The next item of business is consideration of motion S4M-09375, in the name of John Swinney, on the financial resolution for the Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill.
Motion moved,
That the Parliament, for the purposes of any Act of the Scottish Parliament resulting from the Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill, agrees to—
(a) any expenditure of a kind referred to in Rule 9.12.3(a) of the Parliament’s Standing Orders arising in consequence of the Act,
(b) any expenditure of a kind referred to in Rule 9.12.3(b) of the Standing Orders arising in consequence of the Act, and
(c) any charge or payment in relation to which Rule 9.12.4 of the Standing Orders applies arising in consequence of the Act.—[John Swinney.]
Does anybody wish to oppose the motion?
17:45
Yes, Presiding Officer.
The bill that the Scottish Government has introduced is part of the process of reforming the Scottish judicial system. We agree with some but not all of its proposals, and we will support it at stage 1 in the hope of amendment. However, we are not content with the fact that it has been accompanied by a sloppy financial memorandum that contains information from third parties that does not even seem to have been checked by ministers and their civil servants.
We appreciate that these are straitened financial times, but the Scottish Government chose to introduce the bill and it should have carefully considered whether sufficient resources are available to ensure its success. If all that the bill does is place additional pressure on the already overloaded sheriff courts, it will fail its policy intention and the intention of Lord Gill’s review. It is not good enough to say vaguely that court fees can be used to cover additional costs. We believe that the Scottish Government should withdraw the financial memorandum, do its homework and come back with a revised memorandum that has been properly researched and costed.
Cabinet secretary, do you wish to respond?
17:46
I do, Presiding Officer.
The Government takes the preparation of financial memoranda on bills very seriously. They are subjected to extensive consultation with a range of interested parties, and we listen carefully to feedback about issues in connection with them, such as that which we had recently from the Finance Committee. That only serves to reinforce the Government’s determination to ensure that financial memoranda are produced in an effective fashion.
On the Courts Reform (Scotland) Bill, the Government worked extensively with our partners on the making justice work 1 board to develop the business cases for the various reforms that are being taken forward in the bill. The business cases were used to develop the financial memorandum, which has been agreed with all those bodies including in the main the Scottish Court Service and the Scottish Legal Aid Board. The bill is expected on the whole to make the civil justice system in Scotland more efficient by ensuring that cases are heard at the appropriate level in the system and therefore at a proportionate cost, which is reflected in the financial memorandum.
Dr Murray raised the issue of court fees. It has long been Government policy that the cost to the public purse from civil cases should be paid through court fees, with the necessary exemptions being in place for those who require them to be applied. As Mr McQueen, the chief executive of the Scottish Court Service, told the Justice Committee, the Government does not foresee a large overall increase in the total amount of fees that are recovered for the cost of civil business.
The issues around the financial memorandum have been carefully considered. If I understand the Labour Party’s position correctly, it supports the general principles of the bill. I find it strange that, in doing so, the Labour Party is not prepared to put in place the financial mechanisms to enable the bill to be applied. I encourage the Parliament to support the financial resolution at the appropriate time.
The question on the motion will be put at decision time.
Next
Business Motion