³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

When it comes to the number of cases, the answer is that we do not know. We think that, in particular, fewer family cases have been started in court. It may be, as you have said, that those cases will come through in future but, at this point, we do not know.

On virtual business, the picture is mixed. There was a lot of positivity about remote hearings for procedural matters in particular. That positivity was right across the board, I think—civil and criminal. There has been quite a lot of engagement, and I may ask Denise Swanson or Neil Rennick to speak about that. A number of surveys have been done by the Law Society of Scotland, I think, and others; I think that the Faculty of Advocates has done some engagement with its members on what they think. The Lord President has suggested that remote hearings should certainly feature in the future in some form or other.

Adapting to Covid has presented us with opportunities. The ability to change things has been very beneficial in some cases. Previously, civil business was literally pinned to the walls of the court. That was how things used to be done. Obviously, during Covid, nobody was going into court, so the business was published online. Most people would say that such changes are more efficient and allow us to get business done.

In the criminal and the civil system, we need to look at which of those changes—what uses of technology—are working and improving the system, and at what we should and should not retain. Obviously, we want to make sure that we maintain access to justice. We do not want participants—for example, complainers—to feel that they are not able to present their evidence in the best way. We have definitely got to get that balance. One of the officials may be able to talk a little more about the research that has been done.

That is an issue—absolutely. Let us take the example of family court. If you were fleeing domestic abuse and you were not living at home, you might not have your phone and you would not have an internet connection, so you would not be in a position to sit down in front of a computer and calmly access and take part in your court proceedings. Anecdotally, we have heard about issues in that regard, so there is an option to use the telephone instead. It was not expected that everybody would have a broadband connection. Consideration was definitely given to the fact that not everybody is able to use technology to interact. As we discussed earlier, as we move forward, we want to ensure that we look at that. We are not suggesting that we will move everything to an online platform, because that would not be appropriate. However, you raise a good point.

We recently established a cross-justice working group on race data and evidence, which is working to improve the collection and reporting of race data and evidence in the justice system. I will ask Neil Rennick to give the committee a bit more background on that.

I have certainly heard that anecdotally, but I do not think that we have any research findings on people’s experience of remote hearings. As has been covered, we moved online in a number of areas, particularly in civil justice, in order to keep that business going. I think that most people would say that, rather than waiting a year for the outcome in a family court case hearing, they would prefer to get that business through court so that the sheriff can decide what will happen on their family issues.

I completely accept that, for some people, a remote hearing would not have felt the same as sitting in a room and being able to interact with the sheriff. However, other people might have preferred it. There are some people who are in a domestic abuse situation who find it extremely difficult to sit across the table from the person they consider to be their abuser. I think that remote hearings might have been an improvement for people in that position.

Therefore, I think that it is a mixed picture, but I take your point.

That is a very good question. Obviously, we are looking at reforming legal aid. One of the advantages of the reform process is that it could give us the ability to direct legal aid to groups that might face barriers in accessing it.

I am not sure whether the officials can fill us in on any research that has been done on that. Do we have any statistics?

No, convener. I think that the cabinet secretary has covered the matter.

I read that, I think, four out of five women in prison have had a serious head injury, particularly from domestic abuse, which is quite a shocking statistic. Last week, I visited the part of Polmont that holds the women prisoners. I also visited Cornton Vale. I looked at the old prison and met some of the staff and some women who were in custody, and then I went to have a look at the new Cornton Vale that is being built.

We all accept that there are some very complex cases involving women in custody who have very challenging needs. The Prison Service, in particular, accepts that, and it works very hard to keep those women safe and to ensure that they get the facilities and treatment that they need.

The Scottish Government’s investment in the new style of prison estate for female prisoners will make a huge difference. The new Cornton Vale estate has been designed specifically to assist people with their mental health and their other challenges. There is a lot of light. It is airy. There is a lot more space. We have talked about activities and education for prisoners. Obviously, that has been impacted by Covid and the fact that there is not a lot of space in some of the traditional prison areas, so the new facilities will make a huge difference.

I am not sure whether the committee is aware of the community custody units. I visited one in Glasgow and one specifically for women prisoners in Dundee a couple of weeks ago. Again, it is about signposting the move towards adapting the experience of being in custody but, more specifically, responding to the challenges of female prisoners and the way they present and the things that they might need in order to treat them. Then, we hope to progress them and enable them to transition and build skills in order to go back into the community and, we hope, not back into prison again.

I am afraid that I do not have any information on that. One of our officials might be able to give you an update.

Thank you, convener, and good morning. I will be very brief. I agree with the cabinet secretary’s comments about the desire and potential for collaborative working in those aspects of the portfolio for which I am responsible. Anyone who knew me in the previous session will know that I always try to build consensus where possible.

I endorse what the cabinet secretary said about the important contribution of the legal profession as well as that of the third sector, including organisations that work with the victims of crime in our justice system. The engagement and involvement of the legal profession and the third sector, along with other justice agencies, will be vital as the system recovers and renews following the pandemic’s impact.

Returning as the Minister for Community Safety, I am pleased to be taking forward a number of initiatives from the previous session such as those to modernise and strengthen the contribution of our fire and rescue service, reform legal aid and regulate the legal profession. In addition, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, I have been asked by the First Minister to take on the specific role of looking to improve the experience of women in our justice system. Many elements of the justice system including community justice, prisons and courts are designed around the needs of men or the system itself but, as we know, women and children are often disproportionately affected as victims of sexual offending or by the impact of imprisonment.

In taking forward the role, I want to draw on all the relevant evidence and expertise from a wide range of sources and individuals. I look forward to engaging with the committee as I work on that agenda and the rest of our programme for the current session of Parliament.

I think that everyone would agree that the rape statistics that the member has quoted are concerning. Obviously, we have taken quite a bit of action around tackling sexual offending, including things such as improving our laws and encouraging more victims to come forward. The cabinet secretary and Neil Rennick have set out some things that we are doing in that regard. We have the planned spend of £100 million over three years for the prevention of violence against women and girls, which is key.

Obviously, tackling the issue is a key Government responsibility, and we are committed to taking it seriously and looking at what we can do. I see it as a piece of cross-Government work. It is not something that we in justice would be able to tackle alone; I think that we will have to work with colleagues in health, equalities and so on. That cross-portfolio work is going on at the moment.

I echo what was said about Lady Dorrian’s report. It contains six recommendations and I am sure that we will be able to find consensus on some of them. We know that we have consensus across Parliament on anonymity for rape complainers, but there might not be consensus on some of the other ones.

We need to consider the situation carefully and decide how we can proceed. However, we have committed to take forward the recommendation on the anonymity of rape complainers—that was in our manifesto.