Christopher Hales
To ask the Scottish Government when the Crown Office was first notified of the allegations of mortgage fraud against Christopher Hales. (S4T-01133)
As the Crown has made clear on a number of occasions recently, the case of Christopher Hales was first brought to its attention by the Law Society of Scotland at a meeting on 18 December 2014.
We understand that the Law Society told the Crown Office informally about the Christopher Hales case in December 2014, then in April 2015, and then formally in July 2015. Does the Lord Advocate believe that there should be an investigation into the process of communication between the Law Society and the Crown Office, given that additional opportunities for alleged mortgage fraud could have arisen due to the delay? Will he order such an inquiry?
Noting when the Lord Advocate instructed the police to investigate—and if, as we understand, that was within six days of receiving the report—has he set a deadline for the police to submit a report to the Crown Office? If that is not already the case, will he consider so doing?
A number of questions have been asked of me. I will deal first with the last question. It is correct that, on 3 July 2015, Police Scotland was instructed to investigate the allegations that were the subject of the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal. The report was received on that day and was considered by the Crown Office. Six days later, I think on 9 July, formal instructions were issued to the police.
I cannot set a timescale, as these are complex matters, but I can say that the serious and organised crime division of the Crown Office is in regular contact with both the Law Society and Police Scotland, which is dealing with the matter, to monitor progress and to assist in a number of legal matters that have arisen as a result of the investigation.
As to whether I think that there should be an inquiry or whether I should order an inquiry, first, I do not have the power to order an inquiry; and, secondly, I do not think that there should be an inquiry. Let me explain why, and let me take members through the timeline of interaction between the serious and organised crime division of the Crown Office and the Law Society. There are quarterly meetings at which a large number of matters are discussed, including issues of whether the Law Society will make a referral in relation to a solicitor who has been struck off or who is the subject of a disciplinary finding made against them.
The Crown Office was first advised of this issue on 18 December 2014. The Crown Office was advised that the matter was under consideration of a referral to the Crown. The Crown noted the findings of the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal and noted that neither the clients nor the properties involved were named at the meeting.
The next time the matter was discussed was, as the member rightly mentioned in her supplementary question, in April this year—28 April, to be precise. The issue was raised again, and it was noted that it was still under consideration of a referral by the Law Society to the Crown. Again, neither the clients nor the properties were intimated at the time.
Following those meetings, the Crown was in contact with the Law Society to discuss what needed to be obtained—what evidence needed to be obtained, what files needed to be obtained and who had them—and a whole host of other matters. Given that there is a live investigation, it would not be productive to get into those details. I hope that Jackie Baillie will accept from me that preparatory work was undertaken with the Law Society to deal with the matter if and when there was a formal referral.
As indicated, the referral was made on 3 July 2015. On 1 July 2015, the Law Society advised us that it required to get authorisation from the guarantee fund sub-committee to formally refer the case to the Crown Office. That is a Law Society procedure.
We must understand what we are dealing with. We are dealing with a criminal investigation in which a person’s liberty could be in jeopardy, so these things cannot be dealt with quickly or by word of mouth. There is a process. That process was carried out by the Law Society, and authorisation was given for a referral by the guarantee fund sub-committee. Once that authorisation was given, the referral was made on 3 July 2015. That was a formal referral from the Law Society containing a whole load of information that the Crown would need, and the Crown has, of course, worked or been in contact with the Law Society about matters in anticipation of the referral being made.
As indicated, the referral was received on 3 July, which was a Friday. I think that the police were instructed the following Thursday.
The first time the Crown was made aware of the clients and the properties was on 3 July 2015. The Crown was not aware of the clients and the properties prior to that. There would be client confidentiality and data protection issues, but that is not my problem, or that was not my issue, of course; that is a matter for the Law Society in its dealings with the issue. However, I have spoken to the persons who were at the meeting and have had sight of the notes of the meeting, and I can assure members that the first time the Crown was made aware of the identity of the clients and the properties involved was 3 July 2015.
The public would probably not understand why it takes more than a year for the disciplinary tribunal to notify the Crown Office. Our concern should always be that, in the intervening period, vulnerable people could have been caught up and exploited in alleged mortgage fraud.
It appears from press reports that three lawyers, not one, have faced disciplinary action by the Law Society. In all cases, there has been a common denominator. Was the Crown Office aware at any stage of those additional cases and were connections made by the Law Society that were notified to the Crown? Given the seriousness of the allegations, has the Crown Office taken any steps through the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to freeze the assets of any of those who might be implicated?
To deal with the last point first, the Crown has not yet taken steps under the proceeds of crime legislation. It is premature for that to be done or considered. In any criminal investigation, the Crown always has potential proceeds of crime at the forefront, but there has to be established criminality before steps can be embarked on.
On other solicitors who may or may not be involved, I have to be very careful about what I say, but I can tell members that, in relation to the referral on 3 July 2015, as far as I am aware—I read the referral this morning and I will check it after these proceedings are concluded—only one solicitor is referred to. However, Jackie Baillie has placed me on notice, and I will certainly make inquiries into that matter.
In what circumstances would the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service ask Police Scotland to investigate any other person connected with the solicitor subject to the Law Society’s judgment?
I have given consideration to that matter, because that question is highly relevant. The referral to Police Scotland relates to the solicitor who was the subject of the Scottish Solicitors Discipline Tribunal finding. The police has been instructed to investigate the property transactions relating to that finding, which resulted in the solicitor being struck off.
Police Scotland has a duty in any criminal investigation to follow where the evidence takes it. If, during a police investigation, evidence arises that other persons have been involved in criminality, such as fraud or whatever crime, I have complete faith that Police Scotland will act and do the right thing, as will the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.
Affordable Housing
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the claim in the report, Affordable Housing Need in Scotland, that the need for affordable housing is double what is being delivered. (S4T-01136)
We will, of course, consider the report’s findings. We are delivering a huge boost to affordable housing provision across Scotland by investing more than £1.7 billion to build 30,000 affordable homes during this Parliament’s lifetime. That is a significant achievement at a time of cuts to our capital budgets. We want to do more. We want to increase and accelerate our ambitions for Scotland’s housing, and to continue to do so in an integrated and collaborative way. Our target of 6,000 affordable homes a year is absolutely not the limit of our ambition, and in the past seven years we have delivered 19 per cent more affordable homes than the previous Administration.
Statistics that were published this morning also show that provisional local authority capital expenditure on housing increased by 7.1 per cent from 2013-14 to 2014-15. That is 28 per cent of the total capital expenditure for 2014-15.
The minister mentioned the previous coalition Government, but unfortunately, her figures were wrong. Housing starts for 2006-07 were more than 5,500, but starts in the past financial year were just over 3,500. We will put that to the side. The report, which was published by three of Scotland’s leading housing organisations, has reassessed the target that is needed to tackle our housing crisis. It calls for
“at least 12,000 affordable homes a year for the next five years.”
When will the Government be in a position to commit to reassessing its targets and to bringing them closer to realistic needs in order to solve the crisis?
As I said, our target is not the limit of our ambition. We want to do more, and we are working with stakeholders across the sector to do just that.
I remind Jim Hume that, given this Scottish Government’s falling budgets, we have built more houses over the past seven years than the previous Administration. We know that we need to build more houses, and we are working hard to do that. The member can be assured that housing remains a Scottish Government priority.
The director of Shelter Scotland said that
“progress is nowhere near meeting the level of demand.”
Homes for Scotland said that housing production is
“40% lower than in 2007 despite a record population and growing number of households.”
The Scottish Federation of Housing Associations said that
“By ... tackling the housing crisis there is an opportunity to improve the life chances of Scotland’s people, including some of the poorest and most vulnerable.”
In the light of those expert opinions, will the minister provide information on what more it will do to help the most vulnerable people to obtain housing?
The Scottish Government will work with all stakeholders in the sector to deliver housing through its joint delivery plan. The plan’s key aim is to provide more housing and to see housing delivered across all tenures. We will work to achieve that. Our officials are also working tirelessly on more innovative ways to use the reducing finances that we get from the United Kingdom Government in order to ensure that we can stretch them further. We will continue to build social housing and housing across all tenures, which is a priority for this Government. We have delivered in this session of Parliament, and we will deliver any targets that we set in a future Parliament.
Members will note that we have some time in hand over the whole afternoon, so I intend to allow question time to continue in order to allow as many members as possible the opportunity to ask questions of the ministers. However, I would truly appreciate members’ keeping their questions brief.
Two weeks ago, during Labour’s debate on housing, the minister steadfastly refused to accept the description of our housing supply situation by the Commission on Housing and Wellbeing as a “crisis”. Does she accept that the figure of 12,000 social houses a year is an accurate assessment of the current need for social housing?
I said in my initial response that we will, of course, consider very seriously the findings of the report. I also said that the target of 6,000 affordable homes is not our ambition; our ambition is to build more homes—affordable homes and homes for social rent—than that. We will continue to do that. We have delivered 19 per cent more than any other Administration and we will continue to work to deliver even more, above that.
Against the need that was defined in Jim Hume’s question, the national housing trust can be judged only as a failure. Will the minister commit to returning to the idea of the national housing trust and to making alternative proposals for a new vehicle that will facilitate private investment in affordable housing?
At this stage, I am certainly not going to give a commitment to something that Alex Johnstone has, as far as I can recollect, mentioned for the first time. It is something that he has certainly not brought to me before. However, I can tell him that we are working with the sector and with investors and lenders to attract private investment into the housing sector. We will continue to do that. We are open to discussion, and have had discussions with many groups and investors, and we are willing to listen to any ideas. If Alex Johnstone has an idea that he feels we should be taking forward, I suggest that he bring it to us.
What action is the Scottish Government taking to enable local authorities to acquire land for housing at a more reasonable price? Does the minister accept the basic principle that Government targets ought to be determined by the level of need?
Yes, we are looking at housing needs, which is why we have our housing need and demand assessments. Local authorities advise us on demand in their areas, and we look at that. The Cabinet Secretary for Social Justice, Communities and Pensioners’ Rights recently launched the planning review, which is looking at delivery of housing and at the existing infrastructure to ensure that it is not just a process but is about effective and efficient delivery of housing programmes. We are looking at those issues, as well.
Ayrshire College (Cumnock Campus Closure)
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that people in Cumnock are not disadvantaged by the decision to close the Cumnock campus of Ayrshire College. (S4T-01131)
That news is disappointing. I understand that the decision by Ayrshire College to close the Cumnock campus was due to a fall in student numbers, with students choosing to attend the other campuses, including the recently refurbished Ayr campus. The college advises, however, that it will continue to work with its partners and will run short courses at locations across the area to help people to develop employability skills.
Looking ahead, the new £53 million campus in Kilmarnock, which is due to open next year, will provide more opportunities in state-of-the-art facilities for learners across the region.
I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for that response. She will understand the difficulties that are faced by people who live in the Cumnock area, which is a challenged area because of unemployment and other past upsets.
Women’s access is an important issue for the Government. The announcement has come as a great shock to people in Cumnock because of the closure’s impact not only on the economy, but on access to opportunities. Will the cabinet secretary take steps to ensure that what can be done will be done in relation to education in the area?
It is imperative that Ayrshire College continues to work with the community in order to reassure and convince people that it remains, despite the closure of the Cumnock campus, committed to providing learning opportunities in the area.
Graeme Pearson might be interested to note that the Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council’s outcome agreement guidance sets the expectation that colleges will offer a wide range of further education provision in locations across regions, thereby making FE more accessible to students.
I said that Ayrshire College intends to work with local partners to identify alternative venues for the two part-time courses that are currently offered. It will also have to work with the student association to support students during the transition to a new location.
The cabinet secretary will know about the expense that students incur when they have to travel for courses. People in Cumnock are concerned about the additional cost to students in that regard. There is a perception in the area that courses have been transferred to other campuses, which has disadvantaged the Cumnock campus.
Discussions have been going on about the future of the crèche facilities in the Ayr and Kilwinning campuses, which is also of concern to constituents in the context of access to education. I hope that the cabinet secretary will take further interest in those matters.
I will, of course, continue to take an interest in those matters.
I appreciate the tone and tenor of Mr Pearson’s comments. He might be interested to note that students who live more than 2 miles from their college are eligible to apply for assistance with travel costs.
Closure of the Ayr and Kilwinning campus nurseries is a decision for Ayrshire College, which says that despite its endeavours to increase demand, the two nurseries have been struggling to break even. Currently 37 children use the facilities, at a cost to the college of £400,000. I will continue to make inquiries, as will local members, to test the nature of the information that comes our way.
Does the cabinet secretary understand my concern about the college’s lack of consultation of the community about the decision? The lack of transparency and openness compares unfavourably with, for example, the approach that is taken under the protocol for school closure proposals.
What discussions have taken place between the Scottish Government and Ayrshire College? Can the cabinet secretary reassure the Cumnock community in relation to the impact on the level and quality of college provision for my constituents?
I share some of Mr Ingram’s concerns. It is important to say firmly that consultation should never be regarded as an extra and must be part of how the Government and public services conduct themselves.
I am aware of the particular challenges that face the community in Cumnock—not least its comparative isolation and long-standing high unemployment, which has been mentioned. I reiterate to Mr Ingram and to other members who have an interest in the matter my disappointment at the decision. We will continue to work together to ensure that the college mitigates the impact of the closure.
My officials have sought reassurance from the college that plans are in place to continue to enable local residents to meet their aspirations to learn and study. For students who attend the Cumnock campus, the college is, with its local partners, identifying an alternative location for delivery.
Previous
Time for ReflectionNext
Island Communities