Chamber and committees

We welcome the announcement of regulations to enable GPS technology for home detention curfew, but regulations have been in place for a number of years to allow GPS when an accused is on bail and the systems are still not in place to enable that to happen. Has the cabinet secretary now given instructions for the private company to carry out the work that is needed for GPS to be used, which we have for some time been calling for?

We welcome the extra £14 million for community justice, but the Criminal Justice Committee was told yesterday that that covers only the effect of inflation.

We now know that only five victims were informed in relation to the 477 releases over the summer, and the reoffending rate was 12 per cent. When the cabinet secretary announced the early release scheme, I asked her to exclude violent offenders, given the lack of appropriate systems of support and planning, the lack of victim notification and the higher risk from that particular group of prisoners. What lessons has she learned, and what consideration is she giving to prioritising offenders who have been convicted of non-violent offences?

On a number of occasions, the Parliament has been persuaded to extend the time limits in criminal cases—which means that many accused spend longer on remand. With regard to the emergency provisions, is the Lord Advocate confident that such longer time limits will be required in all cases? For the longer term, how confident is she that we can reduce the length of time that individuals spend on remand? What can the prosecution services do to support that by speedily preparing cases?

Yes, I would be happy to—I can imagine what it might concern.

I understand that there is work going on regarding that issue, but I would point out to the member that I am not the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I make representations to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, however, and I know that Scottish Labour is fighting to ensure that as much as possible is done to make progress as quickly as possible.

Colleagues will be aware that Unite the union has launched its no ban without a plan campaign, which calls for new jobs to be commensurate with current workers’ roles. We need pay protection and training to allow workers to transition to the jobs of the future.

The experience of working people in the past has been of unjust transitions, and they have no reason to believe that it will be different this time. If we allow Grangemouth to close, the situation will be looked at again by working people to see whether warm words have become a reality. In many ways, the closure of Grangemouth is not just about climate change—there are far wider issues there—but we need to build support for the actions that are needed to reduce our carbon emissions. That has cost implications, and such actions need the support of all the community.

We cannot continue with the economy being at the mercy of corporate profiteering, which dramatically increases people’s energy bills. We need to move to a system of greener, cleaner energy at a price that we can all afford, and we need a strategy that gets the support of the whole population for the changes that we need to make. We are seeing the devastating effects of climate change across the world and, increasingly, we are beginning to see that in our own country. We must do more, we must do it collectively, and we cannot wait longer for real action to be taken.

You have spoken about the cost of a new prison. We know that prisons soak up huge amounts of money and that the stated policy of the Scottish Government is for a shift to non-custodial disposals. After years of cuts or flat budgets, there was a slight increase in funding last year, which might be partly due to the work of the committee. Given the prisons crisis, to what extent is that new money having an impact, and how much more would it require in the coming budget to make a dent on prison numbers?

My office has submitted a number of freedom of information requests in relation to the implementation of some community-based disposals and electronic monitoring. For example, the issue is not just about the implementation of measures such as community service orders when they are ordered by the court but about whether electronic monitoring happens when the court orders that it should happen. Some of the figures are quite shocking—in half of the cases in some parts of the country, there has not been implementation of the measures.

I am not quite sure who would be best to answer my question. Karyn McCluskey, do you have any insight as to why that might be, from your experience of the system?

The responses that I have had to my freedom of information request have been in the media, but I will provide them to the witnesses, and you might be able to respond in writing afterwards. It would be helpful to understand why, in such a high percentage of cases, there has not been implementation.

I will pick up Rona Mackay’s powerful point about women. I want to get an understanding of the availability of alternatives to custody for women and the geographical spread of that availability. Sheriffs have raised with us the issue that, in some parts of the country, alternatives are unavailable, but that might be partly because there are fewer women offenders in many parts of the country. In more rural parts of the country, there are no alternatives available to sheriffs. Will you say a little about that, and where there is good provision and where there is not?

Is there more provision for men, or is it, again, the case that, in certain parts of the country, there is better provision and, in others, it is not as good? Will you give us a bit more detail on where there is adequate—or something approaching adequate—provision on offer, so that sheriffs have alternatives available to them? If there are large parts of the country where that is not available, is that something that you can talk about today or share with the committee in writing?

Sorry—I am talking about situations in which the court has ordered that those measures take place, but they do not happen. For example, a court will say that there is to be electronic monitoring—I am referring to the electronic monitoring system that we use, because we do not have GPS yet—but that does not happen. The same can apply to apply community service orders. A court order is made, but the sentence is never implemented, so the offender is never asked to carry out the sentence, through no fault of their own. Do you have any insight into why that happens so often?

The opening of the new women’s custody units was very welcome. Last year, the Bella centre was at 50 per cent occupancy, and the Lilias centre was at 33 per cent occupancy. However, in February this year, the cabinet secretary told me that the assessment criteria had been reviewed and that there had been an increase to two thirds occupancy. Are those units now being fully used? Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is important that those facilities are fully utilised?