Chamber and committees

The SPS has been engaged in discussions with the main subcontractor, Serco. That is really around the transfer being effected in a way that looks after the interests of the staff while looking after the safety of prisoners, too. The SPS is embarked on that process.

The member rightly mentions the costs of inflation. On the idea that we would somehow avoid those costs of inflation were we to go back to or maintain the private contractor, I do not know any private contractor that would want to bid for a contract that did not recognise the costs of inflation. I referred to that in the exchange that I had with Pauline McNeill on Addiewell.

You should bear it in mind that the Kilmarnock iteration of PFI came many years—nine years, I think—before the deal was done for Addiewell, by which time contractors were keen to ensure that the inflation costs were part of the bid that they made. I am not sure that there would be the savings that have been hinted at by trying to ignore inflation. In any event, as regards this Government’s position, we believe that prisons should be in the public sector.

We are not proposing a cut, although you could argue that that might end up being the case, depending on whether there is a real-terms increase. The difference between real terms, which accounts for inflation, and flat terms is an important distinction to make. However, there are some flexibilities between resource and capital that we are examining closely. One example is body-worn cameras. There is obviously a capital cost to those but there is also a substantial revenue cost and we are looking to see what we can do to maximise the capital contribution.

It seems to me that, especially after the early part of the previous decade, between 2010 and 2016—I know that that is going back in history somewhat—we regularly had better capital allocations than resource allocations from the UK Government. We also had fairly frequent allocations of financial transactions, which can be applied only in limited ways. However, now, there is a much greater tightening of the grip on capital provision.

I make the point that the indicative capital funding envelope has been maintained from the spending review that was published in February last year. That maintains essential capital funding for the core justice services. That will always be a priority over new initiatives. It includes core services such as estates, technology and fleet. We have also confirmed more than £500 million of capital for our prisons, including the modernisation of the prison estate, which has been on-going for some time.

It is true to say that the spending power of that capital budget has been eroded by inflation and now pays for significantly less as the cost of raw materials increases. However, we remain committed to substantial capital investment in the justice system. We have to keep it under review and how that is done will be part of our discussion and negotiation with the different parts of the portfolio.

We want to see how the existing ones are working first of all. They are absolutely ground breaking—nowhere else has done anything like that—so it is only right that we ensure that they are having the intended effects before we move on to a further roll-out. That roll-out is intended, but it will be based on our experience with the two units that have been up and running.

After I have made a couple of comments, I will ask Donald McGillivray to come in. This project is a bit like high-speed rail—it has been going on for many years. As I said, I was involved in a joint police board on the roll-out of Airwave, which was complicated. I have many concerns over this project, which I have registered with the UK Government, and the Welsh Government has also registered concerns. The budget changes over time, and the spend does not match the profile as we would expect. That is the basic underlying situation, but Don is very heavily involved in that, which I am sure he enjoys.

As the committee will know, earlier this month, the Deputy First Minister, in his statement on the emergency budget review, set out clearly the nature of the financial challenge that we face. The drivers of that challenge are well known; they include Brexit, the on-going impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, rising energy prices and high rates of inflation, which is, I think, currently at a 41-year high. Those pressures are impacting on households and on our vital public services.

Many of those pressures were evident when the resource spending review and the update to the capital spending review were published in May, and they have become even more pronounced in the subsequent months. Inflation means that our budget has already fallen by 10 per cent in real terms between this year and last year, and the announcements in the United Kingdom autumn statement do very little to address the damage that that has done to the Scottish budget.

Despite those pressures, and the necessary realignment of our spending plans, we have, this year, worked to continue to support front-line justice services. That includes support for the on-going process of recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic, with the number of outstanding trials reduced by more than 10,000 between January and September this year. In fact, the number has been reduced even further since then, by around 12,000, to around 31,000.

We are building on the success of the new digital approaches that were developed during the pandemic. For example, the new digital evidence-sharing capability will enable evidence to be shared more efficiently and swiftly, thereby helping cases to resolve earlier. We have continued to modernise the prison estate, with the opening of two new innovative community custody units for women in Glasgow and Dundee, which reflects our commitment to trauma-informed approaches to rehabilitation.

Crucially, in the context of the cost crisis, we are supporting justice organisations to offer pay settlements that are well above the levels that were projected when our budgets were set at the start of the year. That is significant and challenging for the justice portfolio in particular, given the high proportion of our portfolio spending—over 70 per cent—that is committed to staffing costs.

The resource spending review numbers for next year are not final budget allocations; those will be set out by the Deputy First Minister next month. However, it would not be honest or beneficial to our justice services to pretend that exceptionally difficult choices will not have to be made across all portfolios, including justice, in the final budget allocations.

The funding that the UK Government has outlined over the coming two years falls well short of the combined impact of Covid recovery, energy costs and inflation, so we will inevitably need to match our plans with the available resources. However, as far as possible, my aims for the budget process remain those that were set out in “The Vision for Justice in Scotland” document, which was published earlier this year.

Those aims are as follows. We will continue the progress of Covid recovery in our courts, in particular for the most serious cases in our solemn courts. We will ensure that there are trauma-informed approaches for victims and witnesses, drawing on innovative recommendations such as those that Lady Dorrian set out. We will support our police and fire services to continue to deliver vital public services as they modernise and adapt to changing demands. We will support the work of our legal professional and third sector services. We will invest in our prisons to support rehabilitation as well as effective community justice services, including alternatives to custodial sentences and remand.

Members of the committee will recognise, however, that we will need to respond to those priorities within an increasingly tight financial context that is likely to last for an extended period.

With that, I am happy to answer any questions that the committee has as part of its pre-budget scrutiny, and to consider those issues in the on-going budget process.

It will be different in different parts of the portfolio. I mentioned in my opening statement some of the digital innovations that we have developed and are looking to expand on. However, we will necessarily have to look to further public sector reform in order to try to fit in with those financial constraints that I have mentioned. I have had discussions with the chief constable of Police Scotland as recently as yesterday, and with other services, and I know that they are actively considering things that may help with public sector reform. Those things would be necessary anyway.

The experience of fire and police in particular is an excellent example of public sector reform. That was a difficult decision to take, around 10 years ago, and there were difficult periods afterwards; I am thinking about the establishment of the joint police and fire boards. In my view, however, having served on a joint police committee in a local authority, the level of scrutiny of the police is now far greater than ever before. Those services have already established substantial public sector reform, but there will be more to come, and they are actively considering that, perhaps in relation to how the three blue-light services can work more closely together, not least given the findings of the Grenfell inquiry. That will be happening.

We have seen that there have been delays on large-scale capital projects right across the UK. Brexit features prominently in the reasons for those. The pressures that it has caused for supply chains and costs are substantial.

Our intention is to complete the project on schedule, but of course that will depend on a number of factors. There have been delays before now. Pauline McNeill has previously asked me questions about delays caused by the change in the prospective site that was to be used and the choice of a new site. We must acknowledge that. As I have said from the start in relation to HMP Highland, we are to some extent at the mercy of external influences such as Brexit, supply chain issues and labour shortages. We are trying our best to withstand those very real pressures and keep to programme, but I cannot deny that they are there.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak briefly about the draft Scottish Biometrics Commissioner Act 2020 (Code of Practice) (Appointed Day) Regulations 2022. The Parliament passed the 2020 act in March of that year. The legislation speaks to some of the key societal issues of our time, touching on data protection, privacy, human rights and ethics as they relate to the police’s use of very personal information. The Scottish Government therefore welcomed the Parliament’s appointment of Dr Brian Plastow as Scotland’s first Biometrics Commissioner in April last year.

Given the rapid increase in the use of biometric data and technologies, it is important that we have an independent commissioner who will raise public awareness about rights, responsibilities and standards, as well as monitor compliance with such standards. It is vital that a clearer understanding of those issues is promoted in our communities, especially for young people and for vulnerable people.

An integral part of the legislation was for the commissioner to prepare a code of practice. That code has been prepared by the commissioner, and it symbolises what I believe is Scotland’s progressive approach to biometrics in a policing context. It is worth mentioning that the code is the first of its kind in the world. It is designed to promote good practice, transparency and accountability by setting out an agreed framework of standards for professional decision making. It is intended to strike the right balance between the needs and responsibilities of policing and the criminal justice system and the fundamental obligation to guarantee the basic human rights, privacy and freedoms of individual members of the public.

The commissioner has developed the draft code in consultation with key interests, including the bodies that will be subject to the code, statutory consultees and other bodies that are represented on the commissioner’s advisory group. Earlier this year, the committee had the opportunity to consider a draft of the code, alongside evidence from the commissioner, and I know that the contents of the draft code were viewed positively by committee members.

The purpose of the instrument is to bring the code into force on the appointed day. As agreed with the commissioner, the day that is proposed is 16 November 2022. From that day, Police Scotland, the Scottish Police Authority and the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner will be required to comply with the code. The commencement of the code will therefore represent a major milestone in the implementation of the 2020 act.

The Scottish Government is happy to work with the commissioner and other partners to ensure that an ethical, proportionate and lawful approach continues to be taken in the collection, use, retention and disposal of biometric data in Scotland for policing and criminal justice purposes.

I have one thing to say. Although the bill includes a number of temporary changes, this would be a permanent change. However, as I have been trying to explain, the whole situation is under review through the hearings system working group that I have mentioned.

Amendment 1003 agreed to.

Section 38 agreed to.

Schedule—Temporary justice measures

Yes.