Hansard

The present system of automatic and unconditional early release of prisoners is rightly discredited; the system alarms victims and communities because they cannot understand why a person who has been sentenced to four years can be released after only two and can be kept under supervision only in particular circumstances—for example, if the person is a sex offender.

The Custodial Sentences and Weapons (Scotland) Bill should provide more clarity for victims and the public alike. There should be a clear public announcement in court by the sheriff of the minimum time that an offender will spend in jail. That time will be at least half, and up to three quarters, of the sentence. There will be a risk assessment in prison for those who will serve less than three quarters of their sentence in custody. That assessment will decide—in real time—whether a prisoner should be allowed to complete their sentence in the community. Crucially, it will also decide whether the rehabilitation programmes and support services that have been begun in prison will continue in the community where the prisoner will serve the remainder of their sentence under licence conditions.

The principles of the bill have been warmly welcomed. Once enacted, the bill will work alongside the Management of Offenders etc (Scotland) Act 2005, which requires close co-operation between the Scottish Prison Service and the community justice associations, and builds on the integrated case management that has already been developed to deal with certain categories of offenders.

Much of the focus of debate in the Justice 2 Committee was on the custodial part of the sentence—especially on the perceived anomaly of the 15-day cut-off, whereby a 15-day sentence will be served totally in custody, but anything more will be served half in custody and half in the community. As other members have said, wherever the cut-off is, there will be an anomaly. The minister said that there is a minimum time in which rehabilitation measures are possible, but we need a fuller explanation of the minister's thinking. The minister might wish to consider whether there will be particular impacts on female offenders, who tend to be at the lower end of the tariff and who might need support.

We must not overlook the fact that the part of the sentence that is served in the community is just as important as the part of the sentence that is served in jail. Bill Whyte of the criminal justice social work development centre said in evidence:

"I value the bill's recognition that a period in the community should be part of the sentence … because that is what is likely to give us a chance to connect."—[Official Report, Justice 2 Committee, 14 November 2006; c 2967.]

The question that is therefore raised is this: can we have a seamless transition when we consider the numbers of prisoners that it is predicted will come through the prison system? It would be wonderful to be able to offer all offenders a gold standard of support after they leave prison, but there is concern that practical realities will mean that, if there is no prioritisation of resources to those who are most in need, resources will be spread too thinly, to the detriment of all.

I am sure that the Executive has given thought to that and, although I do not expect to see such practicalities in the bill, it would be useful to hear from the minister how priorities will be judged and who will make the judgments. As has been mentioned by other members, one solution that was mooted in evidence was that we should do away with short-term custodial sentences for minor offenders. Witnesses could not, however, agree on a cut-off point.

The debate has been going on for several years, and I feel that the committee was sidetracked somewhat from the main aspects of the bill. It is now perfectly possible for sheriffs to sentence offenders to community disposals. The number of sheriffs who do so is increasing; such disposals are increasingly seen as being neither soft nor ineffective. However, persuading sheriffs to increase the use of such disposals is outwith the scope of the bill, which deals with how custodial sentences should be managed when they are imposed. I hope that the Executive will do all that it can to promote the use of community disposals instead of prison disposals.

Sheriffs take a while to become comfortable with new sentences; naturally, they take time to examine them. We are told that they are somewhat uncertain about section 6 of the bill, which outlines the criteria that should be used in sentencing. It would be helpful if ministers could clarify that. I was pleased to hear the minister's commitment that the section would be reviewed.

Concerns have also been expressed that sheriffs may recalibrate sentences to retain the status quo—although ministers have indicated that that should not happen.

Another area of concern is the process of recall to prison if licence is breached. If release on licence is to be meaningful, a breach must be dealt with when it occurs. However, that raises questions of resources—for example, for the Parole Board, which will review the case, and for the Prison Service, which will provide accommodation. It has been suggested that there could be a revolving-door scenario. Questions have also been asked about the number of members of the Parole Board. Many of the questions will be answered when the detailed information work by the planning group is completed. I know that many of the bodies that asked those questions are members of the planning group, so I assume that they will address their own concerns. I look forward to their solutions.

I turn to the proposals in part 3 to restrict the sale of non-domestic knives and swords. I am sure that there is no one in the chamber who will not welcome those restrictions. We have heard over a number of months—not just during our consideration of the bill—from the violence reduction unit and from accident and emergency consultants about the seriousness of the knife-carrying culture that exists principally in west-central Scotland, although it is not exclusive to that area. Some other parts of the country may, in fact, have been complacent. I fear that that has been true of the area that I represent, although the Northern constabulary has recently expressed concerns about an increase in knife carrying and in the use of knives as weapons in assaults and robberies—in one case, a bayonet was used—and has said that any measure that stops casual carrying, mostly by young men, of those lethal weapons is to be commended. Victims and perpetrators are interchangeable and fatalities or serious injury can occur through panic and ignorance of basic anatomy. Let us do all that we can to stop it.

I support the principles of the bill and recommend it to Parliament.