Chamber
Plenary, 15 Mar 2007
15 Mar 2007 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Custodial Sentences and Weapons (Scotland) Bill: Stage 3
Those members who argue that the current system is in disrepute are absolutely correct. That is what the bill seeks to address. However, the passage of the part of the bill that seeks to make people who are serving 14-day sentences serve even longer than they do now would bring the system into even more disrepute.
To Kenny MacAskill, I say, with all due respect, that it is he who misses the point entirely. I am not suggesting that people should escape punishment. However, as he well knows and as the evidence that was presented to the committee during the passage of this and other bills demonstrated, imprisoning people for short periods of time is a waste of money and time. There are far better disposals available for people in that category. The minister hinted at a few of them—drug treatment and testing orders, supervised attendance orders, community disposals and so on. No one is suggesting that people should walk away without punishment.
Kenny MacAskill and Jeremy Purvis suggested that we should leave matters as they are. Those who want to leave matters as they are should support my amendment, because the bill does not propose to leave matters as they are; it proposes to make people who are sentenced to 14 days in custody spend twice as long in custody as they would under the present system. Both those members have missed the logic entirely. They seem to suggest that leaving matters as they are means that we would not do anything with the current disposal, but that is not the case, as the bill seeks to change the situation entirely.
The emphasis of a large part of the bill, which I welcome, is on the community part of sentences. Jeremy Purvis implied that people need to spend longer in custody so that they can have better rehabilitation services around them, but that flies in the face of all the evidence that he sat through in the committee, as all the experts told us that rehabilitation of offenders serving less than six months is impossible. If that is the case, it beggars belief that it can be done in 14 days. We have to make the sentences shorter by keeping the arrangement as it currently is. That is the point that Kenny MacAskill and Jeremy Purvis missed.
The minister is right to point out that we are dealing with an anomaly. Everybody in the chamber accepts that. However, my amendments are the only way in which that anomaly can be removed from the bill.
I press amendment 16 and ask the Parliament to support it.
To Kenny MacAskill, I say, with all due respect, that it is he who misses the point entirely. I am not suggesting that people should escape punishment. However, as he well knows and as the evidence that was presented to the committee during the passage of this and other bills demonstrated, imprisoning people for short periods of time is a waste of money and time. There are far better disposals available for people in that category. The minister hinted at a few of them—drug treatment and testing orders, supervised attendance orders, community disposals and so on. No one is suggesting that people should walk away without punishment.
Kenny MacAskill and Jeremy Purvis suggested that we should leave matters as they are. Those who want to leave matters as they are should support my amendment, because the bill does not propose to leave matters as they are; it proposes to make people who are sentenced to 14 days in custody spend twice as long in custody as they would under the present system. Both those members have missed the logic entirely. They seem to suggest that leaving matters as they are means that we would not do anything with the current disposal, but that is not the case, as the bill seeks to change the situation entirely.
The emphasis of a large part of the bill, which I welcome, is on the community part of sentences. Jeremy Purvis implied that people need to spend longer in custody so that they can have better rehabilitation services around them, but that flies in the face of all the evidence that he sat through in the committee, as all the experts told us that rehabilitation of offenders serving less than six months is impossible. If that is the case, it beggars belief that it can be done in 14 days. We have to make the sentences shorter by keeping the arrangement as it currently is. That is the point that Kenny MacAskill and Jeremy Purvis missed.
The minister is right to point out that we are dealing with an anomaly. Everybody in the chamber accepts that. However, my amendments are the only way in which that anomaly can be removed from the bill.
I press amendment 16 and ask the Parliament to support it.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid):
NPA
The next item of business is stage 3 proceedings on the Custodial Sentences and Weapons (Scotland) Bill. Members should have with them copies of the bill as ...
Section 4—Basic definitions
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
Group 1 is minor and technical amendments. Amendment 1, in the name of the minister, is grouped with amendments 2, 3, 45, 4, 48, 54, 65, 68, 69, 71, 74, 6 to...
The Deputy Minister for Justice (Johann Lamont):
Lab
This large group of amendments deals with a number of technical and drafting issues that have resulted from a final proofreading of the bill's provisions. Th...
Amendment 1 agreed to.
Amendment 2 moved—Johann Lamont—and agreed to.
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
Group 2 is on the abolition of custody-only sentences. Amendment 16, in the name of Colin Fox, is grouped with amendments 17 to 19 and 33. Again, I draw memb...
Colin Fox (Lothians) (SSP):
SSP
The purpose of the amendments is to address what has been widely accepted as an anomaly in the bill—the fact that offenders who receive 14-day sentences serv...
Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
On the face of it, Mr Fox's comments and the points that were made by Susan Matheson in Sacro's submission have some merit. However, we need to look at these...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
Colin Fox is technically correct to say that the bill appears to contain an anomaly. However, in my experience, sentences of 14 days or fewer are unheard of....
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
At what stage can proper rehabilitation services and support start? At stage 1 and stage 2, Colin Fox made good points about the time it would take the priso...
Johann Lamont:
Lab
Amendments 16 to 19 and 33 seek to address Mr Fox's concern that custody-only prisoners could spend longer in prison than those custody and community sentenc...
Colin Fox:
SSP
Those members who argue that the current system is in disrepute are absolutely correct. That is what the bill seeks to address. However, the passage of the p...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
The question is, that amendment 16 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members:
No.
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
There will be a division. Since this is the first division in these proceedings, there will be a five-minute suspension.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
We will proceed with the division on amendment 16.
ForBaird, Shiona (North East Scotland) (Green) Ballance, Chris (South of Scotland) (Green) Fox, Colin (Lothians) (SSP) Harper, Robin (Lothians) (Green) Harvi...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
The result of the division is: For 6, Against 94, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 16 disagreed to.
Amendment 17 moved—Colin Fox.
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
The question is, that amendment 17 be agreed to. Are we agreed?
Members:
No.
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
There will be a division.
ForBaird, Shiona (North East Scotland) (Green) Ballance, Chris (South of Scotland) (Green) Fox, Colin (Lothians) (SSP) Harper, Robin (Lothians) (Green) Harvi...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
The result of the division is: For 6, Against 94, Abstentions 0.
Amendment 17 disagreed to.
Amendment 3 moved—Johann Lamont—and agreed to.