Chamber and committees

That is helpful.

The plan appears to be quite cluttered—it includes requirements for food strategies, potential community wealth-building duties and other elements. If the Scottish Government’s aim is to simplify the policy and programme for delivery, how will that be achieved when we have another national plan and 46 new local food plans? How do we make the plan relevant?

That is very helpful—thank you. I am not entirely sure whether anyone else—

That is great, convener. It was an open-ended question, because I know that best-value audits happen in all local authority areas; I just wanted to clarify that point.

I want to raise with councils the issue of housing budgets. Again, housing is a topical issue, given that several councils across the country have declared housing emergencies. I have been made aware that certain local authority areas have struggled to access housing budgets from the Scottish Government. Those in the housing sector have applied for housing funding through local authorities but there seems to be a block at Scottish Government level. Has that happened in any of your local authority areas? What impact could it have on your ability to utilise all levers to try to build more homes in your areas? I am not sure who wants to start on that.

Can councils access the affordable homes budget quickly, and at any point? Given that the budget was cut and then reinstated, there is a bit of worry and concern about whether the full budget can be used. Again, my point is, more than anything, about reassuring councils that they absolutely can access that money.

Thank you very much, convener. Good morning, everyone.

A war memorial is a centre point of many a community’s life. People gather round it on remembrance Sunday to pay their respects to and remember those who gave their lives in conflict so that our communities may enjoy peace and freedom, and to pay tribute to those who have served in wars. To many individuals and groups, particularly serving armed forces personnel, veterans and bereaved families, war memorials carry special meaning and significance. To some bereaved relatives and friends of people who have lost their lives in war but whose bodies were never recovered or repatriated, a war memorial is symbolic of a grave site.

Many veterans and armed forces groups have taken on the role of custodians of war memorials. They clean the stone, place flower beds and ensure that the surrounding area is kept tidy. I pay tribute to all groups that are involved in maintaining the upkeep of our war memorials.

Any attack on a war memorial, however large or small, is egregious, cruel, offensive and retraumatising for those who have lost loved ones in conflict or who have served or are serving themselves. In some cases, the vandalism or desecration of a war memorial would be categorised as a heritage crime. In practice, the offence is most likely to be charged and prosecuted under the statutory offence of vandalism or the common-law crime of malicious mischief.

Those matters are generally prosecuted in the justice of the peace and sheriff courts, and there are limits to the sentences that can be handed down and the levels of the fines that can be issued. Although those sentencing options are appropriate for most instances of vandalism, they do not allow courts to consider higher penalties, which would deter acts of desecration of war memorials and provide adequate redress for the distress caused to individuals and communities as a result of such acts.

The costs to local authorities of repairing and cleaning a defaced or damaged war memorial amount to thousands of pounds. That is due to the specialised stonemasonry involved in treating the stone and the skills that are required to restore them.

The question that I have for all committee members is this: do they believe that vandalism of a war memorial should be treated in exactly the same way as vandalism of a lamppost or a telephone box? In short, I do not believe that the current criminal law adequately takes account of the impact of the desecration of a war memorial on the people and communities for whom the memorial has significant and symbolic meaning.

That is why I consider that there should be a specific statutory offence of desecration of a war memorial, with options for courts to hand down higher penalties than those that are available at present, thereby creating a stronger deterrent. Ultimately, the sanctions would be for the courts to decide. However, I want to give them a range of options and the law to more appropriately reflect the seriousness of this particular crime.

As committee members might be aware, the United Kingdom Parliament has already legislated in this area through the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. That followed a private member’s bill from the then MP Jonathan Gullis that would have created an offence of desecrating a war memorial.

I will turn to the provisions of my bill. It is a short, three-section bill with one substantive section. Section 1 would insert a new section 52A into the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995. Proposed new section 52A(1) would establish an offence of desecration of a war memorial. That would mean that any person who

“wilfully or recklessly destroys, damages or desecrates a war memorial”

is committing an offence unless they have a reasonable excuse. What constitutes a reasonable excuse will be determined by the courts on a case-by-case basis. However, an example might be someone who is working on a war memorial to clean or maintain it accidentally causing damage to it in the course of their work.

Proposed new section 52A(2) sets out what desecrating a war memorial means. It includes, but is not limited to,

“spitting, urinating or defecating upon, or otherwise defacing ... a war memorial”,

and it includes both temporary and permanent damage.

Proposed new section 52A(3) sets out the penalties for the new offence. A person, on summary conviction, could face up to 12 months in prison and/or a fine up to the statutory maximum—the maximum fine is £2,500 in a justice of the peace court and £10,000 in a sheriff court. On conviction on indictment, someone could face up to 10 years in prison and/or an unlimited fine.

Proposed new section 52A(4) provides definitions for the terms that are used in the bill. The definition of “war memorial” draws heavily on the definition of “memorial” in section 50 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. Subsection (4) also makes it clear that

“‘land’ does not include land over which access rights are not exercisable under section 6 of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003”.

My intention is to exclude war memorials in private homes and gardens from the scope of the new offence.

Committee members will be aware that I have written to the committee about that matter. After the bill’s introduction, I became aware of a potential unintended consequence of that provision—namely, that it might exclude war memorials in the grounds of places of worship, which would be private land. As I indicated in my letter, should the bill proceed to stage 2, I plan to lodge an amendment to ensure that war memorials in places of worship or their grounds would be protected by the bill’s provisions, as well as those in any other places that would appropriately fall within the bill’s provisions.

As the bill relates to war memorials rather than memorials more generally, proposed new section 52A(4) makes it clear that

“something has a commemorative purpose in respect of armed conflict if at least one of”

the memorial’s

“purposes is to commemorate one or more individuals or animals, or a particular description or category of individuals or animals, who died in armed conflict”.

Sections 2 and 3 of the bill set out provisions on the bill’s commencement and short title.

I hope that that gives a clear overview of the bill and its underpinning policy development, and that it has been helpful to committee members. I look forward to taking questions and to the committee’s stage 1 scrutiny of the bill more generally.

As I said in my opening statement, destroying, damaging or desecrating war memorials has an impact not only financially on local authorities, which have to look after, maintain and restore war memorials, but on armed forces communities, veterans and the wider communities, who know of and are very fond of war memorials in their areas for obvious reasons, given that we are talking about people who have served and died for the freedoms that we enjoy today.

When I embarked on the bill process, back in 2021, there were six attacks in that year alone. In April 2021, the Carronshore war memorial and the Boer war memorial in Glasgow were attacked; in June 2021, the Spanish civil war memorial in Motherwell was attacked; in September 2021, the Kirkcaldy war memorial was attacked; and, in October 2021, the Cowdenbeath and Prestonpans war memorials were attacked. That shows that, even when I was embarking on this piece of legislation, a pattern of events was happening. I am not saying that it happens every year—it seems to be when there are particular acts of civil unrest or when something else is happening in Scotland—but it shows how many attacks can happen on war memorials in the one place in a short space of time.

I fully believe that, when the friends of Dennistoun war memorial brought their petition to the Scottish Parliament, they had identified a gap in the legislation. With this legislation, I aim to escalate and raise the status of war memorials so that vandalism of them is not akin to vandalism of a lamp post or a telephone box and so that they are of a higher status, given not only their cultural importance but their importance to communities and the emotional impact that people feel whenever a war memorial is desecrated.

I believe that the law should recognise that damaging a war memorial has consequences beyond the littering and vandalism aspects—I hope that we will be able to get into that subject later—and that it causes significant trauma to communities that are impacted when they see a war memorial being desecrated. Going back to the statutory offence that is now in force in England and Wales, in many respects, with this bill I am trying to bring the situation into line with what is happening in other areas of the UK.

You raise an important point. I have tried to make the bill’s scope as direct as possible, not only because of the time limitations that the Scottish Parliament has for a member’s bill, but to ensure that the bill is easily understood and has a direct aim and objective.

I am willing to discuss that issue at stage 2, because we have identified that places of worship are not included in the bill’s scope. Such issues could be ironed out at stage 2, and I am happy to have discussions with members about schools or sports clubs, because war memorials could be a part of such premises as well.

I think that because of the work that I have undertaken alongside the friends of Dennistoun war memorial group. We should all applaud the work that it has undertaken and the efforts that it has made to make this a stand-alone offence. It has taken a long time to get to this point. It is only through working with the group that I have truly understood the impact that the issue has on people in our communities, our veterans and our armed forces.

We should look at the issue in the round. Jonathan Gullis’s private member’s bill was absorbed into the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. I was hoping to do the same here with a piece of legislation in this parliamentary session, but, unfortunately, I have not found any vehicles or mechanisms to enable me to do that, given the bills that have been introduced. If there had been an opportunity, I absolutely would have done that by lodging amendments, but such an opportunity has not been afforded to me, given the bills that have been introduced this session.

I will reflect more broadly on section 50 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. It is important that I use the definitions in that act in my bill. Again, had there been an opportunity for me to lodge amendments to other legislation, I absolutely would have done that, but I have had to embark on the member’s bill process to create a stand-alone offence.

I believe that war memorials deserve this level of protection. The research that I have undertaken and presented shows that there has been a pattern of desecration—of varying severity—of war memorials.

The bill could also provide an opportunity to highlight the significance of our war memorials, particularly as we head towards remembrance Sunday, although there are, of course, all the other important memorial events relating to our armed forces and veterans community that take place throughout the year. Most important, we should remember what the people whose names are on those war memorials fought and died for.

I want to ensure that we look at the issue at hand, which is the desecration of war memorials. That is the issue that has been presented to me by the friends of Dennistoun war memorial and others who are very concerned about the number of war memorials that are being desecrated. I want to ensure that my bill is as direct as possible and that there is no room for other interpretations of it. I want to ensure that the bill is fixed on meeting my aims and objectives, which are to give courts more levers and to provide a deterrent so that people do not continue to deface and desecrate our war memorials.

You have hit the nail on the head: I am trying to provide a deterrent. I believe that war memorials, given their significant importance, deserve a higher status of protection and that that can be provided through what I am trying to achieve.

I should put on the record that I do not believe that someone would necessarily be handed a 10-year prison sentence for desecrating a war memorial. Of course, that would be not for me but for the courts to decide, but I cannot see that being the punishment in every case. The punishment would depend on the severity of the case and how the war memorial was vandalised, damaged or desecrated.