Hansard

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 excellent project that tackles reoffending, and it is well worth supporting.

Today’s debate is rightly concerned with rehabilitation. I welcome Alison McInnes’s interest in that area and in particular her efforts in respect of the women’s prison at Cornton Vale. As other members have acknowledged, the purpose of a prison service is to hold prisoners safely in a secure environment, to punish them, to ensure the public’s safety, and—just as important—to address reoffending through education and other programmes.

I have already stated in the chamber my admiration for the work that is carried out across the prison sector in delivering the first two elements of a prison service’s duties. Unfortunately, however, evidence of success in addressing reoffending is thin on the ground and, despite regular pronouncements to the contrary, a great deal of effort is required in that regard.

At the Justice Committee we have heard much about the management of overcrowded prison facilities and the introduction to the system of additional capacity, including the new prison at Low Moss, which is to be welcomed. However, questions on the literacy and numeracy courses that are delivered received broad-brush responses that lacked detail on precisely how the Scottish Prison Service intends to deliver satisfactory courses against achievable targets and to publish results.

The most recent figures show that the rate of reoffending within two years of liberation stands at 42.4 per cent, yet Her Majesty’s chief inspector of Prisons, Hugh Monro, has regularly commented on the significant amount of time that prisoners of all ages spend inactive in their cells, avoiding opportunities for improvement. The challenge for the authorities is to tackle that and to provide the kinds of courses that deliver success. As members have pointed out, that will be no easy task, but it is a prize worth winning. Literacy and numeracy levels across the prison population remain stubbornly low, leaving the majority of prisoners incapable of filling in application forms or dealing with job interviews after release. That is not a good outcome in what is an already depressed employment market.

Much has been said about social impact bonds. If the model can be shown to deliver success while maintaining the necessary security within prisons, why should it not be used? However, that will be a matter for the authorities and I hope that the cabinet secretary will tell us how he intends to encourage results from the initiatives that he announced today and outlined in his speech.

The key demand is that the authorities focus and take steps to deliver on reoffending rates. Prisoner release dates should be linked to successful prisoner participation in education and behaviour improvement courses. Moreover, prisons should be empowered to reduce methadone programmes for each prisoner over the period of their sentence. The return of men and women to our communities with little home support or little evidence of educational improvement and without a new-found independence from methadone creates the fertile circumstances that prepare them for reoffending.

In her motion, Alison McInnes draws proper attention to the issues and challenges that the authorities must respond to. I support the motion and welcome the cabinet secretary’s positive approach in his opening speech.

11:11