:00:00. > :00:00.a very good friend of mine is having a a operation tomorrow morning. Show
:00:00. > :00:00.her this ad and have sympathy for another cancer. Both very much
:00:07. > :00:16.indeed. Tonight, on Newsnight Scotland, yet
:00:17. > :00:22.another setback for the Justice Secretary's plans to change the law
:00:23. > :00:26.on corroboration. We'll speak to Convenor of Committee who says he's
:00:27. > :00:39.making bad law. And, as a research student she discovered pulsars.
:00:40. > :00:48.We'll talk to Professor Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell. About her appointment
:00:49. > :00:52.as the first woman President of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. Good
:00:53. > :01:06.evening. The Justice Secretary has a plan. But it's not going terribly
:01:07. > :01:09.well. He would like to abolish the principle of corroboration in Scots
:01:10. > :01:14.law. The legal establishment is against him. I'm not convinced a
:01:15. > :01:18.case has been made to abolish corroboration. I have said it
:01:19. > :01:24.shouldn't be on the bill. I'm always open to persuasion if good arguments
:01:25. > :01:30.come forward. The Justice Secretary is determined to go-ahead with
:01:31. > :01:34.abolition, he appoint a former High Court judge to review what
:01:35. > :01:40.additional safeguards against wrongful conviction might replace
:01:41. > :01:44.corroboration. He has proposed increasing the majority needed for a
:01:45. > :01:50.15-person jury to secure a conviction from eight to ten. If
:01:51. > :01:52.MSPs vote to the abolish corroboration this year, the
:01:53. > :01:58.Government will take effect once parliament has had the chance to
:01:59. > :02:02.consider and act on the findings next year. At Question Time,
:02:03. > :02:07.opposition leaders said this was not on. Surely, First Minister, it is
:02:08. > :02:13.better to make good law later than bad law now. Law-making in reverse
:02:14. > :02:16.is a shoddy way to expect Scotland's parliament to act. The First
:02:17. > :02:21.Minister insisted reform is necessary. Because there are many
:02:22. > :02:27.hundreds, perhaps thousands of people who cannot, because of this
:02:28. > :02:30.rule, bring their cases to court, or get their cases brought to court,
:02:31. > :02:36.there is a feeling of serious injustice. Most of the legal
:02:37. > :02:47.establishment, including all but one of our current judges, are opposed
:02:48. > :02:50.to abolish corroboration. It it's allowing access to the criminal
:02:51. > :02:56.justice system. Allowing more cases to be heard in criminal courts. And,
:02:57. > :03:01.potentially, looking at the facts and circumstances of these cases, I
:03:02. > :03:05.keep going back to the point. That fairness and proving a case beyond
:03:06. > :03:09.all wherein reasonable doubt is something we hold very dear in the
:03:10. > :03:14.criminal law in Scotland. The evidence they present sod far has
:03:15. > :03:18.not persuaded the Justice Committee that the case for ending
:03:19. > :03:30.corroboration has been made. -- presented so. I'm joined now from
:03:31. > :03:33.Edinburgh the Convenor of the Justice Committee, the SNP's
:03:34. > :03:36.Christine Grahame. Here in the studio is Mhairi McGowan who runs
:03:37. > :03:39.the Assist project, which helps victims of domestic abuse though the
:03:40. > :03:41.legal process. Would it be your intention to vote against the
:03:42. > :03:43.Criminal Justice Bill as it stands. In other words without the
:03:44. > :03:47.proposals, whatever they are? Can I say to you, first of all, I'm
:03:48. > :03:51.speaking as convenor of the Justice Committee. I have to make clear that
:03:52. > :03:56.the whole of the committee was concerned about the successful
:03:57. > :03:59.prosecution of rape cases, sexual abuse, domestic violence, to take
:04:00. > :04:03.three categories, can we put to the side the fact that we all want to
:04:04. > :04:07.get to the same destination, which is to secure and have secure
:04:08. > :04:12.convictions. But what the committee was required to do was to listen to
:04:13. > :04:17.the evidence of all parties and to take a view whether, at stage one,
:04:18. > :04:22.with the evidence before us, the case for abolishing corroboration
:04:23. > :04:26.had been made. We said it had not been made. I take your point. Would
:04:27. > :04:30.it be your intention to vote against the bill as it stands? I'm waiting
:04:31. > :04:34.to see what... The Cabinet secretary made a big move now. I have to say,
:04:35. > :04:40.that is the Justice Committee doing it work. I have to see now what will
:04:41. > :04:45.evolve in the coming days and weeks. Haven't made up your mind? As I said
:04:46. > :04:50.in your clip, I'm always open to hear the evidence and to see - The
:04:51. > :04:53.reason I ask you. Some of our parliamentary nerdy people have been
:04:54. > :04:58.doing sums and reckon the way things stand it would only need you or one
:04:59. > :05:05.other SNP member to vote against this and the bill would fail? You
:05:06. > :05:09.are talking as if each party in the parliament has a solid view for or
:05:10. > :05:12.against corroboration. That's not the case. There are people on the
:05:13. > :05:17.Labour benches who want to see it go. I know there are people on the
:05:18. > :05:20.Labour benches who want it to stay. I think there... I'm not sure about
:05:21. > :05:25.the Conservatives. I know that is the case in the Labour benches. It
:05:26. > :05:29.isn't as clear-cut as that. It's an extremely complex and difficult
:05:30. > :05:32.issue that takes a great deal of thought. I do hope the parliament
:05:33. > :05:39.listens to the considered opinions of the Justice Committee. Would you
:05:40. > :05:42.accept that the bill, as it stands, obviously you are in favour of
:05:43. > :05:47.getting rid of corroboration, would you also agree with Christine
:05:48. > :05:52.Grahame that it would be better to wait until we see what the
:05:53. > :05:56.safeguards are? I agree that we both want the same things. We both want
:05:57. > :06:00.justice for victims and we both want to make sure there is no
:06:01. > :06:04.miscarriages of justice. But, at the end of the day, the position now is
:06:05. > :06:08.that the current justice system is failing victims. Failing victims
:06:09. > :06:16.every day. I see hundreds of women every year whose case can't go
:06:17. > :06:22.forward because of system we have in Scotland of corroboration. It needs
:06:23. > :06:27.to go. The argument now seems to be, OK, we need safeguards in case
:06:28. > :06:32.innocent people are convicted. We ought to wait, according to I think
:06:33. > :06:36.Christine Grahame's committee, unless I'm misrepresenting them - I
:06:37. > :06:39.think you are. We haven't considered, the committee hasn't sat
:06:40. > :06:42.since the Cabinet secretary announced the safeguards. I can't
:06:43. > :06:47.speak for the committee on that. Right, OK. You would presumably
:06:48. > :06:50.accept the need for safeguards? Yes. We need to look at the quality of
:06:51. > :06:55.the evidence. I think what was said before today was that the Crown
:06:56. > :06:58.would come up with a system, a test that would look at the quality of
:06:59. > :07:08.evidence rather than the system we have at the moment, which is a
:07:09. > :07:10.quantitative change. At the end of the day, victims groups are waiting
:07:11. > :07:15.another year to see what that committee will come out and say.
:07:16. > :07:20.It's disappointing. I'm disappointed. Can you explain what
:07:21. > :07:26.the process is here? It seems odd. You have the Criminal Justice Bill,
:07:27. > :07:31.which you are being asked to pass. You have the work coming up weapon
:07:32. > :07:36.new suggestions. You seem to have Ken hi McGascle coming up with new
:07:37. > :07:43.suggestions. It's unclear as to what you are being asked to agree to? The
:07:44. > :07:49.Cabinet secretary didn't intend to bring in that section of the Bill
:07:50. > :07:57.until 201 a 5. The timetable remains the same. The judge has been
:07:58. > :08:03.appointed by the Lord Gill. To paper over the cracks is a bit rude. Let
:08:04. > :08:06.us see what evolves over this these weeks. The committee said, we all
:08:07. > :08:11.want to get to this place where people who are victims of these
:08:12. > :08:18.crimes, which are difficult, get not only to court, but get their cases
:08:19. > :08:24.proved. Bear with me a minute. Bear with me a minute. No. This seems to
:08:25. > :08:31.take an awfully long time to do things which are basic. We have seen
:08:32. > :08:36.the William Roache case. England is helped held up to us a place with no
:08:37. > :08:40.corroboration. His case fell apart. Nobody comes out of that happily. I
:08:41. > :08:44.think we must be aware of looking south of the border for examples. I
:08:45. > :08:48.don't think it's just about looking south of the border, looking across
:08:49. > :08:51.the world. Where else across the world do we have this system of
:08:52. > :08:54.corroboration? We need to look at justice for victims. At the moment,
:08:55. > :08:58.victims aren't getting the opportunity to get into court and
:08:59. > :09:01.get the evidence test the because it has fallen at the hurdle before
:09:02. > :09:05.that. That is the crucial point. To get them... Yes. Not necessarily
:09:06. > :09:10.there would be a higher rate of conviction, most cases would come to
:09:11. > :09:13.court? That's right. There are good credible allegations being made that
:09:14. > :09:16.can't get into court. Hang on, Christine Grahame, we are running
:09:17. > :09:20.out of time. I want to ask you about, I think you saw the thing at
:09:21. > :09:25.the top of Newsnight, about David Cameron's speech he is making
:09:26. > :09:28.tomorrow, phone a friend. Yes. You looking forward to calls from
:09:29. > :09:33.England, Wales and Northern Ireland? My son starts in London, who is marr
:09:34. > :09:36.I whying a Londoner. I could do with hearing from imhad. That be would
:09:37. > :09:42.handy. What do you make of the overall idea? He is a silly, silly
:09:43. > :09:45.man. Is that necessarily silly? He is doing all silly things. He will
:09:46. > :09:50.stand at the Olympics and say... It worked for the Canadians in queue
:09:51. > :09:55.Beck, isn't it? No. It's foolish. Half of my relatives are in England.
:09:56. > :09:59.My late mother, who was English, with as was a great campaigner for
:10:00. > :10:03.independence. He is a foolish man. Leave this here where it is. I'm
:10:04. > :10:07.serious. I could do with hearing from my son! If he's watching, which
:10:08. > :10:15.he won't be if he's in London right now? True. Maybe he will take the
:10:16. > :10:18.hint. Thank you very much indeed. She is best known for discovering
:10:19. > :10:22.pulsars when she was only a research student. Her supervisors took the
:10:23. > :10:29.Nobel prize, but she went on have a distinguished career in
:10:30. > :10:31.astrophysics. This week she was elected as president of the Royal
:10:32. > :10:35.Society of Edinburgh. Surprisingly, she is the first woman to hold the
:10:36. > :10:40.post. We'll speak to her in a moment, but first here's Huw
:10:41. > :10:51.Williams. Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell grat waded from the University of
:10:52. > :10:56.Glasgow in 1965. -- graduated. She went on to study for her PhD in am
:10:57. > :11:01.Cambridge. He was the first to notice a regular signal pulsing once
:11:02. > :11:08.a second, picked up by radio telescopes and recorded as blips on
:11:09. > :11:16.the readout. It gave rise to jokey speculation about extraterrestrial
:11:17. > :11:23.life forms. Kneel kneel they have discovered little green men. --
:11:24. > :11:29.NEWS REEL: They have discovered little green
:11:30. > :11:30.men. Were rotating stars sending out bursts of information.
:11:31. > :11:34.NEWS REEL: Star that is send out radio signals
:11:35. > :11:40.so regularly it was thought by some they came from intelligent beings.
:11:41. > :11:43.Was her supervisor, not her, who won the Nobel Prize for physics. She has
:11:44. > :11:47.always accepted that decision. She has been a passionate campaigner to
:11:48. > :11:53.get more women into the forefront of science and technology. How did you
:11:54. > :11:57.first become interested in the stars? I have been interested as
:11:58. > :12:01.long as I could remember. The numbers taking higher level physics
:12:02. > :12:06.at this school this year are almost at 50% split, 20 girls out of a
:12:07. > :12:09.total of 54 pupils. The proportions vary from year-to-year. The numbers
:12:10. > :12:15.have increased dramatically, even in the course of just one man's
:12:16. > :12:19.teaching career. Tell me when you think you've got it. About there.
:12:20. > :12:25.About there. Not a wee bit further? Could it go further? When I first
:12:26. > :12:32.started teaching it was in a Glasgow school. Very few girls took physics
:12:33. > :12:35.further than fourth year. There must have been pupils you could see would
:12:36. > :12:40.have potential in the subject? Absolutely. Many pupils had the
:12:41. > :12:44.potential. It was seen as a subject where they wouldn't be able to
:12:45. > :12:48.pursue a career for themselves. It wasn't a subject for girls. What
:12:49. > :12:53.about his pupils? What do they think of the fact that we're still talking
:12:54. > :12:58.about gender and science as an issue? It's really old fashioned and
:12:59. > :13:02.people just need to like kind of be more open to the fact that women do
:13:03. > :13:05.have brains and they should be able to work in the science world. I
:13:06. > :13:09.don't think anyone would dispute that women have brains. When you
:13:10. > :13:12.say, I want to do a science or engineering subject, people think
:13:13. > :13:17.that you're a girl. Is that attitude completely died out? I've never
:13:18. > :13:21.personally met anyone that has had that attitude towards it. I'm sure
:13:22. > :13:25.it does exist with some people. When you said to your mum and dad that
:13:26. > :13:29.that is what you wanted to do. How was the reaction from them? They
:13:30. > :13:33.weren't surprised at all. They didn't think because I was a girl I
:13:34. > :13:37.shouldn't do something in science. At university there are
:13:38. > :13:41.predominantly men in specific engineering courses still. It's an
:13:42. > :13:46.issue. Is it annoying we have having this conversation? It's a bit like
:13:47. > :13:50.tiresome, like, I think we should by this stage know that women like
:13:51. > :13:54.doing science subjects that there are women professionals doing maths
:13:55. > :13:58.or engineering and I think it's a bit tiresome. It's kind of a bit
:13:59. > :14:00.naive that people are still thinking that women aren't wanting to go into
:14:01. > :14:11.science subjects. Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell is a still
:14:12. > :14:16.notching up first. She has been elected the first woman as president
:14:17. > :14:20.of the Royal Society of Edinburgh in its history.
:14:21. > :14:23.A short while ago, I spoke to Professor Dame Jocelyn Bell Burnell
:14:24. > :14:28.from our Oxford studio. I asked her if she planned use her new post to
:14:29. > :14:35.promote science to girls. Well, I do not particularly have an
:14:36. > :14:41.agenda for using my position as president, but I am anxious that it
:14:42. > :14:47.serves Scotland well as its leading academy, and there is an issue in
:14:48. > :14:52.all of the English speaking world to do with women in science. There are
:14:53. > :14:58.too few and they do not reach the top positions, so there certainly is
:14:59. > :15:03.an issue there. Why it is, that is a very complex issue. It is not a
:15:04. > :15:08.single issue. There is not a magic will it or we would have found it
:15:09. > :15:15.some time ago. One of the things that strikes me is odd -- as all
:15:16. > :15:22.eyes is that, until university level, girls outperform boys at
:15:23. > :15:27.school, and despite that, there seems to be, I do not know if it is
:15:28. > :15:31.a prejudice from schools or families or what ever, there seems to be a
:15:32. > :15:40.lack of willingness I girls to take up scientific subjects. -- by girls.
:15:41. > :15:46.It is in coeducational school of you find this rather sharp distinction,
:15:47. > :15:49.and there is probably a similar distinction with boys not taking
:15:50. > :15:57.arts and humanities subjects so much. In single-sex schools, girls
:15:58. > :16:01.schools, there are as many girls taking science subjects as boys
:16:02. > :16:10.would in single-sex boys school, aren't there? Have bubbly not quite
:16:11. > :16:19.but in awful lot more than -- probably not quite, but an awful lot
:16:20. > :16:33.more boys take the subject. Do you think that's too mash -- do you
:16:34. > :16:36.think there is more of... Genders tend to divert to their gender
:16:37. > :16:45.stereotypes, and they are is exactly as you described them. In some South
:16:46. > :16:50.American countries, throughout Spain, Italy, there are a lot more
:16:51. > :16:55.women doing physical sciences, engineering and old in top
:16:56. > :17:01.positions, and in Southeast Asia as well. But how do you tackle that
:17:02. > :17:07.when it is partly to do with culture and it is complex? What do you do?
:17:08. > :17:11.We are gradually changing the culture, but it is always a slow
:17:12. > :17:16.process. It is quite painful as a process as well, and there is a
:17:17. > :17:20.limit to how fast you can go, but for instance, you are now finding
:17:21. > :17:24.down South government ministers writing to companies as saying, you
:17:25. > :17:29.must have more women on your boards, because they have discovered that
:17:30. > :17:38.wards and also incidentally research groups are diverse. -- boards. I
:17:39. > :17:45.guess the government has no great control over the boards of a
:17:46. > :17:47.company, but it is an exultation. It could be translated into something
:17:48. > :17:56.more rigid in areas where the government has control. So that is
:17:57. > :18:01.one obvious thing. What else? Mentoring helps a lot. Role models
:18:02. > :18:05.and mentoring. Upping the status of science, but remembering that as
:18:06. > :18:09.well as converting school kids and teachers, you need to work on the
:18:10. > :18:15.parents and the sisters and cousins, so it is the whole of society. There
:18:16. > :18:21.are also changes coming about in the wake care of children -- in the way
:18:22. > :18:26.care of children is organised. We are seeing moves towards more
:18:27. > :18:32.paternity leave for men, and hints that this leave needs to be taken by
:18:33. > :18:35.the men or the couple will lose it, and that is quite commonplace in
:18:36. > :18:39.some Commonwealth countries and it is beginning to come here as well.
:18:40. > :18:45.We cannot have you here without asking what is hot in astrophysics
:18:46. > :18:48.at the moment. If you were explaining to a young person why
:18:49. > :18:52.they should get into the subject and explaining what the leading edge
:18:53. > :18:57.stuff is, what would you say? The leading edge stuff in astrophysics,
:18:58. > :19:02.there is a lot, because of things have become much less unclear during
:19:03. > :19:07.my lifetime, I regret to say. Nothing to do with me, but that is
:19:08. > :19:10.how it has happened. We now know that the stuff around us, the stuff
:19:11. > :19:17.we are made of, the stuff we are reasonably familiar with, only makes
:19:18. > :19:21.up about 5% of the universe, and the other 95% of the matter energy in
:19:22. > :19:28.the universe is dark and a mystery. Dark matter, dark energy. There is a
:19:29. > :19:34.great push on trying to find out what on earth, well, not on earth,
:19:35. > :19:41.these things are. There is also worked on how to find a radiation
:19:42. > :19:44.predicted by Einstein called gravitational waves. Glasgow is very
:19:45. > :19:48.strong in this and is one of the leading groups in the world. That is
:19:49. > :19:56.another exciting area. The other thing I cannot let you go without
:19:57. > :20:01.asking you is, when you discovered ulcers -- pulsars, if you initially
:20:02. > :20:05.named them little green men, because the regularity of the radiation
:20:06. > :20:10.pulsars were so a regular that you thought they had to come from some
:20:11. > :20:16.sort of alien. No, that was a joke. It was just a joke? I regret it very
:20:17. > :20:21.much now because it was tongue in cheek and it stuck. That is not what
:20:22. > :20:27.everything that has been written about it says. That is because the
:20:28. > :20:29.press is interested in extraterrestrial civilizations. I
:20:30. > :20:33.was going to ask you if it was disappointing to you that it was not
:20:34. > :20:38.little green men. I was mighty relieved. This is earth shattering
:20:39. > :20:44.news. You meant it as a joke right from the start? When we had only
:20:45. > :20:49.one, we had not a clue what it was, but after about a month, I found the
:20:50. > :20:56.second and then the fourth, and that demolishes a little green men. ,
:20:57. > :21:00.because there are not that many lots -- and that demolishes a little
:21:01. > :21:06.green men. , because we were using a stupid frequency and eight staff
:21:07. > :21:11.technique. -- a daft technique. It was a joke. It was a joke and you
:21:12. > :21:16.demolish it in five minutes. More or less. Thank you for joining us. Now
:21:17. > :21:25.a quick look at tomorrow's front pages. The Scotsman says that
:21:26. > :21:31.William Roche has been cleared of sex abuse charges. The Financial
:21:32. > :21:35.Times, David Cameron is wanting to keep Britain united. That is it for
:21:36. > :21:37.this week. Gary is here on Monday. Until then, good