Committee
Justice Committee 29 September 2015
29 Sep 2015 · S4 · Justice Committee
Item of business
Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
I will speak to most of the amendments in the group, if you will bear with me, convener. For 18 months, I was repeatedly told by the Scottish Government that stop and search was an operational matter. Ministers insisted that they were comfortable with so-called consensual stop and search, despite it occurring on an industrial scale and targeting young and vulnerable people—even children. My campaign to abolish so-called consensual stop and search and introduce a code of practice won the backing of dozens of charities, academics, the Scottish Human Rights Commission and Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People. As members will be aware, the Government has finally decided to adopt my plans after they were effectively endorsed by the independent advisory group that is chaired by John Scott QC. I have been pleased to work with the Government since that review was published, and I have reflected on the 11 amendments that the cabinet secretary has lodged, which benefit from the additional evidence that has emerged since I lodged mine in February. I am willing, if John Finnie will agree, not to move amendments 50, 51 and 53. However, it is essential that the Government’s amendments are strengthened in a number of respects to ensure that there is no room for ministers to backtrack. As the minister said, amendment 229A would specify the information that must as a minimum be included in the code of practice, namely the circumstances in which searches take place; the procedure to be followed; what records must be taken; and the rights of the subject to access those records. Those provisions are not onerous by any means and provide ministers with a great deal of flexibility to develop the code. However, they will establish what this Parliament expects, and I intend to press that amendment. Amendment 230A specifies that reviews of the code should be completed in six months, again ensuring that reviews cannot just get stalled. I thank the Government for its support on that. Amendment 233A is intended to reflect my belief that every time the code is reviewed, the Parliament should have an opportunity to reaffirm its support for the code or, if it wishes, initiate changes, even if the minister does not believe that change is necessary. However, having listened to what the cabinet secretary has said this morning, I will not move the amendment. Amendment 233B is a significant one. It addresses an omission in the Government’s amendment and requires the introduction of the code of practice and the abolition of so-called consensual stop and search to occur within one year of royal assent. With Police Scotland still conducting hundreds of thousands of these unregulated searches, we should not allow the code of practice to slip. I am grateful that the minister has agreed to support that amendment. I am minded to move amendment 52, which requires the SPA to produce an account of the use of stop and search in its annual report to Parliament. That will encourage transparency and improved data collection methods. The committee will remember the difficulties with the figures that were being bandied about. Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People warns us that amendment 226, which involves powers to search for alcohol, is premature. Children 1st indicates that it is concerned about the possibility that such a power could lead to unintended consequences for children, such as criminalisation and a higher rate of statutory stopping and searching for young people. I note that John Scott QC’s review group reported: “We have not been able to form a concluded view on whether a gap in powers exists that could not be dealt with by existing powers, and also on whether a power to search children for alcohol would be desirable. We therefore recommend that there should be a public consultation that involves children and young people.” The review group went on to say: “We therefore recommend that this should be considered separately, subject to wider consultation, specifically involving children and young people.” I agree that there is no need to have this provision in the bill. Dr Kath Murray’s groundbreaking research into the prevalence of unregulated stop and search and the effects of the encounters in Scotland shone a bright light on something that needs to be challenged. For a long time, I was a lone voice in Parliament raising that challenge, but I am delighted that the evidence has vindicated that approach and that the committee is now on the verge of ensuring that every stop and search that is conducted by the police has a robust legal basis. We are on the verge of ensuring that every search is justified, regulated and accountable. These changes to the bill will be the start of rebuilding community relations with the groups that have been disproportionately targeted by this thoroughly discredited tactic. However, there is one more hurdle, and I hope that members will join me in ensuring that there is no room for delay or for future Governments to slide back. I hope that the committee will back my amendments.
In the same item of business
The Convener
SNP
Agenda item 2 is day 3 of stage 2 proceedings on the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill. I welcome to the meeting the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Michael Ma...
The Convener
SNP
Amendment 223, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendments 224 to 229, 229A, 230, 230A, 231, 232, 232A, 233, 233A, 233B, 50, 51, 51A, 52...
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Michael Matheson)
SNP
Good morning. I thank the committee for altering the normal order of consideration of amendments. As members know, the advisory group on stop and search was ...
The Convener
SNP
I thank the cabinet secretary for a very comprehensive trip round all the amendments. I think that members received some explanatory notes in advance, which ...
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD)
LD
I will speak to most of the amendments in the group, if you will bear with me, convener. For 18 months, I was repeatedly told by the Scottish Government tha...
John Finnie (Highlands and Islands) (Ind)
Ind
Stop and search did not use to be a problem. There were all the statutes that could be invoked on stop and search and there was a lot of statutory guidance a...
The Convener
SNP
It is still early and already you are falling apart.
John Finnie
Ind
I know. Forgive me, convener. I will not repeat much of what my colleague Alison McInnes has said, but I am certainly grateful for the movement that has bee...
Elaine Murray (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Lab
Labour members also welcome the progress that has been made on stop and search and the move to putting it on to a statutory basis. However, I invite the cabi...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con)
Con
I am happy to support the cabinet secretary’s amendment on stop and search, which reflects the recommendation of the review committee chaired by John Scott. ...
Roderick Campbell (North East Fife) (SNP)
SNP
I have heard the point that has been made about amendment 229A being prescriptive but, for me, the important point is that Parliament will have the opportuni...
Michael Matheson
SNP
I am grateful for the comments that various committee members have made. The intention behind amendment 226 is not to pre-empt anything. Instead, it creates...
The Convener
SNP
The question is, that amendment 226 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Alison McInnes
LD
No.
The Convener
SNP
There will be a division. For Allard, Christian (North East Scotland) (SNP) Campbell, Roderick (North East Fife) (SNP) Finnie, John (Highlands and Island...
The Convener
SNP
The result of the division is: For 8, Against 1, Abstentions 0. Amendment 226 agreed to. Amendments 227 and 228 moved—Michael Matheson—and agreed to. Amen...
The Convener
SNP
The question is, that amendment 229A be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No.
The Convener
SNP
There will be a division. For Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind) McDougall, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab) McInnes, Alison (North East Scotlan...
The Convener
SNP
The result of the division is: For 5, Against 4, Abstentions 0. Amendment 229A agreed to. Amendment 229, as amended, agreed to. Amendment 230 moved—Michae...
The Convener
SNP
The question is, that amendment 52 be agreed to. Are we agreed? Members: No.
The Convener
SNP
There will be a division. For Finnie, John (Highlands and Islands) (Ind) McDougall, Margaret (Central Scotland) (Lab) McInnes, Alison (North East Scotlan...
The Convener
SNP
The result of the division is: For 5, Against 4, Abstentions 0. Amendment 52 agreed to. Section 1—Power of a constable
The Convener
SNP
Amendment 111, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendments 112 and 37.
Michael Matheson
SNP
I will deal first with amendments 111 and 112, both of which are relatively minor, before turning to amendment 37 and the proposed definition of arrest. Ame...
The Convener
SNP
So far so good.
Michael Matheson
SNP
Part 1 is, in a sense, an extended definition of arrest. It sets out who can exercise the power of arrest, the grounds for doing so, the rights of the person...
The Convener
SNP
I call Elaine Murray to speak to amendment 37, in the name of John Pentland.
Elaine Murray
Lab
I just want to say a few words regarding amendment 37, in the name of my colleague John Pentland. I should point out that, despite the hilarity over the word...
The Convener
SNP
I think that that is deuce.
Elaine Murray
Lab
It was drafted by people who know what they are doing. However, as the cabinet secretary implied in his remarks, the reason why John Pentland lodged the ame...