Official Report 183KB pdf
The next item of business is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, Angela Constance, on Scotland’s prison population. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement and so there should be no interventions or interruptions. I remind members that we are quite tight for time this afternoon, and I therefore expect succinct questions and answers to match. I also expect that the statement should last no longer than 10 minutes.
15:05
Throughout my tenure as justice secretary, I have taken significant steps both to strengthen our justice system and to address the rising prison population. I have also proactively kept Parliament up to date on this critical issue, and on any proposals and measures that we are taking, alongside a clear explanation as to why I believe that they are necessary.
In November 2024, the Parliament agreed to modify the release point for certain short-term prisoners so that they are released after serving 40 per cent, rather than 50 per cent, of their sentence. That change is projected to result in a sustained reduction of approximately 5 per cent across the sentenced population of short-term prisoners in comparison with the situation if no change had been made.
The Scottish Prison Service has further optimised capacity in the existing estate to create 400 additional spaces in comparison with 2024. In addition, we have increased SPS capital funding to £355 million this year, with £458.5 million allocated next year to support the construction of two new prisons. HMP Highland, which is due for completion in late 2026, will provide 107 additional places, while HMP Glasgow, which is expected in 2028, will add 357 places.
We have also significantly increased investment in community justice, bringing the total funding for this financial year to £159 million. That investment has enabled expansion of the availability and use of alternatives to custody. In 2024-25, 1,500 bail supervision cases were commenced—the highest number in 10 years. The use of electronically monitored bail also remains high, with 1,470 cases recorded over the year. The use of community payback orders has grown, too, with 16,500 CPOs commenced in 2024-25; that is a 9 per cent increase on 2023-24 and the fifth‑highest total in a decade.
In November 2025, Parliament approved a further emergency release of certain short-term prisoners. That measure included important safeguards to protect the public and victims, and we have worked in close partnership with the national health service, local authorities and the third sector to provide additional support on release in order to facilitate successful reintegration into communities. We have completed four tranches of emergency early releases, and 415 prisoners have been released to date; that figure is lower than expected. There are a further three tranches planned up to April, which it is estimated will result in a further 100 to 200 prisoners being released.
The action that the Government has taken has been necessary to ensure the safe running of our prison estate for those in prison and, importantly, for our hard-working staff. All those measures could not have been implemented successfully without the hard work of Scottish Prison Service staff, justice social work services and a range of other partners, and I thank them for their dedication and commitment.
Despite the best efforts of the Government and our delivery partners, however, the prison population remains stubbornly high, and the current trajectory indicates that the upwards trend will continue. Today, the prison population is sitting at 8,301. As of 27 January, eight prisons are showing red risk status and 15 are shown as being close to, or over, their assessed capacity tolerance.
The continued rise in the prison population reflects the action that we have taken to strengthen the justice system. For example, the number of homicide victims in 2024-25 was the lowest since comparable records began in 1976, and recorded crime rates remain among the lowest in more than 50 years. However, at the same time, we are seeing more convictions for serious and organised crime, as well as for recent and historical sexual offences. That is testament to the work of Police Scotland and our courts, and it also reflects a confidence among the public in reporting sexual offences, knowing that that will be taken seriously.
Sentencing patterns have also changed, with considerably more people being sentenced for longer. The average custodial sentence length increased by 37 per cent between 2014-15 and 2023-24, which is a significant contributor to the growing number of long‑term prisoners who are serving four years or more, and one that cannot be predicted. That means that, as well as having an increased, and increasing, prison population, the composition of our prison population has also changed considerably. Taken together, that creates significant risks for those who work and live in our prisons.
Those risks cannot be underestimated and the projections are clear. The emergency release provides only a temporary relief and will not reduce population pressures to a safe and sustainable level on its own, so further action is required.
That is why—alongside our work to prevent crime, expand prison capacity, reduce reoffending and strengthen alternatives to custody, which I am clear must all continue—I believe that additional changes to the automatic release point for certain short-term prisoners are now necessary to deliver a further, sustained reduction in the prison population.
Following careful consideration of the options that are available to me, I would like to notify the Parliament of my intention to carry out a short consultation with relevant partners on the issue, with the aim of laying secondary legislation next week for Parliament’s approval. That is necessary to meet standing orders on Scottish statutory instruments and ensure that the regulations can be scrutinised ahead of Parliament’s dissolution.
The consultation will seek views on changing the automatic release point for certain short-term prisoners, so that they serve 30 per cent of their sentence in custody, instead of 40 per cent. That would not apply to those serving sentences for domestic abuse and sexual offences. Unlike with emergency early release, the change would deliver a reduction that would be sustained over time.
Protecting victims and public safety remains an absolute priority for this Government. I stress that the proposed changes would not apply to those serving long-term custodial sentences over four years or those serving sentences for domestic abuse and sexual offences. That recognises the particular concerns that can arise in relation to those offences and the considerable progress that has been made in recent years so that victims and survivors can have confidence in the justice system.
Let me make clear that this is not a decision that I have taken lightly. It remains crucial that those who pose the greatest risk of harm to the public are housed in prisons. However, it is also the case that there are too many people in our prisons and, like the rest of the United Kingdom, we remain an outlier among western nations in that regard.
Although the measure is required in the immediate term, we must look beyond that to a sustainable long-term position that reduces the reliance on custody and makes use of robust community alternatives. The sentencing and penal policy commission, which I established last year, is set to publish its recommendations shortly. I will return to Parliament following its publication.
We know that community sentences are more effective in reducing reoffending than short-term prison sentences, which disrupt families and adversely affect employment opportunities and stable housing. Managed release processes are therefore an important and recognised part of our justice system, supporting meaningful rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
Those leaving prison after a short-term sentence in Scotland are entitled to request throughcare support, which is provided through their local authority, a third sector organisation or the national voluntary service, Upside. Those services provide flexible and personalised support before, during and after release. They help prisoners to access support to find somewhere to stay, find a job and healthcare. We have seen that that can support successful reintegration and contribute to reduced risk of reoffending, less crime, fewer victims and safer communities. That is what we all want to see.
I believe that this action is necessary and that the proposed exclusions that I outlined strike the right balance between recognising the concerns of victims and survivors and supporting a sustained reduction in the prison population, which is essential in enabling our prison estate to function safely and effectively.
The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues that were raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes, after which we will move on to the next item of business. It would be helpful if those members who wish to ask a question were to press their request-to-speak button.
I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement.
Criminals get up to four years for things such as drug offences, serious assault and possession of offensive weapons. There was a time when a sentence of four years meant four years. Then, for years, that came to mean automatic release at the halfway point. Since February 2020, such prisoners were let out after serving only 40 per cent of their sentence. In the past couple of years, we have also had several so-called emergency release programmes.
In December 2023, the prison population was just under 8,300. Today, it is just over 8,300. The Government’s knee-jerk, unevidenced, panicked schemes have failed. The cabinet secretary has come to Parliament today talking at length about her inputs, but in just two paragraphs, we have learned that the only outputs will be hardened criminals, released after serving just 30 per cent of their sentence.
What research has been done that demonstrates that a 30 per cent release scheme will be any more successful than previous failed schemes? Has the cabinet secretary changed the previous failure of Government to keep any formal records of the risks, objectives and rationale related to prisoners being released early? In addition, in previous similar statements, the cabinet secretary focused on protections for victims; in this statement, she does no such thing. Does that not clearly show where the Government’s priorities lie?
Presiding Officer, with the greatest respect, I am not going to take lessons on supporting victims from a member who did not support the most recent victims bill. With regard to the member’s trip down memory lane, it is almost a quarter of a century since I worked in the Prison Service and, at that point, short-term prisoners were automatically released halfway through their sentence.
However, I say to Mr Kerr, because his point about demonstrating outcomes is important, that of course we can demonstrate the impact of the wide range of actions and steps that I have taken, directly or indirectly. One example is that after the implementation of the STP40 programme last year, the short-term prisoner population between February and November was reduced by 8 per cent. I can give other examples. However, Mr Kerr needs to recognise that, although the Government can take steps to manage the population, we know, for example—because we look closely at the detail—that the impact of the current early emergency release programme is lower than expected because of higher inflows into the system over the festive period and the use of the governor’s veto.
It is key that we all step back from our rhetoric and look at and appreciate the evidence on why Scotland is such an outlier in having an exceptionally high prison population. Leaving aside the rhetoric, it does not serve our communities and people well to have an overpopulated prison population, because that is contrary to achieving safety in our communities.
Thank you, cabinet secretary. We will need briefer answers.
The prison system has been in a constant state of crisis for some time—and it is not using “rhetoric” to say so.
Every few months, we come to the chamber to hear a statement about more offenders being let out early through one scheme or another. It was just over a year ago that Parliament agreed to change the release date for short-term prisoners from 50 per cent to 40 per cent of their sentence served. Today, we have been asked to move that further, to 30 per cent, with only a short time in which to consult on the proposal. Where does this end for victims, who will be alarmed that some offenders will now serve only 30 per cent of their sentence?
I ask the cabinet secretary for full transparency and detail on the crime profile of those offenders who will now be eligible for permanent early release if that further reduction in time served is implemented. What type of offences have they committed? The public deserve to know that.
As I said in my statement, the prisoners who will be excluded will be those who are serving a prison sentence of less than four years for domestic violence and sexual offences. The member will be well aware that there are a wide range of other offences. We are beholden to deliver a sustainable prison population, because that is in the interests of the health, safety and welfare of staff and in the interests of the communities that we serve. The advantage of looking at the automatic release point for certain prisoners is that that will give us a sustainable reduction.
I have to say to Ms McNeill that what we are wrestling with in Scotland is not unique to Scotland. There are similarities between the action that has been taken in Scotland and that which has been taken south of the border. I say that not to demur from my responsibilities, but by way of context. We know that the Tories released 10,000 prisoners early, without a hi or a bye to parliamentary accountability. We know that the Labour Party continued with that scheme until its current measures kicked in. We know that the UK Labour Government—
I have asked for succinct answers, and that really is not one at this point.
Okay. I will respect that.
I appreciate that it is an important matter, but a lot of members would like to ask their question and get an answer.
The 37 per cent increase in the sentence length that the cabinet secretary mentioned merits further examination. I presume that, if that is an on-going trend, it will contribute to an increased prison population. Can the cabinet secretary set out what research or analysis the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service might have undertaken to better understand why that increased sentence length is occurring?
I am not aware of that research, but the increase is shown in statistics. The trend over the past decade has been driven by a range of factors. In part, it reflects the action that we have taken to strengthen the justice system. For example, we are seeing more convictions for serious organised crime and recent and historical sex offences. Also, the number of those sentenced to short-term sentences continues to remain high. As of 2 February—yesterday—there were 1,928 short-term prisoners, which is about 23 per cent of the entire prison population.
We have seen the High Court of Justiciary impose four-year custodial sentences for knife assaults that have caused severe injury, permanent disfigurement and even cases in which emergency brain surgery was required. Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether, under her proposals, offenders who are convicted of crimes of that gravity could be released after serving only around 30 per cent of their sentence? If so, how can she possibly expect the public to have confidence in the justice system when judges impose four years only for offenders to be released after little more than a year?
Ms Dowey makes the underlying point that it is important that people understand more about how sentences are applied in this country and that, if a person is given a short-term sentence of just below four years, they will have an automatic release point that is less than that sentence. I agree with the point that more transparency and public awareness are needed on that.
It is not the Government’s intention to create a hierarchy of offences. All offences have consequences for victims and communities. I am of the view that, in this instance, we can justify exemptions around violence against women and girls because of the historical barriers to not reporting it. Given the progress that has been made as a result of growing confidence in the justice system, we do not want to step back from that.
Evidence shows that those who serve sentences of less than a year reoffend nearly twice as often as those who are given a community payback order. Will the change that has been announced today reduce recidivism, or do we need further changes to community justice, including more investment, to stop the cycle of reoffending?
As has been repeated in the chamber, the evidence is clear that community sentences are far more effective in reducing reoffending than short custodial sentences, and that leads to fewer victims and safer communities. That is why I have made it, in part, my mission to reduce the reliance on custody by increasing investment in community justice services. The forthcoming budget includes another increase and will take investment to £169 million. It is important to recognise the evidence and the statistics. A total of 1,500 bail supervision cases were commenced in 2024-25, which was the highest number in 10 years. The number of diversions from prosecution cases has also risen.
Only 2 per cent of this year’s budget for justice and home affairs is assigned to community justice, and only 10 per cent of that community justice budget is to be spent on front-line services, which is a real-terms cut of 2 per cent. Local government has also faced cuts to its budget of about 50 per cent since 2010 and is unable to provide a range of services. The cabinet secretary and I have been in correspondence about this, but she must surely accept that we cannot have real-terms cuts to community justice in this year’s budget.
As I demonstrated at portfolio questions last week, we have not cut budgets for community justice. I am sure that I quoted a specific figure to Ms Clark that demonstrated that, for example, investment in community justice social work services has increased by more than 50 per cent over several years. I am happy to provide that figure again to Ms Clark, but I cannot overemphasise the importance of community justice in providing effective and robust justice that makes communities safer.
The number of people who receive short-term sentences of a year has remained stubbornly high, despite the presumption against them. Does the cabinet secretary have an annual breakdown of those who serve short-term sentences that she can provide today, or can she provide it to the Criminal Justice Committee ahead of our discussion on the Scottish statutory instrument?
It is appropriate for me to recognise that the appropriate sentence in any given case is for the independent courts to decide. Although there is a longer-term trend away from shorter sentences, a high number continue to be imposed. We are undertaking further work to better understand how the presumption against short sentences currently operates. In the most recent figures, from 2023-24, 73 per cent of short-term sentences were for 12 months or less, and a further 15 per cent were for 24 months or less.
In her statement, the cabinet secretary mentioned the changed “composition” of the prison population and, when taken with the increasing prison population, the increased risks that that poses for prison staff as well as for those serving sentences. Can she say a bit more about those risks and the current impact on staff and prisoners, and can she set out why the proposed changes that she has outlined are vital in order to ensure the safety and wellbeing of prison staff, whose work is vital to reducing reoffending?
The Scottish Prison Service—and therefore ministers—has a very clear responsibility to the health, safety and wellbeing of prisoners and staff. We must recognise that prison is not the end of the line. The work that happens in our prisons, although often hidden, is imperative to the safe reintegration and rehabilitation of prisoners. Right now, prison staff need to know that, collectively, we will pull together, do the hard yards and make the hard decisions that they require from us to be supported in their work. That is vital for a front-line service that has a direct bearing on the safety of our communities.
The Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Act 2025 required a review of the operation of the reduction of the automatic early release point to be published by this time next year. That is a really important part of post-legislative scrutiny. Will the cabinet secretary today commit to a review of the change that is being proposed this afternoon?
Ms Nicoll has raised a very important point of detail. Although the 2025 act requires a statutory review of the operation of the reduction of the release point for certain short-term prisoners from 50 to 40 per cent, the regulations cannot create a similar statutory duty, because they are secondary legislation. However, I commit that the Government will review the impact of the changes that are proposed under the regulations. That is vital, because regular monitoring allows us to keep measures under review and assess the impact on the prison population and on the communities to which released prisoners return.
I thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of her statement.
It appears that extraordinary emergency release measures have now become a routine tool for the Government in managing the prison population. However, I understand that, as of 1 January, the remand population was still more than 2,000, and some of those people are being held before their trial. What specific measures is the cabinet secretary taking to drive down the remand population, which remains stubbornly and unacceptably high?
I stress to Mr McArthur that we most certainly are not normalising shorter-term, emergency-type measures. The reality is that we have had to take action that will provide outcomes in the immediate term. However, Mr McArthur is right that we must lift our eyes and find solutions for the medium and longer terms, and I assure him that we are engaged in that.
Remand is a very important part of that work. I note that 82 per cent of remand prisoners are detained under solemn proceedings and that 16 per cent are detained under summary proceedings, with the data being unclear for the other 2 per cent. The work of services such as Upside in supporting those who are released from remand is important, and we must continue to build on our work on alternatives to remand, including bail and supervised bail.
The cabinet secretary has outlined the actions that have been taken to reduce the prison population over the past few years. Has she been able to assess the impact on the prison population? Has she also reflected on what the population would have been if the changes had not taken place?
We have done some of that analytical work. Those in analytical services work very hard to track the impact of the decisions and actions that are taken. It is estimated that, if we had not implemented the short-term prisoner release programme—which is otherwise known as the STP40 programme—and the current early emergency release programme, our prison population would be between 8,780 and 9,010, so the action that we are taking is making a difference.
As I have said at each and every step when I have come to the Parliament, this is not the end of the journey. There is no one solution or step—there are many—and we must be prepared to undertake that journey.
In her statement, the cabinet secretary said that the measures will not apply to prisoners who have been sentenced to more than four years in prison, because they pose the greatest risk of harm to others. Does she not understand that her Government’s policy of putting men who have committed murder in female prisons poses a great risk of harm to others? Why is that bizarre policy continuing in Scotland? Why is her Government in court today, arguing that it should continue into the future?
Although I am not going to comment on a live court case—[Interruption.]—I will get to the answer. With respect to the member, he will appreciate that I am not currently following the court case, which I believe is being live streamed.
I reiterate the evidence that I gave to the Criminal Justice Committee some time ago—evidence that the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service also gave some time ago—on the current policy: no transgender woman with a history of violence against women and girls—
Man!
Members!
—who presents a risk of harm is placed in the female estate.
They are murderers!
Mr Ross!
I stress that, as a responsible Government, we must ensure that our policies comply with all our legal obligations, including the Scotland Act 1998, the European convention on human rights and the recent Supreme Court judgment.
Thank you, cabinet secretary. That concludes the statement. We will now move on to the next item of business.