Chamber and committees

We have about half an hour left and we still have four members who wish to come in, so I politely ask for succinct questions and responses.

I will bring the evidence session to a close. We have overrun a bit but that discussion was valuable. I thank both our witnesses for attending. We will have a short suspension to allow for a changeover of witnesses.

I will give you the final word if you wish, Mr Logue. You do not have to add anything.

For our next panel of witnesses, we are joined by representatives of the Scottish Prison Service. I extend a warm welcome to Teresa Medhurst, chief executive; Linda Pollock, deputy chief executive; and Gerry O’Donnell, director of finance. I intend to allow about 75 minutes for the session. I ask for concise questions and responses, and for brevity, as there is a lot to get through and a lot that we are interested in.

In addition to papers 1 and 2, which members already have, I refer members to the written submission from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland, which was circulated separately and is relevant to our questions.

I will kick things off with general opening questions for Teresa Medhurst. In your view, what are the main financial challenges that are facing the Scottish Prison Service? What advice has the SPS given to the Scottish Government on the budget resources that are needed for prisons in 2025-26?

I have a couple of questions that I am interested in picking up on from the submission from HMIPS. Theresa Medhurst touched on Castle Huntly prison in earlier evidence. I note that, in the recently published thematic review on progression, there was a reference to significant improvements being required in individualised case management, and in training and development of staff, if people in prison are to progress to less secure conditions—such as in Castle Huntly—in preparation for release, thereby optimising the benefits of the underused capacity. Are there specific blockages or challenges—for example, around staff training and development—that are adding to that and which, from a budgetary point of view, are of interest to the committee?

Agenda item 2 is pre-budget scrutiny. Our focus today is on the courts, the prosecution service and prisons. We have two panels of witnesses this morning. Our first panel consists of representatives of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. I am pleased that we are joined by Malcolm Graham, the chief executive of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service—welcome to your new role—and John Logue, the Crown Agent at the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. I offer you both a very warm welcome.

I refer members to papers 1 and 2. I also refer members to the FDA union’s written submission, which was circulated separately and is relevant to our questioning of Mr Logue. We thank the FDA union for its submission.

I intend to allow about 75 minutes for this session. I will begin by asking the witnesses an opening general question to set the scene, after which we will move on to other members’ questions.

What do you see as being the main financial challenges that your organisation faces, and what is the latest position on any discussions that you have had with the Scottish Government on your budget for 2025-26?

I should say that we still have three members seeking to come in, and there will probably be a couple of supplementary questions, so I will just stop you there, Mr Graham.

Liam Kerr has a supplementary question.

I, too, commend Fulton MacGregor and congratulate him on bringing the debate and on his commitment to what is a complex, difficult and—often—hidden issue. I also commend the cross-party group on adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse for its broader work and for putting the report together.

As other members have referenced, the motion sets out a significant amount of detail and lays bare the extent to which sibling sexual abuse is believed to be underreported in Scotland and the challenges that survivors continue to face in their experience being minimised, not believed, or seen in the context of curiosity or experimentation. The paper that the cross-party group produced recognises and sets out the significant and lasting impact of sibling sexual abuse—the shame, the fear of blame and not being believed—and the physical impacts on survivors, including depression, substance abuse and relationship difficulties, which can be enduring and can last well into adulthood.

I am pleased that the motion makes reference to the complexities of how to respond to sibling sexual abuse. As others have spoken about, it outlines some of the ideas and views on how to respond and how to draw further focus on the issue, bringing together stakeholders, good practice and those with lived experience.

It is worth noting that this debate follows immediately on the debate that the minister led about the Promise, which seeks to create a care system that places love and relationships at the centre for every child and family who need support. I have no doubt of the commitment across Scotland to giving children the best start in life.

In the short time that is left, I will reflect a little on my experience of working in policing, on the progress that has been made over the years on the investigation of childhood sexual abuse more broadly and on the emerging challenges that make tackling the issue even more challenging.

Many members know about my background. It is safe to say that a good part of my service was immersed in complex public protection investigations into child sexual abuse, domestic abuse and, latterly, adult harm. I also spent many years in the development of policy and practice in that space. In 2024, we have moved to a point at which there is a plethora of guidance, legislation and organisations that aim to support the response to sexual harm, including that which is perpetrated on siblings. That is to be commended and recognised. I am pleased that, within that, there is focused guidance and material that is relevant to sibling sexual abuse, which I hope will underpin the response, particularly at a local level, when a disclosure is made. On a point that Monica Lennon made, training is absolutely at the centre of how robust and effective that response has to be.

The cross-party group’s report makes reference to the need for better care pathways for survivors and for joined-up policies. I completely agree with that. In my experience, that is key, but it can take time for organisations to come together and agree roles and responsibilities, information-sharing protocols and so on. Earlier today, in the Criminal Justice Committee, we spoke about the challenges that are faced by individual organisations that work within a whole system such as justice. That brings me to my second point, which is about trusted professional relationships absolutely underpinning work on tackling public protection and, closer to home in the debate, sibling sexual abuse.

I am conscious of time, so I will finish on a couple of points.

Members will be familiar with the bairns’ hoose, which involves a child-centred, trauma-informed approach to enable children to give their best evidence, where that is necessary, in a single space that brings together police, health and recovery services.

Finally, I want to raise concerns about the escalating incidence of online child sexual abuse, which we need to monitor, specifically with regard to sibling sexual abuse.

I again commend my colleague Fulton MacGregor and the cross-party group.

I note the cabinet secretary’s confirmation that the pay claims continue to be progressed through the Police Negotiating Board for Scotland. Will she further explain the two separate processes for police pay and say whether any pay offer will be backdated?