“Youth Justice in Scotland”
Before we begin item 2, I point out that Scott Barrie is also acting as reporter for the Justice 2 Committee, which has expressed an interest in this item.
I invite the Auditor General to brief the committee on his report "Youth Justice in Scotland". I refer members to the briefing paper that accompanies the report.
Mr Robert Black (Auditor General for Scotland):
"Youth Justice in Scotland" is what we call a baseline report. In other words, it is a first look at the youth justice system in Scotland. In particular, it contains a range of information about children and young people, the nature of their offending and how that behaviour is dealt with in Scotland.
I am sure that the committee recalls that I indicated in June last year that we might return to the topic of youth justice in Scotland. We have now done that. The report marks the start of a process, not the end. Subject to the support of the committee, we intend to undertake a full performance audit of the youth justice system.
Youth justice is complex and important in Scottish life. It is complex because of the range of agencies that are involved. Therefore, the study that we propose to undertake will be the first example of a major cross-cutting study involving a wide range of agencies that are involved in the youth justice system in Scotland. I hope that the study will demonstrate the value of Audit Scotland as a single audit agency that is capable of examining all the agencies at once and presenting a broad picture of what is happening in the youth justice system.
We have consulted the Scottish Executive on the study. The study has the Executive's full support and Scottish ministers have openly expressed their support for the work.
I will take a moment or two to share with the committee some of the major contents of the report. It covers those aged eight to 21. It attempts to describe what is known about offenders in Scotland and what is known about the offences that are committed—for example, property offences alone probably account for £80 million in losses and other costs excluding the cost of the justice process. It describes how offenders are dealt with in Scotland in the children's hearing system or in the courts. The report goes on to suggest how we might undertake the study.
The report includes a chapter that considers policy developments in Scotland and other countries. There is a great deal of activity in youth justice. Helpfully for us, a lot of work has been undertaken to find out what works best. There has been a lot of research—not only in Scotland or the United Kingdom, but internationally—into the most effective interventions to reduce reoffending. We draw out some of that work in the report.
The Scottish Executive has also been active in the area. In 1999, the Executive formed an advisory group on youth crime in Scotland. That group recommended that a national strategy be devised. I understand that the Executive continues to work on that.
The Executive made additional funding available to help councils to address the needs of offending behaviour and services across Scotland. The quality and range of responses to that extra funding varies. That is one of the issues that we will examine.
The third chapter considers the characteristics of children and young people who offend. Some of the statistics in that chapter will not come as a surprise to members as representatives of their communities. A snapshot in March 2001 showed that there were more than 76,000 recorded offenders under the age of 21. If pending cases are taken into account, that means that 8 per cent of people aged eight to 21 have offences recorded against them or have cases pending.
Of particular concern to the agencies is that the number of repeat offenders or prolific offenders is increasing. In the past 10 years, the number of children dealt with by the children's reporter for more than 10 offences per young person rose by more than 40 per cent. One British study showed that 3 per cent of offenders account for more than a quarter of all crime. When we work out what that means for Scotland, we find that just over 2,000 young people are responsible for about a quarter of all crime in Scotland. There are other statistics in the report that are important and will, I am sure, be of interest to the committee.
What happens to children and young people who offend? Generally speaking, as members are well aware, under-16s go to the children's hearing system and over-16s go to the court system. However, there are overlaps and the two systems share certain features. In particular, they rely on multi-agency support and on reports from the police and social work. We examine how the two systems operate and the differences between them. We link that to some of the evidence that is available on what seems to work most effectively to reduce the chances of reoffending. We would like to undertake further work to establish the extent to which existing programmes are based on what seems to work best; the extent to which they are available across Scotland; and whether use is made of the programmes by decision makers in the justice system.
Mr Robert Black (Auditor General for Scotland):
In chapter 5, we identify a number of headings under which we will carry out the work: the process characteristics of the system, financial arrangements and outcomes—the extent to which services are successful in reducing offending.
The process characteristics of the system are quite interesting. The general message is that there is considerable variation in the way in which the system works. The speed with which police forces report to the children's reporter and the procurator fiscal varies widely. There are also variations in the time taken to convene a hearing. In some areas 50 per cent of decisions are taken within three months, but in other areas the figure is only 25 per cent.
What happens to young people once they have offended? In some areas there is a developed range of options, whereas in others the panels and the courts seem to have fewer choices. We want to examine the different interventions that are available across Scotland.
We will also consider the financial arrangements. The costs to the justice system of dealing with young people who offend should be identifiable. We hope to produce data on the costs and benefits of the different interventions. The aim of the exercise is to reduce reoffending and to promote rehabilitation of offenders. We discuss that in the report.
This is a demanding and challenging piece of work and it will take some time to complete our analysis. We expect to be able to submit a report to the committee towards the end of next year. I am very happy to answer any questions. I invite the committee to support our continuing involvement in this area.
I thank the Auditor General for his detailed briefing on this important subject, which involves costs from property offences alone of more than £80 million. We wish Audit Scotland well in its quest for best practice.
As part of your examination of the range of interventions that are available, will you consider the issue of truancy? I understand that the Executive is running a couple of pilot schemes in this area, one of which is based at Alloa Academy. Many truants lead a double life, using the time that they are not at school to commit petty crime. In that way, they become involved in the youth justice system. Do you envisage that those pilot schemes will provide a way of dealing effectively with youth justice, particularly its financial aspects?
Policy towards truancy and the intervention strategies that are used to combat the problem vary across Scotland. We will take that into account when seeking to explain why young people are treated differently by different local authorities. Truancy policy will form an element of the study, but it will not be its main focus.
Will you examine the Executive's pilot schemes?
At the moment we are not planning to do that. Although we plan to start work on the study shortly, over the summer we will consult and take advice from others on how to fine-tune it. We may consider the issue that Mr Raffan raises in that context.
In paragraph 3.4, you note that different organisations gather statistics in different ways. How can you extrapolate from those statistics sufficient information to enable you to build on the baseline study?
One of the main reasons for undertaking the study is to gather together good data. We will use the audit process to capture data from existing systems to understand better what is in that data set and to analyse it consistently. We will also gather information from local authority data sets and audits and undertake our own surveys of organisations to capture new information for the first time.
On the allocations of funding, appendix 1 details the additional funding that was made available by the Scottish Executive. How will you be able to set down that information against the numbers? Will you examine what funding is made available by the local authorities, so that we can look at the bigger picture?
One of the challenges that we face is that so much of the expenditure on interventions with young people is not separately identifiable. In the course of our study, we hope to help to make expenditure more transparent, so that we are able to understand better exactly what resources are spent on dealing with young people.
In taking that approach, will you be able to identify the authorities that spend below the amount allocated in grant-aided expenditure and those that spend above that amount?
To be honest, it is too early to say.
We would find such information interesting.
We will bear that in mind.
Following on from your answers to Margaret Jamieson's questions, I do not underestimate the size of the task that is ahead of you. I was responsible for providing information to the social work services group and was always disappointed that, when information was returned, it was difficult to carry out a benchmarking exercise because that information had been collected in different forms. If we are to be serious about having a youth justice system—as opposed to youth justice systems—in Scotland, the task that you have set yourself is both pertinent and long overdue.
You acknowledge the huge number of agencies that are involved—it is not simply one or two agencies, as the issue is multifaceted. Will the task be manageable, or is it likely that, once you get into it, you will be able to focus on only two or three parts of the system? Do you intend to undertake a holistic overview of the system? Have you given any thought to what areas you might concentrate on if you are unable to undertake such an overview?
We will be clear about the answer to that question after the summer. As I said, this is quite a complex area for us. We have produced an early report to encourage people who are experts in the area to help us frame our study more fully between now and late August or early September. We will continue at full pelt with the study while we are consulting, but it is important that we get that input during and towards the end of the summer. That will allow us to pin down exactly what we are doing.
I agree that this is a complex and demanding study to undertake. It is possible that we may have to refocus elements of it once we have gone through the consultation exercise during the summer and into the autumn.
It is also possible—in fact, it is more than likely—that we will want to pursue further certain aspects of the study when we report back in the autumn of next year. In other words, if the data sets are not as good as they might be, we might be able to make general statements about what is happening, but we might have to go further to develop the data before we can zero in on exactly what is happening in different parts of Scotland.
As there are no further questions, I invite the committee to note that the consultation period will run until the end of August 2001 and that the report of the audit findings is expected to be published towards the end of 2002. We look forward to further consideration of this important topic.