Scottish Executive
Under our second item on the agenda this morning we will hear from the Minister for Justice, Jim Wallace. I will have to be strict about ending the meeting at 10:45. The minister will make a statement. It would be helpful if members could be focused in the points that they make.
I welcome Jim Wallace and his team to the Justice 1 Committee and Justice 2 Committee joint meeting on stock-taking issues. My notes state that the Minister for Justice will address the committee for 10 minutes. He might be pleased to know that I have already told members of the committee that I must finish this meeting at 10:45. It would be helpful if his introduction was shorter, so that we have time for as many questions as possible.
Thank you. That request was conveyed to me about a minute ago. I will do my best to truncate my comments.
I thank the committee for the opportunity to take stock and set out what we have achieved so far in pursuing our aim of working together for a safer and fairer Scotland. Before I do that, I would like to associate myself with the remarks the Lord Advocate made about the terrible events in the United States last week.
It might be helpful to the committee if I mention some of the action that has been taken in Scotland in the aftermath of the attacks. The establishment of the Scottish police information and co-ordinating centre has been of particular importance. It has co-ordinated the security and intelligence response in Scotland and it has liaised with forces throughout the United Kingdom. That has included direct liaison with the Metropolitan police casualty bureau, where work on identifying UK victims of the atrocities has been taking place.
The situation has been changing daily, as members of the committee will appreciate. So far, the Scottish co-ordinating centre is aware of four persons who appear to be missing in connection with the incidents and have close family in Scotland. That number may well rise. It could be some time before formal confirmation of identities can be made and the next of kin informed. The time scale will be dependent on the judicial, post mortem and release procedures determined by the US authorities. We are working closely with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office on these matters, which in turn is working closely with the American authorities.
The police are properly in the lead in following up information on possible victims. Police liaison officers have been appointed to assist the families of missing Scots. The UK Government has made it clear that it will meet the uninsured US hospital treatment costs of British victims and the cost of repatriation of the remains of those who have been killed. Travel and accommodation costs for three days in New York for the close families of those believed dead in the tragedy will also be met. Careful consideration is also being given by the appropriate health and social agencies to the longer-term counselling and other support that will be necessary for bereaved families.
More generally, a heightened level of security has been put in place at Scottish airports and local emergency planning networks have been put on alert. Emergency plans for dealing with serious incidents are kept under constant review and are rehearsed regularly. The current tense situation will continue for some time. We must all be vigilant.
I will now return to the theme of taking stock. The two committees will be aware of the 24 acts that the Scottish Parliament has passed in its first 28 months. The justice committees have made a big contribution to that. I take this opportunity to express my appreciation of the work that has been done members of the committees, clerks and others who serve the committee.
Listing all the legislation would take up too much time. We have passed some important pieces of legislation in the past year. Some of the legislation passed early in the session, such as the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000, is now coming into operation. It will do a lot of good for many vulnerable people.
Looking ahead, a major criminal justice bill will introduce a range of measures, which will include those for dealing with serious and violent offenders: those will be based on the recommendations of the MacLean committee. The bill will also implement our commitment to increase protection from stalking and harassment. Members may remember that I announced our plans on that in January. The bill will introduce a new power of arrest when a non-harassment order is breached. We will publish a white paper shortly with details of the measures to be included in the bill.
We are also committed to introducing a bill to provide a workable and humane alternative to poindings and warrant sales. A broadly based working group that included some members of Parliament has made detailed and constructive proposals, which were published in July. We are consulting on them. The deadline for legislation is the end of 2002.
The wider review of diligence—covering issues such as bank arrestments and debt arrangement schemes—is also making good progress at official level and I hope to issue a consultation paper around the turn of the year.
We will introduce a bill to modernise the law relating to civil marriages, which will take over from Euan Robson's bill.
There will be a substantial bill on land reform that will provide a right of responsible access to land and inland water, a community right to buy and a crofting community right to buy. The freedom of information bill will shortly be introduced, based on the draft that has been published for consultation.
Other bills are in preparation. We will introduce those in draft form when parliamentary time permits. They include bills on title conditions and family law. We hope to publish a family law bill in draft form in the present session.
Legislation is not the whole story—our aim is to create a safer and fairer Scotland. We have delivered on our pledge to resource a record number of police officers—indeed, police funding in Scotland is now one third higher in real terms than it was 10 years ago. The Scottish Drugs Enforcement Agency is up and running and has seized £17.5 million-worth of drugs and arrested 130 people allegedly involved in organised crime.
In 1999, we published our plan on the Macpherson report. I continue to chair the steering group to take forward the Executive's response. Police forces and other partners are working closely together to improve the safety of everyone in our communities.
We accept that more must be done. We want to improve access to justice and are working on proposals for legal services in the community. We are having detailed discussions with the legal profession and the Scottish Legal Aid Board about fees in the present system. The Justice 1 Committee has looked at that matter in detail.
The first sitting of the pilot drug court will take place in Glasgow sheriff court in November. We are analysing our consultation on whether a human rights commissioner for Scotland is needed. We have set out our proposals on police complaints and we have important plans for improving the common police services, which support all our forces.
The committees know that we have made clear our plans for greater transparency in judicial appointments, and through public advertisement we will soon seek members for a new judicial appointments board. Two judges, one sheriff principal and seven sheriffs have already been appointed under an interim procedure involving advertisements and interviews.
There have been substantial improvements in community penalties for offenders. Drug treatment and testing orders are being rolled out in several parts of the country and will be available in a further seven courts next year. Those new orders are a good example of tackling difficult problems in an imaginative and community-based way. Restriction of liberty orders—tagging—will be available throughout the country next spring. The ministerial working group on women offenders will report later this year.
We said that we would focus on victims. Our victim strategy and the justice department's victim plan was published in January. Seventeen witness service schemes are already in operation and the witness service should be available in all Scottish sheriff courts by next summer.
More will come before us. Before a final decision is made, I want to put out to consultation and public debate the options for the prisons estate. We have also set up a committee to review licensing law under Sheriff Principal Nicolson.
Finally, we want to promote a criminal justice system that is prompt and efficient in its operation. As part of that, I can announce today that we are setting up a committee under Sheriff Principal John McInnes to examine the operation of the summary justice system and the district courts. The great majority of criminal cases are dealt with in the summary courts and it is vital that they work well. I hope to announce the full membership of the committee shortly.
I have tried to go as quickly as I can through a long and inevitably incomplete list. The justice committees will appreciate that we have a full agenda and I look forward to working with the committees on it.
I am happy to try to respond to questions.
I thank the minister for going through his presentation so speedily.
The Justice 1 Committee and the Justice 2 Committee are conscious of the 24 acts that have been passed. The clerks have told me that the number of bills with which both committees have dealt is nearly in double figures and the committees are conscious of their role in that.
Good morning, minister.
I am sure that there will be widespread support for your objectives in your announcement about the physical chastisement of children. How do you intend to measure outcomes? The objective is not simply to change the legal system, but to deliver a better environment for children in which fewer are chastised. How do you expect to measure the reduction in chastisement of children as opposed to the legal delivery of people who are responsible for it?
I am not sure that an arithmetical target can be set for the reduction in the chastisement of children, but I will make two points. First, it is important to recognise that unreasonable chastisement is currently contrary to the law. One objective of our proposed legislation is to clarify for the courts and parents what the boundaries ought to be. As Stewart Stevenson has indicated, there is a legal dimension in doing so.
Secondly, I hope that we can help to create an environment and a culture in which people are far more clear about where boundaries are set. The proposals were not plucked out of the ether—they were the subject of considerable consultation. Parliament will be invited to give its approval to the proposals. I hope that the proposals are an important contribution to a culture in which violence towards children can be reduced.
Will you consider putting a measurement system in place that will enable us to know the benefits of what you propose?
I do not want to dismiss that matter completely out of hand without having given it further thought. My immediate reaction is that it sounds like a good idea, but practical measurement of the baseline is probably fraught with difficulty—that is a completely off-the-cuff response. We have a research unit that may find it worthwhile to consider the issue. The suggestion will be borne in mind.
I appreciate that you tried to shorten your statement, but I would like you to expand on the district courts review. You said that a committee is about to be set up. Do you have a timetable for that? Is there a timetable for the review itself? Who would be involved?
I will wind the clock back a little. When Angus MacKay was still the Deputy Minister for Justice, he indicated that we would review the district courts. The preparatory work for that and trying to draft the consultation paper made it clear that it made sense to look at the district courts in the context of the wider issue of summary justice, including summary cases in the sheriff court. That is why the review has been expanded into a review of summary justice. Sheriff Principal McInnes has only recently accepted the appointment as chair of the committee—he accepted it enthusiastically. Officials and I will work with him at once and over the coming weeks to try to identify people to serve on the committee.
If I may put it this way, there are the usual suspects—those who use the courts regularly. We want to ensure that there are representatives of justices of the peace who are currently involved in the district courts. I do not want the review to linger, but if the job is to be done thoroughly—and I have every confidence that Sheriff Principal McInnes will tackle it thoroughly—there might be a report in about 18 months' time.
Does the Deputy First Minister accept that early legislation on the confiscation of criminal assets, particularly the proceeds of drug pushing and drug trafficking, could have great deterrent value?
The Queen's speech at Westminster announced that a proceeds of crime bill will feature as part of the UK Government's legislative programme for the session. We have indicated that we want to opt into that legislation. Lord James's question provides me with an opportunity to explain some of the thinking behind the bill. There is a perceived need to tighten up the existing rules on the confiscation of criminal assets. There are provisions for confiscation already, but there is agreement that the procedures and the law need strengthening. If the legislation concerned purely drug trafficking and drugs, criminal law in relation to drug misuse would make it a reserved matter. It is obvious to many people, however, that drug money is often only one aspect of a wide-ranging network of criminal activity. It is open to us to bring separate legislation before the Parliament to deal with non-drug serious crime, but when we discussed that with the Home Office and the police, we were concerned that having two separate regimes operating in different parts of the United Kingdom would be a recipe for loopholes and that it could mean that there would be safer havens in one or another part of the UK. Therefore, it made sense to legislate on a UK basis.
That said, the legislation will be tailor-made to the Scottish legal and criminal justice system. Officials in my department have been and will continue to be involved closely in the drafting of that legislation and in assisting the United Kingdom Government as the legislation goes through the Houses of Parliament. In due course, a Sewel motion that relates to reserved matters will be brought before the Scottish Parliament. I accept that this is an area of law that needs strengthening and I hope that the Justice 1 Committee and the Justice 2 Committee agree with our thinking as to why it should be done on a UK basis and that it is the right way forward.
I want to raise two issues with the minister: the first concerns prisons. Last week, the Justice 1 Committee took evidence from the chief inspector of prisons on his annual report. Many issues arose, but I will truncate them because of the pressure of time today.
I would like to hear the minister's view on the fact that five of our prisons are significantly overcrowded. The chief inspector of prisons' report highlighted concern that there is a cultural "them and us" attitude between operational staff and senior management. Does the minister believe that members of senior management in the Scottish Prison Service are doing enough to alleviate that problem? Recently, senior management decided to award bonuses to certain members of staff for coming to work during industrial action and to delay signing the contract to end slopping out in Barlinnie's B hall as a negotiation tool for the new working arrangements with staff. Is that an appropriate way for senior management in the SPS to behave, given that the chief inspector has identified those clear problems?
My second question is linked to the minister's earlier comments. The minister had the pleasure of leading a delegation to China during the summer recess. Will he expand on what relationship the justice department is developing with the Chinese Government? What changes have occurred in the Chinese judicial system as a result of the work that he has done with the Chinese Government?
Those are two important and distinct questions and I will endeavour to answer them fully.
One thing that I have learned in the just over two years that I have held this office is that prisoner numbers are impossible to predict. In the years when they were expected to be at a particular level, there were about two years when they were roughly 200 or more below the anticipated level. This year, there has been a significant increase. Although I ask questions, it is not obvious what has changed or what is different in the sentencing practice of judges. If we examine the situation in more detail, the baseload of longer-term prison sentences is beginning to rise. In many respects, that increase reflects some of the success that we have had in tackling some of the bigger players in the misuse of drugs scene, who inevitably attract longer sentences.
Predicting prisoner numbers and providing for them accordingly is not an exact science. I accept fully your point that some prisons are overcrowded at present. That is where the prison estates review comes into play because it is intended that the review will look ahead 10 years to identify needs. It is not a simple question of overall totals. For example, numbers have not reached overcrowding levels in open prisons. Overcrowding changes with categories of prisons and the levels of security in which prisoners are held.
One of the key issues for the prison estates review will be to consider the current estate and prisoner numbers. It will also take into account the fact that slopping out is undesirable, which is the opinion of the Justice 1 Committee, the Justice 2 Committee, the Parliament and ministers. Slopping out is understandably disliked by prisoners and prison staff. We must consider prisoner numbers to provide new units that will lead to the abolition of slopping out. We will consider the likely expected numbers, the numbers that we have currently, what we want to replace and improve and the options to meet those numbers. I hope that we will have a mature and informed debate. We still await the final figures from PricewaterhouseCoopers to allow that debate to take place.
Regarding industrial relations, it was stressed all along that agreement about the staffing structure was needed before a particular redevelopment could go ahead. If we plan to invest a considerable amount of capital in a new development, it makes sense to consider its longer-term running costs. That is why attendance patterns and the staffing structure were key to the development.
Following the unlawful strike action in April, an agreement to go to arbitration over attendance patterns was reached between the trade union side and management. That was a positive development and, if members recall, I encouraged it on the day of the strike. As a result, different attendance patterns are being rolled out across the prison estate.
I am well aware that there have been difficulties with morale in some prisons. I visit prisons and that information is communicated to me. The chief inspector mentions it in his report and when I met him earlier this month he conveyed it to me. Members of staff have delivered across a range of the set key indicators in educational programmes and, above all, in security. That is a tribute to the staff. I accept that the uncertainty about attendance patterns and about the estate have not helped, but I hope that that uncertainty will be dispelled sooner rather than later.
The invitation to visit the People's Republic of China came from the Chinese authorities and was part of a four to six-week British justice programme there. It followed a number of high-level visits to the United Kingdom by the previous Chinese justice minister and officials. During those visits, the Chinese expressed a particular wish to come to Scotland. Their request was to examine a few specific areas of the Scottish justice system: the management of the profession, particularly the solicitor branch; juvenile justice and our system of children's hearings; and rehabilitation work. Those were the key areas that were considered.
It is evident that China's structure of justice is different from ours, but it is alert to the fact that if it is to continue as the country it wishes to be, if it is to become more of a member of the international community of nations and, particularly, if it wishes to develop trade links through membership of the World Trade Organisation, for example, the necessity of having the rule of law becomes more obvious and important.
There is a clear wish in the Chinese justice community to build up a distinct system of the rule of law and to find places to learn about such a system. When we received the approach, it seemed helpful to respond. Alan Miller from the Scottish Children's Reporter's Administration accompanied me, as did Valerie Macniven from my department, and Lord Gill, who chairs the Scottish Law Commission. Martin McAllister, the president of the Law Society of Scotland, also attended. Useful discussions were held on the system of juvenile justice. There are fundamental differences in culture, traditions and legal systems, but the Chinese told us that young men between the ages of 14 and 25 commit the majority of their crimes. That is interesting, as our research shows that young men of a similar age group commit the majority of our crimes.
There was a willingness to share ideas: the Chinese want to develop a penal system that leads to rehabilitation rather than one that is used simply for punishment. We were able to discuss our community disposals and some of the work that is done by Safeguarding Communities Reducing Offending and the Apex Trust Scotland to aid rehabilitation. We want to build on what was achieved.
Although nothing formal has been proposed as yet, on a future visit we will let the Chinese officials see some of the work that is done in Scotland, including the airborne initiative at Abington or some SACRO projects. It is important for us to enable exchanges at student and university level so that young lawyers from China can have first-hand experience and knowledge of how a different legal system works.
Changes in China are difficult to pick up on but, if we are being pragmatic, we should try to encourage a country that has indicated that it wants to develop its rule of law. The fact that China has looked at aspects of the Scottish legal system makes it important that we respond positively.
It is unfortunate, but we have to stop at this point. We have not been able to cover a number of areas and there are questions that I hoped to ask. However, as we specified our finishing time, in an act of self-discipline I will not ask those questions.
I am sure that Christine Grahame, the convener of the Justice 1 Committee, who is not present, would like to follow up on some of the questions that have been put to the minister today. We hope to be able to arrange further meetings on a regular basis.
Perhaps one of the things that my predecessors and I have failed to do is to have more regular meetings with the conveners of the justice committees. I am willing to try to do that. My diary tells me that I am before you again in less than two weeks' time to discuss the budget. I am sure that some of the issues that we did not have time to discuss today will be relevant to our discussion on the budget.
I am sure that the Justice 1 Committee will question you further on the prison estates review. Will you tell us quickly when that review is to be published?
Before the end of the year.
I thank Mr Wallace, the Minister for Justice, and his team for coming before the committee this morning.
That completes the business of the joint meeting of the two justice committees.
I want to raise the issue of timetabling. If members will pardon the pun, it does not do the minister justice if he is asked to come before the committees with only 25 minutes available for questions. I have a series of issues that I would like to raise with the minister. I am sure that he would want to expand on those issues in his replies. In future, we have to take more care with the timetabling of such meetings.
I agree. I did not get the chance to ask the minister a number of my burning questions. The two committees should discuss that problem. I repeat my thanks to the minister for his replies to the questions that were put to him.
The Justice 2 Committee will reconvene at 11 o'clock. There is time for tea or coffee before we begin that meeting.
Meeting closed at 10:49.