Official Report 219KB pdf
The next item of business is a statement by the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Neil Gray, on HMP and YOI Polmont. Questions will be taken at the end of the statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.
15:41
I wish to make a statement on the incident that occurred at HMP and YOI Polmont on 25 September. Although the management of prisons, including the management of incidents in prisons, is the operational responsibility of the Scottish Prison Service, and the incident was reported in the media at the time, I understand the concerns that members of the Criminal Justice Committee raised and acknowledge that they would have welcomed an earlier opportunity to hear directly about the events at Polmont and the actions that have been taken in response.
It has not been established practice for ministers to make statements to the Parliament on individual operational incidents. However, given the level of interest in the incident and the wider challenges that Scotland’s prison estate faces, I have decided that it is appropriate to update members on the incident and the actions that have been taken since, and to recognise those who responded to the incident.
I remind members—you will understand the implications of this point, Deputy Presiding Officer—that this remains a live criminal case.
At approximately 4 pm on Friday 25 September, disorder broke out in one residential section of HMP and YOI Polmont after a group of young people returned from exercise. During the initial stages of the incident, a prison officer sustained minor injuries. Staff acted promptly to secure the area and withdraw safely, in line with established operational procedures.
Extensive damage then occurred in the residential accommodation. Closed-circuit television systems were destroyed, furniture and fittings were damaged, and significant disruption was caused in the affected area. Staff who attempted to engage with those involved were allegedly subjected to threats and violence, including the alleged throwing of improvised weapons.
As per standard procedure, local command arrangements were established immediately and specialist negotiators were deployed before the Scottish Prison Service took the decision to escalate the response by activating national command arrangements and designating the situation as a level 3 incident. A level 3 response enables specialist resources, experienced national commanders and national operational support to be mobilised from across the prison estate.
Police Scotland was informed immediately and remained engaged throughout the incident. In accordance with established arrangements, the Scottish Ambulance Service, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and national health service partners were also on site and available to provide support, if required. A total of 93 Scottish Prison Service staff supported the response.
I was informed on the evening of 25 September, following the activation of national command arrangements, and I received detailed briefing from the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service and the director of operations during the evening. It was clear to me from that briefing that a significant operational response was under way and that all necessary resources were being deployed to bring the situation safely under control. I continued to receive updates through the night.
At 1.32 am on Saturday morning, I was advised that, following intervention by specialist operational support teams, all those involved in the incident had been brought under control. The incident was formally concluded by the national commander at approximately 3 am. From beginning to end, the incident was brought to order and concluded within 12 hours.
I received a further briefing from the chief executive and the director of operations on the Saturday morning and continued receiving updates over the following days. Senior Scottish Prison Service leaders subsequently visited Polmont to meet staff who were involved in the response, assess the extent of the damage and begin the formal debriefing process that follows all significant incidents. Importantly, outside of the affected section, the remainder of the establishment continued operating safely and staff were able to maintain a full regime in other parts of the prison.
I place on record my thanks to all those who were involved in responding to the incident. The staff working in our prisons carry out a difficult and demanding role on behalf of us all. They work in complex environments and often with the most challenging individuals in our society. Their response to the events at Polmont demonstrates the hard work and commitment that they show every single day. Those who responded to the incident were faced with a volatile situation and their actions helped to contain the disturbance, to protect colleagues and those in custody and to safely restore control. I pay tribute to their professionalism and also thank the specialist response teams, operational commanders, negotiators and emergency services partners who supported that response.
Violence towards prison staff is completely unacceptable. Those who work in our prisons have the right to carry out their duties free from violence, intimidation and threat. I was particularly concerned by the reports of injury to staff and of the threats that were alleged to have been made during the course of the disturbance. The two members of staff who were most directly affected have received support from the Scottish Prison Service and I know that colleagues will join me in wishing them well.
Understandably, members will wish to know about the incident’s impact on the operation of the establishment. I can report that 19 young people are alleged to have been directly involved in the disturbance and that a total of 29 individuals were accommodated in the affected section. The disturbance resulted in significant damage, including to cell doors, flooring, office accommodation, the section pantry and CCTV equipment. Although substantial, that damage was contained to the affected area and work to restore the accommodation began immediately. Estates teams have worked to repair the damage, replace CCTV equipment and restore accommodation capacity. The Scottish Prison Service has also taken the necessary operational steps to continue managing the population safely while those repairs have been undertaken. Evidence relating to the incident has been provided to Police Scotland and it would therefore be inappropriate for me to comment on any matters that may be subject to police consideration.
Alongside that work, the Scottish Prison Service has undertaken a full debrief at local and national level, in line with its standard procedures following a serious incident. That work will examine the circumstances surrounding the incident, the effectiveness of the operational response and any lessons that can be learned.
Although the focus of today’s statement is the incident at Polmont, it is important to recognise the wider context in which Scotland’s prisons are operating. The Scottish Prison Service has been open about the challenges that are associated with sustained growth in the prison population and the pressures that that places on establishments, staff and infrastructure across the prison estate.
Although incidents such as the one at Polmont are often the result of a range of circumstances that are specific to the establishment concerned, we would be failing in our responsibilities if we did not also address the wider pressures that the Scottish Prison Service has consistently highlighted. That is why the programme for government sets out our intention to deliver a more sustainable position across the prison system through a combination of increasing capacity when necessary and reducing demand where it is safe and appropriate to do so.
Work is under way to increase resilience across the estate while we continue considering a range of options to manage prison population pressures in the long term. In addition to the planned opening of HMP Highland and HMP Glasgow, we are rapidly looking at ways to expand the estate further, including the consideration of temporary modular accommodation. Over the summer, we also consulted on a number of proposals that are intended to support a more sustainable prison population by reducing the demand for prison places to ensure that custodial capacity remains available for those who present the greatest risk of harm. The Scottish Government is currently considering the views that were received via that consultation, alongside wider work across the justice system that is aimed at maintaining public safety and supporting a stable and resilient prison estate.
As members will be aware, Scotland has invested significantly in modernising and expanding the prison estate while the Scottish Prison Service continues to take operational action to manage capacity safely and to maintain resilience across establishments. Alongside that work, we are considering the consultation responses and are engaging closely with justice partners to ensure that any future measures continue to support public safety, rehabilitation and confidence in the justice system.
I anticipate returning to Parliament in due course on that wider programme of work. However, I believe that it is important to acknowledge today that maintaining a safe and effective prison system requires us not only to respond effectively when incidents occur but to address the longer-term pressures that can contribute to operational risk across the estate.
I want to be clear, however, that nothing about those wider pressures excuses the violence, disorder or damage that are alleged to have occurred at Polmont. Anyone who is found responsible must be held accountable for their actions.
Nevertheless, it is important that the debrief process considers the immediate circumstances of the incident and whether there are wider lessons to be learned about resilience, safety and stability across the prison system. The work will be important not only in helping us to understand the circumstances of this incident but in informing the wider work that is under way to ensure the continued safety, resilience and effective operation of Scotland’s prisons
As I said at the start of my statement, I recognise that the committee has concerns about the fact that knowledge of this incident was not shared with it. As I said, that approach has never been taken previously. However, I want to make it clear that the Government is very willing to develop a process or protocol with the committee so that, in future, information can be shared by the SPS appropriately and safely. I know that the committee will share my concern that nothing should be done to compromise safety. However, I am confident that we can find a satisfactory way to ensure that the SPS can share information that the committee needs to know.
Incidents such as this are not common, but, when they occur, it is right that they are examined thoroughly and lessons are learned.
Again, I thank the staff of the Scottish Prison Service. I am sure that members will join me in recognising the professionalism of those who responded and in acknowledging the impact that the incident has had on those who were affected.
I intend to allow 20 minutes for members to ask the cabinet secretary questions on the issues raised in his statement. Members who wish to ask a question should press their request-to-speak button now.
I thank Stephen Kerr and David Linden for pressing for this statement. Given the reported level 3 response, the statement is necessary, and public agencies must respect Parliament’s role in scrutinising these decisions.
Linda Pollock, chief executive of the SPS, said that disorder in Polmont is an example of “bubbling tension” caused by increasing overcrowding in the estate. She also said that the disorder was “not unexpected”. That is alarming.
Phil Fairlie, the assistant secretary of the Prison Officers Association, described the situation as “shocking and depressing”. He said that the SPS would reach a point of
“saying the doors are shut”
to new inmates should the projected increases in prisoner numbers prove to be accurate.
When the cabinet secretary wrote to the Criminal Justice Committee in August, he said:
“Across all scenarios, the prison population is expected to increase, with the average daily population by March 2027 projected to be between 8,100 and 9,150.”
Does the cabinet secretary fear that what took place in Polmont could happen in another jail, given that the incident was a result of severe overcrowding? What is his response to Phil Fairlie’s assertion that the SPS may have to shut its doors? What is the Scottish Government’s contingency plan for dealing with that possibility in the long run?
Neither of those scenarios is an inevitability, which is why we are taking forward those steps to address the prison population. That is a question that we, as a Parliament, will collectively need to wrestle with.
Before the summer, I set out some of the potential options for penal reform. Those were informed by the Scottish sentencing and penal commission, which is an independent commission, and its work informed the consultation that ran over the summer.
Alongside the potential steps that we are still to conclude, we are also taking steps to increase capacity. I very much recognise the projections for the prison population, not least because of the success of the justice system in prosecuting serious sexual offending, both current and historical. I will not apologise for this success, which is commanding significant custodial sentences and driving up the long-term prison population, making it the majority of the population in the Scottish Prison Service for the first time.
I say that those are not inevitabilities, but they are questions that we will need to wrestle with as a Parliament. I intend to take forward measures in due course to ensure that the Parliament can take the necessary decisions.
Prison officers and those in custody have lived with the consequences of years of chronic underfunding of the Scottish Prison Service, which has resulted in rising tension, staffing pressures and restricted regimes at Polmont and across the prison estate. In his statement, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice refers to
“reducing demand where it is safe and appropriate to do so.”
Will that be another example of this Government’s soft-touch justice and of criminals being given a get-out-of-jail-free card due to the chronic underfunding of the Scottish Prison Service?
No; Amanda Lindsay completely misses the point. The Scottish Prison Service is facing those capacity issues precisely because of the success and strength of the Scottish justice system. There has been a 37 per cent increase in the average length of sentences over the past 10 years, and the successful prosecution of current and historical sexual offending is at an unprecedented level, which is driving up the long-term prison population.
I do not apologise for that being the situation, but it hardly speaks of a soft-touch approach to justice, which is the position that Ms Lindsay seeks to prosecute in this chamber. Rather, it speaks of the success of our justice system. That has implications. We are currently constructing two new prisons in Scotland—the new HMP Glasgow and HMP Highland—and we will need to consider and take forward steps to continue to increase capacity. However, Government and Parliament will need to wrestle with who prison is there for and what it is there to achieve. Those are fundamental questions that we will all need to take forward as a Government, as a Parliament and as a society.
First and foremost, I put on record my thanks and that of my committee to the 93 SPS staff who responded to the incident at Polmont with professionalism, and I commend their bravery.
As the convener of the Criminal Justice Committee, I make no apologies for seeking to ensure that good parliamentary scrutiny takes place. Given that the prison system is operating at 109 per cent capacity, I very much welcome the commitment that the cabinet secretary has given to go away and reflect on the development of a protocol whereby the committee can be kept up to date when such things happen.
I was struck by what the cabinet secretary said in his statement about the severity of the issue. How many times has the level 3 protocol been activated?
I thank the convener of the Criminal Justice Committee for the remarks that he puts on the record commending, as I did, the bravery of the Scottish Prison Service staff, as well as partners who were involved in the immediate response.
Mercifully, these are relatively rare incidents. The most recent level 3 incident before this one was in 2014 at HMP Grampian. I know that the risk of such incidents is greater when we have a high prison population, which David Linden referred to, but they are not inevitable. That is why I am seeking to take steps to ensure that we have a sustainable prison population going forward and that we are able to deliver the necessary capacity to enable the High Court and other courts to do their business and ensure justice for victims of criminality.
The Criminal Justice Committee and Parliament will need to consider those questions carefully over the coming months, and I will seek to engage constructively, as I always do, not just with the committee but with Parliament.
In a similar vein, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice talks about building resilience through expanding the prison estate, but surely we need to ask whether we are simply building more capacity to accommodate a system that is already failing too many people. Scotland’s high remand population is of particular concern. People are being held in custody, often for long periods, without ever being convicted of an offence. That has consequences not only for those individuals but for the safety, stability and rehabilitative potential of our prisons.
Does the cabinet secretary accept that we cannot build our way out of this crisis? Will he commit to a meaningful strategy to reduce the prison population, starting with remand, and to ensuring that the lessons learned from Polmont include a serious examination of the conditions that people are living in, rather than simply the operational response to the disorder?
We cannot just build our way out of the prison population pressures that we face. There are steps that we need to take to ensure that we can increase capacity, but we also need to give serious consideration to the measures that were recommended by the independent sentencing and penal policy commission. The Government consulted on those measures over the summer and we are currently considering the consultation responses. We need to consider who and what prison is there for and ensure that prison is there for the most serious offenders.
Again, I will not apologise for the fact that, thanks in large part to the leadership of the previous Lord Advocate and, indeed, this Lord Advocate, and the work that has been taken forward by the Crown, we are seeing a significant escalation in the prosecution of current and historical sexual offending, which will merit significant custodial sentences. In order to ensure that we manage those individuals, we need to make sure that we have the space available to do so. That requires a response that takes forward capacity but also reduces demand.
Hiding in the cabinet secretary’s statement, there was a slight hint of penitence on his part, because I think that he now accepts that he is accountable to this chamber and its members. Of course we expected the cabinet secretary to report to this Parliament when we had the worst riot in a Scottish prison in a decade.
Turning to the detail of the statement, for the past six months, the cabinet secretary has talked about the potential for temporary modular accommodation, with nothing yet to show for all the talk. When will we finally get some detail? Is there a business case for increasing capacity? How much will it cost? How many places will be included? When will those places be ready?
I am never anything other than respectful of Parliament and, indeed, the committees that I am accountable to as a minister. I have not been anything other than respectful in this role or in my previous roles. The most recent incident of this type before this one occurred in 2014. I will need to double check this, but I do not believe that there was a statement at that time, because, in such situations, there are operational considerations and safety considerations—as well as, in this instance, a live criminal case. However, I recognise and understand the interest that the Criminal Justice Committee and others in Parliament have in the matter, which is why I brought forward the statement and why I have set out my determination to find a protocol that would allow for the sharing of information.
On the work that is being done to increase capacity, potentially through the use of modular units, that work is live and it is under consideration. Given the prison population projections that Pauline McNeill set out to Parliament, which I absolutely recognise and understand, Stephen Kerr can expect that work to be expedited as quickly as possible. Of course, the committee will be availed of that information as soon as decisions are taken.
First, I thank the prison officers and staff at HMP Polmont and across the Scottish Prison Service for their professionalism in responding to this serious incident. I also thank David Linden and Stephen Kerr for their efforts to bring this statement to the chamber today.
Over the past decade, at least 11 young prisoners have died by suicide at HMP Polmont—each one a tragedy. In light of recent disorder and considering that many young people in custody are already vulnerable, what assurance can the cabinet secretary provide, in such a pressure-cooker environment, with regard to what is being done to safeguard those who are most at risk and to prevent further tragedies?
I completely understand the question from Yi-pei Chou Turvey. Following the high-profile fatal accident inquiries around some of the tragic cases that she mentioned, the Scottish Prison Service has taken significant steps to ensure that the fabric of Polmont and the training of the staff contained within it are able to deliver the response that she would expect in terms of the supportive environment that is required, particularly for those entering custody for the first time and for those in the early stages of their entering into custody. I can give her that absolute assurance that that has been undertaken by the Scottish Prison Service.
I appeal for succinct questions and answers, as many members still wish to ask a question.
Is the cabinet secretary concerned that those who were involved in the Polmont incident might actually be pleased at the coverage and that highlighting the disturbance could lead to an increased risk of their wanting to do so again, perhaps in a planned way, or that those in other prisons might follow suit?
I understand where Martyn Day is coming from, and I certainly hope that that is not the case. The continued safe operation of our prison system must be the first consideration for all of us. Those who were involved in the perpetration of the incident should realise that all acts of disorder are unacceptable, and they should be under no illusion that there will be serious consequences for their actions. That would be the same in any prison.
The Scottish Prison Service continually assesses risks across the estate and has well-established intelligence, incident management and command arrangements in place. I have seen those in operation. The SPS will continue to monitor and respond to any emerging risks to ensure that we do not see the potential for contagion, the risks of which the member has set out.
It is particularly concerning that the most serious incident in a prison in Scotland since 2014 took place in a young offenders institution. In the previous session of Parliament, legislation was passed that meant that under-18s are no longer housed in young offenders institutions and instead go to secure care. Therefore, we are dealing with a specific age group—those between 18 and 21 years old. As a result of the debrief following this serious incident, what specific actions will be taken to target that group of young offenders and focus on rehabilitation so that this sort of thing does not happen again?
I perfectly understand Jenny Young’s line of questioning. Ordinarily, it is 18 to 24-year-olds who are housed in Polmont, if at all possible, although the SPS takes decisions on those matters on a case-by-case basis. The member will be aware that it is the Scottish Prison Service’s responsibility to risk assess and risk manage and to ensure that it takes steps to reduce the risk of such incidents occurring. That includes acting on the type of intelligence that I mentioned in responding to Mr Day’s question and deploying the skills that prison officers are there to deploy, which are about supporting rehabilitation and ensuring that prison is there to change individuals and return them to the community as reformed characters.
It is testament to our justice system that more cases are getting to court and that people who are convicted are being sentenced, but is it not time to overhaul our penal system so that those in prison are those who most need to be there and there can be a focus on reducing reoffending and rehabilitation?
Yes. I mentioned the consultation that we ran in the summer, which followed from the recommendations of the sentencing and penal policy commission. We are wrestling with difficult choices—I understand that—and they have implications, which I also understand and recognise. However, we need to take the necessary steps to ensure that prison places are available for the most serious offenders, and we need to understand that prison is there to ensure the rehabilitation of offenders. We need to ensure that we are effectively managing individuals in the community, whether that is at the start of their interaction with the criminal justice system or as they leave prison, which the vast majority inevitably do, as well as preventing involvement in it.
Irrespective of whether there should have been a parliamentary statement, this was the worst riot in a Scottish prison for a decade, and it was hushed up. There is no point in the cabinet secretary shaking his head, because that is the reality. Who took the decision to keep quiet about the riot, and will the cabinet secretary reflect on that?
That is simply not the case. My first consideration after receiving the briefing and meeting with the chief executive and operations director of the Scottish Prison Service was the safe operation of our prisons and the safety of the people in Polmont and those who work in Polmont. I have set out clearly that these are operational matters and it is not ordinarily the case that such statements are made to the Parliament. However, I understand the points that were put forward by members of the Criminal Justice Committee and by other members. That is why I made this statement, and it is why I set out my hope that we can have a position whereby SPS is able to share information on such incidents in a way that is safe and ensures its operational independence while allowing the committee to do its scrutiny work.
I note that it is not common practice to make a statement such as this one. I thank the cabinet secretary for making the statement and endorse much of what was in it, and I particularly commend those who responded to the incident. I also appreciate that, in many instances, public services, including the SPS, need to operate independently and get on with their everyday operations as they see fit. However, as the cabinet secretary is aware, the Criminal Justice Committee, of which I am a member, was disappointed to hear about the incident through the media. What review will be carried out regarding when the Parliament should be updated on such an incident if it happens in the future—let us hope that it does not—even if that is done privately to the committee in the first instance?
In my statement, I set out the steps that I am seeking to take. Last week, I said to the committee that I was willing to reflect on how information is disseminated to it. I feel that I obliged in that regard from Wednesday to Tuesday, and I have now set out a potential route through which that could happen. There could be a potential protocol, or measures could be taken by the SPS, in order to disseminate information to the committee in a way that is respectful of the service’s operational independence, ensures the continued safety and safe operation of our prison system, given the complex arrangements that it manages and the risks that it holds, and allows scrutiny work to be done by the Criminal Justice Committee, for which I have the greatest respect and to which I am, of course, accountable.
This summer, the Council of Europe, which is the guardian of human rights in Scotland, informed the Scottish Government that overcrowding in prisons might amount to inhuman and degrading treatment that is contrary to article 3 of the European convention on human rights. In light of that warning and the recent disturbance at YOI Polmont, is the cabinet secretary satisfied that the treatment of prisoners in Scotland is consistent with Scotland’s human rights commitments?
I recognise the concerns that have been expressed, and they are part of the reason why we need to ensure that there is a stable prison population. We are taking forward steps to increase capacity through the construction of HMP Glasgow and HMP Inverness, and we are modernising the facilities that are available through the prisons that are coming on stream, looking at where further capacity can be generated and reducing the level of demand on places. We have consulted on those steps and we are currently considering that consultation. As soon as I am able, I will set out to the Parliament the steps that we will take to ensure that we provide the built environment that we need, that we reduce demand and that we are clear about who prisons are there for and what they are there to achieve.
That concludes the ministerial statement—I beg your pardon; I call Fulton MacGregor.
Thank you, Presiding Officer—I just got in there. My question is similar to Jenny Young’s earlier line of questioning. Given that HMP and YOI Polmont houses mainly young men who are under the age of 21 and in our care, we can all understand that this moment represents an opportunity to reduce the cycle of offending in that population. Are there any plans to enhance the youth justice and rehabilitation work that is on offer? Perhaps this incident can work as a catalyst for that.
I acknowledge the substantial experience that Fulton MacGregor has as a social worker and a member of the previous Criminal Justice Committee. As I said in my answer to Jenny Young, we are looking to ensure that Polmont and other institutions are able to provide the rehabilitative support that we wish them to provide, to ensure that we have a sustainable prison population in order to allow them the space and time to do so, and also to ensure that we are investing in community justice answers. We have substantially increased Community Justice Scotland’s budget to ensure that community payback orders and other measures can be taken forward. The point that Fulton MacGregor has made about youth services is on the record and I am sure that it will have been heard in relation to the budgets that are available to other partners to deliver them.
That concludes the ministerial statement on HMP and YOI Polmont. I apologise to members who I was unable to call, but we are very tight for time.
The rest of this Official Report will be published progressively as soon as the text is available.
Previous
Winter Resilience