Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Justice 2 Committee, 28 Mar 2006

28 Mar 2006 · S2 · Justice 2 Committee

Item of business

Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Purvis, Jeremy LD Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale Watch on SPTV

No one can be in any doubt about the scale of the problem of knife crime in Scotland. All committee members were struck by the presentation that was given to us by Dr Michael Sheridan and Dr Jean Moller. It is worth repeating the statistics from their research. In 2003, 72 murders with sharp implements took place in Scotland and 193 attempted murders involving a knife took place in Strathclyde alone. Those are the bare statistics. Underlying those statistics are many individuals with deep problems, chaotic lifestyles or just an inability to go out on a Friday night without an extremely dangerous weapon. Therefore, not only the criminal element but the societal problem needs to be dealt with.The suite of amendments in my name, which are connected, aims to shift the debate towards using our criminal justice system flexibly. Amendment 2A would amend amendment 2, in the name of Stewart Maxwell, by increasing the maximum term of imprisonment to 18 months. Amendment 233 would increase the maximum sentence on indictment to seven years.Far from seeking to become involved in a bidding game in which individuals or parties try to appear to be tougher than others are on sentencing, I have linked those amendments to amendment 235, which introduces a new concept in sentencing. That new concept is the custody and behavioural order, which is essentially consistent with the recommendations of the Sentencing Commission for Scotland. The commission recommended that we move away from simple custodial sentences to which no conditions for release or other conditions are attached when the sentence is handed down by the sheriff. Those conditions could include, for example, a community sentence model that is attached to a custodial sentence.Within the window of seven years that amendments 233 and 234 propose for possession of a knife or sharp implement in a public place or school, both a custodial and a community sentence could be imposed that would be shaped around the individual's offending behaviour. Amendment 235 would allow the court flexibility in deciding whether a custody and behavioural order was appropriate for an individual and what conditions should be required to rehabilitate the individual in the community. Such a flexible option would allow sheriffs to hand down, for example, a two-year custodial sentence and a five-year community sentence the latter of which included attendance on a programme. The programmes might deal with anger management or with other aspects of the offending behaviour for individuals with chaotic lifestyles. For example, training or housing interviews could be required.I hope that the minister will accept that I have lodged my amendments in good faith as a way of moving the debate beyond simply stating what the maximum sentence should be. As Stewart Maxwell said in an intervention during the stage 1 debate, the issue is not just about increasing sentences. I want to move the debate on.If the minister can respond positively by confirming that such criminal justice measures will be considered as a way of taking forward the Sentencing Commission's recommendations, I will not press my amendments at this stage. However, I will reserve the right to lodge them again so that it can be established whether Parliament considers that simply extending sentences is the right way forward or whether there is a cross-party consensus in the Parliament on the need for sentences with additional measures attached that will help individuals, make communities safer and ultimately be more effective.I move amendment 2A.

Search Hansard contributions

Justice 2 Committee, 28 Mar 2006

In the same item of business