Justice 2 Committee, 29 Jun 2004

Meeting date: Tuesday, June 29, 2004

Official Report 98KB pdf

---

Convener's Correspondence

The next item is our consideration of a letter from Mrs Gina Riva, which was addressed to me as convener of the committee. I have discretion in these matters as to whether such correspondence should be brought before the committee. On this occasion, I felt reluctant about taking a unilateral decision not to do so. I thought that it was preferable at least to place the item on the agenda so that committee members could express their views. I invite members to discuss the letter.

I read Mrs Riva's letter and the enclosed report in which she raises a number of points. I am not clear, however, whether she has raised them with her constituency member of the Scottish Parliament or any of the list MSPs for her region. The most appropriate way for her to raise them is not with this committee but with her constituency member or her list members. She should give those MSPs the opportunity to pursue the points that she raises. As a constituency MSP who has a prison in her constituency, I get many letters—almost on a weekly basis—from prisoners who raise issues, some of which are important and others that are less so. It is for constituency or list MSPs to pursue those issues.

We have to be careful not to establish a precedent whereby members of the public raise with this or another subject committee issues that should be raised initially at the constituency level.

It may well be that Mrs Riva has points to raise with the Parliament, but the first point of contact should be the Public Petitions Committee, which in turn would want to contact the relevant subject committee. I suggest that we write back to her and thank her for her correspondence, note that she has raised the issue most appropriately with the Minister for Justice and recommend that she make early contact with her constituency member and with the list members in her region. We might also want to consider copying her letter to the constituency member and notifying them of any decision that the committee takes.

I am happy with Karen Whitefield's suggestion about Mrs Riva's letter. However, when I read the letter I was mindful of the recent report of HM prisons inspectorate for Scotland about Cornton Vale. Perhaps members of the Justice 1 Committee or the Justice 2 Committee have visited Cornton Vale. I might have missed that visit, or we might have a visit scheduled. Could you clarify that, convener? If we have not visited Cornton Vale, do we have a space for a visit in our schedule?

I will just clarify that with the clerks. As you know, we have had a schedule of prison visits. I know that some of us were able to make some visits but not others. Cornton Vale was among the prisons in the schedule. We do not have a current schedule of prison visits, presumably because we have no active business relative to prisons. The committee has no intention at this point to visit more prisons. The schedule of visits that we undertook was our last activity in that respect.

Okay.

Are you content with Karen Whitefield's suggestion?

Yes, as that is probably the best way to deal with the correspondence. I was just aware of the programme of prison visits in which we were engaged.

That has been a helpful discussion. I acknowledge the point that Karen Whitefield was quite correct to make, as the committee is not the agency of first intervention or first action. It is the obligation of constituency and list members to take matters forward on behalf of constituents who instruct them. It is important that the two separate roles of the MSP and the committee are identified and acknowledged, because they are not the same.

The proposal, as outlined by Karen Whitefield, is that we should write to Mrs Riva suggesting that she raise the matter with either her constituency member or one of her list members, to whom she should certainly copy her report. We should strongly advise her to ask her MSP to liaise with her and the Minister for Justice, because if the minister is simply sent a copy of the report, she may not be clear as to whether action is sought or advice is required. As Karen Whitefield said, Mrs Riva can also approach the Public Petitions Committee, which would certainly be a relevant step to take. Does the committee agree that I should proceed on the basis that Karen Whitefield outlined and ask the clerks to draft a letter to Mrs Riva?

Members indicated agreement.

Thank you. We proceed to items 4 and 5, which are to be taken in private.

Meeting continued in private until 14:40.