Hansard

I am not, and never have been, a member of the Justice Committee, but looking back over the eight years that I have spent in the Parliament and the debates on justice that I have taken part in, I notice that usually I have a personal or professional interest in the work that the Justice Committee is doing. It is important work, which we expect to be done, because we want to live in a safer society.

My background in social work took me to many households, local area teams, support groups and support centres, where I saw some amazing work going on. When we see people who have been, in a sense, victims of the justice system, in as much as how they ended up there, and how they are rehabilitated out the other end, we cannot fail to realise the fantastic work that is being done by professionals in that field. They need every tool in the toolbox to help them to do that work.

I have said it before, but I will say it again: the safety of the public is our absolute priority. However, rehabilitation and support for people who have been through the justice system are just as important in building the safe society that we all want.

The question is, how best do we achieve that result? I know that it is not going to be done in one great leap, but these debates—the number that I have taken part in is probably a drop in the ocean compared with the number for some others in the chamber—are a way to highlight some of that, and I believe that this particular bill takes us a small but important step forward.

One of my interests as co-convener of the cross-party group on men’s violence against women and children is obviously what happens to people who are victims of domestic violence or sexual abuse. We might see a convicted criminal sentenced for 10 years, and his victim might heave a sigh of relief, but she—and in most cases it is a she—will be well aware that the likelihood of that perpetrator being released early and of her not knowing about it is very high indeed.

I supported the Clare’s law pilot, and I am happy that the Scottish Government has taken that forward. It allows someone who has suspicions about their partner to get the information that they need. That is an important way of providing people with relevant information where appropriate.

There are questions about transparency, and I see that transparency and clarity are a key theme in the stage 1 report. People’s rights, and some prisoners’ rights, have to be clear and transparent too. They are two sides of the same coin, in my opinion. Knowing what the real, rather than theoretical, outcome is going to be is just as important to prisoners as it is to victims, and transparency is a hallmark of this Government. We live and operate in a real world, rather than behind the gated entrance of Downing Street.

The bill is a move towards greater transparency. Rather than vague assumptions about early release, it will introduce proper controls that will improve the system by allowing decisions about when and how people are released to be the most important element. Those decisions will be taken and informed by individual consideration of a prisoner, taking into account public safety and the need for effective supervision. In that way, it addresses both sides of the coin: it ensures that dangerous prisoners do not get released automatically, while bringing in a mandatory period of control through supervision for all long-term prisoners leaving custody. Long-term support and control are something that I absolutely agree with.

I suppose that doing that successfully will always be something of a balancing act. I spent some time working with criminal justice social workers, so I know that it is sometimes difficult to make that judgment call. That is why they need the best tools to hand.

We are thinking about not petty criminals—people on three or four-month sentences—but people who are serving much longer jail terms and who should remain in jail for the sentence that they have been given. No prisoner serving time for serious offences would be automatically released on licence after two thirds of their sentence, for instance. We already know that a prisoner on automatic release is seven times more likely to breach their licence conditions than someone released after a decision by the Parole Board. The reason is obvious: when individual consideration is applied, people are likely to respond more positively.

When the Government decided to close down Cornton Vale women’s prison, that was one of the realities that the cabinet secretary recognised. Prison of itself is not curative. What works is small units such as the 218 centre, where women prisoners are managed in a far more constructive way. Although by far the majority of women in prison are there for minor offences, women can and do commit violent crime, and society should be protected from them.

Dame Elish Angiolini’s report pointed out that women commit different types of crimes for distinctly different reasons. Drug abuse, a dysfunctional or deprived family background, being victims of violence themselves, or confused desperation can all colour their motives. She pointed out:

“While the proportions of the male and female populations in prison for violent offences are similar (about 35 per cent as at 30 June 2010), proportionally more women are in prison for ‘other’ crimes”.

The current system is—much like Westminster, in my view—not working for Scotland, but we have the foresight and intelligence here to find ways to manage criminals better. The elements that I have highlighted indicate how right Dame Elish Angiolini’s recommendations are.

I am talking about the women’s prison because I believe that the recommendations from that report could apply across the board. One-stop shops such as the 218 centre and the Willow project can be used to deal with all prisoners. There is scope to develop that idea across the entire prison regime, and I hope that the cabinet secretary will think about that.

Support services such as those that have been described, and the greater clarity on release arrangements for which the stage 1 report calls, can only help to ensure that we reduce reoffending and give the professionals the teams and tools to do the job properly. Victim Support Scotland has called for more clarity, and I am sure that the cabinet secretary will step up in that regard.

It is clear that the Government and members want to move forward with innovative responses in order to find a more effective and meaningful direction than the current system can offer. That can only be good for us all.