The next item of business is a debate on motion 8159, in the name of Keith Brown, on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny. I would invite those members who would wish to speak in the debate to please press the request-to-speak buttons, and I call on Keith Brown to speak to and to move the motion around 12 minutes, please, cabinet secretary. The working group on misogyny and criminal justice received 930 responses to its lived experience survey, and the vast majority of the respondents were women and girls. The experiences reported are both harrowing and can and should be unsettling, certainly for women and girls, but I would hope also for men. Some of the examples include the following. I was threatened by a man in a pub for not laughing at what he thought was a funny remark. I have been called a slut in a car park because I accidentally viewed my trolley too close to a man's car. In a club I was grabbed by a man, he groped my bottom and tried to touch my breasts. I pulled away, he laughed and called me frigid. One man tweeted that he would love to watch me getting my teeth kicked in. Many others said that I was too unattractive for my experiences to be true. They didn't believe that it had happened. The pernicious impact of misogyny continues to be felt by women and girls all over the world, including Scotland, and it's time for action. In November I closed the debate on men's role in eradicating violence against women and girls. In the debate I agreed to take an intervention from and only from any man in the chamber who has never heard misogynistic or sexist comments in an all-male environment or any man who has heard such comments and has challenged them every time. There was silence, no intervention was made and I myself could not have made an intervention on that basis. Those instances of real world examples of misogyny are important because they are the reality for women and girls day in, day out in Scotland and they demonstrate the need for action. The examples will not come as a surprise to women in the chamber. However, some men might be surprised by how routine it is for women and girls to experience this kind of behaviour. We, as men, say that we find such behaviour unacceptable, although the uncomfortable truth that must be confronted is that some of us do not actually find it unacceptable or it wouldn't be as commonplace as it is. It's important that men who do not experience this on a day-to-day basis acknowledge that there is nothing at all unusual or exceptional about it. Misogyny in whatever form it takes belittles women and girls. It drains confidence and it limits ambition. It can affect the potential of individual women and girls and groups of women and girls by making them more reluctant and less able to play a full part in all aspects of everyday life. It represents a barrier to achieving a growing economy and dynamic society where everyone can reach their full potential free from discrimination. The title of this afternoon's debate is Misogyny and Criminal Law Reform. I am under no illusion that changing the criminal law on its own will not be sufficient to address the age-old problem of misogyny. However, criminal law reform can help spur wider social transformation by encouraging and requiring behavioural change through new laws as to what amounts to criminally unacceptable behaviour. I would like to take this opportunity to welcome Jamie Greene's amendments and absolutely agree that the reforms that we are proposing in the forthcoming criminal justice reform bill will be crucial in ensuring that the criminal justice system delivers a better experience and outcomes for victims, especially women and girls. I look forward to working with Jamie Greene on the bill with a shared focus on the importance of putting victims at the heart of the system. There is a lot in Pauli McNeill's amendment to the motion, which I would want to support. Members will all agree about the need to focus on education and recognise the importance of tackling misogyny in social media. The amendment, though, expresses regret about the length of time it has taken to get to this point. The Scottish Government will accept the amendment, but let me place that support in context. We do not accept that there has been delay in bringing this consultation forward. The First Minister's National Advisory Council on Women and Girls' Initial Report in 29 recommended criminalising serious misogynistic harassment, filling gaps in existing law. The initial approach was to seek to respond to this request through hate crime legislation. However, members will be aware that there were strong views offered that this was not the appropriate way to deal with misogyny. In February 2021, the Scottish Government established an independent working group on misogyny and criminal justice, chaired by Baroness Helena Kennedy to consider how the criminal law deals with misogyny. The group made its final report in March 2022, and we are now consulting on draft laws, taking the experience of previous consultations on specific provisions to implement each of the recommendations. As the Labour amendment acknowledges, this is complicated work, as it is not just one item of criminal law that is proposed, but five separate items that are being consulted upon. The idea that the Scottish Government is being tardy in this regard is belied by the fact that if we can achieve the legislation that we hope, we will be the first jurisdiction in the world to do so. Turning to the report, it made four recommendations for reform of the criminal law, and these were a new offence of misogynistic harassment of women and girls, a new offence of issuing threats of or invoking rape or sexual assault or disfigurement of women and girls, a new statutory aggravation to relate to misogynistic behaviour where a crime such as assault, criminal damage or vandalism is aggravated by misogyny, and a new offence of stirring up hatred of women and girls. The recommendations seek to make it easier to prosecute misogynistic behaviour that does not easily fit into the framework of existing criminal offences such as threatening or abusive behaviour, breach of the peace and sexual offences. Equally important, the clearly label criminal misogynistic behaviour for what it is so that both potential perpetrators and victims are aware that such behaviour is criminal. In April 2022, the Scottish Government's response made a commitment to consult and draft legislative provisions. The consultation paper has now been published, and as recommended by the group, we have developed those provisions as law that specifically protects women and girls. Criminal law is usually provided for on a gender-neutral basis. However, this working group is clear that the law should reflect the fact that it is women and girls specifically who need protection from sexual harassment and misogyny, and the Scottish Government fully endorses that approach. The comprehensive response that is being consulted upon ensures that there will be clear and new specific powers to deal with situations such as where men and boys harass an individual woman or girl, or a specific group of women and girls, by behaving in a threatening, sexual or abusive way that is likely to cause them to experience fear, alarm, degradation, humiliation or distress, or behave in a sexual or abusive manner that causes a woman or girl to experience fear, alarm, degradation, humiliation or distress, or commit certain existing offences in a manner that is motivated by or demonstrates misogyny, or to send threatening or abusive communications invoking rape, sexual assault or disfigurement to a woman or girl or a group of women and girls, to intimidate or silence women, especially online, with the effect of discouraging women from participating in public debate, or finally uses threatening or abusive language to communicate threatening or abusive materials intending to stir up hatred of women and girls in others. In the approach that we have taken, there are some particular issues that I would like to draw attention to. While the group recommended four new pieces of criminal law, we are consulting on five. The group proposed the creation of a new offence of public misogynistic harassment, and we have decided it was better to split this into two new pieces of criminal law, so we are seeking views on two separate offences, one of misogynistic harassment and one of misogynistic behaviour. This is because when we consider the kinds of behaviour of which the group thinks should be criminalised, we came to the view that the offence proposed by the report is seeking to criminalise two different forms of behaviour. The first can be described as misogynistic harassment, so behaviour that is directed at a specific woman or girl or group of women and girls, that amounts to harassment of that woman or girl or group of women and girls. That could include, for example, shouting sexually abusive remarks to a woman in the street, using abusive language to a woman who refuses to engage in being chatted up or rubbing up against a woman in a crowded place. The second can be described as misogynistic behaviour, which is not necessarily directed at a particular victim, but which is likely to harm those who may encounter it. That could include, for example, watching pornography in a public place where it is quite clearly visible or audible or having loud conversations of what should be done sexually to women in a place where others can hear. Another way in which we have adapted a group recommendation is that, while an offence of public misogynistic harassment was suggested, the offences that we are consulting on can be committed in both public and private. When it comes to considering the behaviour to be criminalised by this offence, we did not consider that there was a justification for why harassment occurring in a private place, such as, for example, an office in which people work, should be treated differently from the same behaviour occurring in public. The consultation runs until June, and I urge anyone with an interest to read it and to respond to setting out their views. If people have concerns that the provisions go too far or do not go far enough, they have the opportunity to voice those views and to suggest amendments in response to the consultation. We consider that the working group's report provides clear and compelling arguments for the form of the criminal law to better enable the justice system to respond to different forms of misogynistic behaviour experienced by women and girls across Scotland. I ask that the Parliament supports the motion in which I move in my name. I remind those members who wish to speak in the debate to please press the request to speak buttons. I now call on Jamie Greene to speak too and to move amendment 8159.2, around eight minutes, please, Mr Greene.  The middle-aged bit came as a huge shock to me when it happened, but none the less. I have to say that I don't really have to worry about where to sit on a train. I don't have to move seats when, on an otherwise empty bus, another bloke comes and sits next to me. I am not will-whistled on my way to work in the morning. People do not shout things from the windows of vans about my appearance. They sometimes shout about my politics, perhaps, but that is a different matter. I do not need to worry about the effect that having children might have on my career prospects. I am not critiqued for the length of my trousers, perhaps only my taste and ties. I am not subject to threats of sexual violence on social media by anonymous trolls. I am not one of the 46 per cent of female MSPs in this place who have received death threats according to a Holyrood magazine poll. My female cousins are not one of the 67 per cent of girls who have been sexually harassed at school. I am perhaps one of the lucky ones, but that is because I am a man. I do have an inkling of what hatred feels like. Do not get me wrong, I have been too scared to hold a partner's hand in the street for fear of abuse or attack. That is perhaps something that feels normal to most people in this room. I have had disgusting comments made about me online, my appearance and, of course, my sexuality. Yes, I have empathy for what misogyny looks and feels like, but that is not enough, nor is it the same. What we have in this place is collective power. We have the power to change things, to say things and to do something. It is the do something that we must do. We must do something about the two and a half thousand crimes of rape or attempted rape that happened in Scotland last year. We must do something about the 65,000 reported incidents of domestic abuse. We must do something about the 50 per cent of women who apparently do not report those bad experiences to the police because they do not have faith in the overall system, which is why the message must come out of your loud and clear from every one of us today. Misogyny is simply not on, but let's face it. Men, and it is men, need to have a think about the consequences of their actions, their words, and their deeds, which knowingly or even unwittingly make a woman or a girl feel uncomfortable or unsafe. I know that we have had some really feisty debates in here over the years. Some of us from the last session still bear the scars of the passing of the hate crime bill. There has been no shortage of other contentious issues to deal with, which get to the very heart of our ways of society, where as a Parliament, or even the law, debates and defines the issues of sex in gender, but despite all those differences, there is consensus, I believe, amongst those that more can and needs to be done on misogyny. The question is, though, is not if we should tackle it, but the what we do to tackle it and how we tackle it. The Kennedy Port, I think, was a great piece of work, and I'm grateful for it. It was a forensic piece of work in response to that debate that we had during the hate crime bill. At Barnas Kennedy herself, it was over five decades of legal experience. However, of course, how all that translates into law is quite another matter. I have to say to the cabinet secretary that I do not envy his Government's position on this. This will be a difficult law, but a consultation is a good place to start. Yes, I note Labour's frustration about the time that has taken, but I note the Government's response in return. However, irrespective of what that law might look like, in my view, it must pass this test. Is it competent, is it enforceable and is there consensus around its aims and ambitions? I'm afraid to say that we have an unfortunate habit in this Parliament of passing law, which is not always competent, not always enforceable and which is not always garnered to consensus. Just this week, the criminal justice committee has been undertaking excellent post-legit scrutiny on the domestic abuse Scotland Act. In my view, that is a great example of a good piece of law, which did have cross-party consensus. However, one thing that did strike me in the evidence that we have taken so far is the vast array of new laws that our justice partners already have to deal with. The reality is that the thin blue line is getting thinner and struggling to meet existing statutory demands, no least because it is shouldering the burden of other public services. The reality is that our justice system is too often being described as being stacked against victims, not in their favour, which is why I was concerned to hear from victims support Scotland. When Kate Wallace told us that delays and repeated adjournments are leading to some victims withdrawing from the process altogether, that should shock all of us. Even when they get their day in court, the question is how effective are those laws anyway? The conviction rate for sexual crimes last year was 79 per cent, compared with 91 per cent for other types of crime. If I could get my time back, I have got a lot to get through. I thank Jamie Greene for his contribution so far, just on the point that he had made quite rightly about that they have to be workable and enforceable. I can provide at least at this early stage before we lock horns, as we inevitably will do further down the road, that both Barnas Kennedy and I were very aware of that. The idea that if we pass legislation, which is never used because it is not practical or it is overused, was a big concern of Barnas Kennedy as well. Again, that will have a detrimental effect. We are very alive to that, and the provisions that we have put in place so far, subject to consultation, seek to try to address those competing pressures. I am going to come on to the proposal itself. Of course, the law itself is not the only way to tackle this and to tackle the scourge of misogyny. There is no guarantee that any of this will be an effective deterrent or true deterrent, which is why our amendment says that wider reform of the justice sector is also required. The cabinet secretary is right. What of those proposals? It is important that we hear what people think of them. The experts, the third sector, charities, legal minds and the judiciary play such an important part in the cog of that wheel.  Of course, most importantly, we need to hear from victims of crime themselves. I want to hear what is good, bad or indifferent about the proposals. I suspect that there is going to be a wide range of views on it. How do you define misogyny in law is not the same as how you define it in the paper of a working group. How will it be prosecuted and what sentencing guidelines might go around it? I think that there is an inevitability that the consultation will labour something that I fear, is that some of this may be controversial. When does the offensive become immoral or indeed illegal? What is free speech versus bad taste? How do you define what is said in private versus what is said in public? What is aggravated or consequential or even just coincidental? These are really difficult questions that need to be answered. The laundry of all this will be aired in the future. My only plea at this stage though is that we learn the hard lessons of making law in this place in the past. Let's neither make good law badly or make bad law well, and we've done both over the years. In the meantime and in closing, I don't think that we need new laws to state the obvious. We should all be free to go about our lives without fear or prejudice, and I cannot think of a more fitting way to close the debates that we've had this week. Excellent debates with excellent contributions from right across the chamber by finding some much needed consensus as a Parliament that we will work with each other, not against each other, on these important issues. Perhaps if we were all a little bit kinder to each other in the first place, we wouldn't even need laws against hatred. The law can't punish hatred alone, it can't stop hatred alone. Those are down to the choices that people make. We can make choices. We can lead by example. We should lead by example. I move the amendment in my name. Thank you, Mr Greene. I now call on Pauline McNeill to speak to and to move amendment 8159.1, around six minutes please, Ms McNeill. Thank you very much. The Scottish Labour welcomes us to be and commends baroness Heller Kennedy on the working group for the excellent report on misogyny and the work that the Scottish Government has clearly committed to in this Parliament. Labour will support the Government motion tonight and the amendment in Jamie Greene's name. I appreciate the remarks that the cabinet secretary has made around the complexity of the issues. I really put on record my appreciation that the spirit of our amendment will be accepted, so I think that that's important. I think that, in light of what Jamie Greene said there in an excellent speech, we've got a lot of work to do, so finding consensus is really important to that. Despite my earlier cynicism, I have to say when the Scottish Government did vote against sexism and aggravated and the hate crime bill, I say honestly that I did find the recommendations compelling and the work that we're about to undertake vitally important. Because at this high time, we need to tackle misogyny across Scotland and it is quite shocking in 2023 that we'll find ourselves in such a situation as the cabinet secretary clearly and will illustrate what we're driving at using the examples that he did. I'm just using an example, not because it's not in Scotland but channel 4, just to show how recent this is, revealed yesterday that a member of his elite firearms units currently under investigations for allegations of serious sexual misconduct after it was alleged that he filmed two women without their consent while having sex and allegedly shared the footage on social media. Scotland's had its own issues with its own elite firearms unit, just simply to illustrate that, unfortunately, we face this everywhere. Last week, a disgraced reality TV star was in prison for 21 months for disclosing private sexual photographs video footage of his ex-girlfriend on social media without her consent. I appreciate that there are particular challenges when it comes to social media but I think it's important to include it in the conversation. Just for completeness, a former commissioner of the police in England said that Vera Baird said that these behaviours don't just exist in a vacuum, they are in fact a consequence of widespread nature of sexism and misogyny in our society. For centuries, we know that misogyny has upheld the primary status of men in a sense of male entitlement while subordinating women and limiting their powers to feed them. I think that it's important to take that extract from the report that it's beyond hatred. It's also about undermining women's position in society by belittling them and calling them names and the use of language. I do highlight again the cruel murders of Sarah Everard, Sabina Nesha and Nicole Smallman, because they do remind us that in those cases we know that men set out specifically to murder women. It's a mindset, unfortunately, where there's hatred, obviously, involved in those crimes. What is striking about Baroness Hill in a Kennedy report is the size and the scale of the problem. I think that the working group illustrates really well, and I think that it's excellent language, to illustrate what we are trying to achieve here. I'm looking at the recommendations, as the cabinet secretary says, looking at gendered law, particularly intended to protect women and girls. I think that that would be hugely significant, if we could get to that point, because the law prefers to operate on the basis of neutrality in most cases, meaning that most laws would be available to men and women as well, but that would be a law specifically aimed at this. We wholeheartedly welcome that. According to Baroness Kennedy, it disguises the reality that there are particular kinds of behaviour that target women for simply existing as women. We might assume that society is becoming more progressive towards gender equality, but I highlight this new research, which is only one, but it's worth highlighting the Ipsos UK and Global Institute for Women's Leadership at King's College London. The majority of young people in Britain now believe that women's rights have gone too far. Some 52 per cent of generations Z and 53 per cent of millennials said that society has gone so far in promoting women's rights to discriminating against men. To be honest, I think that I've actually heard that a few times in my lifetime. I'm just sad to read it now, but I do illustrate the extent to which I'm sure Christine McElw and someone will make this point as well, that it isn't just about the law, we need to go a long way in changing attitudes before we can make any real progress. As I've said in previous debates, it's also really important to include the gaps in the law and gender-based crime, particularly in cybercrimes, is really important. Certain men have been unscrupulous using methods to lure boys and young men only to instill them in shocking attitudes towards women is quite appalling. In schools, we know that there is sexist bullying, sexual harassment, all very much under-reported and being normalised in everyday occurrences, often positioned as a joke and therefore not often reported. We're all responsible for calling that out, sexist attitudes, condemning misogynistic behaviour in a daily life, and, as we've said before, in this Parliament, it's especially up to men to reflect and change their behaviour. I do welcome the approach that the cabinet secretary took to this. You're not really living a real life if you haven't heard this in your own personal circles. I just want to conclude on some of the important points that Jamie Greene has made in this. I want to make it clear that the Scottish Labour is totally up for working with the Government on the support piece of legislation. I think that it will be quite intricate in achieving four or five big recommendations. The non-legal definition of misogyny for the purposes of the report was helpful, but our job is to make sure that we turn that into legislative framework that's workable.  All I can do in closing is to say that I think that this is the heart of the matter, to make sure that the detail of it is something that will stand up, it will be respected, it will be seen by the legal profession and those who have to work it as being useful and helpful. It is a clear provision that can be used in our courts to protect women and girls. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ms McNeill. Can I ask if Ms McNeill has moved the amendment? Move the motion in my name. Thank you very much. And I now call on Liam McArthur. Around six minutes please, Mr McArthur. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Can I thank and congratulate the Cabinet Secretary, Jamie Greene and Pauline McNeill, for their contributions and the tones they've set at the start of the last and a week of debates on the rights, the achievements, the needs of women and girls. Can I also warmly welcome the consultation announced by the First Minister and launched by the Cabinet Secretary yesterday? Scottish Liberal Democrats strongly support the objectives underlying the proposals set out in that consultation and, like others, I would strongly encourage anyone with an interest in these issues to contribute their views, their experience and their asks to inform the process of legislative reform going forward. Can I give a particular welcome to the announcement in relation to the fully funded legal representation for sexual offence complainers where applications are being made to lead evidence on sexual history? I think that's an issue. A number of us have had a concern about for some time and I was delighted to see that move. At the risk of turning this into an Oscar acceptance speech, can I also put on record again my thanks to Dame Helena Kennedy and her group for the contribution that they've already made, and specifically the late and much-missed Emma Rich from Engender, who's informed this policy debate but so much more in this area. The depth and breadth of the analysis and insight that the group has brought to bear is very evident and will be invaluable. As a member of the previous Justice Committee that scrutinised the hate crime bill in the last Parliament, I'm painfully conscious not only of the complexity of the task that we set at Dame Helena and her colleagues. We also placed upon them a timeframe that I think could charitably be described as challenging, but that was not without good reason. Concerns were being raised at stage 3 of the bill, both by stakeholders and very forcefully in this chamber by MSP colleagues, foremost amongst whom was my friend Joanne Lamont, who expressed entirely reasonable disquiet about the lack of a sex aggravator in that bill. While the committee had accepted and I think understandably accepted the arguments being put by Women's Aid, Race Crisis Scotland and others that a broader approach to misogyny was required, I vividly recall how uncomfortable it was or it felt in passing legislation that effectively parked that protection, albeit with the promise of something better and more comprehensive to come. I'll give way to Jamie Greene. Jamie Greene? One of the things that struck me during the passage of that bill was what there was clearly a parallel debate, which was the build-up for the debate that we had last year around gender reform. How do we ensure that as we conspire, if you like, to work with the Government that is productively instructive as we can, we don't allow those other parallel debates to happen this time on this bill? I think that Jamie Greene makes a very valid point. I think that I've had the answer to that. I would have deployed it well before now, but I would hope that we can avoid retreating and retrenching into that debate, because I think that there's a lot of common ground and valuable work that we can do here. As I say, it's probably with some relief that I note the progress that's been made towards finally addressing this substantive and substantial anomaly. I can also say, as it appears to have been raised as an issue in recent debates in the House of Commons, that I don't believe, including misogyny, that a hate crime is simply virtue signalling, but I think that Jamie Greene and Pauline McNeill were absolutely right to point to the risks of putting in place effective legislation. It would be interesting to hear the evidence from Police Scotland, the Crown Office and the legal profession in particular, about how they see new offences extending the tools available to responding to and discouraging such behaviours. However, I believe that the proposals provide a solid basis for improving protections, helping to change culture and attitudes, and moving us closer to eradicating misogyny. When the working group initially published its findings, Scottish Liberal Democrats called it a watershed moment, that report laid bare the extent of the deeply ingrained misogynistic behaviour and subordination of women across Scottish society and the Cabinet Secretary, I think rightly, highlighted very graphically some examples of that at the start of the debate. The report also set out, obviously, how we might legislate to challenge such attitudes to improve women's freedom and safety. The Government's draft proposals build upon principles set out in existing discrimination law, while putting front and centre the specific and distinct issue of misogyny. That reflects the fact that misogyny upholding the primary status of men over women is so deeply rooted in our society that it needs a distinct set of responses. As the report and the consultation make clear, a number of the acts that could become offences under those proposals might already be deemed criminal under existing law. However, the normalisation of male abuse of women and girls is so profound that it risks creating blind spots when it comes to our police and courts identifying, prosecuting such behaviours. Fyllton, to reflect this gender reality more explicitly in law, risks undermining efforts to challenge those behaviours. While supportive of the Malena's recommendations and the proposals set out in the consultation, I do wonder if there is perhaps more the Government can be doing. As the Cabinet Secretary will be aware from previous exchanges on this issue, Scottish Liberal Democrats have been calling for the establishment of a broader commission on misogyny and notwithstanding the moves announced this week. I think that there is still an opportunity and perhaps a need to look at what more we can be doing to prevent violence against women and girls in all its forms. This is not simply about legislation, as Pauline McNeill reminded us, important though that is. I would welcome a commitment either from the cabinet secretary or minister that the Government will look at such a commission. Of course, there is no silver bullet or legislative change that will bring about an end to misogyny in this or indeed any other society. Those problems are rooted in deeply held and even formative societal attitudes and will need determined and sustained effort to root out. Critically, as we heard again repeatedly this week, it will require men and boys taking an active role and challenging our own attitudes and behaviours and those of others to not be that guy, to be an active ally. However, the discussions taking place around reform in Scotland are a significant and welcome step in the right direction. I support the motion, both of the amendments, and look forward to playing a personal role as well as my party playing a role in pursuing our shared objective on this issue. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr MacArthur. Before we move to the open debate, I would advise members that we do have some time in hand should members wish to take or seek to make, for example, interventions. I call Audrey Nicol to be followed by Tess White to miss Nicol. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Throughout this week, we have acknowledged International Women's Day with debates, events and discussions, testament to our commitment to make life better for women and girls in Scotland and indeed across the globe. In a particular debate on public safety on transport, colleagues articulated their experiences of travelling on public transport going about their daily lives but all the time making adjustments, self-safegarding and for some being confronted by men who felt validated in inappropriate, disinhibited behaviour. Today's motion focuses on misogynistic behaviour and the proposal to establish a new misogyny and criminal justice act that would create an aggravation of misogyny and three offences relating to stirring up hatred against women and girls, public misogynistic harassment and issuing threats of or invoking rape or sexual assault or disfigurement of women and girls online and offline. That emanates from the work of the independent working group on misogyny chaired by Baroness Helena Kennedy and set out in their report, Misogyny, a Human Rights Issue. Like other members, I would very much like to thank Baroness Kennedy and other working group members for producing a really comprehensive report. In the report's introduction, Baroness Kennedy acknowledges debates about the failure of the system to deliver justice for women have now moved centre stage in a climate of increasing polarisation and divisiveness, where vicious conduct seems to have exploded, turbocharged by online disinhibition and social media invasiveness. Things must change. What is misogyny? How do we know when behaviour has crossed the line from something well-meaning to something else? The working group described misogyny as a way of thinking that upholds the primary status of men and a sense of male entitlement, while subordinating women and limiting their power and freedom. Conduct based on this thinking can include a range of abusive and controlling behaviours, including rape, sexual offences, harassment and bullying and domestic abuse. In their briefing, Scottish Women's Aid goes further, adding that misogyny can be conscious or unconscious and men and women can be socialised to accept it. In their report, the working group set out examples of the testimony that they heard about how misogyny is perpetrated, including pervasive sexualised abuse online and offline, threats of harm, including rape, sexual assault and disfigurement, and the emerging threat posed by a growing incel culture. Being on the receiving end of those behaviours is routine for women and girls in Scotland and places them at greater risk of poverty, ill health, isolation, exclusion and other forms of inequality. It is important to recognise the positive work under way in Scotland to tackle misogyny. Indeed, the motion acknowledges that creating new law will not, in and of itself, eradicate the centuries-old cultural attitudes driving misogyny. I thank my colleague Paul McLennan for hosting an event in the Parliament yesterday evening on behalf of the Make Public Sexual Harassment illegal campaign. I know that the member will talk on that further, so I will not steal his thunder. However, I want to make specific reference to the contribution made by Graham Golden of the world-renowned violence reduction unit, who encouraged us all to become active bystanders and moral rebels, tapping into our own values and creating a positive culture in Scotland. Last year, Baroness Kennedy gave evidence to the Criminal Justice Committee on the work of the working group and the rationale for creating a statutory aggravation of misogyny and other new offences. Members probed the need for new law when it could be argued that there is already a legislative provision in Scotland. In her response, Baroness Kennedy spoke of the need to address the normalising of behaviours towards women and girls that lead to, as she described, more grievous kinds of behaviour that are the seabed of worse stuff, and that, taking into account all the evidence heard, the working group concluded that new legislation was required. I am very grateful to Audrey Nicholl for taking intervention. I am interested in the evidence that the committee took from Baroness Kennedy. In particular, whether or not there was a reflection, perhaps, on the views within policing or the Crown Office and legal representatives, about the potential for confusion where there was felt to be legislation already in place in addressing the point that, clearly, you were pursuing with Baroness Kennedy. I thank the member for the intervention. My impression from the report is that much of the evidence came from lived experience and the voices of women and girls who have been impacted by misogynistic behaviour. I know that they took international evidence and reviewed that. I would expect that Baroness Helen Kennedy would have consulted and taken into account the views of the judiciary. While I understand the explanation that she gave, I agreed with colleagues who sought clarity around the wording and detail. Creating workable legislation that police officers are confident using as a positive tool to tackling gender abuse and abuse within that misogyny cannot be understated. I note the Scottish Government's comprehensive response to the working group report, in particular the issues raised around the aggravation and the new offences. Of course, the Scottish Parliament will have an important, if not challenging role in this regard, as other members have already articulated. To conclude, this leads me nicely to my final point today that echoes the cabinet secretary to encourage women in Scotland to contribute to the consultation on developing the new legislation, think about what is proposed and help to develop potentially groundbreaking new law that will put Scotland at the forefront of eradicating misogyny once and for all. This week, Wayne Cousins was sentenced to a further 19 months in prison for three offences of indecent exposure. That is on top of a whole life sentence for the horrendous murder of 33-year-old Sarah Everard in March 2021, who was simply walking home from a friend's house when she was kidnapped, raped and murdered. I begin with Wayne Cousins' latest sentence. Baroness Kennedy, who chaired the independent working group on misogyny and criminal justice in Scotland, said in relation to this horrendous case. This police officer was known to be peculiar in relation to women, but also had recently been exposing himself and nothing had been done about it. She continued, if you don't act on the lower level stuff, then it creates a subsoil from which much more serious crime like rape and homicide take place. Presiding Officer, so many women and girls have experienced the so-called lower level stuff. Too many. Some might know that they have experienced misogynistic conduct and behaviour at the hands of men in person or online, but others don't. It's become normalised rather than criminalised. Misogyny needs to be better defined so that people understand what it is and what it looks like. They need to have the right language. There are laws that address threatening and abusive behaviour, stalking and breach of the peace, often seen as less serious. But those laws do not capture the sex-specific experience of misogynistic behaviour. They don't capture the fear and the humiliation experienced by women and girls. Presiding Officer, we know that sexual crimes in Scotland are at their highest level on record. In Aberdeenshire, my region, the number of rapes and attempted rapes soared by 104 per cent in one year. Police Scotland responds to a domestic abuse call every nine minutes. Officers attend around 60,000 incidents every single year. And one such example was Erlen Boreck, a fisherman from Inverburby who was jailed for 16 months earlier this week.  It is reported Boreck described his actions to the police as a massive domestic. This incident was not an argument. It was cruel and it was a violent assault that resulted in serious injury and permanent disfigurement. Presiding Officer, if we don't challenge misogyny, if perpetrators can get away with misogynistic harassment and abuse, we will never change the status quo and women and girls will never feel equally safe, they will never see justice. The reality is that when it comes to violence against women and girls, the criminal justice system in Scotland needs significant reform, not only in how the law captures misogynistic crimes, but also in the way victims are treated. To this end, the recommendations from the independent working group on misogyny and criminal justice in Scotland, chaired by Baroness Kennedy, seek to address gaps in the law relating to misogyny. Lady Dorian's reforms meanwhile seek to improve the experiences of women and children in the criminal justice system. The consultation on reforming the criminal law to address criminal misogyny outlined by the Cabinet Secretary today feels long overdue. Many women were frustrated that sex was not included as a protected characteristic in the hate crime framework two years ago. This latest consultation process is only just getting underway, with no legislative deadline in sight. We will, of course, closely scrutinise the draft legislation when it is introduced to the Scottish Parliament. In the meantime, I urge the Scottish Government to consult as widely as possible with women and with women's groups on these proposals. A question that parliamentarians and policy makers often reflect on is the extent to which changes in the law can change behaviour at societal level. When it comes to misogynistic crimes, my feeling is that any changes in the law must be accompanied by sufficient resources to make perpetrators truly and meaningfully accountable for their actions. That means enough police and court capacity to ensure any changes are deliverable on the ground as well as in statute. That means that the punishment should match the crime. That means that the victim should be prioritised over the offender for too long. Women have had to change their behaviour to protect themselves. It is time for the system to change to protect us. As we have heard today, boys and men need to call each other out. I call Rona Mackay to be followed by Claire Baker. This is the third and final debate this week on International Women's Day. We have heard some excellent and moving speeches on each of these days from across the chamber. Misogyny is endemic in our culture, and it is only by tackling it through legislation, discussion and education that we have a hope of eradicating it for future generations of women and girls. I come from a generation of women who grew up with rampant misogyny in the workplace, and in truth, like many working women from the 70s and through the following decades, I just thought, oh well, I guess that's how men behave. I recommend watching, if people haven't already seen it, I recommend watching BBC's excellent three-part series, The Women Who Changed Modern Scotland for typical examples of that at that time. Misogyny was normalised and we must do everything we can to call it out today. It's depressing that, half a century on, women and girls are still subjected to this denigration. The barrier to countless women in progressing or flourishing under this horrible, restrictive workplace environment and, as they go about their daily lives, can never be underestimated.  Of course, misogyny is a global curse. We know that women and girls throughout the world, in Afghanistan, Iran and many other countries, have been denied education, exploited and trafficked.  Anyone who says that they can't legislate for equality or a better society is wrong. The Scottish Government has brought in groundbreaking legislations such as the Domestic Abuse Scotland Act, which include coercion for the first time, free-period products, extended childcare and many other things that will help women. That's why today's debate reforming the criminal law to address misogyny is so important and necessary. As we've heard, the proposals that are out for consultation are based on the recommendations made by the working group, or Misogyny, led by Barnas Helen Akeridy QC, which concluded that the harmful effects of misogyny meant that women and girls required new protection through criminal law. Under the proposals, the scope of how current laws tackle misogynistic abuse would be expanded to include threatening abusive or sexual behaviour if you're directed towards women and girls because of their gender, which is likely to cause them to feel degradation, humiliation or distress.  As a member of the criminal justice committee, colleagues and I had the privilege of attending a private briefing with Barnas Akeridy, and it was as enlightening as it was shocking. The working group took evidence from large numbers of women retelling horrific misogynistic incidents, some blatant and some far more insidious, all of them totally unacceptable. The report reflects the scale of the problem of misogyny and the fact that nearly every woman has at some time in their lives, if not daily, been subjected to it. I too congratulate Barnas Akeridy and all who worked on producing the report. As others have said, the law can only go so far to deliver a policy of eradicating misogyny and violence against women and girls. It is only by changing the misogynistic attitudes and culture that Scotland can become a place where women and girls can seek to fulfil their full potential. One person who was a titan of the feminist movement in Scotland was in gender's chief executive Emma Rich. Emma was a powerhouse, and that is why I was delighted to hear the First Minister's announcement of the opening of the Emma Rich law school in Glasgow, what a legacy she has left future generations. I would like to highlight two examples, and there are many in which women are currently being treated disgracefully.  Those women bear the brunt of disrespect, and I would suggest misogyny by being forced to endure a delay of six years before they could access their pension. I applaud the campaigners still striving to get justice on this issue. Secondly, refugee women already traumatised who are fleeing domestic abuse in Scotland but have no recourse to public funds. Surely the UK Government can do better than can sign them and often their children to a life of destitution by offering no support. That is inhumane, and it must end now. Women and girls' experience of violence and abuse across private and public spaces is under a cause and consequence of women's inequality, and that is recognised by our equally safe strategy, which is, of course, on-going. I would also like to commend Police Scotland's Gai campaign, which was created to effect a change in men's misogynistic behaviour. It is only by men leading this culture change that women will be free from misogynistic behaviour and violence, and that has to start early in schools and in family conversations with our sons, brothers and nephews. We know that marginalised women are more likely to experience bias, discrimination and harm, continuing prejudice and structural barriers in society that cause inequality. Lesbian, bisexual and transgender women and girls often experience violence and abuse that targets their sexual orientation, gender identity or both. There is no place in modern Scotland for homophobia, biphobia or transphobia. We must continue to work towards equality for all and to end misogyny. Clare Baker, to be followed by Paul McLennan. The report of the Wicken Group on Misogyny led by Baroness Kennedy was stark in its assessment of the misogynistic behaviour that exists in Scotland, the harassment, abuse and threatening behaviours that impact on women and girls each and every day. Scottish Labour welcomed the recommendations from Baroness Kennedy for legislation to tackle those behaviours, and we will work to ensure that the legislation is workable and effective. As Paul McLennan emphasised, we will work with the Government and take a partnership approach. Today's debate is very clear in expressing the Parliament's commitment to tackling misogyny, but we recognise the hard work that is ahead of us in creating an effective bill. The Government motion is right to highlight that legislation alone will not eradicate cultural attitudes that can drive this behaviour. The introduction of new laws can only be part of the work to break down the acceptance of misogyny and set a clear message about what is and what is not acceptable. The spectrum of misogynistic behaviour is wide from low-level comments and jokes through to violence and abuse of women, but there is no question that it is also widespread. Too many men are guilty of such behaviour. The Kennedy report makes that very clear. We need to see much more and much wider action to change attitudes and male behaviour, including the tolerance of misogyny. It is not difficult for any of us to find examples and attitudes that need to be tackled. We see examples of inequality and sexism in all parts of our society. Some are more obvious than others, but all are damaging. In 2016, I spoke during a member's debate on the Standing Safe campaign, which was a West of Scotland university initiative addressing sexual violence on university campuses. Research at the time suggested that a third of female students had experienced sexual assault or harassment as a student. I spoke then about the role of universities and colleges in tackling a culture of sexism and ensuring a safe environment for students. That, unfortunately, continues to be the case today because we have to ask ourselves how much has changed. More recently, we have seen students expelled and staff forced to quit following a series of sexual misconduct cases at St Andrew's University, with many more required to attend workshops on diversity and consent. Last month, I spoke in the debate on women and girls and science on barriers to female progression and STEM education and employment. Barriers such as exclusionary behaviour, bullying and harassment, cultural challenges of male-dominated departments and industries. Those barriers will not be addressed by encouraging more women and girls to study subjects but by changing that culture and stopping that harassment. In the Economy and Fair Work Committee, which I convened, we have heard consistently about the lack of support for women in business and too often see a lack of awareness from businesses who do not feel the need to collect gender data. The recent report on women in enterprise highlights unjustifiable inequality, calling it a denial of opportunity on literally an industrial scale. More broadly, women's role in the economy has been neglected for far too long and that is underpinned by the misogynyd within our culture. We live in a society that continues to be characterised by inequality and sexism. Although some of those cultural attitudes may be centuries old, we continue to see those attitudes and behaviours expressed in new ways, including the use of online spaces which not only allow misogynistic behaviours, but in some instances are used to encourage it. Technological developments have provided both new opportunities and new means for perpetrators to contact and to harm women, often anonymously. Women are targets for online abuse just as a result of being present, and those who are not targeted themselves can see that that abuse every time that they go online has been directed at other women being normalised. We may talk about differences between online presences in the real world, the anonymity that can empower people to act in ways that they may not dare to in face-to-face situations. However, the online world is a part of our lives now, particularly for young people who cannot look at it separately. It bleeds into our interactions. The way people are treated online impacts how they are treated in person. The way young women and young men see women being treated online is not forgotten when they put down their phones and it informs their own experience and behaviour. I have to say that reading some of the press coverage this morning also flags the pervasiveness of certain attitudes.  There is a new story saying that men could go to jail for talking about sex and really reflect the seriousness of these offences, the degradation, the fear, the humiliation and the distress that we are trying to prevent. Does that really challenge those behaviours? I will close by returning to criminal justice. I have previously raised the issue of violence and sexual relationships, the use of the so-called rough sex defence in criminal cases and consent in cases of sexual offences, highlighting work by the We Can't Consent to this campaign. A key concern of that campaign is the normalisation of violence against women and sex, alongside the way in which those cases are reported and then defended in courts. In the last parliamentary session, I asked the Scottish Government about data collection on violence within what begins as consensual sexual activity and the impacts for women of such behaviours becoming normalised. A report from BBC Radio 5 Live suggested that over a third of UK women under 40 had experienced unwanted slapping, choking, gagging or spitting during consensual sex. Of those women, 42 per cent felt pressured, coerced or forced into it. The then Justice Secretary, Hamza Yousaf, indicated that there was potential for the Scottish Government to look at research into the apparent normalisation of violence and sexual activity, potentially viewing via the Scottish Crime and Justice Survey. I would welcome an update from the cabinet secretary on whether work has been taken forward. If it is not possible within the debate, I would appreciate correspondence outside of the debate. Last night, I was proud to host a parliamentary reception, along with Strutsafe calling for sexual harassment in public places, to be made illegal in Scotland. Announcement on the consultation yesterday was very welcomed by all at the event. At the event, we heard the counts of a number of women who had suffered from men making sexually inappropriate remarks. Women know those instances so well. One woman commented last night that it was just that feeling where she just wanted to cry. We have all seen it. Women feel so humiliated, but at the same time think, did that really happen? Sally Donald and Alice Jackson, co-founder of Strutsafe, launched the end public sexual harassment campaign last night. I am proud to work with them. Last year, I met Alice and Sally at the vigil for Sarah Everard. I said at the time that so many women have so many stories, a whole backlog of stories, of their experiences of being publicly sexually harassed. Last night, it was a number of women who had come to the event just to try and see what was happening, who then shared their experiences at that time in front of a number of people. One of the key things that I think for the campaign is talking about alongside the proposed legislation is a strong education approach. Sally, Alice and I had a very productive meeting with Scottish Government officials to discuss the campaign and will be meeting with them again soon on working very closely with them. 97 per cent of women aged 18 to 24 reported the experiences of sexual harassment, according to UN Women Report in 2021. 97 per cent. That is thousands of women every year in Scotland, the UK, Europe and across the world's suffering abuse. That includes cat-calling, wheel-flishling, unsolicited sexual comments and advances, abuse of remarks and wanted deliberate touching, flashing and following a person in public. Women also reported feeling constantly scared, powerless and humiliated by the experiences that have been harassed in public spaces. Jamie Greene touched on that. We can go out as a guy. We can go out and meet friends. We do not have to think around about what we do. If a woman goes out and has to come back, gets an attack, she is just a phone of friends and sends her message to where she is going. That is something that is in a women's brain and in her mind every single time that we go out as a man. We do not have to suffer from that. We need to be challenging behaviours and cultures all over our society, our schools, our universities and our workplaces. Many of you will know the story about Emily's test. A young girl up in Aberdeen had been sexually harassed at a university, spoke to the university, nothing was done and she ended up committing suicide. Her mum now goes out and speaks to others about that particular issue. If we have not had a chance to look the campaign up, please look it up. It is incredibly humbling. As men, we need to double our efforts in tackling misogyny. Baroness Helen McKenzie on International Women's Day last year recommended that public harassment be made a criminal offence. In countries such as Belgium, France and Portugal, public sexual harassment is already an offence that perpetrators can be persecuted for. Under the proposal of the scope of how current laws can tackle misogynistic abuse, we would be expanded to include threatening or abuse of sexual behaviour directed towards women and girls because of their gender, which is likely to cause them to feel degradation, humiliation and distress. The cabinet secretary touched on the five proposed new criminal laws and the offence of misogynistic harassment, behaviour and statutory aggravation concerning misogyny and the offence of threatening or abuse of communications to women or girls that reference rape, sexual assault or disfigurement. The offence of stirring up hatred against women and girls for too long. The law has been drawn not from the experience of women, it is time to hear from girls and women about what they think should be included in the law so that they should be treated as equals. At this stage, it is worth reminding us what the four main priorities of weekly safe are. That should be in our society. We shouldn't have to be talking about this all the time, but we are in the situation that we have to. Priority 1 in Scottish society embraces equality and mutual respect and rejects all forms of violence against women and girls. Priority 2, women and girls thrive as equal citizens socially, culturally, economically and politically. Priority 3 interventions are really ineffective preventing violence and maximising the safety of wellbeing of women, children and young people. Priority 4, men desist from all forms of violence against women and girls and perpetrators of such violence and receive a robust and effective response. We have heard the discussions and talks about the education part of it. Equally safe at school has been developed by rape crisis Scotland in partnership with the University of Glasgow. It was designed and piloted in several schools in Scotland with support of zero tolerance and a wide range of other voluntary and statutory partners and stakeholders. It is designed for secondary schools to take a holistic approach to prevent gender-based violence consistent with the Scottish Government's and COSLA's equally safe strategy to prevent and eradicate violence against women and girls. ESAS is designed to meet the health and wellbeing outcomes of the curriculum for excellence and other key frameworks such as getting it right for every child. ESAS also takes a whole-school approach working with staff and students to prevent gender-based violence into increased confidence and skills when responding to incidents and disclosures of such violence. It aims to positively enhance the school culture by fostering a shared, consistent approach to gender-based violence, and ESAS is underpinned by the principles of quality, safety, accessibility and student voices at the forefront. We have been referring now obviously around about Don't Be That Guy. Graham Golden couldn't make her come in the meeting last night but sent us a video. Obviously Don't Be That Guy has been a very good major success.  It is about prioritising prevention that can be done to end violence against women and girls, and we can't repeat this enough.  There are still too many men in our society and around the world. We are making progress. The proposed legislation is a major step forward, more needs to be done, especially by men. I want to begin by thanking the cabinet secretary for the conversations that we have had about the work of the misogyny working group and the consultation on the proposed legislation that was launched yesterday. I am grateful to him for his openness in these discussions, and I also appreciate his approach to and desire for unity in this debate this afternoon, and I thank others who have engaged in similar tones. I am immensely grateful to Helena Kennedy and all those involved in the detailed, difficult yet important work that the working group undertook that allows us to be here today, discussing the different ways we could and should tackle what is a stain on our society. Because that society, the society we live in, is structurally misogynistic. Women have experienced that throughout our lives in ways that might seem trivial, and in ways that are clearly, revoltingly intolerable. But all of those experiences, as every woman in this chamber knows, leave scars. Perhaps scars that, after decades, we are still not ready fully to face. As Scottish Women's Aid has said, women and girls' experiences of violence and abuse across private and public spaces are a cause and consequence of women's inequality. Just this week, in Tuesday's debate about the safety of women and girls on public transport, we heard about what happens in some of those public spaces. Story after story came bitter testimony that of the everyday misogyny intended to keep us, sometimes quite literally, in our place. Our mothers might have hoped that it would be better by now, and in some ways it is. There is a greater understanding among both women and men, girls and boys, of gender work, of pay and representation issues of the realities of the patriarchy and of the potential for liberation in diversity and identity beyond the binary. But at the same time as the First Minister highlighted yesterday in her speech for International Women's Day, new technologies and communication platforms open up new spaces and channels for misogynistic abuse, especially of young women and girls. They are chilling counter-movements, preying on the vulnerable, movements of hard reaction that do not simply employ misogyny but centre it as the very core of their ideology. We do not pretend that we are going to change that overnight, but change, active resistance, is essential. Helena Kennedy has written of this problem as one of social proof, conduct that is increasingly mimicked until it becomes a widespread norm. We cannot, we must not wait until that norm is ubiquitous. We must look not only at where we are, but at where, without a change in direction, our society is heading. We are not doing this only for women and girls. Misogyny is not good for men either. It is no liberation to be forced into navigating constant pressures to express or condone attitudes of hate. For men who, for whatever reason, do not visibly comply with macho stereotypes, it can be especially painful and dangerous. For misogyny is deeply intertwined, not with healthy and confident identity, but with other defensive and fearful forms of discrimination, oppression and hate, including racism, homophobia and transphobia. That is why the attempt to co-opt the concept of misogyny as an insult against trans-inclusive feminists is both pathetically misguided and ludicrously ironic. For misogyny is foundationally connected to other patriarchal systems of violent and coercive control. Those include sexual violence and domestic abuse, but also conservative strategies of education and healthcare denial, not least denial of reproductive rights. It is important to be conscious of that wider picture as we face, as I am sure we will face, some quite virulent opposition to the report's recommendations. Just as we are mindfully conscious of that wider context of the patriarchy and the myriad inequalities it entranches in every structure of our society, we must be mindful, as others have already noted this afternoon, that legislation is not the only part of the solution. Structural change requires proactive and determined approaches across our social and cultural lives. Education and awareness raising are crucial, as are building collective and solidaristic behaviours and cultures that recognise intersections with other structures of power inequalities. As Helena Kennedy's report highlights over and over, women have said, something has to be done. Today's debate is an important milestone in this work, in a journey that I hope and trust will result in real and significant change in our law, because such change needs to happen and needs to happen now. It will resonate not just through Scotland but far beyond showing what is possible for a Parliament that takes equality seriously. I look forward to working with my fellow MSPs and our wider civil society to make that legislation the best it can possibly be, normalising a culture of respect and dignity, protecting the rights and enhancing the wellbeing of all women, both cis and trans, gaining widespread support among all genders, communicated and understood as both a symbol of and a tool for a healthier, safer and happier Scotland. Presiding Officer, I am honoured to be contributing to this extremely important debate on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny. All too often, women are the targets of criminal behaviour, motivated by misogyny, with sexual crimes at their highest level of record in Scotland and domestic abuse incidents at their second highest. However, legislating on crimes against women and girls as well as eradicating misogyny is an area where the Parliament has failed to keep up. The failure to tackle institutional and systematic misogyny is evident in more than 60,000 domestic abuse calls reported by Police Scotland each year. Misogynistic attitudes allow abuse and violence against women and girls to flourish, made yet more accessible by growing online and cell culture, spread by influencers. Therefore, I welcome the majority of the recommendations outlined in Barron's Kennedy's report. However, there are several aspects that I would like to raise in today's debate to constructively add to the conversation going forward. Firstly, I think that any legislation on misogyny should be clearly defined. Sex is the protected character that is missing from hate crime legislation, and if this bill is to address that effectively, the definition needs to be clear. That was raised with me by more than one organisation. That was something that the Scottish Conservatives supported when the hate crime bill was debated in the Parliament. It has also been raised with me by many of the organisations. However, I remain open to proposals and look forward to seeing responses to the consultation. The SNP Government has committed to the criminal justice reform bill to improve the experience of women in the justice system. Again, that is something that I welcome, as well as the granting of anonymity to victims of sexual crimes. However, how can we begin to tackle misogyny through criminal law when misogyny remains a rife within the criminal justice system itself? The Domestic Abuse Court Experience Project suggests that there are shortfalls between the aspirations of the Domestic Abuse 2018 act and its operation and practice. For example, many felt that the justice system struggled to deal with prosecution of psychological abuse. The survivors felt that they were marginalised in and by justice processes, often uninformed about what was happening and why. Misogyny can also be seen in other areas of the justice system, such as in the court room itself. Ellie Wilson, who has spoken about frequently in this chamber, has bravely spoken about her ordeal with the criminal justice system as a rape survivor. In court, rape complainers are not supposed to be asked irrelevant information about their history unless an exemption is made, but in her experience and in the experience of many others going through the court systems, that does not happen in practice. Her experience is evidence of misogyny in action. After Ellie's horrific ordeal, financial barriers later stood in the way to accessing the court-transcript fees needed to corroborate her complaints against the defence. She resorted to crowd funding to raise the financial means.  As it stands, most people convicted of domestic abuse crimes do not go to prison. Between 2010 and 2020, the highest percentage of offenders who went to prison convicted of crime with a domestic abuse aggravation was 16 per cent. Similarly, misogyny can also impact police handling of inquiries. Myself and my colleague Russell Finlay was involved in a case whereby the woman was treated differently to her husband by the police force. Today's debate on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny comes at a pivotal time. All too often, women are the targets of criminal behaviour motivated by deep-rooted misogyny who are with violent and sexual crimes on the rise across Scotland. As an advocate of women and girls, I look positively on any proposals to eradicate growing misogynistic attitudes. However, I also think that this debate is an opportunity to discuss the urgent changes that are needed to the wider justice system such that female victims who report a crime should not be subject to a further misogyny throughout the justice system. Any crimes against women should be severely punished, and any laws to address misogyny should be clear, targeted and proportionate. I too welcome the consultation. When the hate crime bill went through the Parliament, we were promised action urgently. Now, two years later and a year after Helen Kennedy's report, we are only going out to consultation on the changes to the law. I hope that the Cabinet Secretary will commit to legislating on that during this Parliament, because women should not have to wait any longer. Helen Kennedy's QC proposed an act to create a statutory misogyny agrivation, an offence of stirring up hatred against women and girls, an offence of public misogynistic harassment, an offence of issuing threats of or invoking rape or sexual assault or disfigurement of women and girls online and offline. Those principles must be adhered to. We must remember that the law is the servant of the people and we must find ways of enshrining those principles within legislation. I was hurting to see that the Scottish Government are building their approach on the stocking section of the criminal justice and licence in Scotland Act 2010. I remember when I put forward that amendment, I was told that it was incompetent, that the definition of stocking could not be enshrined in law, and I remember having to answer very tough questions. Had it not been for animals dogged persistence that stocking should be an offence, I think that we would have failed. That is my case. The law is our servant and has to enshrine the protection that we require. Those who are implementing it must be trained to do so. However, as others have said, simply changing the law is only part of the solution. Education is central to this. We must, of course, educate children, and that education needs to provide them with information that they need and the capacity to critically think about what they see here in experience. It is sad that children are viewing extreme porn to try to inform themselves on relationships and sex. It is a little wonder that their views are skewed and unhealthy, especially regarding respect of women and girls. However, we must go further and educate all our citizens on what is acceptable and what is reasonable behaviour. As Pauline McNeill said, too often those charged to uphold the law demonstrate views that are absolutely unacceptable. Too often, those giving effect to the law do not hold with it and obviously have no understanding of it. How do we change how women are viewed by them and those like them? The Scottish Government has also pledged to legislate to change the way that laws view prostitution. Why are they looking at those two issues separately? They are fundamentally linked. How do we deal with misogyny if women are still looked on as commodities in Scotland, where our law endorses that consent can be bought, where the poverty of women and the inequality that they face leads to their exploitation and we allow that to happen? We need to ensure that women are not poorer than men. We need to ensure that caring responsibilities do not leave women prey to exploitative men. To tackle misogyny, we need to look at the whole role of women in society, and women must have respect as equals within our society. Alongside legislation, we need support for women. I, like Liam McArthur, Rona Mackay and others, was really heartened to hear of the opening of the Emma Rich Centre in Glasgow to support women who have been raped and need support while the trial of the perpetrator goes through court. It is a fitting tribute to Emma, something that I know that she would have approved of. This is something that Scottish Labour has been asking for for many years. It needs to be made available to all women in this situation, and to achieve that, we need to make sure that there are solicitors available to carry out this work, and that legal aid is available at an adequate level for everyone in this situation. Presiding Officer, I agree with the cabinet secretary that the problem with misogyny will not be eradicated by only bringing punishment for those who are committed, or even the threat of a criminal offence. It needs education, opportunity and equality. We have to create a society where there are opportunities for jobs equal pay and true social justice for women. We have to ensure that our educators and our education system support our children growing up, giving them access to services when and where they are needed, and we must ensure that those who are exposed to disgusting sexist and hate-fuelled materials online and in life are equipped with the capacity to question those behaviours and to stand up to them. After International Women's Day yesterday, a chance to celebrate the social, economic, cultural and political achievements of women is right that we also reflect on the barriers holding women back. I welcome this afternoon's Government to be on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny because, fuelled by centuries-old cultural attitudes, misogyny is a continuing stain on society. Like everyone in the chamber today, I want to mention the important work done by Baroness Helena Kennedy and everyone involved in the working group on misogyny and criminal justice in Scotland. Their findings have led to new proposed criminal laws, including an offence of misogynistic harassment, a statutory agrivation concerning misogyny and an offence of threatening or abusive communications that reference rape or sexual assault. Those would provide police and prosecutors with new powers to tackle the corrosive effects of misogyny. I was pleased about the justice secretary's announcement of a consultation on that and I encourage every women and girl to have their say. I think that it is also important that we make clear what we are talking about by misogyny. I thank Scottish Women's Aid for the briefing for today's debate and I want to read their suggested definition of misogyny, a way of thinking that upholds the primary status of men and a sense of male entitlement, while subordinate women and limiting their power and freedom. Conduct based on that thinking can include a range of abusive and controlling behaviours, including domestic abuse, sexual violence and other forms of violence against women and girls, as well as harassment and bullying. Misogyny can be conscious or unconscious and men and women both can be socialised to accept it. Misogyny influences institutional and structural arrangements in society, as well as individual behaviours. That is powerful and shows the wide-ranging nature of the problem that we need to eradicate. In recent years, we have seen solid reforms to the criminal law in Scotland, including the Women's Aid, put it, gold standard Domestic Abuse Scotland Act 2018. Yesterday, at the Criminal Justice Committee, we carried out post-legitim scrutiny on the act. Despite there being lack of data due, in part, to Covid, that has been groundbreaking. The Vision for Justice, published last year, set out that urgent action is required to ensure that women and girls are better served by Scotland's justice system. The Scottish Government has already taken steps to meet those challenges. A victim-centred approach fund has been established, awarding £48 million to provide practical and emotional support to victims, including £18.5 million for specialist advocacy support for survivors of gender-based violence. Supporting courts, including through the justice recovery fund, to reduce the backlog caused by Covid. Funding the Caledonian system, a programme that seeks to change the behaviour of domestically abusive men and increasing the use of Police Scotland's disclosure scheme for domestic abuse, helping to safeguard more people who have been harmed or are at risk. Those measures are helping women who have experienced domestic abuse and violence, but, as Scottish Women's Aid highlighted, there are gaps in the criminal law, including for protecting women and girls from online and street harassment. I welcome the Scottish Government's proposals in that regard, and I hope that those gaps will be plugged. That is essential. I was pleased to attend the event last night that was sponsored by Paul MacLennan in Parliament with Shrutsafe and learned more about their work to make public sexual harassment illegal in Scotland. How do we develop that right culture to develop moral rebels? That was the word spoken by Graham Golden, who is campaigning on this front, and he urged everyone to be an active bystander. For too long, the law has not been drawn from the experience of women. It is time to hear from girls and women about what they think should be included in law so that we can be treated as equals. In conclusion, why do we need to train actions to tackle and eradicate misogyny? Much of that is cultural, but there is a role for the criminal justice system to play to. Harassment, abuse and violence have no place in modern Scotland, and I once again encourage women and girls to have their say on the Scottish Government's proposed reforms to criminal law. Many underlying prejudices, sexism and misogynistic societal attitudes are still far too prevalent in our society, and deep inequalities still exist. Only by working together across every area of Scottish life will we successfully end the discrimination that women and girls face, and we must recommit ourselves to that until we eradicate it. I am pleased to close the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour and to put on record again our support for legislation on misogyny. We appreciate the points made by the cabinet secretary about the number of offences being proposed, and we also appreciate how unusual legislation of this nature is and the range of behaviours that could potentially be captured by the legislation. We also appreciate that the legislation came from the debate around the hate crime bill. Pauline Mule has already outlined our approach in relation to that legislation, and Liam McArthur has also outlined in his contribution the concern about the lack of sex as an aggravator in that bill. Clearly, fundamental change is needed, and legislation is only a small part of that change. Jamie Greene in his contribution said that that legislation could be controversial and spoke about the need for it to be workable, a point echoed by Audrey Nicholl. In his contribution, Jamie Greene also spoke about the number of new offences being created in Scotland. Yesterday, as Collette Stevenson has said, we carried out post-legislative scrutiny on the Domestic Abuse Scotland Act 2018. Although I appreciate the point that has been made by the Conservatives, we have to accept a point made by Collette Stevenson that the legal system has failed women and indeed the law has been written by men. Audrey Nicholl also spoke about the work of the misogyny working group and gave examples of the types of unacceptable behaviour towards women and men which potentially could be addressed by this current law. She outlined how she believed that this legislation was coming forward based on lived experience. We know that the current law does not address the challenges that women and girls face and that, to have any legitimacy, the justice system needs to deliver for women and girls. We therefore welcome the specific provisions included both in the report that led to the document published yesterday by the Scottish Government and indeed the proposals specifically given yesterday by the Scottish Government. We obviously have just seen the proposed wording of the various provisions, so we are not able to comment in detail on the wording being proposed. However, we welcome that that wording is being shared and that there is a consultation process because it is vital that we get this legislation right. Scottish Labour has assured the Scottish Government that it will have our full support in trying to ensure that this legislation is workable. It is important that the Scottish Parliament effectively scrutinises the proposals and that they are rooted in evidence that will work in the courts. We particularly welcome that those proposals relate to both online and offline behaviour. Claire Baker spoke of the damage caused by online behaviour. We have to say to the Conservative benches that we are very disappointed that the UK-wide online safety bill has still not been enacted. As Rona Mackay said, misogyny is rampant in society and is normalised. She spoke of the experience of women in older generations. Rhoda Grant spoke of the experiences of girls and young women now, and we need to ensure that the very specific forms of misogyny being faced by girls and young women, in particular in our schools, are dealt with in this legislation, as we know that that is a very real and growing current challenge. The proposals put forward by the Scottish Government to split misogynistic behaviour and misogynistic harassment to create a new offence of issuing threats of invoking rape and sexual violence or disfigurement or developing a statutory history misogyny agrivation and of developing the stirring up of hatred offence are welcomed. We also welcome the fact that the Scottish Government is out consulting and trying to involve women and girls, and we very much hope that parliamentarians are involved in this process, as it is vital that we get the detail of the legislation right and that there is cross-party support for the proposals. We note that the hate crime bill has still not been enacted and hope that this new legislation will not have to wait for the enactment of that legislation and will not be conditional on any issues in relation to that bill. We believe that it is vital that we go forward with legislation that has the support of the people of Scotland, and we look forward to actively participating to ensure that we get the detail of this legislation right. I begin by noting that just 10 minutes before this debate began, another man was found guilty of killing his female partner in Scotland. Dr Brenda Page was murdered almost 45 years ago, and today's verdict illustrates the determination of police and prosecutors to achieve justice no matter how long that might take. It is a privilege to close for my party on what is the third consecutive debate to mark today's International Women's Day. I was also fortunate to speak and choose this debate about antisocial and criminal behaviour in public transport, and we have heard many powerful and insightful contributions from across the chamber today. The cabinet secretary's opening examples of women's first-hand accounts of abuse were unsettling, but hardly surprising or sadly unsurprising. Both Tess White and Pauline McNeill spoke of the murder of Sarah Iverard by a police officer and wider policing issues. I fully agree with Audrey Nicol and Claire Baker about the explosion of online abuse and fear that this is likely to get even worse. Rona Mackay reminder is about the medieval horror that is being inflicted on women and girls in other countries, and there were many other considered contributions today, too many for me to address them all. Today's Government motion refers to reforming criminal law in order to address misogyny, and I agree with the intent to find the most effective way to do this and await the details with interest. However, I agree with my colleagues Jamie Greene, Pam Goswell and indeed the cabinet secretary that new laws alone are not always the answer, and I would like to use today's time to talk about an area that is not often discussed, and that is how women can suffer additional harassment, trauma and stress due to Scotland's legal system, the system that is supposed to protect them. At yesterday's criminal justice committee, we heard from Dr Claire Houghton of Edinburgh University. She and her team spoke with domestic violence victims for a study that was published in January. It lays bare the difficulties many face in the justice journey, a journey beset by fear, vulnerability, delays, secrecy, exclusion and often bitter disappointment with whatever sentence is imposed. Dr Houghton yesterday told me that her report's findings were, and I quote, unremittingly grim. It's a harsh take. I would rather say it is sobering and striking, and we encourage all members to read it. It contains 10 key points, but I think one of those encapsulates so much in quite a few words, and it says, participants had significant concerns that the investigation, prosecution and sentencing for domestic abuse offences did not adequately reflect the sustained level, severity or impact of abuse experienced. Yesterday, I also asked about another rarely discussed issue, and that's how some male criminals further their coercive control and abuse by manipulating both criminal and civil law. Victims already struggling with the daunting criminal justice process tell of becoming ensnared in the quicksand of parallel civil cases, whether relating to financial matters or children. Those two systems do not effectively communicate with each other. Dr Marcia Scott of Scottish Women's Aid told of her organisation, tasking a US Supreme Court judge to look at this in Scotland, but his recommendations went nowhere. Also at yesterday's committee, Professor Michelle Berman of Glasgow University acknowledged the cases of an, I quote, legal system abuse are very prevalent. However, she also told me that there has been no research about this conducted in Scotland, none. Abusers are also sometimes able to access public money to pursue their victims. Now, weeks ago, I wrote to the Scottish legal aid board on behalf of a woman and her daughter, who I will refer to as Amy and Laura. Amy's former partner, who I will call John, is the father of Laura. When Laura recently became a teenager, her father tried to ban her from the sport that she loves, ordered her to pray daily, wear a hijab and issued threats of violence. He is now seeking legal aid to increase access to Laura, contrary to her wishes. John has been convicted of stalking Amy and, as so often the case, the full extent of his alleged criminality was much greater and more prolonged. There is also intelligence suggesting that John is connected to organised crime. Assets, which were in his name, have now been transferred to relatives. There have been other policing investigations in connection with a child to another ex-partner. Access in that case is prohibited. I told the legal aid board all about this on 6 February. On 6 March, they wrote back, no decision had been reached, apparently, about the legal aid application. Yet, on 28 February, one week earlier, the board told Amy that legal aid had indeed been granted. I assume that there is an explanation for this apparent anomaly. Amy and her daughter are at their wits end. While we are in here talking about international women's day, that is consuming their lives. Amy tells me that John knows that going to court will cause me financial difficulty. I am not entitled to legal aid. I am so scared that the courts will not recognise the risk of Laura being abused. I feel totally let down by the services that claim to be there to protect us. He is using public funds to continue his control and abuse. Yesterday's justice committee raised this case with a senior police Scotland officer and asked her if there was any mechanism by which the police can give relevant information to the legal aid board. They say that there is not. Legal system abuse is real. It must be exposed and it must be tackled. The state cannot strive and legislate to protect Scotland's women and children, while simultaneously facilitating further abuse of them. To conclude, I am delighted that there is cross-party consensus today. I thank you and I call on Christina McKelvie to wind up nine minutes or so. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. This has been a very useful and interesting debate this afternoon. I thank all colleagues for their consensus on the principles and we will get into the detail as we publish the consultation. It has highlighted the importance that we as a Parliament come together to consider carefully how best we can take real action to address misogyny. At the top of the debate, I add my voice to those of others and welcome the Emma Rich clinic at Glasgow University. A dear friend of mine and many in this chamber and wider in Scotland, I am sure that her family and her husband, Kenny, will be rightly proud to have Emma remembered in such a way as she has been as we work through the many areas that they will work on. I was very touched to hear about the clinic. Emma, of course, was one of the original members of the misogyny working group, and she contributed to that with all of her great ideas and influence that she had. She is threaded through all of those recommendations. In the course of the debate, we have heard some horrifying examples of misogynistic behaviour that women and girls are faced with every single day. Jamie Greene gave us that figure of 46 per cent of women MSPs in this place have received death threats, myself included.  The independent Scottish law commission is looking at how homicide law operates, including in relation to the so-called rough sex defence and how that might operate. When the commission publishes its final report with its recommendations, we will consider that fully and come back to Claire Baker at that point if that is helpful. I think that it is important that we all ask ourselves what we can do now to ensure that, in 20 or 30 years time, we as a Parliament are not back here, still debating what can be done to address this problem. As Jamie Greene said, we do have power in this place and we should use that appropriately. I can also welcome the work of Paul McClellan and Strutsafe, and I hope that the consultation and the proposal in this law brings welcome progress to the work that they have been doing as well. To confirm to the chamber, some questions were asked around this, we will legislate on this in this parliamentary session, and it will not be subject to other implementation of pieces of legislation. Reform of the criminal law will be important. It will not only ensure that police, prosecutors and courts have the appropriate tools to take action to deal with misogynistic behaviour that is serious enough that it is properly the business of the police and courts. I hear the challenges from members across here about how we are working to implement the Lady Dorian recommendations, because they will be pivotal in ensuring that our system works appropriately in this way. It will also help to send a clear signal and a real signal. I think that such behaviour is unacceptable, something that can itself help to change in grain culture's attitudes and change behaviour too. However, it cannot be the whole answer, as we have already heard. We cannot arrest our way to equality. Not all misogynistic behaviour can or should be dealt with by our criminal courts. The patriarchy is deeply established in our society, in our structures and yes, in our organisations. We cannot use the threat of prosecutions to change behaviour of men who talk over women in meetings or boys who mock the girl who speaks up in class. The insidious, low-level systemic misogyny, as articulated by Rona Mackay, stocks a girl's life all the way through her life. When the First Minister's National Advisory Council published its first annual report in 2019, it set out 11 recommendations for change under the themes of attitude and culture change. Those words, attitudes and culture change are key. It is through change in attitudes and culture that we can hope to bring about real change over the longer term. We know that violence against women and let it be in no doubt that misogynistic harassment and abuse that we have heard about and described today is violence against women, is caused by and further exacerbates gender inequality. Claire Baker gave us many examples of how and when that happens through a woman's life, including abuse and threats online. Therefore, we urge alongside other members and alongside our Scottish Labour colleagues the UK Government to ensure that online harms bill is as strong as it possibly can be. A culture that does not consider women to be truly equal to men will find it easier to excuse misogynistic behaviour and attitudes. A culture where misogynistic behaviour and attitudes is normalised is not one in which women have equal rights and freedom of action. Paul McNeill spoke about the endemic violence and hatred faced by women and girls in all settings, and Maggie Chapman spoke about how some men are not just perpetrating misogyny but centering it in their work to attack women. That is why we will continue to focus on tackling wider gender inequalities, including women in all their diversities and all their intersecting characteristics, including economic inequalities. We have continued to prioritise policies such as the expansion of free childcare and the closing of the gender pay grab. Curiously, we have focused on prevention and the role that men can play. We know that early years are important, and that is why we continue to take forward a range of actions in schools to address gender-based violence and sexual harassment. I echo Paul McClellan's praise for Fiona Droat and Emily Tess on what she is doing in higher and further education. Education plays a significant role in supporting our children and young people to learn about safe and healthy relationships, high-quality relationships, sexual health and parent-hood education, and an important part of the health and wellbeing curriculum aims to help children and young people to build positive relationships as they grow older and seek help when they need it. The content is delivered in an agent-stage appropriate non-judgmental manner within a framework of sound values and awareness of the law, including that in sexual behaviour. We will strengthen that with a national framework that supports skills to tackle sexual harassment and gender-based violence. Our mentors on violence prevention Scotland programme is working to tackle gender stereotyping and attitudes that can do in violence against women and girls. We also fund the Equally Safe at Skills programme, which we developed in partnership with Zero Tolerance, Rape Price of Scotland and others. It raises awareness among staff and pupils of the reality and causes of gender-based violence. Education at an early stage in life is useful and important, but many adult males who come across the horrific situations that we have heard about today do not know what to do. They do not know how to intervene. They may want to intervene in a situation, but they do not know how to do it safely, if they do not put themselves or even the women concerned at risk. Will the Government consider a targeted programme of awareness and education aimed at adult males on how to deal and de-escalate those situations? I think that many would find it incredibly helpful. I certainly will consider that request. We are currently undergoing a refresh of our Equally Safe strategy in Scotland. I will give thought to both that and to the Lib Dem ask around about the commission. Of course, the work that Pauline McNeill and her colleagues have taken forward within the Labour Party and I thank you for inviting my officials along to that. It has been incredibly helpful. I think that all of those things will ensure that the new Equally Safe strategy will be as informed as it possibly can be, but as effective as it possibly can be. In response to one of the recommendations that was made by the First Minister's advisory council for women and girls, we have established a gender equality task force in education and learning, and that targets young men in school as well. It is not only in education that it is important to drive that change. Last month, Anna Stewart and Mark Logan published their report on pathways and a new approach for women in entrepreneurship after they were commissioned by the Scottish Government to consider how we can address the under-participation of women in entrepreneurship to move our society away from its current extreme gender imbalance in this field of endeavour. Up to now, I have focused on what has been done to support women and girls, but that is not a problem that women and girls can or should have to solve on their own. Collette Stevenson and Audrey Nicholl spoke about being an active bystander, and we have also heard of the impact of don't be that guy. I think that those are important interventions and we should always try to raise the profile of them as we go, but when men remain silent, they can be perceived as supporting or at least condoning the harassment and abuse that women and girls experience. It is vital that men speak out and take responsibility for challenging sexist and misogynistic attitudes. They are unfortunately still too common. Tess White, using the words of Baroness Kennedy about Wayne Cousins, illustrates perfectly what can happen when men remain silent. When Baroness Kennedy gave her evidence to the criminal justice committee last year on the findings of the working group, she had chaired, she said, that we, the expert panel, were shocked. I say that as someone who is a pretty, died-in-the-will criminal lawyer who thought that she had heard it all. This report is in a particular period of time, and I think that we can't deny that something is happening at the moment, which meant that every single woman or group that appeared in front of us were saying something has to be done. This is affecting women and girls in their lives, and it really does undermine in a serious way their sense of self-confidence and self-worth and the ways in which they conduct their own lives and what their aspirations are. She is absolutely spot on. I was sent yesterday from Myra Ross, a training officer at the Highland Violence Against Women and Girls partnership, a poem that she had written to Mark International Women's Day, and it was just so perfectly timed. Her poem is called Rhyths, and it starts. Do they see me as an object to use to buy yourself? Do they see me as a target for any passing male? Do they just see a commodity perhaps to pass around? Do they think I might be flattered by a lear, a taunt, a sound? Do they understand, I wonder, how imposing was that stare when I first became a woman and he tried to touch me there? Do they understand the terror that took root in my heart? Do they know that that one in sea better wound that had a start? I start with little subtle things we didn't understand, a starting, breaching boundaries with looks, then words, then hands. Perhaps we tell the good men they might lend us a voice, we are not a commodity, we are people with a choice. Perhaps we ask the women, the other two and three, don't say how you don't mind, stand in solidarity. Perhaps we say our women are schooled children, our girls, deserve safety and dignity, rights beyond written and unupheld. I agree with Parliament now that in working through the challenges of this new legislation as a Parliament this will be an achievement for the Parliament and not just the Scottish Government and has been clear from the debate today that the Scottish Government is committed to work with Parliament and external stakeholders to ensure that the new laws to address misogynistic behaviour recommended by Baroness Kennedy's working group are as effective as they can be. My last plea in closing please encourage every women, girls and organisation you know to take part in the consultation. We need to hear your voices. That concludes the debate on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny. It is now time to move on to the next item of business. I am minded to accept a motion without notice under rule 11.2.4 of standing orders that decision time be brought forward to now and I invite Neil Bibby to move the motion. Thank you Mr Bibby. The question is that decision time be brought forward to now. Are we all agreed? We are agreed and there are three questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first is the amendment 8159.2 in the name of Jamie Greene which seeks to amend motion 8159 in the name of Keith Brown on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny be agreed. Are we all agreed? The amendment is therefore agreed. The next question is the amendment 8159.1 in the name of Pauline McNeill which seeks to amend motion 8159 in the name of Keith Brown on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny be agreed. Are we all agreed? The amendment is therefore agreed. And the final question is the motion 8159 in the name of Keith Brown as amended on reforming the criminal law to address misogyny be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. That concludes decision time and I close this meeting.