Chamber
Plenary, 15 Mar 2007
15 Mar 2007 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Custodial Sentences and Weapons (Scotland) Bill
At First Minister's question time today, the First Minister said that the bill will end the Tories' provisions on the automatic early release of prisoners. Of course, it will do no such thing, because it will replace those provisions with Labour's provisions on the automatic early release of prisoners. Offenders will continue to be released early, before they have served the full period that the sentencers hand down.
The bill promises to address the public's confusion and irritation about the present situation, in which six months means three months, a year equals six months and people commit crimes while they are out on licence. However, the truth is that that situation will continue under the bill: the first 50 per cent of people's sentences will be served in custody and, unfortunately, it is likely that prisoners will commit crimes while out on licence, because the supervision will be based on no more than a promise of good behaviour. The bill will fail to deliver on the promises. Who says so? For one, the Justice 2 Committee, which stated in its stage 1 report that it
"supports the … objectives of the Bill"—
members can read those for themselves—but
"calls into question whether the measures in the Bill, as currently constituted, can achieve the stated objectives."
The members of the Justice 2 Committee are not the only ones who have criticisms and believe that the bill will fail. The Scottish Consortium on Crime and Criminal Justice
"regrets very much that the Scottish Executive is choosing to follow a path that, far from achieving the above goals and intentions, would incur huge costs and have serious negative … consequences for the criminal justice system and for the safety of Scottish communities."
Time does not permit me to read out the evidence from Sacro, the community justice authorities, Professor Andrew Coyle and the Sheriffs Association, all of whom criticised the bill and suggested that it will not achieve the transparency that is sought.
It is a pity that the bill is flawed, because it has some sensible aspects, such as the restriction on knife ownership and the emphasis on community sentences. As the minister knows full well, I have commended on the record the Scottish Executive and the justice system in Scotland for the fact that, for the first time, we now dispose of most cases through non-custodial options. I welcome that. However, we are sending more people to jail for longer, which is especially curious when, by all accounts, we have a falling crime rate. I want more sentences to be served in the community, with properly supported and supervised offenders and appropriate risk management in tandem with thorough protection for the wider community. However, the bill will not provide that.
Like other members, I am staggered by the complacency of the Executive, which is prepared to see prisoner numbers—which are already at record levels—continue to rise, especially given the appalling reports of overcrowding that we receive every year. The Executive has a dead-end strategy. The minister says that nothing in the bill will require judges to change their sentencing practice, yet virtually every witness from whom the Justice 2 Committee heard suggested that judges will change their practice. The Scottish Prison Service expects the daily prisoner population to rise by 1,100. That is the reality with which we are grappling.
The bill gives the public unrealistic expectations and will result in the inappropriate use of scarce resources. In reality, much of the evidence that the committee received was that the bill will put us in danger of reducing public confidence by putting resources in all the wrong places, which will not serve the best interests of the victims of crime. The bill represents exceptionally poor value for money. About £200 million will be spent on two new prisons for 1,100 extra prisoners, more prison staff will be required and 10 per cent more criminal justice social workers will be needed—I could go on and on. The bill will result in more people going to jail for longer—precisely the opposite of the advice on what works that the committee was given repeatedly in evidence.
Any bill that could add 20 per cent to our dangerously high prison population is wrong-headed. The bill will put badly needed resources for tackling crime in the wrong place. I voiced my criticisms in the committee at stage 1 and stage 2 and I cannot support the bill at decision time.
The bill promises to address the public's confusion and irritation about the present situation, in which six months means three months, a year equals six months and people commit crimes while they are out on licence. However, the truth is that that situation will continue under the bill: the first 50 per cent of people's sentences will be served in custody and, unfortunately, it is likely that prisoners will commit crimes while out on licence, because the supervision will be based on no more than a promise of good behaviour. The bill will fail to deliver on the promises. Who says so? For one, the Justice 2 Committee, which stated in its stage 1 report that it
"supports the … objectives of the Bill"—
members can read those for themselves—but
"calls into question whether the measures in the Bill, as currently constituted, can achieve the stated objectives."
The members of the Justice 2 Committee are not the only ones who have criticisms and believe that the bill will fail. The Scottish Consortium on Crime and Criminal Justice
"regrets very much that the Scottish Executive is choosing to follow a path that, far from achieving the above goals and intentions, would incur huge costs and have serious negative … consequences for the criminal justice system and for the safety of Scottish communities."
Time does not permit me to read out the evidence from Sacro, the community justice authorities, Professor Andrew Coyle and the Sheriffs Association, all of whom criticised the bill and suggested that it will not achieve the transparency that is sought.
It is a pity that the bill is flawed, because it has some sensible aspects, such as the restriction on knife ownership and the emphasis on community sentences. As the minister knows full well, I have commended on the record the Scottish Executive and the justice system in Scotland for the fact that, for the first time, we now dispose of most cases through non-custodial options. I welcome that. However, we are sending more people to jail for longer, which is especially curious when, by all accounts, we have a falling crime rate. I want more sentences to be served in the community, with properly supported and supervised offenders and appropriate risk management in tandem with thorough protection for the wider community. However, the bill will not provide that.
Like other members, I am staggered by the complacency of the Executive, which is prepared to see prisoner numbers—which are already at record levels—continue to rise, especially given the appalling reports of overcrowding that we receive every year. The Executive has a dead-end strategy. The minister says that nothing in the bill will require judges to change their sentencing practice, yet virtually every witness from whom the Justice 2 Committee heard suggested that judges will change their practice. The Scottish Prison Service expects the daily prisoner population to rise by 1,100. That is the reality with which we are grappling.
The bill gives the public unrealistic expectations and will result in the inappropriate use of scarce resources. In reality, much of the evidence that the committee received was that the bill will put us in danger of reducing public confidence by putting resources in all the wrong places, which will not serve the best interests of the victims of crime. The bill represents exceptionally poor value for money. About £200 million will be spent on two new prisons for 1,100 extra prisoners, more prison staff will be required and 10 per cent more criminal justice social workers will be needed—I could go on and on. The bill will result in more people going to jail for longer—precisely the opposite of the advice on what works that the committee was given repeatedly in evidence.
Any bill that could add 20 per cent to our dangerously high prison population is wrong-headed. The bill will put badly needed resources for tackling crime in the wrong place. I voiced my criticisms in the committee at stage 1 and stage 2 and I cannot support the bill at decision time.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-5632, in the name of Cathy Jamieson, that the Parliament agrees that the Custodial Sentences and Weapons ...
The Minister for Justice (Cathy Jamieson):
Lab
It is often said that a week is a long time in politics, but the past four years seem to have flown by as we have worked on comprehensively reforming our cri...
Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
Will the minister give way?
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
Indeed.
Phil Gallie:
Con
I thank the minister for giving way with her usual courtesy, but how on earth can she guarantee that the licence conditions will be met in full? Bail conditi...
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
Mr Gallie always raises questions about bail and people's responsibility to comply with conditions. The onus is absolutely on the offender: if conditions are...
Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
Although there are aspects of the bill that we fully support, there are parts of it that still cause us significant concern. We are grateful to the minister ...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
I apologise for being slightly late for the minister's speech. I was debating the matter on television with Bill Butler.During this morning's stage 3 proceed...
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
Will Mr Aitken enlighten members on the cost of the proposals in the amendments that he moved this morning, which were unsuccessful? What impact would those ...
Bill Aitken:
Con
The minister will appreciate that if the amendments in my name had been agreed to they would have had an impact on the prison estate and another prison would...
Cathy Jamieson:
Lab
I hope that Bill Aitken agrees that it is important to make a distinction between prisoners who are released on licence and shorter-term prisoners who are cu...
Bill Aitken:
Con
I accept the minister's point in part, but if someone reoffends during the unexpired period of their sentence, they can be brought back to the court to be de...
Mr MacAskill:
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Bill Aitken:
Con
I am sorry, but I am in my last minute.Offences at the lower end of the scale are not a serious matter, but when there is an accumulation of offences, someth...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
We will support the bill today, as we did at stage 1, although we share many of the concerns that were outlined by Kenny MacAskill. The bill is only one part...
Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton) (Lab):
Lab
I thank the Justice 2 Committee clerks, our advisers, the ministers and their officials and everyone who gave evidence and helped to shape the bill.I very mu...
Bill Aitken:
Con
Will the member give way?
Jackie Baillie:
Lab
Of course.
Bill Aitken:
Con
Where has the member been for the past 10 years? After all, the Labour Party has had that long to change the current flawed system.
Jackie Baillie:
Lab
The difference is that we are changing the system now. The record will show that the Tories did not do so and that, in fact, they wasted opportunities to mak...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green):
Green
This morning, Johann Lamont said that there had been attacks on the bill from both sides—from some who appear to want nobody to be sent to prison and from ot...
Gordon Jackson (Glasgow Govan) (Lab):
Lab
The minister is right to say that the bill represents a fundamental—and good—change in the way in which we do things.There was no lack of clarity before. Whe...
Colin Fox (Lothians) (SSP):
SSP
At First Minister's question time today, the First Minister said that the bill will end the Tories' provisions on the automatic early release of prisoners. O...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
We come to closing speeches. We are behind the clock, so I am obliged to Jeremy Purvis for waiving his second speaking slot.
Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
It is with disappointment that I rise today. I had great hopes for the bill. Like Bill Aitken and others, including Colin Fox and Patrick Harvie, I feel that...
The Deputy Minister for Justice (Johann Lamont):
Lab
The member obviously did not listen to my earlier explanation. When sentencing, judges take into account whatever they choose to take into account, including...
Phil Gallie:
Con
If it is simply not true, minister, why on earth leave those words in the bill? They could have been removed. Given what the minister has said, it would not ...
Jeremy Purvis:
LD
Will the member give way?
Phil Gallie:
Con
I am sorry, but I am in my last minute. Patrick Harvie's points on education and addressing addiction were worth while. There is a need for longer terms in p...
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP):
SNP
I say to Phil Gallie that, if this is legislating in haste, I would hate to see us taking our time. After 10 years, it is probably time that we got round to ...