Chamber and committees

That is super. Thank you. We might be able to come back to that if there is time later in the session.

The people’s panel recommended

“a guaranteed and protected five year minimum period of funding for community and third sector services”.

That theme has been discussed across the Parliament this year. Can you provide the committee with more detail on the fairer funding pilot scheme that you mention in your response to the people’s panel report? Does the Scottish Government intend to go a wee bit further than its current commitment of providing funding and grants for two years?

In your response, you refer to data sharing, which is a crucial part of the effectiveness of referral and other processes. I am interested in hearing a wee bit more detail on what you are looking to do to improve data-sharing mechanisms and the robustness of the data that is collected.

Good morning. My question touches on points that were raised earlier, particularly by Helen Douglas and Alison Weir. It is all very well for things to be in place, but are they working properly? Perhaps this is an opportunity for us to look under the bonnet a wee bit, to see what needs to change.

James Allan, your report made three recommendations under the justice and law reform theme. One said that

“All services should be able to refer to each other”

and that funding should be provided to support that. I am interested in hearing about any evidence that that is not currently taking place. What are the barriers and obstacles to that happening properly?

Since this parliamentary session began, the challenges that the justice system faces have featured prominently in chamber business. Justice touches absolutely everyone. Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

Back in 2022, the new strategy, “Vision for Justice in Scotland: three year delivery plan”, set out the timely and welcome approach that was being taken across Scotland to grasp the nettle of reforming our justice system so that it meets the needs of a modern and contemporary Scotland. Scotland’s prison population remains among the highest, per capita, in western Europe, and front and centre of virtually every debate on the subject in this parliamentary session has been the need to reduce that population.

We understand the factors behind the stubborn upward trend. Many members have referenced the complexities of the prison population, longer sentences and the unrelenting legacy of Covid. Those factors are not unique to Scotland, but meaningful and sustained change has been difficult to achieve.

Although I support modernisation of our prison estate, I strongly disagree that creating more prison space as part of the solution to the current prison population challenge fits remotely with a contemporary justice system.

I will not, if Liam Kerr does not mind, as I am short of time.

In response, Scotland has undertaken a range of proactive steps, including a broadening out of community justice, interventions, the presumption against short-term prison sentences, and the enactment of the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Act 2023 to support more effective use of bail and more effective release planning. The provisions in the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Act 2024 that ensure that under-18s are no longer sent to prison are also hugely welcome. I agree entirely with Rona Mackay’s comments with regard to community custody units that aim to effectively support women as they transition out of a prison environment and back into the community.

On the forthcoming budget for 2025-26, I am pleased to see the Scottish Government’s commitment to strengthening community justice services through an investment of almost £160 million, and I urge all members to support the budget next week. We cannot call out perceived failures in the system on the one hand without supporting the solutions on the other.

I note the comments of Dr Hannah Graham and her academic colleagues in their submission to the Criminal Justice Committee relating to the recent early release of prisoners. They said that

“the prison population and jail conditions are important issues which have been raised for decades. It will take political will, moral courage, resources, and action on several fronts to achieve meaningful change.”

I therefore welcome the cabinet secretary’s update on an independent review of sentencing and penal policy to examine how custodial sentences and community interventions can be used to best effect, including, importantly, whether and how they can be developed further.

I am also delighted to hear that Martyn Evans will chair the commission. He will bring a wealth of insight and experience to his role, as will the other commissioners who have been referenced today, and I do not think for one second that he will simply tell the cabinet secretary what she wants to hear.

The cabinet secretary noted that the review will focus initially on community sentencing, bail and release from custody. However, I hope that the issues around remand are also included as part of that early work. Perhaps, in her closing remarks, the cabinet secretary can jog my memory about whether remand is to be included.

I support all proposals to enable Scotland to continue on its journey towards a reformed and effective justice system. I welcome the announcement and look forward to following the progress of the review.

Thank you.

Cabinet secretary, before we get under way, I wonder whether I could take the liberty of beginning with a question that I hope you will not mind my asking. I appreciate that it might not sit entirely within the scope of the bill. You might recall that, last year, the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee led a debate on a petition calling for the creation of a specific offence that would enable courts to hand down longer sentences when miscarriage has been caused by an act of domestic violence. In your contribution, you said that you believed that there should be a statutory aggravator for causing miscarriage through such violence. Given the consensual nature of that debate, and the points covered in it, will you now consider introducing such an aggravator? Are you willing to meet me to discuss its possible introduction at stage 2 of the bill process?

Thank you. I note the provisions in the bill that say that a case review panel could be instructed to carry out its review in conjunction with another form of review. That is reassuring.

I am conscious of time, so I will bring in Fulton MacGregor. We will then move on to part 1.

I will now move us on to part 1. I will go first to Liam Kerr—once he is ready—and I will then bring in Pauline McNeill.

A couple of members still have questions, but I just want to ask about digital productions and the authentication of electronic copy documents. In relation to digital productions, some concerns have been expressed that the original physical item—the physical production—might be disposed of before the potential evidence benefits of retaining it have been fully explored. What work is being done on a retention and disposal policy? Given some of the evidence that we have heard, might there be scope to make the position clearer in the bill?