Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 15 March 2012
15 Mar 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Offenders (Rehabilitation)
It is a pleasure to be able to move my motion. It is not often that we talk about reducing crime in the context of the services that are available for those who have committed a crime. I think that that is unfortunate. Scotland’s prisons are overcrowded. Our prison population has increased by 25 per cent over the past 10 years. That is a worrying statistic in itself, but if we delve a little deeper we get to truly startling figures: 62 per cent of Scottish prisoners reoffend within two years of being released and more than one in 10 offenders who went to prison in 2010 had served 10 or more previous prison sentences.
Audit Scotland’s recent report on the criminal justice system identified that the cost per prisoner place is £34,279 per year, which does not include the cost of processing the case through the courts. It is clear that it is time for us to take a new look at the rehabilitation services and programmes that we provide in prisons. That is what our motion is about: the opportunities that we provide for those who find themselves behind bars.
I use the word “opportunities” quite deliberately; of course we do not seek to reward people for committing a crime, but it is only right that we give them the chance to better themselves. It is our responsibility to give offenders the chance to address the issues that led them to prison in the first place and the chance to move past their crime and contribute positively to society. Frankly, if we are not giving offenders that chance, we are failing them and—just as bad—we are failing the society that they are being released back into. Indeed, it is only in giving offenders the chance to better themselves that prison can be said to be working.
At present, our prisons simply do not have the capacity or the facilities that are needed to support properly the rehabilitation of offenders, so what we get instead is a vicious cycle. Existing rehabilitation programmes cannot succeed, at least partly because prisoners have limited access to them in overcrowded prisons. That means that fewer offenders can successfully participate in the programmes, more offenders reoffend, the prison population grows still further and the rehabilitation programmes become still less able to cope.
I am happy to recognise that good progress is being made on the prison estate itself. HMP Low Moss opened its doors just this week, plans for the new HMP Grampian at Peterhead are moving forward and the Government’s recent budget included £20 million to be spent on much-needed improvements to the women’s prison estate. Those are all positive steps. However, when all is said and done, there is only so much that can be achieved by modernising the prison estate. We must also address the rehabilitation programmes themselves. Audit Scotland concluded:
“Funding arrangements are complex and do not always provide a financial incentive to reduce reoffending.”
As I said, the reconviction rate in Scotland is too high but, more worryingly, it is consistent. The reconviction rate today is more or less the same as it was 13 years ago when the Parliament first opened. In that time, the rate has never varied by more than a few percentage points either way, despite the Government having a national indicator to reduce offending.
How can we revolutionise prisoner rehabilitation and finally start to bring down the reconviction rate? We believe that we need help from specialists. The simple fact is that, when ex-offenders get a job after leaving prison, the likelihood of their reoffending is cut dramatically—by as much as 50 per cent. However, figures show that offenders are 13 times more likely to be unemployed than those in the rest of society. The Scottish Prison Service’s latest survey reveals stark numbers on the problems that many offenders face. Forty per cent of prisoners reported that drug use was a problem for them on the outside; a quarter of prisoners reported that alcohol use had affected their ability to hold down a job; and one in five prisoners reported problems with literacy and numeracy.
Social enterprise is well placed to tackle holistically the range of needs of repeat offenders. In Scotland and throughout the United Kingdom, we are blessed with a wealth of voluntary organisations, social enterprises and charities that specialise in providing precisely the sort of support that those offenders need to push them back towards playing a positive role in society. Therefore, why not look to those bodies to do just that?
There are plenty of examples of innovative approaches to tackling reoffending, such as the Foundation Training Company, which is a not-for-profit organisation that provides a through-the-gate mentoring and resettlement service for prisoners. The organisation leads programmes and workshops in prisons that are aimed at equipping offenders with computer skills and which provide literacy and job application training. To date, the Foundation Training Company has helped more than 11,000 prisoners, 95 per cent of whom have achieved at least one nationally recognised award. Research from the Home Office has shown that the likelihood of reoffending is reduced by 7 per cent among those who have completed one of the Foundation Training Company’s courses.
Those are the sort of positive and innovative interventions that we should do everything possible to encourage. The Liberal Democrats believe that using the social impact bond model is the perfect way to do just that.
Audit Scotland’s recent report on the criminal justice system identified that the cost per prisoner place is £34,279 per year, which does not include the cost of processing the case through the courts. It is clear that it is time for us to take a new look at the rehabilitation services and programmes that we provide in prisons. That is what our motion is about: the opportunities that we provide for those who find themselves behind bars.
I use the word “opportunities” quite deliberately; of course we do not seek to reward people for committing a crime, but it is only right that we give them the chance to better themselves. It is our responsibility to give offenders the chance to address the issues that led them to prison in the first place and the chance to move past their crime and contribute positively to society. Frankly, if we are not giving offenders that chance, we are failing them and—just as bad—we are failing the society that they are being released back into. Indeed, it is only in giving offenders the chance to better themselves that prison can be said to be working.
At present, our prisons simply do not have the capacity or the facilities that are needed to support properly the rehabilitation of offenders, so what we get instead is a vicious cycle. Existing rehabilitation programmes cannot succeed, at least partly because prisoners have limited access to them in overcrowded prisons. That means that fewer offenders can successfully participate in the programmes, more offenders reoffend, the prison population grows still further and the rehabilitation programmes become still less able to cope.
I am happy to recognise that good progress is being made on the prison estate itself. HMP Low Moss opened its doors just this week, plans for the new HMP Grampian at Peterhead are moving forward and the Government’s recent budget included £20 million to be spent on much-needed improvements to the women’s prison estate. Those are all positive steps. However, when all is said and done, there is only so much that can be achieved by modernising the prison estate. We must also address the rehabilitation programmes themselves. Audit Scotland concluded:
“Funding arrangements are complex and do not always provide a financial incentive to reduce reoffending.”
As I said, the reconviction rate in Scotland is too high but, more worryingly, it is consistent. The reconviction rate today is more or less the same as it was 13 years ago when the Parliament first opened. In that time, the rate has never varied by more than a few percentage points either way, despite the Government having a national indicator to reduce offending.
How can we revolutionise prisoner rehabilitation and finally start to bring down the reconviction rate? We believe that we need help from specialists. The simple fact is that, when ex-offenders get a job after leaving prison, the likelihood of their reoffending is cut dramatically—by as much as 50 per cent. However, figures show that offenders are 13 times more likely to be unemployed than those in the rest of society. The Scottish Prison Service’s latest survey reveals stark numbers on the problems that many offenders face. Forty per cent of prisoners reported that drug use was a problem for them on the outside; a quarter of prisoners reported that alcohol use had affected their ability to hold down a job; and one in five prisoners reported problems with literacy and numeracy.
Social enterprise is well placed to tackle holistically the range of needs of repeat offenders. In Scotland and throughout the United Kingdom, we are blessed with a wealth of voluntary organisations, social enterprises and charities that specialise in providing precisely the sort of support that those offenders need to push them back towards playing a positive role in society. Therefore, why not look to those bodies to do just that?
There are plenty of examples of innovative approaches to tackling reoffending, such as the Foundation Training Company, which is a not-for-profit organisation that provides a through-the-gate mentoring and resettlement service for prisoners. The organisation leads programmes and workshops in prisons that are aimed at equipping offenders with computer skills and which provide literacy and job application training. To date, the Foundation Training Company has helped more than 11,000 prisoners, 95 per cent of whom have achieved at least one nationally recognised award. Research from the Home Office has shown that the likelihood of reoffending is reduced by 7 per cent among those who have completed one of the Foundation Training Company’s courses.
Those are the sort of positive and innovative interventions that we should do everything possible to encourage. The Liberal Democrats believe that using the social impact bond model is the perfect way to do just that.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott)
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-02337, in the name of Alison McInnes, on prisons.10:26
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD)
LD
It is a pleasure to be able to move my motion. It is not often that we talk about reducing crime in the context of the services that are available for those ...
Chic Brodie (South Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
The member refers to social impact bonds. The RAND Europe report on planning and implementation of the social impact bond at Peterborough prison highlighted ...
Alison McInnes
LD
No, I do not accept that. There is good reason to proceed with further pilots to assess the model. The Finance Committee has considered the issue and Audit S...
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill)
SNP
I thank Alison McInnes and my other Liberal Democrat colleagues for highlighting reoffending. I welcome their shared commitment to tackling this difficult is...
Lewis Macdonald (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
As has been said, an effective justice system must protect communities, support victims and seek to rehabilitate offenders. That means that those who have be...
David McLetchie (Lothian) (Con)
Con
I thank Alison McInnes for bringing the subject to the chamber and for highlighting an imaginative approach to rehabilitation that is being piloted by the Go...
Christine Grahame (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
SNP
I, too, very much welcome the debate and the consensus across the chamber about reoffending. I will not reprise the figures and percentages, which have been ...
Mary Fee (West Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I thank the Liberal Democrats for bringing the issue to the chamber so that we can have a serious debate on how we address reoffending in Scotland. Reducing ...
Dennis Robertson (Aberdeenshire West) (SNP)
SNP
I thank Alison McInnes for bringing this debate to the chamber, and I hope that she is less disappointed after hearing the cabinet secretary’s reassurances t...
Graeme Pearson (South Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
Unfortunately, I must begin my contribution by agreeing with Christine Grahame and acknowledging all that she said about the 218 project in Glasgow. It is an...
Roderick Campbell (North East Fife) (SNP)
SNP
First of all, I thank Alison McInnes for lodging a motion on what is an important issue. When we think about offenders, we find it all too easy to think pure...
Alison McInnes
LD
Will the member give way?
Roderick Campbell
SNP
I have limited time, so I cannot. When the Justice Committee was taking evidence on the Scottish Government’s budget, we highlighted the fact that the obliga...
David McLetchie
Con
This has been an interesting and useful debate with some excellent contributions. I thank Lewis Macdonald for pointing out that the social impact bond model ...
Dr Richard Simpson (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab)
Lab
Alison McInnes reminded us of the poor outcomes: 62 per cent of prisoners reoffend, and the figure is even higher for young prisoners. Although there has bee...
Kenny MacAskill
SNP
Justice debates in the chamber are frequently rumbustious and confrontational, and it is fair to say that, sometimes, they generate more heat than light. How...
Alison McInnes
LD
I do, indeed, welcome the cabinet secretary’s positive comments this morning, but I will press him a little on timescale. In 2009-10, the Scottish Prison Ser...
Kenny MacAskill
SNP
As Roderick Campbell eloquently said, we must build on the evidence. The only scheme of which we are aware is in Peterborough and I am happy to look at it, a...
Jim Hume (South Scotland) (LD)
LD
I welcome the opportunity to sum up what has been an important debate that was led very ably by Alison McInnes on behalf of the Liberal Democrats. The debate...