Support for adult victims of trafficking and exploitation - guidance: consultation analysis

3. Question 1 – Purpose

Question: Does the Guidance clearly set out its purpose and who it applies to?

Positive comments

Some respondents considered that Section 1 clearly sets out the purpose of the Guidance and identifies its intended audience. The explanation of the support framework for adult victims of trafficking and exploitation, together with links to wider legislation and policy, was viewed positively. Respondents also welcomed the definition of an adult and the identification of organisations involved in delivering support, considering this helpful in establishing the scope of the Guidance.

Need for further clarity

Specific uncertainty which was identified in a number of responses related to references to 16 and 17-year-olds and how the adult Guidance interacts with Child Protection arrangements. It was felt that a clearer explanation of the position where a person’s age is disputed was needed, including the presumption of age under section 12 of the 2015 Act and the support available while an age assessment is undertaken.

Respondents also sought greater clarity on the respective roles of statutory agencies, local authorities and specialist support providers. Respondents commented that further clarity is required regarding the intended audience for the Guidance and how it relates to wider legislation and policy frameworks.

They also sought clearer explanation of organisational roles and responsibilities, particularly where these overlap with Adult Support and Protection (ASP), Child Protection and the NRM, including where a child’s age is disputed. Clarification was also sought on whether the published guidance itself would be used by any eventual Scottish Government Decision Makers when approving or continuing support, or whether separate internal policies or criteria will apply.

Need for practical information

Respondents sought more practical information about what an individual needed to know before deciding whether to enter the support framework. This included understanding what would be expected of them during the process, what forms of support they may be able to access, and specifically how that support can be accessed. Respondents considered that the Guidance would benefit from greater practical information regarding assessment processes, eligibility criteria and how decisions about support are made. It was also suggested that clearer information on review or challenge processes would help survivors and practitioners better understand the support framework.

Suggested additions to the Guidance

Several respondents wanted the Guidance to identify more explicitly the organisations responsible for delivering support. Suggestions included providing a list of, or direct links to, the organisations delivering statutory trafficking support and giving greater information on the specialist remits of organisations working within the wider support framework. It was generally felt that this would be helpful in allowing practitioners and survivors to understand which organisations the Guidance applies to and the respective roles they perform. There was also a suggestion that Section 1 should define the boundaries of the document more explicitly. A respondent proposed a short explanation of what the Guidance does not cover, with child victims, criminal justice processes and immigration status determinations given as examples, so that readers can quickly establish whether this is the appropriate source of guidance for their circumstances.

Other concerns or comments

Other comments included suggestions to improve the glossary, strengthen references to specialist and gender-specific services, clarify the scope of the Guidance, and provide greater information on how the Guidance will be reviewed and updated.