Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,354,908
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Showing 60 of 2,354,908 contributions. Latest 30 days: 0. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 25 Mar 2026.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Would it be possible to reconcile those two things relatively straightforwardly, assuming that you wanted to persist with that? Would it be possible for someone to say “Right. Your punishment part is 10 years, but of course that’s subject to the standing early-release provisio...
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Is the issue of protection of the public not meant to be about protecting the public in the future? The public are already protected in the present because the prisoner is in the jail. The idea that within a determinate sentence there is an element of protection of the public ...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
The root of all the complexity seems to be the interrelationship between the different types of sentences and the operation of the rules in relation to early release—particularly automatic early release, which the Parliament is supposed to have been getting around to abolishin...
David McLetchie (Lothian) (Con) Con Chamber
19 Apr 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
As other members have done, I speak as a member of the Justice Committee, which has had responsibility for scrutinising the bill, the first part of which was described to us as creating“a tortuous system which is barely intelligible to lawyers, let alone to the general public”...
David McLetchie Con Chamber
19 Apr 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I agree that our prisons are full. However, I think that that is a good thing and it is one reason why crime rates are at their lowest for 35 years. I am astonished that members of the Scottish National Party, who like to brag about that weekly, fail to see the fairly obvious ...
David McLetchie: Con Chamber
25 Nov 1999
Law and Order
Will the minister explain how the prison population is predicted to fall at a time when crime is rising? Common sense would suggest that, if serious crime is increasing, as Mr Gallie said and official statistics show, the prison population should also rise, unless the Executiv...
David McLetchie: Con Chamber
02 Feb 2000
British-Irish Council
I could not agree more with Mr Raffan. This is a rare occasion, and I do not expect to say those words too often in this Parliament, but I agree with his sentiments on these matters—as he rightly says, we need a concerted approach. We need a multi-agency and multi-dimensional ...
David McLetchie (Lothians) (Con): Con Chamber
02 Mar 2000
European Convention on Human Rights
Thank you, Presiding Officer.At the outset of my speech, I wish to clarify what this debate is about and what we are seeking to achieve with our motion. It is not about withdrawal from the European convention on human rights—it is about the legal relationship between ECHR and ...
David McLetchie: Con Chamber
17 May 2001
First Minister's Question Time · Cabinet (Meetings)
Having listened to that answer, I have to ask whether it is any wonder that the Scottish Police Federation passes motions at its conference criticising the Executive for"misleading and inaccurate information issued by elected representatives and officials".May I give the First...
David McLetchie: Con Chamber
06 Mar 2003
Scottish Executive (Record)
It would work a lot better if Mr Rumbles were in it.The prison service is not perfect. We should try to rehabilitate offenders, but let us not forget that the number 1 priority is the protection of the public. We need honest sentences with limited remission that has to be earn...
David McLetchie: Con Chamber
29 May 2003
First Minister's Question Time · Cabinet (Meetings)
I sincerely trust that, at its next meeting, the Cabinet will find the time to discuss the rising tide of serious crime in Scotland, exemplified by the statistics that came out the other day. During the election campaign, the First Minister said that he was concerned about con...
David McLetchie (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Con): Con Chamber
06 Sep 2005
Scottish Executive's Programme
Although we will be able to support aspects of the legislative programme, I submit that it is not the programme that Scotland needs. It is still all too symptomatic of an approach to government that we have criticised and will continue to criticise. It adds further to the impr...
David McLetchie (Lothian) (Con) Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
If I understood correctly, it was said earlier that the bill will make a complex situation even more complex. As we have just heard, a lot of this is bound up with the present provisions on the statute book in relation to the automatic early release of prisoners who are on det...
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Indeed. I was struck by the Law Society of Scotland’s comments in its submission about the notional stripping out of notional discrete elements from notional fixed sentences. It concludes:“if this stripping out exercise was removed, then as a matter of law, an indeterminate pr...
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I would like you to clarify something. If the al-Megrahi appeal had proceeded, is it the case that everything in the 800-plus pages of the statement of reasons and the 13 volumes of evidence would have been published?
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
What would not have been published if the appeal had proceeded?
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Right, so the commission would not publish the statement of reasons, but is all the material not public, in the sense that it is available to other parties, such as prosecutors and the defence? I am trying to get a handle on what difference the bill would have made as regards ...
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
But one of the parties that held it could make it available to the general public.
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
What I am trying to get at is that, if the appeal had proceeded, all this evidence that you had garnered and all this material—all 13 volumes and 800 pages of it—would have been made available to the parties to the appeal. Is that right?
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Therefore your control of that information or data would no longer be absolute. The parties to the appeal would have it and could decide whether to publish and make it public.
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Did all the people who provided you with evidence know when they did so that that would be a possibility?
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
When they gave you the evidence, they knew that, had al-Megrahi proceeded with his appeal, any piece of evidence contained in those 800 pages and 13 volumes could be published because it would no longer have been held in any confidential forum.
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Please tell me, then, what would not have been published. I am trying to get to the bottom of this.
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I am not quite sure—
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Which is really the point that I am making. Everyone who provides you with evidence does so in the knowledge that every single piece of it might come into the public domain because, at that point, your organisation no longer has control over it and cannot guarantee to protect ...
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
But what if that information were material to the person’s guilt or innocence?
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
So, there are two groups of evidence. First, there is the 800-plus pages and 13 volumes, which might have come into the public domain had the appeal proceeded, as you would no longer have had control over it. Secondly, there may be another group of evidence that you may have c...
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Can I just clarify a couple of points? Notwithstanding the release of the information, the question of guilt or innocence is not going to be adjudicated on anywhere, is it?
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
No—exactly. And there is no indication that any court anywhere will, on the basis of that information, ever adjudicate on the guilt or innocence of al-Megrahi.
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I just want to know—that is what I am trying to establish.From what you said, Mr Sinclair, with regard to the 2009 order—if I understand this correctly—al-Megrahi certainly never gave unqualified consent for the release of all that material, and I think that you indicated to t...
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
And I would not have thought that many lawyers would encourage Mr Fhimah, who was acquitted, to release a lot of information that might cast doubt on the security of his acquittal.
David McLetchie Con Committee
31 Jan 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Right. One is therefore tempted to ask what the point of all this is.
David McLetchie (Lothian) (Con) Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Good morning, gentlemen. I want to explore the issue of how a resolution of the case could be achieved. There have been a couple of references to that, but it is not clear to me what the mechanism is for achieving a resolution of the case. We have had a trial, an appeal has be...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Megrahi has been convicted in a court and his appeal has been rejected by a court. What body—what forum—is going to adjudicate that that conviction was unsafe?
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I might have been informed of that if Mr Megrahi had not withdrawn his appeal.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I want to be clear about what that way is.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
The issue today is the point of the bill. From different perspectives, we may be coming to a similar conclusion in that you regard the bill as unnecessary and, in some respects, for entirely different reasons, I might regard it as unnecessary. I would not necessarily say that ...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Yes, I know, but I am not talking about that. I am talking about evidence from the SCCRC last week that Megrahi refused to consent to the release of certain information and was therefore willing to give consent only to the partial release of information—presumably information ...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I find it rather puzzling that they should get into a game of “I’ll show you mine if you show me yours”.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
If we are talking about someone who claims that he is innocent and has the power to consent to the release of information, why are we getting into the area of partial disclosure?
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Megrahi, who has a campaign called Justice for Megrahi, wants justice only on the basis of a partial release of information. That seems rather perverse to me.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I am not saying that. My question—
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
No. I think that you have misheard me. What I am putting to you is the evidence that we received last week from the SCCRC, which I am sure all the other committee members will recall. When we asked about issues relating to consent, we were informed that Megrahi did not consent...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Why are we waiting for his death?
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Whether the witnesses like it or not, we are looking at the bill and at issues relating to data protection. As currently constructed, the bill will require the consent of persons for the release of information. My point—I find this inexplicable—is that the person convicted of ...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Can I ask a question, convener?
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Yes.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Most people would say, in a simplistic way, that if someone was sentenced to 12 years, they should serve eight of those years and the Parole Board, on a discretionary basis, should determine how much of the remaining four years they would serve on the basis of estimations pred...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
How does that deal with the comparative justice issue and the issue of early release? That is what I was coming to. In an ideal situation, how would you fit that in?
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Right. Carry on.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Oh, yes.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I will explore that point with the Government.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
My understanding of the normal procedure when an appeal proceeds is that the commission does not publish anything at all. It simply makes its recommendations and hands over its material. What is or is not published is down to what happens in the ensuing court proceedings and m...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Going back to the question whether it is appropriate for the commission to decide whether to publish, I understand that when an appeal proceeds the commission itself does not decide to publish anything. Whether information comes into the public domain is down to what happens i...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
So, as you point out in your submission, the bill will give the commission a responsibility with regard to publication that it does not have under the primary legislation that governs its operations at present.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
Can the Data Protection Act 1998 therefore determine or restrict what is or is not produced in evidence in a court appeal that might be relevant to the guilt or innocence of one of the parties?
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
So, rather than all the information being out there for anyone to pick whichever bits and pieces they choose, the court becomes the filter of what is published in the context of court proceedings.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
That is interesting.
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I wonder whether, having dealt successfully with the Data Protection Act 1998, we can move on to the other barriers or non-barriers to disclosure. Will you elaborate for our benefit the ECHR issues that might act as a barrier to the release of certain information that we have ...
David McLetchie Con Committee
07 Feb 2012
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
But that would be only for the purposes of certification of competence at the outset. It would not preclude an individual relying upon that right to assert, at some later stage, that the legislation, this particular provision or whatever was ultra vires.
← Back to list
Committee

Justice Committee 07 February 2012

07 Feb 2012 · S4 · Justice Committee
Item of business
Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
McLetchie, David Con Lothian Watch on SPTV
Would it be possible to reconcile those two things relatively straightforwardly, assuming that you wanted to persist with that? Would it be possible for someone to say “Right. Your punishment part is 10 years, but of course that’s subject to the standing early-release provisions or the review provisions”? Would it offend the idea of comparative justice if you said “Your punishment part is 12 years and it will be treated exactly the same as it would had you been given a determinate sentence of 12 years”?

In the same item of business

The Convener SNP
Agenda item 2 is our second evidence session on the Criminal Cases (Punishment and Review) (Scotland) Bill at stage 1. I declare an interest as a member of t...
Len Murray (Justice for Megrahi)
Thank you, convener. I do not propose to take long, as it seems to me that the submission that has been lodged on behalf of JFM amply sets out our position.S...
The Convener SNP
I seek questions from members.
John Finnie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) SNP
When, last week, I asked Michael Walker of the review group about the Official Secrets Acts he replied:“in our written submissions we state that we do not pe...
Len Murray
Who said that?
John Finnie SNP
That was from Mr Walker, who is a member of—
The Convener SNP
The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission.
Len Murray
Ah, the SCCRC. What did he say?
John Finnie SNP
He said that he did not perceive the Official Secrets Acts as being relevant and that, in any case,“There is no information in the statement of reasons that ...
Len Murray
It is new to me, let me put it that way. We have not touched on the issue in our submission. Did we get a copy of that?
Robert Forrester (Justice for Megrahi)
What—of Walker’s statement?
Len Murray
Yes.
Robert Forrester
I have only the Official Report. It would take me a while to—
The Convener SNP
Please indicate your wish to speak through the chair.
Robert Forrester
My apologies, convener.
The Convener SNP
I will take Mr McKie first and then Mr Forrester.
Iain McKie (Justice for Megrahi)
I noted that comment when I read the SCCRC submission and we should accept its view that the Official Secrets Acts are not relevant. I do not think that we h...
The Convener SNP
Whether we take your suggested route or the route that the Government has taken in the bill, would data protection considerations not still prevail with rega...
Len Murray
As the second paragraph of section 1.06 of our written submission makes clear,“The reference to data protection is a complete red herring”because of section ...
The Convener SNP
We will need to put that argument to the witnesses from the Information Commissioner’s Office, who will be giving evidence later.
Len Murray
I understand that.
The Convener SNP
My simple understanding of your argument, then, is that subordinate legislation made here prevails over United Kingdom data protection legislation but primar...
Len Murray
The simple solution is to remove article 2(b) from the 2009 order; indeed, that is the primary part of our submission. If I may say so respectfully, the bill...
Roderick Campbell (North East Fife) (SNP) SNP
Last week, Mr Sinclair said that any information that disclosed criminality in relation to an individual or organisation would clearly be “sensitive personal...
Len Murray
I come back to Professor Black’s comment—to which I referred previously and which is mentioned in section 1.06 of our submission—that data protection is a “r...
Roderick Campbell SNP
I hear your views, but we will need to put that point to the Information Commissioner’s Office.
Humza Yousaf (Glasgow) (SNP) SNP
This question might be for the next panel, but have the witnesses considered the wider implications of altering article 2(b) of the 2009 order or the precede...
Len Murray
At the moment, the question with which we are concerning ourselves is our submission on the bill in so far as it relates to Megrahi and his conviction. As fa...
Robert Forrester
I speak as a layman in legal matters and, to be honest, I find the whole situation rather perverse—please stop me if you think that I am wandering off the po...
The Convener SNP
I cannot do that to committee members if they wander off the point, so just go for it, Mr Forrester.