Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, May 28, 2013


Contents


Topical Question Time


Rendition Flights



1. To ask the Scottish Government what recent representations it has received regarding rendition flights landing in Scotland. (S4T-00377)

The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill)

The Scottish Government strongly opposes illegal rendition flights. No representations have been received by the Scottish Government regarding such flights. However, as I said back in 2007, if anyone has any evidence of lawbreaking of this sort, they should come forward with it and help justice to be done. I reiterate that today.

Patrick Harvie

I gather that my colleague Mr Finnie has written to the Lord Advocate on the matter, following reports in the press demonstrating evidence of landings at Wick, Aberdeen and Inverness. Does the cabinet secretary accept that a proactive approach is needed in this matter, that it is not enough simply to wait until evidence of something innately covert is produced, and that, even if flights are returning through Scottish airports for refuelling, for example, without detainees on board at the time when they are at those airports, that is itself complicity, in much the same way that flights taking prisoners through our airports would be?

Kenny MacAskill

The Scottish Government takes these matters seriously and would not condone any such action in any shape or form. Mr Finnie’s letter has not yet been received by the Crown, but the Crown has made clear how strongly it would view the matter and has asked that any information be made available to it. The police and the Crown can act only if that information is passed on, and that is what we have always sought to do as a Government.

When Mr Harvie asked me about rendition on 27 June 2007, I said that we treated the allegations very seriously and that we had stated our opposition to rendition flights, but I made it clear that civil aviation is a reserved matter and is, therefore, the responsibility of the United Kingdom Government. Nevertheless, I stated that criminal matters are the responsibility not simply of the Scottish Government but of law enforcement, in particular the Crown and the police. We asked for information to be provided. Amnesty International met me and I passed on the documentation that it had at that stage to the then Lord Advocate, Dame Elish Angiolini, who fully investigated the matter. However, no proceedings could be taken.

I have no doubt that the present Lord Advocate, Frank Mulholland, will give exactly the same assurance in response to the letter that is coming his way from Mr Finnie. We do not support or condone the practice and we would not allow it. However, unless the information is there for our police and prosecutors, there are difficulties with what they can do. Until there is a change in the constitution, civil aviation remains a matter for the United Kingdom Government.

Patrick Harvie

Two years before the exchange to which the cabinet secretary refers, in a debate in the chamber in 2005, Mr MacAskill, speaking from the Opposition benches at that time, said:

“this is not simply a police matter or a matter for law officers, but a political matter ... This comes down to political will: fundamentally, that is what is lacking from the Executive.”—[Official Report, 22 December 2005; c 22075.]

I regret that we appear to be in much the same position at the moment. Can the cabinet secretary tell me of any other area of serious organised crime in which such a reactive approach would be taken, whereby both police and the Government would not take a proactive approach and investigate vehicles that were suspected of being used for such serious criminal offences?

Kenny MacAskill

I refute any suggestion that the Scottish police would not and do not take action. If the information were available to them, they certainly would act. In this situation, the information that has been provided is historical and could not have been available to them at the time. If people have information, it should be provided and will be investigated, as it was to the credit of the former Lord Advocate, Dame Elish Angiolini.

We do not view the issue simply as a matter of law enforcement. It is for that reason that I met Amnesty International, engaged with it and gave it the assurance that the issue would be fully considered. It is not for the Government to bring prosecutions but, as a Government, we gave the information to the Lord Advocate that was given to us by Amnesty International. Subsequent to that, I have had discussions regarding the issue with a variety of organisations including—because of a personal friendship with Clive Stafford Smith—Reprieve UK.

If the information is there and is provided, we will pass it on. I give the assurance that Police Scotland and the Crown will not hesitate to take the appropriate action, but they must have the information to be able to act.

This morning, there were reports that Dundee airport may be linked to rendition. Will the cabinet secretary ask the UK Government whether it has any information on the use of Dundee airport for rendition activity?

Kenny MacAskill

Again, that is a matter for the law officers and the police. I will be happy to pass that on to the Lord Advocate, who awaits Mr Finnie’s letter. He will, no doubt, consider these matters given the reference suggested.

The matters that were correctly raised with me by Mr Harvie happened not on the watch of the current coalition Government but when there was a Labour Government in the UK. Going back to the information that was provided to me by Clive Stafford Smith, I think that Jack Straw has a lot to answer for with regard to the complicity in rendition that I understand has been involved in the UK’s alliance with the United States.


Proposed Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) Bill



2. To ask the Scottish Government when it will introduce the proposed marriage and civil partnership (Scotland) bill. (S4T-00369)

The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing (Alex Neil)

As the First Minister set out in the programme for government on 4 September 2012, we will introduce the marriage and civil partnership (Scotland) bill within the 2012-13 parliamentary year, so the bill will be introduced before the forthcoming summer recess.

Marco Biagi

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, because the proposed bill offers equality not just for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people, but for those diverse faiths that sincerely believe in same-sex marriage and which are currently prevented from holding such ceremonies. However, I recognise that, just as those faiths wish to perform same-sex marriage, many others do not or are divided on the issue. What progress has been made on ensuring that the necessary changes are made to the United Kingdom Equality Act 2010 to safeguard the right of each religion to govern its own internal affairs on this matter?

Alex Neil

We have made substantial progress in co-operation with Maria Miller, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, who is responsible for such matters in the UK Government. When the marriage and civil partnership (Scotland) bill is published, I hope to be in a position to confirm the details of the amendments that will be made to the UK Equality Act 2010 in respect of the Scottish bill.

Marco Biagi

The cabinet secretary will be aware of the claims that Maria Miller has made about the cost and timescales for equalising civil partnership. A key aim of the equal marriage campaign in Scotland has been to secure mixed-sex civil partnerships, and I would be deeply uncomfortable about LGBT people continuing to be singled out by legislation that emphasises our difference. What consideration has the cabinet secretary given to that issue? Will he order a review or other work to be done to assess the potential impact, should the Parliament express that its wish is to open up civil partnerships to mixed-sex couples?

Alex Neil

As the member will be aware, Maria Miller has ordered a review—indeed, she has built it into the legislation on same-sex marriage down south. As well as covering devolved matters in respect of England, that review will cover reserved matters such as pensions. I am giving consideration to how we should address the issue, and I hope to make an announcement to Parliament fairly soon.

Drew Smith (Glasgow) (Lab)

Following last week’s vote in the House of Commons, Stonewall Scotland called on us members of the Scottish Parliament to “get on with it” in relation to equal marriage in Scotland, so I very much welcome the cabinet secretary’s confirmation that a bill will be introduced before the summer recess. While the progress of that bill will be a matter for the Parliament and the Presiding Officers, could the cabinet secretary indicate whether, under the timetable that he has in mind, he envisages that the first marriages that take place under the bill’s provisions will do so before or after the September 2014 referendum?

Alex Neil

I am thinking about the principles of the bill rather than the referendum. After our extensive consultation, we have given a commitment to introduce the bill as quickly as possible, which is what we are doing. It will be up to the relevant committee and the Parliamentary Bureau to timetable the bill, but I hope that the timetabling will be such that we see the bill become law sooner rather than later.

Dave Thompson (Skye, Lochaber and Badenoch) (SNP)

Marriage is different from civil partnership. I do not believe that this is an equality issue, as civil partnerships provide nearly all the legal rights and obligations of marriage and can easily be adjusted to make the two the same. In the light of the concerns about religious freedom, will the cabinet secretary confirm that the civil liberty and religious freedom of people of faith will be safeguarded not in regulation but on the face of the bill?

Alex Neil

The main protections with regard to what the member refers to will be in amendments to the Equality Act 2010, because much of that relates to reserved matters rather than devolved matters, and reserved matters cannot be dealt with in a bill on devolved matters. However, I think that the key point on which the member will want reassurance is that the civil rights of those who do not wish to carry out a same-sex marriage will be fully protected.