Hansard

Like the minister, I thank all those who worked so hard on the bill and the organisations and individuals who provided written submissions and gave oral evidence to the committee. Jim Wallace was accurate in his thanks to the Justice 2 Committee, which worked so hard on scrutinising the bill. Its members raised fundamental and important issues in addition to making a number of suggestions that helped to improve the final outcome.

This debate is the culmination of a process of policy development. As the minister said, it included wide consultation, the publication of two white papers setting out our proposals and debates in the Parliament. We are not talking about hurried or hasty legislation. There has been an interesting and lively debate, which has reflected the diverse nature and importance of the provisions of the bill as well as concerns, doubts and anxieties that are to be recognised.

The debate has also reflected the determination of the Parliament to have an improved system of criminal justice in Scotland. It has shown that, despite some caveats, there is wide agreement on the overall aims of the legislation, which are to deliver better public protection, to promote more effective sentencing and to keep the law up to date. Johann Lamont rightly said that the willingness of people to engage in the process is a testament to the Parliament. In echoing her comments, I believe that the willingness of the Executive to listen and to respond is a strength of the parliamentary process and not a weakness.

I want to address a couple of comments that were made by members of the Conservative party. Lord James Douglas-Hamilton talked about the Conservatives' medicine being too strong. He is not correct, as the problem was that the Conservatives' medicine was wrongly prescribed and incorrectly mixed. The Conservatives made a number of proposals, some of which we accepted and others of which contributed to changes that were made. However, some of their proposals contained errors, including on reserved issues—Lord James Douglas-Hamilton referred to that. There were also some weaknesses in the Conservative proposals. The Conservatives' medicine was wrongly composed and would have been completely ineffective. Lord James Douglas-Hamilton's comment was inaccurate.

The bill should not be seen as an opportunity lost and we should not look to diminish or demean the bill on the basis of the remarks that Bill Aitken made. It is not an opportunity lost to tighten up the law on child pornography and on the trafficking of people for prostitution. It is not an opportunity lost to extend rights to victims or to crack down on wildlife crime. It is certainly not an opportunity lost to toughen up measures to deal with the anti-social behaviour that is scarring many of our communities in Scotland.

All in all, the bill represents progress for the Scottish Parliament and for the people of Scotland. Many measures in the bill will have a great impact on the wider community. Many good things have come out of the bill, but it is right to say that although it marks our progress, the Parliament and its Administration are not complacent. There is much more to do to tackle crime and anti-social behaviour in Scotland, and the bill is the first of a number of measures that we intend to introduce to make Scotland a safer and more secure place.