtually no remedial support whatsoever. David Torrance, sorry—I interrupted you.

I was going to ask whether that was a reflection or a question, Mr Ewing, but we got to a question in the end.

I feel that I have a duty to the petitioner and to the witnesses from whom I heard to ask this question. They understand that the police operate within guidelines, issued by the Lord Advocate, that deal with the circumstances in which alleged offences committed by children should be reported to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. What impact do those guidelines have on police who have to deal with allegations of violence? Does more need to be done to explain to victims what action is and is not being taken?

The experience of those witnesses was not abstract; it was real. They were told by the police, “They are under 25. There’s nothing we can do. It’s not worth it. The procurator won’t act.” As a consequence, in both cases, the families felt unable to leave their homes, because they had come into contact with the perpetrators, who provoked them further, mocked them and made their lives difficult in their community because they felt that they were immune. Bizarrely, their parents seemed to be part of the posse of those abusing the victims. Gone are the days when some parents would have felt that they had a duty to act in respect of their children; they now seem to feel that they have to defend their children in front of the people who were abused.

What would you say to those people? They listened in some despair to our academic discussion at our previous evidence session, and they tried to relate that to their absolutely appalling experiences and the lack of any response.