Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Plenary, 27 Jun 2001

27 Jun 2001 · S1 · Plenary

Item of business

Serious Violent and Sexual Offenders

McNeill, Pauline Lab Glasgow Kelvin Watch on SPTV

The debate has always been emotive and controversial. It concerns the most difficult offenders in our society. The debate is about creating safe communities. Members of our communities must be able to have confidence in the criminal justice system. They have not always had that confidence. They also expect the system to protect them and their children. For me, that is what the MacLean report and the panel chaired by Lady Cosgrove are all about.

Scotland has high standards of criminal justice. Ensuring that those standards are the same throughout the system is what the MacLean and Cosgrove reports are about. The reports give us properly substantiated research to assist us in our assessment of what is real harm.

As Gordon Jackson said, many criminologists in Scotland have long argued that we have abandoned the rehabilitation approach in Scottish prisons. The debate allows us to refocus on rehabilitation.

I would like to talk about sexual offenders. Along with colleagues on the Justice 2 Committee, I visited HM Prison Barlinnie and the hall in which sex offenders are kept. We did not really get a sense of what was going on. However, we have a sense of the work that is being done in Scottish prisons and of the need for a closer look at training programmes—for staff in particular. The establishment of a new risk management authority is crucial. Sex offenders often minimise their offending and its effect on their victims. Many have complicated needs. Offenders are often highly manipulative, which means that we need expertise in the system. I am alarmed at what has been drawn out by Lady Cosgrove's panel on reducing the risk.

The survey of local authorities that was commissioned to gather information about the availability of structured personal change programmes showed that seven local authorities did not respond, and six provided no specific sex offender programmes. Only 50 per cent of criminal justice social workers were required to undertake additional training, the length of which varied from three to nine days. A potentially dangerous situation can arise when inexperienced or untrained social workers with limited experience of supervision manage high-risk offenders. That is why the MacLean report is adamant about having the right kind of training and developing the right kind of expertise.

The report levelled some criticism at the Scottish Prison Service about its training inadequacies—the SPS says that its training has improved—but it must be noted that, until now, there has been no framework for quality risk management and training and that the SPS has been delivering the STOP 2000 programme at Peterhead successfully. Prior to the establishment of the Parliament, there was no focus on prisons. I commend the work of the SPS.

Early intervention is highlighted in the report and must be afforded importance. It is a difficult issue to address, because it is not clear how to identify the early stages of inappropriate behaviour and translate that knowledge into practical action. It is estimated that 30 per cent of all sexual offences are committed by young men under the age of 21 and we know that sexual offending starts in adolescence. We can do something about that, so we must think about early intervention.

I welcome the establishment of the risk management authority. It is a radical step in establishing a standards framework, but we must examine in some detail the powers that we will give to the authority, and consider how it will link with the rest of the criminal justice system. We must ensure that the new authority fits in properly; if it does not, it will create tension with other agencies. I am unsure about the risk management authority's powers to direct agencies to comply with standards, and I am unsure about whether it should make recommendations on the funding of other agencies, given our democratic role to examine the funding of agencies.

This is a good day for criminal justice and for anyone with an interest in dealing with serious offenders and the approach to rehabilitation.

Search Hansard contributions

Plenary, 27 Jun 2001

In the same item of business