Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 15 June 2011

15 Jun 2011 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Taking Scotland Forward: Justice

Pearson, Graeme Lab South Scotland Watch on SPTV

I acknowledge Christine Grahame’s contribution and associate myself with much of what she said in relation to the Justice Committee. Last month, the First Minister introduced to the Parliament his vision for the next five years, which is underpinned, as he said, by a social wage. Although he stopped short of fully explaining his concept, many have linked the social wage to the 16th century philosophy of the social contract. The Parliament should be reminded that a key tenet behind such a philosophy is that concluding a social contract between the state and its citizens relies on the proper enforcement of laws by the state. The enforcement of laws provides protection and freedom for all, including the weak and poor in our communities, enabling them to contribute to our society. However, legislation that is worthy of enforcement requires proper review and scrutiny by members of the Parliament so that we give knowing consent and an authority to the laws that are to be enforced.

In the context of the Government’s anti-sectarianism proposals, the Justice Committee has yet to be circulated with the information on behalf of the Parliament. We therefore have few, if any, days available to debate and review Government proposals on an issue that the Government deems to be a priority. Press reports have indicated that the yet-to-be-seen proposals will be made law by the end of the month, thereby creating an anticipation in the minds of the public. The Government is displaying a cavalier disregard for the very principles that underpin the First Minister’s vision for Scotland for the next five years. That does not demonstrate the inclusive approach that has been promised for this new session of our Parliament.

If the Scottish Parliament is to mature into its rightful position in our constitutional arrangements, its members must be provided with time and due respect from Government ministers to play their individual parts in the creation of Scotland’s future. I make a non-partisan point here and reflect the intentions of our forebears in providing in this Parliament an institution to call Scotland’s Government to account properly. Governments typically find that process an interference and inconvenience, but a true democracy values not only a Government with vision but a strong Parliament that provides accountability.

I turn to our justice secretary’s latest skirmish with the desirability or otherwise of police officers patrolling on our streets. I have sympathy for Mr MacAskill, and I believe that he has been misunderstood by the press and would never make such a comment. In communities across Scotland that are marginalised and threatened by criminality, the presence of effective and visible police officers offers the beginning of a safe and secure environment. It is therefore impossible to believe the cabinet secretary’s comments as reported. After all, the justice secretary has enough on his plate. Among other things, he needs to try to keep prisoners locked up in our prisons and to ensure that sufficient assets are seized from criminals and that actions taken under our drugs policy actually work.

For almost a decade, we have suffered the impact of having around 55,000 problematic drug users in our communities. We spend more than £1 million of public taxes delivering methadone programmes in our prisons. The volume of methadone that is prescribed in the methadone programme in Scotland almost doubled in the three years to 2009, to almost 31,000 litres. Although there is a place for methadone treatment as part of a planned and delivered programme of recovery, future initiatives need to give each drug-addicted person the opportunity for health and a return to wellbeing and gainful employment. I commend Annabel Goldie for maintaining a focus on that area of Government policy.

On the Supreme Court, I draw the justice secretary’s attention to the 11 June edition of The Daily Telegraph, where he will read that the Faculty of Advocates, the Law Society of Scotland, the Scottish Human Rights Commission and the campaign group Justice have all supported the Supreme Court’s sensible and proportionate rulings. Who pays the piper is not the issue—nor should it be. I hope that, as with the comments on patrolling police officers that were attributed to him, the cabinet secretary has again been misunderstood.

Instead of holding summits about football matches and arguing over supreme courts, I would want the justice secretary to attend to the issues that affect normal people and their families and communities. The deaths of young men as a result of knife attacks continue, and their families are grieving. In addition to demanding justice, those families want a positive response from the authorities in order to prevent such crimes from being committed in the future. I can tell the cabinet secretary that the provision of high-profile policing after such events does little to give confidence to communities that are facing criminality week after week.

I do not doubt the justice secretary’s sincerity in offering his sympathy, but we need to know what his plans are in this regard. Will he ensure that the victims will be placed at the centre of our criminal justice system and will he acknowledge that Children 1st continues to report the negative experiences that youngsters who attend court face? Will he share with us his intentions and will he offer to work in tandem with the Opposition parties in delivering, through the Justice Committee, actions that work and positive outcomes?

15:41

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 15 June 2011

In the same item of business