Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 18 May 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 4236 contributions

|

Meeting of the Parliament

Restoring Nature to Tackle Climate Change

Meeting date: 30 November 2023

John Swinney

I wonder whether Mr Kerr could name an example of an area that he is concerned about.

Meeting of the Parliament

Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 30 November 2023

John Swinney

Has the committee given any consideration to what role it might perform, in the event of the bill passing, in considering the operation of the licensing arrangements to provide wider and broader satisfaction with them or in raising issues about how they are operated?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

John Swinney

In relation to the research work that you undertook, I would be interested to hear whether any differences in perspective or substance of view on the question emerged between the jurors in the sexual assault mock trial and those in the non-sexual assault trial.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

John Swinney

Our panellists have commented on the unanimity provision that exists in certain other jurisdictions. I am interested in understanding why our tradition is one of majority rather than one of unanimity.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

John Swinney

Let us say, for the sake of argument, that the Government’s proposal prevails and that the majority would have to be eight out of 12. You have expressed some reservations about whether that is the appropriate balance. The question that I am airing is: would the committee need to be mindful of other issues, if the Government was intent on pursuing that approach, in order to maintain confidence in the criminal justice system?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

John Swinney

That is exactly what I am getting at.

11:30  

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

John Swinney

Can I interrupt you for a second, Professor Leverick? That is not what I am asking—

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

John Swinney

I totally accept that you cannot do that, but I am interested in what issues we have to consider to ensure fairness to all parties—I stress “all parties”—to a trial.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

John Swinney

Based on your observations of the mock trials, your research suggests a multiplicity of views as to what the verdict means, whether it is that the Crown did not prove its case sufficiently or that the juror wants to send a signal to A N Other.

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 29 November 2023

John Swinney

That is helpful, and it brings me to the other area that I want to discuss. To broaden out the topic, I want to address the interaction and the relationship—which your research in your evidence paper helpfully draws out for the committee—between the size of the jury, the question of majority versus supermajority and the presence or absence of the not proven verdict.

I am interested in the relationship between those three factors. One might take the view—for all the arguments that Mr Keane gave us a moment ago—that the not proven verdict does not help us to have a clear criminal justice system. However, the implications of that need to be carefully considered in relation to the impact on the other two questions: what is the optimum size of a jury and what are the arguments for a simple majority versus a supermajority?

Can you air some of the dynamics of the relationship within that triumvirate of jury size, a simple majority versus a supermajority and the presence of not proven?