Official Report 1201KB pdf
The next item of business is consideration of Parliamentary Bureau motion S6M-19535, on approval of a Scottish statutory instrument. I ask the minister to move the motion on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament agrees that the Early Release of Prisoners (Scotland) Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.—[Graeme Dey]
18:48
I will not vote tonight to release more than 1,000 criminals early from prison. Yes, the Scottish National Party’s failure to come up with a holistic justice strategy has led to our prisons being dangerously overcrowded, but throwing open the gates and freeing criminals early is not the solution.
During the passage of the Prisoners (Early Release) (Scotland) Act 2025, the cabinet secretary said:
“The measures in this Bill will bring about a sustained reduction in the prison population”.
As I warned, that was nonsense then and it remains nonsense now. Indeed, Victim Support Scotland told the Criminal Justice Committee that early release is
“not effective in reducing the prison population in the medium or longer term.”
Scotland’s chief inspector of prisons has pointed out that short-term releases do not reduce the numbers over the longer term, because they do not
“address any of the root causes of the problems.”
The cabinet secretary will argue that early release provides short-term relief, but Scottish Prison Service statistics show that 11 of our 17 prisons were full mere days after the previous early release programme.
Early release only exposes the public to risk, as data shows high levels of reoffending by previous early-release prisoners. It retraumatises victims, it diminishes respect for our courts and it exposes the SNP’s failure to expedite the over-budget and delayed HMP Glasgow and HMP Highland.
Do not forget the SPS’s recent warning that a new prison the size of HMP Grampian or HMP Shotts would be needed to address the overcrowding—a new prison that the cabinet secretary refuses to even contemplate because, as she put it,
“If we build, they will come.”—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 29 October 2025; c 8.]
However, there are alternatives. The Government could heed prison inspectors and address the 27 per cent of the prison population that is on remand. It could note His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland’s comments that the long-term population is key and look at its proposed solutions. It could use existing powers to bring in alcohol and drug tags to reduce risks and reoffending, as is the case in England.
Instead, the Government presents MSPs with what was originally a knee-jerk response to a wholly predictable crisis as the sole default option, with no guarantee that it will not be extended to long-term prisoners in the future.
Will the member take an intervention?
I am very sorry, but I have only three minutes.
Presiding Officer,
“Public confidence in Scotland’s criminal justice system is being eroded with these measures.”
Victim Support Scotland said that, and it is right. A Government that rips up sentences that are independently imposed on criminals by judges for a very good reason makes a mockery of our justice system, weakens deterrence and sends precisely the wrong message to victims and communities.
I will not vote to expose the public to risk, trash respect for our courts and sentencing and retraumatise victims, simply to absolve the Government of its failure of foresight and planning. Those MSPs who do should hang their heads in shame.
I call the cabinet secretary to respond.
18:51
I start by acknowledging the gravity of the decision that I ask Parliament to make this evening, and I remind colleagues that every decision taken by me and the Government has been made under full parliamentary scrutiny and that parliamentary approval has been sought when it has been required.
I also wish to inform Parliament that the prison population today is 8,431, which is a new record high and a milestone that few of us would have wanted to reach. The Scottish Prison Service’s assessed capacity tolerance has been breached on a number of occasions. Ten of our prisons are at red risk status, and there is a risk of non-compliance with our statutory and legal obligations. Therefore, doing nothing is not an option.
The emergency action for which I seek Parliament’s approval is critical to ensuring the safe and secure operation of our prisons and the health and safety of those who work in them. In short, I seek to ensure that our prisons can continue to accommodate those who pose the greatest risks. I know that many members of the Parliament and many of those who work in the justice system and, indeed, victim support organisations have narrated the need for longer-term solutions to secure a stable and sustainable prison population, and I agree with them. In fact, I have been advocating for that and, in my view, I have laid the foundations for that with, among other things, the establishment of the independent sentencing and penal commission, which will report to me at the end of this year.
I continue my commitment to that, to the expansion of community justice and to doing more than that, including with the use of electronic monitoring and widening the scope. That is in addition to increasing capacity in the prison estate, as well as completing two new prisons.
It remains to be seen who, at the end of the day, will be prepared to engage with and debate the evidence about what works to reduce offending and increase the rehabilitation of offenders to keep our communities safe.
I noted Mr Kerr’s comments about the need to reduce the remand population and manage prisoners differently and, of course, the use of electronic monitoring.
However, right now, we have to reach a position of stability to enable more permanent change and reform. The challenge for us as a Parliament and, indeed, as a country is that, if we do not want to remain in a cycle of shorter-term decisions, we will need to take bolder and longer-lasting action.
This is absolutely not a decision that I have taken lightly, but it is a decision that is now necessary. I absolutely recognise that the early release of prisoners will be cause for concern for victims. That is why the regulations have stringent safeguards in place, including statutory exclusions for sex offenders and those serving sentences for domestic abuse. We have also added extra exclusions for prisoners with unspent previous domestic abuse convictions or non-harassment orders. Of course, a prison governor’s veto can be applied if a release poses—
Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?
I have only three minutes, sir.
A prison governor’s veto can be applied if a release poses an immediate risk of harm to an identifiable individual or group. I remind members that, last year, the figure for return to custody after earlier emergency release was 13 per cent and, following the STP40 programme, it was 5 per cent.
I want to be clear that emergency release is not the answer to addressing the prison population in the long term, but it is essential right now to providing critical relief to those who live and work in our prisons. It is my view that the legal test for emergency release has been met and that these measures are necessary and proportionate to maintain the security and good order of our prisons, as well as the safety and welfare of prisoners and staff.
Please conclude, cabinet secretary.
Emergency release will start to reduce the prison population within days, if approved, and the schedule of releases over the next six months will help to maintain its effect for that time. We can critique the past and debate the future, but tonight we must make a decision to act and not put our hands over our ears or turn our face to the wall.
The question on the motion will be put at decision time.
The next item of business is consideration of four Parliamentary Bureau motions. I ask Graeme Dey, on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, to move motions S6M-19536, on approval of a Scottish statutory instrument, S6M-19537, on the office of the clerk, S6M-19538, on campaign recess dates and S6M-19539, on recess dates.
Motions moved,
That the Parliament agrees that the Carer’s Assistance (Miscellaneous and Consequential Amendments, Revocation, Transitional and Saving Provisions) (Scotland) Regulations 2025 [draft] be approved.
That the Parliament agrees that the Office of the Clerk be closed on Wednesday 24 (am), Monday 29, Tuesday 30 and Wednesday 31 December 2025.
That the Parliament agrees—
(a) for the purpose of the pre-election campaign period from 26 March to 8 April 2026 (inclusive), that the office of the clerk be closed from 26 March to 8 April 2026 (inclusive);
(b) in respect of meetings of committees and sub-committees during the pre-election campaign period, that, in rule 12.3.3, the word “normally” in the second sentence be suspended; and
(c) for the purpose of the lodging of written questions immediately prior to the pre-election campaign period, that rule 13.3.4A be suspended and replaced with—
“The last day on which written questions may be lodged in the current session is Thursday 12 March 2026.”
That the Parliament agrees, for the purposes of the pre-election campaign period from 26 March to 8 April 2026 (inclusive), the following parliamentary recess dates under Rule 2.3.1: 26 March to 8 April 2026 (inclusive).—[Graeme Dey]
The question on the motions will be put at decision time.
Previous
Business Motion