Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Plenary, 09 Jan 2008

09 Jan 2008 · S3 · Plenary

Item of business

Serious Organised Crime

White, Sandra SNP Glasgow Watch on SPTV

I do not want to know about the Liberal Democrats' manifesto commitments, some of which certainly have not been taken forward. That said, I take the member's point. However, my point is that the amendment belittles this debate. The issue could have been raised in other debates.

For too long, Scotland—and, in particular, Glasgow and the west—has been scarred by the activities of organised gangs that have terrorised the general public and have made huge profits from others' misery. As a result, I welcome not only this debate but the cabinet secretary's recent announcement that he will crack down on the use of taxi firms for money laundering purposes by making it easier for councils to limit the number of private hire cabs.

I also welcome the proposal for legislation to regulate security firms, which, as most of us know, have some very high profile clients. We all recall the conviction last year of James Stevenson, who, as Pauline McNeill and Bill Aitken have pointed out, was sentenced to more than 12 years for his part in money laundering activities, which included the setting up of a taxi firm. Moreover, Tam McGraw, who died last year leaving a fortune estimated at £14 million, laundered money through taxi firms and security companies. We should welcome the length of the sentence imposed on Stevenson as a clear message that we will not tolerate those who participate in organised crime. Indeed, the courts should make a commitment to take such a view in the future, as only through our taking a consistently tough line on sentencing can we hope to deter others.

I also welcome the cabinet secretary's commitment to crack down on the use of tanning salons for money-laundering purposes. I have raised this issue many times over the years, particularly in relation to unmanned salons where unsupervised and uninformed people simply put £1 into a machine. No one checks their age or, indeed, what they get up to, and I assure the chamber that some salons have been closed down because of the unsavoury practices that have taken place in them. I look forward to hearing more on that matter from the cabinet secretary.

By bringing together different agencies and bodies in the fight against organised crime, the serious organised crime task force will be highly effective in achieving our desired aims. For too long, criminals have been able to operate because intelligence on their activities has not been as widely available to other agencies as it might have been. As Bill Butler and others have pointed out, through this platform of co-operation the task force will be in a perfect position to work with its UK counterpart, the Serious Organised Crime Agency, and Europol, to fight and respond to the threat of organised crime on an international level.

As the motion makes clear, more than £17 million has already been recovered through the provisions in the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. However, although that situation should be welcomed and applauded, it can be improved on. In fact, in response to a question on 15 November 2007, the First Minister said that

"we are actively looking at what improvements can be made"

to those provisions and that

"We are also considering ways to increase the value of assets seized."—[Official Report, 15 November 2007; c 3470.]

I welcome both that statement and the cabinet secretary's on-going dialogue with Westminster. In that respect, I wonder whether the cabinet secretary is able to give us some idea of when he will announce what improvements can be made to the 2002 act to ensure further that criminals get the message that we will not tolerate their activities and that they will not benefit from them.

The cabinet secretary also mentioned that the Government is working with several organisations on using recovered assets to help young people throughout the country and on drawing up specific funding proposals to increase available opportunities. I would be grateful if he could provide us with an update on how those plans are progressing. After all, investing in a positive future for our young people is the best guarantee that they will not turn to crime in the first place. Of course, we must ensure that any money for such initiatives makes a real difference to the lives of the people that they target. I am interested in finding out how that will be achieved.

We will debate the legislative consent motion on the Dormant Bank and Building Society Accounts Bill next week. I hope that the money that will be raised through its provisions and which will be administered by the Big Lottery Fund with guidance from ministers will be used specifically for local initiatives aimed at helping more young people to become involved in activities and projects of interest to them and their community.

By sending out the message that criminals will receive the maximum sentences that are available to the courts and that they will not profit from their activities, we are going down the right road. By coupling that message with the bringing together of the crime agencies to hunt down those criminals, we will take the fight to the criminals who are blighting our communities.

Search Hansard contributions

Plenary, 09 Jan 2008

In the same item of business