Chamber and committees

Convener, is there time for me to ask a question about victim notification?

That is actually higher than the indication that we were given.

The cabinet secretary is very clear that she does not see early release as a solution but as a measure that will give the Prison Service time and capacity, but we are trying to understand what it will give the prison service time and capacity to do. The measure is clearly a sticking plaster and will not resolve the issues, so are we not going to be back in this place in, say, three or four months? Does Teresa Medhurst envisage that we will be back here in three or four months?

I will ask a question and get a very short answer—yes or no. We were told last week that the governor’s veto was little used with Covid legislation. Is it correct that there was only a handful of cases? Maybe Andy Hodge could confirm that. We were told that the governor’s veto has been little used in the past, and that there were not huge numbers of governor’s vetoes. Is that accurate?

This has been an inadequate scrutiny process of a draft order that is based on a section of an act that was passed by the Parliament last year, following on from emergency legislation that was passed during Covid and which, at the time, everybody accepted to be draconian. That particular section did not get a huge amount of attention during that process, because there were so many other parts to the legislation. I recall questioning the cabinet secretary about it in this committee, and the focus was very much on justifying the section based on an eventuality such as a prison fire at Barlinnie or the spread of infection.

I therefore have concerns about the process itself and about the idea that, basically, this is going to be it. A lot of information has been provided to the committee extremely late, and some of it is contradictory: some of the evidence that we have heard today contradicts what we heard last week. I am saying not that the information that we have heard today is inaccurate but that, simply, we have been given different information over the fortnight.

The committee has been put in an impossible position by being asked to make this decision today. There is absolutely no doubt that we are in this situation because of failures of Government policy. Concerns about overcrowding and the increase in the prison population have been expressed for very many months—indeed, for very many years—so it is not an emergency in that sense. I fully accept that the situation in the prisons is completely intolerable and unacceptable. However, we are being asked to vote for what has been described as the only option available.

There is no doubt that many prisoners who are now in the prison estate could be safely released. However, we need to be convinced that the cohort that is covered by the order is the cohort that could most safely—and should—be released. That has simply not been addressed through this process. A great deal more thinking and work should have been done over the past days and weeks to identify such a cohort—and, if necessary, to bring emergency legislation to Parliament. The committee has repeatedly discussed who those prisoners might be. We have specifically focused on women and remand prisoners, but there are many prisoners who are in prison for non-violent offences. However, the cohort in the draft order includes many people who have been convicted of violent offences, such as culpable homicide or other offences of a very serious nature.

We have to listen to what Victim Support Scotland has said. It could not have been more forceful in raising its concerns, including a concern that most victims will probably not be notified.

It is appropriate to put all that on the record today and say that the committee has been put in an impossible position. This has been a rushed process. Many members have not been able even to ask questions and, even now, we do not have the information that we need in order to make a decision.

Have any concerns been raised? Have staff raised concerns, and have some of those changes been in response to problems that existed in the organisation that were recognised?

Scottish ministers are ultimately responsible for charity law and third sector policy in Scotland. I understand that OSCR works closely with the Scottish Government’s charity law team to ensure effective regulation. How well does that work in practice? How frequently do you engage with the Scottish Government? Is the level of collaboration effective? I will address those questions to Marieke Dwarshuis first.

Cabinet secretary, you said something about the co-design process in your opening remarks, but perhaps you could give us a bit more information about it and say how clients’ priorities have been reflected in the revised charter. I understand that there was a core client group of 16 participants. Perhaps you could expand on that and on how you attempted to capture other claimants’ experiences.

Marieke Dwarshuis referred to the fundamental restructuring that has taken place. OSCR launched a people strategy in July 2022, in which it detailed its plans to support staff to thrive and develop new skills. What specific actions does that work involve, and how is the implementation of the strategy progressing? You covered that a little in your opening statement, but perhaps you could expand on what that means from your perspective and also mention any concerns that have been raised.

How were those 16 people selected?

I understand that only seven stakeholder organisations responded to the survey. How do you know that stakeholders’ priorities are reflected in the revised charter?