Sharon Dowey
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“There should be an outright ban, across the whole country, on phones in schools, with no exceptions, exemptions or compromise. The Scottish Government has said that headteachers have the power to impose a ban in any case, but we must go further and give them our full support.”
“Ayr diving club has been in existence since 1964 and uses one of only four diving facilities in the whole of Scotland. It is the only one on the west coast, with the other three being on the east coast.”
“This extremely important subject is more pressing than many of the things that we debate in Parliament, and I thank Pam Gosal for bringing it to the chamber. We know that schools, and the teachers and pupils in them, face a range of challenges, which we also know are not exclusive to Scotland.”
“The position should be obvious to us all: phones in schools fuel distraction and conflict, pose nightmare scenarios for teachers and inflict harm in almost every area of the school, from classrooms and corridors to the playground. That is not the children’s fault, nor is it exclusive to them.”
“As a parent, I instinctively know that the concerns relating to smart phones are completely legitimate. Anyone with eyes and ears can see the harm and distractions that those devices cause for young people, and there is also hard evidence.”
“They go back to having a life that is not lived on the tiny screen in front of them. From the minute a pupil walks into a school, there should be no mobile phones in sight. That is what the teachers want and what the children need. That is why I am delighted to give this motion my full and unequivocal support.”
The complete record
Every one of 344 lines we hold for Sharon Dowey, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 7.
“The Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act 2023 remains only partially implemented, the Female Genital Mutilation (Protection and Guidance) (Scotland) Act 2020 has not been implemented, and now the Fireworks and Pyrotechnic Articles (Scotland) Act 2022 has been quietly paused. That is only the latest example of the Government talking tough when passing legislation and then sneakily dropping it when it becomes inconvenient. How can the public have confidence that the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill will be fully implemented? Can the First Minister explain why the public—and, indeed, this Parliament—had to find out about the U-turn through the press instead of the minister?”
“Its targeted approach to risk and the allocation of resources overtook the focus on response times some years ago, and I would also point out that we have seen an increase in response times across the whole of the United Kingdom. The safety of our firefighters is of utmost importance, and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has in place strict health and safety policies that have evolved over the years. For example, changes to operational procedures to stop firefighters travelling under blue-light conditions while putting on personal protective equipment have added to response times in recent years. That is an essential change to protect firefighter safety. Social Care (Fife) 4.”
“The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service’s consultation proposes closing eight fire stations and changing several others from 24-hour, whole-time cover to day shift only. The minister says that that will put officers in the right place at the right time. However, given that the service’s median emergency response time is the slowest for more than a decade, how does the Government expect those changes to improve response times or enhance public safety? Siobhian Brown: Regarding the response time that the member mentioned, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service continues to respond to every emergency incident with the appropriate level of resources.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted yes. The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Dowey. I will ensure that that is recorded.”
“Amendment 120 disagreed to. Amendment 121 moved—[Tim Eagle]. The Presiding Officer: The question is, that amendment 121 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted yes. The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Dowey. We will ensure that that is recorded. For Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carlaw, Jackson (Eastwood) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Ewing, Fergus (Inverness and Nairn) (Ind) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Webber, Sue (Lothian) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) Against Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Ind) Clark, Katy (West Scotland) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Ewing, Annabelle (Cowdenbeath) (SNP) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) FitzPatrick, Joe (Dundee City West) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) [Proxy vote cast by Michael Marra] Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP) [Proxy vote cast by Fulton MacGregor] Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 26, Against 85, Abstentions 0.”
“We will ensure that any impact of the proposals on business is fully understood and that policy implementation is effective and proportionate while delivering the beneficial outcomes for population health that are sought. E-Bikes and Off-road Vehicles (Misuse) 4.”
“Retailers tell us that asking for proof of age can often be a trigger point for violence or abuse if the sale is refused, and that response times from Police Scotland are poor, if officers even turn up at all. What communication has the minister had with Police Scotland on that? How many prosecutions have there been under the Protection of Workers (Retail and Age-restricted Goods and Services) (Scotland) Act 2021? Siobhian Brown: I do not have details for how many prosecutions there have been—perhaps I could write to the member on that. I engage quite frequently with retailers, who raised the issue with me prior to the introduction of the ban on single-use vapes in June. The Scottish Government is committed, through the new deal for business, to meet regularly the regulatory review group on the Tobacco and Vapes Bill.”
“I take exception to the statement that shoplifting has, in effect, been decriminalised in this country. I am rightly notified of every death in custody and I can advise members that, as I shared with some colleagues earlier, there was one such death of a person who was in custody for shoplifting times seven, so I really cannot—”
“The total number of scheduled trials that are outstanding has fallen by more than 60 per cent since January 2022, and we have reached the milestone of returning to a position where the number of outstanding scheduled trials across all criminal business types is below 20,000. The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service considers that to be a manageable level of workload for the justice system. However, I acknowledge that we need to give focused and acute attention to the increased demand, particularly on the High Court. The nature of that business is changing, even though the overall volume has returned to pre-pandemic levels. Initiatives such as the £33 million investment in the digital evidence sharing capability that is being rolled out will support the bill’s provisions on digital productions.”
“The bill will deliver the necessary legislative underpinning that will ensure that our justice system can continue to meet the demands that are placed on it. It will provide a solid foundation to ensure that we learn the lessons following domestic abuse-related deaths, improve services and, ultimately, better protect victims. Justice agencies and victim support organisations strongly support the temporary measures that the bill will make permanent, and they have been clear that those are essential features of a modern system. I remind members that significant progress has been made in reducing court backlogs.”
“I note the views of Liam Kerr when he spoke about this being a two-part bill. There are, of course, pros and cons to that approach. Like Liam McArthur, I fall on the side of pragmatism. I am always looking to get things done, particularly given where we are in the parliamentary cycle. I feel that there has been significant scrutiny, but that is perhaps just because of where I sit. I think that the scrutiny, particularly on part 1, has been detailed, and we have certainly been in the weeds of court procedure and process. I am pleased that the bill now has broad agreement and consensus on its aims, and I am particularly pleased that it looks as though the bill will be passed when Parliament votes on it this evening.”
“Today, there is at least an opportunity to reverse some of that decline. That is why we will vote for the bill, but it must be the start of a sea change, not a ceiling for victims and witnesses, and not warm words that are matched by little action. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance, to wind up the debate on behalf of the Scottish Government. 16:28 Angela Constance: I thank everyone for their constructive engagement on the bill and for their remarks this afternoon. In particular, I thank the criminal justice spokespeople from the Opposition parties, the members of the Criminal Justice Committee and the committee’s convener, Audrey Nicoll. It is indeed a busy committee and its members have my sympathy.”
“My amendment would have reduced the chances of those mistakes being repeated, and ministers must now find another way to keep family members included. Maggie Chapman also highlighted the importance of communication. Liam Kerr highlighted the differences between part 1 and part 2 of the bill. The risk of rushing through legislation is that we might not give it the scrutiny that it deserves and that we might miss opportunities to include more improvements. We need to consider that in relation to any further legislation that comes through. Katy Clark highlighted concerns about digital inclusion. For far too long in Scotland, victims have played second fiddle to criminals. Victims have been let down by a justice system that does not punish or deter, does not keep communities safe and does not rehabilitate offenders.”
“We cannot place additional strain on public services without giving them the right tools. That is especially true of the police, who are already under immense strain and on whom many of the changes will fall. Both Police Scotland and COSLA have expressed concern about funding when it comes to the domestic homicide and suicide reviews. However, the finances behind the reviews are vague in the bill, and we need to make sure that the reviews will work effectively in practice. Audrey Nicoll highlighted the benefits of that happening. I am also disappointed that my amendment on working with family members when producing these reviews was rejected. We know from experience that when the legal and justice system deals with tragic cases, families often feel marginalised and out of the loop.”
“That is particularly true of shoplifting, a scourge that has run out of control across Scotland. Indeed, as the Scottish Solicitors Bar Association highlighted in evidence, shoplifting is already effectively decriminalised, given how readily courts deal with it by way of fines. What must be made crystal clear is that a raising of the threshold does not mean an expansion of how fines are used. That increase should absolutely not be seen as a replacement for stiffer punishments. It is disappointing that my amendment that would have compelled ministers to produce a progress report within a year of this change was rejected. That will make it harder to know whether the new measure is being used as intended. As is the case with all legislation, we need to ensure it is matched by resources.”
“There is an obvious risk of tampering when real, physical things are replaced with photographs—a threat that is becoming greater with advancements in artificial intelligence. The system must be absolutely bullet proof. Another element of the bill that requires caution and monitoring is the permanent increase of the fiscal fine limit to £500. On the face of it, that makes sense and represents a strengthening of the system of punishment for offenders whose crime fits that punishment. However, we already know that criminals are let off with fines when they really ought to be receiving something more serious. That weakens deterrence, emboldening criminals to offend again, safe in the knowledge that the gains from their crimes will probably outweigh the fine handed down by the court.”
“Although it is right that some pandemic-era measures are consigned to history, it is absolutely correct that those that work well are retained. The courts system is under huge stress. Backlogs show little sign of clearing, and there are fears among senior lawyers that things will get even worse. In addition, the system can cause unnecessary distress and inconvenience to victims and witnesses. Pauline McNeill highlighted that virtual attendance is a positive change, although it is vital that the correct technology is in place to make sure that such appearances are smooth, free from technical glitches and of good enough quality that it does not matter that the person speaking is not in the room. That point was also emphasised by Liam McArthur. Similarly, the change to photographed evidence must also come with assurances.”
“Scotland’s justice system is in a state of crisis, and the Scottish Conservatives welcome anything that improves things for those who work in it and, of course, for victims and witnesses. As such, the bill has our support, and the priority now should be to ensure that the changes that are agreed today will genuinely make life better for those who matter most. Although we will vote for the bill, we still have some concerns about implementation and financing, and we remain disappointed that some of our suggestions were rejected. Like many of our institutions, the courts system is in desperate need of modernisation, so I am glad to see some sensible provisions in the bill. As the cabinet secretary said, some of those were introduced on an emergency basis during Covid, through necessity rather than design.”
“Angela Constance: For the sake of brevity, I point out that I gave very full answers to Ms Dowey and other colleagues at last week’s meeting of the Criminal Justice Committee, when I gave an update on the plans to implement sections 12 and 13 in part 2 of the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act 2023 and on the aspects of that act that have been implemented. The return-to-custody figure for prisoners who have been released under the Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Act 2025 is 5 per cent, and the figure for prisoners who were released under the emergency early release programme that was undertaken last year is 13 per cent.”
“For justice to be delivered, people need to serve their sentences and receive meaningful rehabilitation. Neither happens with early release. The Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act 2023 was intended to support reintegration and release and help to reduce reoffending, yet key provisions such as those in sections 12 and 13 have still not been implemented and the timescales are still being worked out. Given the pressures of prison overcrowding, when will clear implementation plans be set out and what engagement has the Government had with justice agencies to overcome any delays?”
“On the general point about proportionality and speed and making sure that planning facilitates development and does not hinder it, that is very much something that I am aware of. I have mentioned the planning hub and recruitment. Our action plan speaks to actions, too. I draw Ms Dowey’s attention to the work that the planning minister and I have been doing in respect of stalled sites. We are actively brokering relations between developers, planners and the Government to try to unlock those sites that have permission but are not moving forward. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I can squeeze in question 8 if I have succinct questions and answers to match. Aberdeen City Region Deal (Housing Infrastructure Fund) 8.”
“The cabinet secretary and I are both aware of a case where a developer is ready to put shovels in the ground, yet delays persist because paperwork has not been signed off. I have raised this in the chamber and I have written letters, while the developer, who, for nearly two months, has been ready to start on site, has also reached out, but with no conclusion. If this situation continues, investors will simply take their projects elsewhere. The Scottish Government might say that it is serious about house building, but can the cabinet secretary honestly say that that is matched by any action? Màiri McAllan: As I have set out in response to a letter that Sharon Dowey wrote to me, I am not able to comment on the specifics of any planning application. Planning is a semi-judicial process and it is not for ministers to get involved with.”
“I ask all members to support my amendment, which will show firefighters that that is the case and will, I hope, trigger an urgent rethink on funding and resources. I move amendment S6M-19124.1, to insert at end: “; recognises that the Scottish Government’s mismanagement of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) has resulted in an £800 million operational backlog that has mostly resulted from the failure to bring stations up to modern standards, with 18 fire stations lacking running water; notes that the SFRS is coming under increasing strain thanks to the pressures presented by wildfires, and that the public are becoming more concerned about the fire hazards presented by battery storage sites, and calls on the Scottish Government to ensure that firefighters have the basic resources to do their job, to ensure that lives are not needlessly lost.” The Deputy Presiding Officer: I invite Maggie Chapman to open on behalf of the Scottish Greens.”
“Wildfires are on the rise. Newer developments such as recycling centres and battery energy storage systems also present a fresh challenge. Scotland’s population is increasing and ageing and is therefore becoming more vulnerable. Instead of constantly asking firefighters to do more with less, the Scottish Government needs to completely change direction. John McKenzie, the Scottish secretary of the FBU, said: “The Minister’s call for improved fire safety at a time when she is overseeing a service being systematically stripped of jobs and fire fighting capacity shows she is in complete denial about what is going on in the service she is responsible for.” Brave firefighters save lives, keep communities safe and place themselves in grave danger while doing so. They need to know that the Scottish Parliament has their backs.”
“The chief officer, Stuart Stevens, is on record as saying that the efficiencies will go ahead only if they ensure “the safety of the community of Scotland.” If that is the case and the service’s damaging proposals can be vetoed on the ground of people’s safety, those changes must be stopped and an improved funding settlement from the Scottish Government delivered. I fully support the FBU and its cuts leave scars campaign. Unlike the Scottish Government, it understands the genuine risks that the proposed efficiencies will pose. The fire brigade is facing a range of new challenges, yet it is expected to meet them with fewer tools. Siobhian Brown: Will Sharon Dowey take an intervention? Sharon Dowey: Would I get the time back, Presiding Officer? The Deputy Presiding Officer: There is no time in hand. Sharon Dowey: I am sorry.”
“Scottish Conservative research shows the effects that those cuts have had on performance statistics. Average response times have increased by one and a half minutes. That all begs the question, why? Why did the Scottish National Party Government centralise the fire service only to subsequently oversee brutal cuts and woeful mismanagement? The minister in charge likes to make the point that Scotland has more firefighters per head than England, but anyone who understands the geography of Scotland and appreciates how spread out and remote our communities are in comparison with those in England knows that that is a completely ridiculous argument. The efficiencies that are proposed by the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service are truly terrifying and difficult to believe.”
“We should take the opportunity to again remember the ultimate sacrifices that were made by Ewan Williamson in 2009 and, more recently, by Barry Martin in 2023. In fact, it seems that the Scottish Government is alone in not fully comprehending the fire brigade’s importance. It is quick to praise firefighters and to talk up its support for them, but the money and the numbers tell a vastly different story. Since the creation of the single fire service in 2013—a move that was supposed to create a nimbler and more effective organisation—things have got decidedly worse. There has been a reduction of 1,215 uniformed firefighters in that time, which represents a drop of almost 16 per cent, and, although ministers talk about uplifts in funding, the real-terms picture shows that there have been devastating cuts to the budget over a number of years.”
“I thank Katy Clark for securing this important debate for the chamber. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service is a life- saving organisation, which protects people, homes, businesses and the environment every day. Its importance can be seen in towns and cities, where firefighters race to put out potentially devastating fires in minutes, and it can increasingly be seen in the countryside, as they tackle raging wildfires that threaten to run out of control, ruin wildlife and pose risks for those who live in remote and rural communities. The importance of firefighters is seldom more recognised than when they put themselves in danger, without hesitation, to ensure that we can live safely. In the process, many have been injured and some have tragically lost their lives.”
“The Scottish Government’s revised guidance for schools refers young people and families to charities such as Mermaids and Time for Inclusive Education for help. That is despite Mermaids being criticised for giving young people chest binders without their parents’ involvement, and despite TIE providing schools with guidance that promotes gender ideology. I have been contacted by numerous parents—”
“Several months have now passed since the ruling, and, disappointingly, Scottish ministers appear to have made no progress on ensuring that its public bodies are following the rule of law. I hope that the motion focuses the minds of those in Government, and I am delighted to give it my full and unwavering support. 17:36”
“In the absence of strong and unwavering guidance from the Scottish Government, those organisations cannot go full steam ahead with the changes that they need to make and which we know that they want to make. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service told me that “The Supreme Court ruling has provided important clarity.” All that is to say nothing of the situation in schools, hospitals and other public sector workplaces, all of which desperately need action from the Scottish Government. Parliament respecting the ruling of the Supreme Court is not a choice; it is a duty. Doing so does not just uphold the law but strengthens and protects the rights of women and girls across Scotland.”
“However, thanks to the efforts of groups such as For Women Scotland, which has rightly been praised in the motion, we know that that will not happen. Ignoring the state of play could have serious ramifications for organisations. We know that female police officers need protection from dangerous male criminals who claim to be women just so that they can be searched by a woman police constable, humiliating, intimidating and degrading them in the process. We know that female firefighters expect dignity and privacy in a fast-moving and male-dominated organisation. Most shamefully of all, we know the lengths that some male criminals are prepared to go to to persuade the Scottish Government that they should be incarcerated in a female prison alongside some of society’s most vulnerable women.”
“Police Scotland told me that it was reviewing the guidance, but that “No formal guidance, instruction, or policy has been provided by the Scottish Government to Police Scotland.” The SFRS is also moving forward with some engagement, but they—like their policing colleagues—warned: “At present, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has not received any formal direction, advice or guidance from the Scottish Government in relation to the ruling.” The Scottish Prison Service has said that, although it was reviewing matters “at pace”, it, too, was awaiting guidance. A reasonable person would conclude that the Scottish Government is merely closing its eyes and ears and hoping that all this goes away.”
“I have recently written to three major public sector bodies—Police Scotland, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and the Scottish Prison Service—to inquire as to how they are getting on in enacting the consequences of the ruling. Their replies were worryingly similar and betrayed the same issue: nothing concrete from SNP ministers has yet arrived, leaving all manner of taxpayer-funded organisations, which are all under the leadership of the Scottish Government, to muddle through on their own.”
“I very much welcome the motion that has been lodged by my friend and colleague Pam Gosal. I especially back the motion’s conclusion, which urges the Scottish Government “to ensure that” its policies “are in line with the law.” The Supreme Court judgment in April was unequivocal in its conclusion: that the term “woman” refers to biological women and that “sex” refers to biological sex in the Equality Act 2010. Since the ruling, the Scottish Government seems to have been very reluctant to take that message on board and, five months on, a range of important public bodies are still waiting for instructions. This should not be difficult. The ruling itself, as well as being obvious to many of us, and long overdue, is in fact very simple.”
“We urged the Government to accept our amendments, which would have made fundamental changes and delivered a victims bill worthy of the name. Russell Findlay tried to deliver a real Suzanne’s law—meaning that if there is no body, there is no parole—and commonsense reforms so that victims would not be left in the dark regarding plea deals. Liam Kerr tried to deliver a Scottish grooming gangs inquiry. I tried to ensure that victims would be notified about decisions not to prosecute. However, all those amendments were voted down. As a result, this is a victims bill in name only, and it is with a very heavy heart that I will vote against it at decision time. 16:18”
“As Liam Kerr said, the issue of jury majorities was decided without any hard evidence, despite the liberty of our constituents literally being on the line, with the changes based largely on mock jury research that experts such as Lord Renucci KC warned do not in any way mirror what really happens in the courts. I tried to stop that by lodging an amendment that would have put us in line with the tried and tested system in England and Wales and in other jurisdictions, but it was defeated in favour of a step into the unknown. It is hard not to conclude that the bill does anything other than waste millions of pounds on cosmetic solutions that will make little difference to victims while ignoring the real issues. Victims deserve real change, but the bill does not deliver that. What is most disappointing is what could have been.”
“However, as Pauline McNeill outlined, instead of setting up a new court and the huge expense that will come with that, we could create a specialist division in the existing courts, focusing our resources where we know that they are badly needed. The Faculty of Advocates and the Law Society of Scotland both said that that would be more effective, while Children First said that it feared that creating a new court would distract from making the changes that victims and witnesses argue would make things better. Simon Di Rollo KC even called it “window dressing”. Once again, we are patting ourselves on the back without having addressed the real issues.”
“Meanwhile, Children First has said that a commissioner should not be brought in as a substitute for concrete actions to improve the experiences of victims and witnesses, and I agree. Victims are being failed, but all that we are doing is creating yet another commissioner of debatable effectiveness and saying, “Job well done,” without having changed much. I admit that the Government has done a great job on the branding of the bill, because creating a new sexual offences court sounds brilliant. However, as Douglas Ross said during the stage 3 proceedings yesterday, when we scratch the surface we realise that it is little more than an expensive sign on a door—in the same court buildings with the same judges and the same staff. I welcome the requirement for training in trauma- informed practice.”
“If we had limitless resources, that would be one thing, but we do not. The truth is that the commissioner lacks teeth and has no ability to intervene in individual cases, which will provide false hope to victims that it could directly help them while taking away resources that could be invested instead in victim support services, as Scottish Women’s Aid warned us. During stage 3 proceedings, I tried to strengthen the role by giving the victims commissioner the power to obtain information from local authorities and social housing providers, but my amendment was voted down. The Parliament set up a cross-party committee to look into the role of commissioners, which concluded, a few months ago, that creating new bodies to address public service failures or perceived public service failures is not necessarily effective nor sustainable.”
“I acknowledge that the bill contains some improvements, and I welcome the fact that the Government backed my amendments to toughen up non-harassment orders and allow for a review to notify victims when fiscal fines are issued. However, taken as a whole, the bill fails to deliver the meaningful changes to the criminal justice system that victims in Scotland are crying out for. As Katy Clark said, the bill is far too big. It should have been broken up long ago, but, instead, it has been made even bigger, with significant changes introduced by the Government at the very last minute and without proper scrutiny, as Liam Kerr and Pauline McNeill made clear last night. Let me turn to what the bill will do. It will create a victims commissioner, which, on paper, sounds wonderful.”
“That is why the investment that we have made in the new HMP Stirling, as well as in the Bella and Lilias centres, is so important. The crux of the issue that Sharon Dowey’s question pointed to is the fact that short-term custodial sentences are way less effective for rehabilitating both women and men. That is why we must all resolve to do more in relation to alternatives to remand and to custody. Community payback orders offer great flexibility, including the ability to provide tailor-made support for women and others. Land Auctions (Misleading Advertising) 4.”
“The numbers speak for themselves: we are not doing enough. Reconviction rates for women who have been discharged from custody increased from 39 per cent for the 2020-21 cohort to 45 per cent for the 2021-22 cohort, which is higher than the rate for men. In March, there was a documentary about HMP Stirling, in which a female inmate said: “I don’t want to be out, it’s just safer in here.” How does the Government explain the huge increase in reconviction rates for women? What is it doing to ensure that women are safe when they leave prison? Angela Constance: It is important to recognise that the proportion of females in custody is significantly smaller than the proportion of men in custody. Sharon Dowey is correct to point to the greater vulnerability and complexity of needs among many women in our care.”
“The Presiding Officer: Does any member object to a single question being put on amendments 18 to 21?”
“As I said in my opening statement, in exercising their duties under the act, the victims and witnesses commissioner can, of course, engage with any relevant party. Liam Kerr: On the point that the cabinet secretary made about the amendments being new to stage 3, can we take it that any amendments that are newly introduced at stage 3 will not find favour with her? Angela Constance: That will depend on the consultation and engagement that has taken place. With respect to Ms Dowey’s amendments, I repeat that I did not hear her make any reference to the engagement that she has had with those who would be impacted by the amendments— namely, housing providers and local authorities. Amendment 17 agreed to. Amendments 18 to 21 moved—[Angela Constance].”
“However, I recognise that, if the bill passes, we will have one, and so we must give them the tools that they need to create change for victims. There is no point in having a commissioner if they cannot hold all relevant agencies to account. If any MSP has ever been contacted by a constituent who has been failed by a local authority or social housing provider, they should back my amendment today on their behalf. Angela Constance: I stress to members that these amendments are new to stage 3. Unfortunately, I did not hear Ms Dowey make any reference to consultation with either social housing providers or local authorities. Liam Kerr: Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention? Angela Constance: In a moment.”
“My amendment 96 would give the victims commissioner the power to request information from local authorities and social housing providers for the purpose of determining the support that they are providing to victims and witnesses. The amendment was suggested to me by Victim Support Scotland, which backs it. All MSPs will be aware from their casework that local authorities and social housing providers play a key role in supporting victims. The power to request information from them will help the commissioner to assess the support that those bodies are providing to victims, and their compliance with the victims code. Amendments 97 to 100 are all technical amendments in consequence of amendment 96. I have concerns about the potential for a victims commissioner to drain resources from victim support services.”
“Motion, as amended, agreed to, That the Parliament reaffirms individuals' rights to asylum under international law, including the 1951 Refugee Convention and 1967 Protocol; upholds the European Convention on Human Rights, and highlights Scotland's place in the world as a welcoming nation to those fleeing persecution, conflict or danger. The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that motion S6M-18771, in the name of Fiona Hyslop, on the Bus Services (No 2) Bill, which is United Kingdom legislation, be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No. The Presiding Officer: There will be a division. The vote is closed. Richard Leonard: On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I was unable to connect to the voting system once again. I would have voted yes. The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Mr Leonard. We will ensure that that is recorded.”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I would have voted no. The Presiding Officer: Thank you, Ms Dowey. We will ensure that that is recorded. For Adam, George (Paisley) (SNP) Adam, Karen (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP) Adamson, Clare (Motherwell and Wishaw) (SNP) Allan, Alasdair (Na h-Eileanan an Iar) (SNP) Arthur, Tom (Renfrewshire South) (SNP) Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) Baker, Claire (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Balfour, Jeremy (Lothian) (Ind) Beattie, Colin (Midlothian North and Musselburgh) (SNP) Bibby, Neil (West Scotland) (Lab) Boyack, Sarah (Lothian) (Lab) Brown, Keith (Clackmannanshire and Dunblane) (SNP) Brown, Siobhian (Ayr) (SNP) Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green) Callaghan, Stephanie (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP) Chapman, Maggie (North East Scotland) (Green) Choudhury, Foysol (Lothian) (Lab) Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP) Cole-Hamilton, Alex (Edinburgh Western) (LD) Constance, Angela (Almond Valley) (SNP) Dey, Graeme (Angus South) (SNP) Don-Innes, Natalie (Renfrewshire North and West) (SNP) Doris, Bob (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (SNP) Dornan, James (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP) Dunbar, Jackie (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP) Duncan-Glancy, Pam (Glasgow) (Lab) Fairlie, Jim (Perthshire South and Kinross-shire) (SNP) Forbes, Kate (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP) Gibson, Kenneth (Cunninghame North) (SNP) Gilruth, Jenny (Mid Fife and Glenrothes) (SNP) Gougeon, Mairi (Angus North and Mearns) (SNP) Grahame, Christine (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP) Gray, Neil (Airdrie and Shotts) (SNP) Greene, Jamie (West Scotland) (LD) Greer, Ross (West Scotland) (Green) Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab) Harper, Emma (South Scotland) (SNP) Harvie, Patrick (Glasgow) (Green) Haughey, Clare (Rutherglen) (SNP) Hepburn, Jamie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (SNP) Hyslop, Fiona (Linlithgow) (SNP) Johnson, Daniel (Edinburgh Southern) (Lab) Kidd, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (SNP) Leonard, Richard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lochhead, Richard (Moray) (SNP) MacDonald, Gordon (Edinburgh Pentlands) (SNP) MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP) Mackay, Gillian (Central Scotland) (Green) [Proxy vote cast by Ross Greer] Mackay, Rona (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) Macpherson, Ben (Edinburgh Northern and Leith) (SNP) Maguire, Ruth (Cunninghame South) (SNP) Marra, Michael (North East Scotland) (Lab) Martin, Gillian (Aberdeenshire East) (SNP) Mason, John (Glasgow Shettleston) (Ind) Matheson, Michael (Falkirk West) (SNP) McAllan, Màiri (Clydesdale) (SNP) McArthur, Liam (Orkney Islands) (LD) McKee, Ivan (Glasgow Provan) (SNP) McLennan, Paul (East Lothian) (SNP) McMillan, Stuart (Greenock and Inverclyde) (SNP) McNair, Marie (Clydebank and Milngavie) (SNP) McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow) (Lab) Minto, Jenni (Argyll and Bute) (SNP) Mochan, Carol (South Scotland) (Lab) Nicoll, Audrey (Aberdeen South and North Kincardine) (SNP) O’Kane, Paul (West Scotland) (Lab) [Proxy vote cast by Michael Marra] Regan, Ash (Edinburgh Eastern) (Alba) Rennie, Willie (North East Fife) (LD) Robertson, Angus (Edinburgh Central) (SNP) Robison, Shona (Dundee City East) (SNP) Roddick, Emma (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) Rowley, Alex (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Ruskell, Mark (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Russell, Davy (Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse) (Lab) Sarwar, Anas (Glasgow) (Lab) Slater, Lorna (Lothian) (Green) Somerville, Shirley-Anne (Dunfermline) (SNP) Stewart, Kaukab (Glasgow Kelvin) (SNP) Stewart, Kevin (Aberdeen Central) (SNP) Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow Southside) (SNP) Sweeney, Paul (Glasgow) (Lab) Swinney, John (Perthshire North) (SNP) Thomson, Michelle (Falkirk East) (SNP) Todd, Maree (Caithness, Sutherland and Ross) (SNP) Torrance, David (Kirkcaldy) (SNP) Tweed, Evelyn (Stirling) (SNP) Villalba, Mercedes (North East Scotland) (Lab) Whitfield, Martin (South Scotland) (Lab) Whitham, Elena (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (SNP) Wishart, Beatrice (Shetland Islands) (LD) [Proxy vote cast by Willie Rennie] Yousaf, Humza (Glasgow Pollok) (SNP) Against Briggs, Miles (Lothian) (Con) Burnett, Alexander (Aberdeenshire West) (Con) Carson, Finlay (Galloway and West Dumfries) (Con) Dowey, Sharon (South Scotland) (Con) Eagle, Tim (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Findlay, Russell (West Scotland) (Con) Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con) Golden, Maurice (North East Scotland) (Con) Gosal, Pam (West Scotland) (Con) Gulhane, Sandesh (Glasgow) (Con) Hamilton, Rachael (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con) Hoy, Craig (South Scotland) (Con) Halcro Johnston, Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Kerr, Liam (North East Scotland) (Con) Kerr, Stephen (Central Scotland) (Con) Lumsden, Douglas (North East Scotland) (Con) McCall, Roz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Mountain, Edward (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Mundell, Oliver (Dumfriesshire) (Con) Ross, Douglas (Highlands and Islands) (Con) Simpson, Graham (Central Scotland) (Reform) Smith, Liz (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) Wells, Annie (Glasgow) (Con) White, Tess (North East Scotland) (Con) Whittle, Brian (South Scotland) (Con) The Presiding Officer: The result of the division on motion S6M-18780, in the name of Craig Hoy, on the impact of accommodating asylum seekers on Scottish local government, as amended, is: For 91, Against 27, Abstentions 0.”