���˿���

I have one further question, which is for Alison Bavidge. It is about the other side—the resources, which you mentioned right at the start. What can the bill do in terms of making use of other resources, at community level, to prevent people needing secure care in the first place? I know that that is the million-dollar question. You have touched on it through some of your answers, but I want to give you a chance to expand on that.

On that basis, would you like there to be a change in who makes the decision? I certainly remember that the chief of the social work department or whatever in a local authority makes that decision. As I think you referred to, previously, it would not be every nine months for some of the cross-border cases; it would perhaps be every four to six weeks.

Would you like a change in who makes the decision? Obviously, there can be a lot of variance between local authorities. Should it be somebody more central, or is it more about training for local authorities?

I have another question for Jim Shields, before he comes in. How does the sector engage and interact with the facilities that are run by local authorities? I have not visited the one in Edinburgh that you referred to.

Jim, I ask you a similar question. In your view, are there particular challenges for people in exercising their human rights in combating discrimination?

Okay—I was going to come in on the domestic abuse angle. I apologise for the misunderstanding. That is one of the risks with an informal round-table session. I totally messed up there.

Good morning, everybody. I have a question about services, which is probably for Rachel Moon initially and then maybe Jim Stephenson; Pam Duncan-Glancy might have touched on this. I am a Lanarkshire MSP, and I know that there are differences in services across the country. Rachel, is it correct that Govan Law Centre deals only with people with a Glasgow postcode? People who are in Lanarkshire, which is close to Glasgow, do not have a similar service. Your service is very well known and well thought of. What do you think about the provision of services across the country? What more can the committee do, in conjunction with the Scottish Government or other partners, to ensure that there is a consistency of service across the whole country?

I was trying to catch the convener’s eye, as my question might supplement Pam Gosal’s, and they could be answered together.

I also sit on the Criminal Justice Committee. Last week, we did some post-legislative scrutiny work on the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018, which criminalised coercive control. How is that overlapping with some of the work that you are doing on domestic abuse? To follow questions from Karen Adam and Pam Gosal, are you seeing any overlap between coercive control being recognised as a form of abuse and cases that involve that offence going to the civil courts? Have you picked up on that in your work? I hope that that will supplement Pam Gosal’s question, in which she referred to a specific case.

Do you want to let Karen Adam in now? I do not want to step on any toes.

My question follows on from what Pauline McNeill and the convener have asked, and from my line of questioning for the previous panel. It is about victim confidence in the legislation. In fact, “victim confidence” is probably not the right term. This is about public confidence and the public realising that there is a new offence that deals with something that is as wrong as a physical assault.

There are similarities between the two crimes. The evidence that we have heard suggests that domestic violence would not have been seen as an offence several decades ago, although most people now understand that it is. They may not report it, which is a completely different matter that can also involve control issues, but most people now understand that an assault is an offence.

How can we get the wider public to that same place with this offence? I am assuming that both the police and the Crown will know of situations in which officers will have said that something might be an offence but the victim has not known that. Is there anything more that the committee or Parliament can do to promote that understanding?

Good morning to the panel. It has been quite an interesting discussion. I was a member of the committee that considered the legislation in the previous parliamentary session, along with Rona Mackay. It is fair to say that one of the highlights of the session was when it was passed in the chamber. It is good now to do the post-legislative scrutiny of it.

My questions are on an area that has had a wee bit of coverage—Amanda Masson raised it first—which is information on the legislation for victims and the wider public.

When we take bills through the Parliament, we sometimes concentrate on how the police will implement the provisions and how social work services, the third sector and the courts will react, but we sometimes forget to ask what the public’s perception is.

Amanda, you put it really well when you described how people would come to you not thinking that an offence had been committed because they had not been physically hit or assaulted. They might say, “This is just the way he has always treated me,” for instance.

How can we make it clearer to the public that coercive control is an offence? How do we make what it is clear and change the culture around it? I am not expecting that to happen overnight, and it has clearly not happened over the four years since the act has been in place—although that is not that long a period of time. Is there more that we can do to speed up the process, however?

Since I have mentioned you Amanda, you can perhaps respond first, followed by the other panellists.

Given the previous two answers, before I bring you in, Michele, let me save some time by suggesting that, when you respond, you might reflect on one thing that the committee could take away from today’s evidence session when we go back to the Government. Might that be public awareness?