Meeting of the Parliament 02 April 2015
If Mr Allard does not mind, I will make some progress.
That is not a precedent that the Scottish Parliament should set or encourage, and nor is the cabinet secretary’s piecemeal filtering down of more information as recently as yesterday, in an attempt to address the numerous unanswered questions that the proposed change has prompted, any more acceptable.
Furthermore, evidence from witnesses such as the University of Strathclyde’s Professor Cyrus Tata highlighted the fact that the proposals could result in a prisoner being released without supervision on what has been termed “cold release”. He confirmed that, in such cases, released prisoners would be more likely to reoffend.
Moreover, instead of clarifying already complicated sentencing policy, the bill—to quote Dr Monica Barry from the University of Strathclyde—merely “muddies the water”.
Victim Support Scotland wants
“greater clarity and transparency in the system, so that victims and the community are better able to understand sentencing.”—[Official Report, Justice Committee, 24 February 2015; c 14.]
That is why it supports the Scottish Conservatives’ call for the ending of automatic early release for all prisoners, which would provide clarity and honesty in sentencing.
Witnesses have also raised issues regarding the shortage of places on rehabilitation programmes in prison. With demand outstripping supply, there is—as Professor Miller confirmed—an issue about the human rights impact statements being inadequate. Therefore, the committee recommended that an independent assessment of the provision and availability of rehabilitation programmes in prison be carried out. I look forward to hearing the cabinet secretary’s response to that.
The Justice Committee’s task was to scrutinise the bill. In addition to dealing with all the flaws that I have just identified, it is being asked to form a view on a policy change that has been announced at the final hour, without having sight of a revised policy memorandum, financial memorandum or explanatory notes. That is hardly conducive to effective scrutiny. Stakeholders across the board have echoed that view, and many witnesses are calling for the bill to be withdrawn.
For those reasons, I dissented in committee from agreeing to the general principles of the bill. Those reasons are also why the Scottish Conservatives will abstain at stage 1.
15:11