Chamber
Plenary, 15 Mar 2007
15 Mar 2007 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Custodial Sentences and Weapons (Scotland) Bill
We will support the bill today, as we did at stage 1, although we share many of the concerns that were outlined by Kenny MacAskill.
The bill is only one part of an effective approach to cutting crime. The other part will be—as the deputy minister said this morning—the responsibility of the Parliament in the new session, after May. The bill focuses almost exclusively on sentence management rather than sentencing practice and policy. I say "almost exclusively" because there are welcome measures for restricting the sale of knives and banning swords—except for wholly justified circumstances. Those aspects of the bill, inevitably, have not been given the consideration that other parts of the bill have been given, as there has been considerable consensus on them. I think that those provisions will make a difference.
In Scotland, two thirds of offenders who are convicted of breach of the peace and just under half of those who are convicted of shoplifting go to prison for less than three months. For those offenders, we ask whether prison works. More than two thirds of them reoffend within a year of their release from prison. Prison sentences do not appear to work, either for those offenders or for our communities.
Between 50 and 80 per cent of prisoners have writing, numeracy and reading skills below the level that is expected of an 11-year-old child, and prisoners are 13 times more likely than the general population to be unemployed. In addition, between 60 and 80 per cent of prisoners were using drugs before their imprisonment. Three quarters of young people in custody in Scotland have a history of regular school truancy, less than half of them had attended school regularly, and only a third of them have any qualifications. Of course, short-term prison sentences do not work for those young people.
For adults who enter our prisons, the indicators are clear: drug or alcohol misuse; a lack of stable employment; and literacy and numeracy skills below the level expected of an 11-year-old child. For youth offenders, the indicators are just as clear: a history of contact with social work services—and, frequently, with the police and the reporter for their local authority—and no qualifications.
According to the Conservatives and others, putting adults and young people with very short sentences in jail with offenders of the same social make-up will reduce reoffending. Such a claim shows complete ignorance of the evidence, which was certainly clear when it was presented to the committee.
I do not doubt the integrity or sincerity of the Minister for Justice or her deputy. Indeed, I have considerable respect for them; it is a pleasure to work with them, because they listen to suggestions and respond positively. They know that short-term prison sentences are useful only for giving communities or individuals respite from violent or dangerous people. Moreover, they welcome the fact that more community than custody disposals are being handed down, which is a major step forward.
However, there is no commitment to address the problem of very short-term sentences. By not tackling the issue head-on, we are telling communities throughout Scotland that we are happy to tolerate, for example, the fact that more than 60 per cent of offenders commit another crime on their release from jail. The Conservatives seem to be happy that their approach will make no difference to the underlying problems facing individual offenders and that, therefore, further crimes will be committed.
I felt frustrated at stage 2, because I wanted to lodge amendments that would have introduced conditional sentences for offenders who were given less than six months or which would have given a judge or justice of the peace the discretion to vary the custody part of a sentence from 0 to 100 per cent. However, those amendments were judged not to be within the scope of the bill, and the convener did not permit them to be lodged. Of course, such decisions are at his discretion. Nevertheless, if I had been allowed to lodge my amendments, we could have had a better debate on the bill.
I have not been an MSP for as long as some other members but, in my four years in the Parliament, I have not heard such sheer hypocrisy as I have heard from the Conservatives, both this morning and at lunch time, with regard to the bill. Under their policy, a person who is sentenced to two years would serve four months out of jail; indeed, Bill Aitken confirmed that someone on a four-year sentence would serve eight months in the community. The Conservatives keep telling us that people should serve their full sentence in prison, but that is not even their policy.
The Conservatives also say that they are on the side of victims. However, saying that victims want more and more punitive responses to offenders shows a complete misunderstanding of the situation. For example, victims of crime have told me that they simply want a system that ensures that the offender does not reoffend.
We are halfway towards meeting that aim with this progressive legislation; the Parliament in the next session will have to complete the other half of that work.
The bill is only one part of an effective approach to cutting crime. The other part will be—as the deputy minister said this morning—the responsibility of the Parliament in the new session, after May. The bill focuses almost exclusively on sentence management rather than sentencing practice and policy. I say "almost exclusively" because there are welcome measures for restricting the sale of knives and banning swords—except for wholly justified circumstances. Those aspects of the bill, inevitably, have not been given the consideration that other parts of the bill have been given, as there has been considerable consensus on them. I think that those provisions will make a difference.
In Scotland, two thirds of offenders who are convicted of breach of the peace and just under half of those who are convicted of shoplifting go to prison for less than three months. For those offenders, we ask whether prison works. More than two thirds of them reoffend within a year of their release from prison. Prison sentences do not appear to work, either for those offenders or for our communities.
Between 50 and 80 per cent of prisoners have writing, numeracy and reading skills below the level that is expected of an 11-year-old child, and prisoners are 13 times more likely than the general population to be unemployed. In addition, between 60 and 80 per cent of prisoners were using drugs before their imprisonment. Three quarters of young people in custody in Scotland have a history of regular school truancy, less than half of them had attended school regularly, and only a third of them have any qualifications. Of course, short-term prison sentences do not work for those young people.
For adults who enter our prisons, the indicators are clear: drug or alcohol misuse; a lack of stable employment; and literacy and numeracy skills below the level expected of an 11-year-old child. For youth offenders, the indicators are just as clear: a history of contact with social work services—and, frequently, with the police and the reporter for their local authority—and no qualifications.
According to the Conservatives and others, putting adults and young people with very short sentences in jail with offenders of the same social make-up will reduce reoffending. Such a claim shows complete ignorance of the evidence, which was certainly clear when it was presented to the committee.
I do not doubt the integrity or sincerity of the Minister for Justice or her deputy. Indeed, I have considerable respect for them; it is a pleasure to work with them, because they listen to suggestions and respond positively. They know that short-term prison sentences are useful only for giving communities or individuals respite from violent or dangerous people. Moreover, they welcome the fact that more community than custody disposals are being handed down, which is a major step forward.
However, there is no commitment to address the problem of very short-term sentences. By not tackling the issue head-on, we are telling communities throughout Scotland that we are happy to tolerate, for example, the fact that more than 60 per cent of offenders commit another crime on their release from jail. The Conservatives seem to be happy that their approach will make no difference to the underlying problems facing individual offenders and that, therefore, further crimes will be committed.
I felt frustrated at stage 2, because I wanted to lodge amendments that would have introduced conditional sentences for offenders who were given less than six months or which would have given a judge or justice of the peace the discretion to vary the custody part of a sentence from 0 to 100 per cent. However, those amendments were judged not to be within the scope of the bill, and the convener did not permit them to be lodged. Of course, such decisions are at his discretion. Nevertheless, if I had been allowed to lodge my amendments, we could have had a better debate on the bill.
I have not been an MSP for as long as some other members but, in my four years in the Parliament, I have not heard such sheer hypocrisy as I have heard from the Conservatives, both this morning and at lunch time, with regard to the bill. Under their policy, a person who is sentenced to two years would serve four months out of jail; indeed, Bill Aitken confirmed that someone on a four-year sentence would serve eight months in the community. The Conservatives keep telling us that people should serve their full sentence in prison, but that is not even their policy.
The Conservatives also say that they are on the side of victims. However, saying that victims want more and more punitive responses to offenders shows a complete misunderstanding of the situation. For example, victims of crime have told me that they simply want a system that ensures that the offender does not reoffend.
We are halfway towards meeting that aim with this progressive legislation; the Parliament in the next session will have to complete the other half of that work.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-5632, in the name of Cathy Jamieson, that the Parliament agrees that the Custodial Sentences and Weapons ...
The Minister for Justice (Cathy Jamieson):
Lab
It is often said that a week is a long time in politics, but the past four years seem to have flown by as we have worked on comprehensively reforming our cri...
Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
Will the minister give way?
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
Indeed.
Phil Gallie:
Con
I thank the minister for giving way with her usual courtesy, but how on earth can she guarantee that the licence conditions will be met in full? Bail conditi...
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
Mr Gallie always raises questions about bail and people's responsibility to comply with conditions. The onus is absolutely on the offender: if conditions are...
Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
Although there are aspects of the bill that we fully support, there are parts of it that still cause us significant concern. We are grateful to the minister ...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
I apologise for being slightly late for the minister's speech. I was debating the matter on television with Bill Butler.During this morning's stage 3 proceed...
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
Will Mr Aitken enlighten members on the cost of the proposals in the amendments that he moved this morning, which were unsuccessful? What impact would those ...
Bill Aitken:
Con
The minister will appreciate that if the amendments in my name had been agreed to they would have had an impact on the prison estate and another prison would...
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
I hope that Bill Aitken agrees that it is important to make a distinction between prisoners who are released on licence and shorter-term prisoners who are cu...
Bill Aitken:
Con
I accept the minister's point in part, but if someone reoffends during the unexpired period of their sentence, they can be brought back to the court to be de...
Mr MacAskill:
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Bill Aitken:
Con
I am sorry, but I am in my last minute.Offences at the lower end of the scale are not a serious matter, but when there is an accumulation of offences, someth...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
We will support the bill today, as we did at stage 1, although we share many of the concerns that were outlined by Kenny MacAskill. The bill is only one part...
Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton) (Lab):
Lab
I thank the Justice 2 Committee clerks, our advisers, the ministers and their officials and everyone who gave evidence and helped to shape the bill.I very mu...
Bill Aitken:
Con
Will the member give way?
Jackie Baillie:
Lab
Of course.
Bill Aitken:
Con
Where has the member been for the past 10 years? After all, the Labour Party has had that long to change the current flawed system.
Jackie Baillie:
Lab
The difference is that we are changing the system now. The record will show that the Tories did not do so and that, in fact, they wasted opportunities to mak...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green):
Green
This morning, Johann Lamont said that there had been attacks on the bill from both sides—from some who appear to want nobody to be sent to prison and from ot...
Gordon Jackson (Glasgow Govan) (Lab):
Lab
The minister is right to say that the bill represents a fundamental—and good—change in the way in which we do things.There was no lack of clarity before. Whe...
Colin Fox (Lothians) (SSP):
SSP
At First Minister's question time today, the First Minister said that the bill will end the Tories' provisions on the automatic early release of prisoners. O...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
We come to closing speeches. We are behind the clock, so I am obliged to Jeremy Purvis for waiving his second speaking slot.
Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
It is with disappointment that I rise today. I had great hopes for the bill. Like Bill Aitken and others, including Colin Fox and Patrick Harvie, I feel that...
The Deputy Minister for Justice (Johann Lamont):
Lab
The member obviously did not listen to my earlier explanation. When sentencing, judges take into account whatever they choose to take into account, including...
Phil Gallie:
Con
If it is simply not true, minister, why on earth leave those words in the bill? They could have been removed. Given what the minister has said, it would not ...
Jeremy Purvis:
LD
Will the member give way?
Phil Gallie:
Con
I am sorry, but I am in my last minute. Patrick Harvie's points on education and addressing addiction were worth while. There is a need for longer terms in p...
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP):
SNP
I say to Phil Gallie that, if this is legislating in haste, I would hate to see us taking our time. After 10 years, it is probably time that we got round to ...