Chamber and committees

Of course, if the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill had passed into law instead of being stopped by another Government—completely wrongly—it would not have changed the SPS’s approach to trans prisoners, which is not dependent on the possession of a gender recognition certificate. The possession of a GRC will continue to have a minimal impact on how the SPS manages transgender people. The important thing is that its process is one that is based on the assessment of risk—[Interruption.]—for the individual, for other prisoners and for prison staff. It has a tremendous track record in dealing with the management of that risk. I would suggest that the SPS is far more expert in assessing and dealing with that risk than any of us in this chamber.

This morning, I visited the SPS to discuss its management of risks in relation to serious and organised crime. The SPS is a fantastic organisation that manages risk every day of the week. It has a great track record in relation to trans prisoners and I have faith in its ability to evolve its policy to continue that track record.

It is an important point—[Interruption.]—and it bears repetition, because it has not been taken on board by some of those who are asking questions about it and are shouting just now.

The Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill does not change the SPS’s approach to trans prisoners, which is not dependent on the possession of a GRC. The possession of a GRC will continue to have a minimal impact on how the SPS manages transgender people in its care. Decisions on placement and management are not based solely on the possession of a GRC but are based on a range of multiple factors and thorough individualised assessments. The SPS will retain the ability to place an individual in an estate that does not necessarily correspond to the gender on their GRC if it determines that not doing so would place that individual or others at risk. It is a risk-based approach.

Of course, the GRR bill is not currently in force, so it is not relevant to any current cases.

In relation to the policy review and its outcome, both Pauline McNeill and Russell Findlay have the ability to question that in detail, as members of the Criminal Justice Committee as well as the Parliament.

I confirm to Pauline McNeill that a rights-based approach is taken now. The rights of everybody concerned are taken into account by the SPS. Again, the Criminal Justice Committee can go through the process of inviting the SPS in to ask it about those issues. The approach that we have taken is rights based and assesses the risks that are involved.

As well as that, during the course of the consultation that was undertaken as part of the current review, prisoners, including women prisoners, were consulted on the process, so they will have fed into the outcome of the policy review.

Therefore, I am content with the process that is there just now and I think that the SPS has a tremendous track record. Of course, I want to look at what the policy review comes back with, as will Pauline McNeill and the Criminal Justice Committee. At that point, if we remain dissatisfied, we can ask further questions. I am not dissatisfied—I trust the SPS to do what it is doing in this area, and its track record has shown that it is more than capable of assessing the risks.

I have asked Teresa Medhurst, the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service, for an update on the progress of the policy review, and she has confirmed that the SPS’s policy review is being conducted in five stages. The policy initiation stage and the evidence and engagement stages have now been completed, and the policy review is now moving through the analysis, recommendations and authorise, and publish stages. The SPS anticipates the updated policy being published in the coming months. Following implementation, the policy will be subject to on-going monitoring and evaluations.

It would have made for a more illuminating discussion if Russell Findlay had listened to my answer before going on to his preset next question.

The simple fact is that, as I have said already, I trust the SPS to deal with this. It does not follow the practice in England and Wales, where the process is determined by the presence of a GRC. That is not how it is done in Scotland. In Scotland, if someone has a GRC, it does not give them the right to be transferred to the place of their choice. Here, every decision is carried out on the basis of risk. I trust the SPS to do that.

Of course, the Parliament and I will be interested in the outcome of the policy review. We can have a discussion about the review when it is published. However, as things stand, I trust the SPS, and my faith in it is borne out by its track record. When it has a case of a trans prisoner, all the appropriate assessments—including by health and possibly psychiatric services—are made. That is the right way to deal with these situations. If anyone does not think that it is, they can look at the SPS’s track record in this regard, which is exemplary, as it has ensured the safety of prisoners for many years.

Police Scotland should operate at all times with fairness, integrity and respect, and irrespective of ethnicity. The chief constable has made clear his commitment that Police Scotland must become an actively anti-racist organisation.

In respect of stop and search, the code of practice in Scotland was developed by an independent advisory group and was approved by the Scottish Parliament. That code of practice, which came into force on 11 May 2017 and was reviewed in 2019, sets out clearly the rules for when and how the police in Scotland can use stop and search.

I want to be clear that Scotland welcomes people from all over the world. Over successive generations, migrants and refugees have greatly contributed to our society and brought diversity to our communities. Racism, in any form, is abhorrent and wholly unacceptable.

Counterterrorism is a reserved matter and is delivered through the United Kingdom Government CONTEST strategy. The Scottish Government is engaging actively with the Home Office to ensure that the recently announced review of the strategy appropriately reflects the situation and takes into consideration the terrorism threat throughout the UK, including in Scotland.

The operation of counterterrorism in Scotland is a matter for Police Scotland, taking account of the specific code of practice for counterterrorism stop and search at the border, as issued by the Home Office.

I agree with Maggie Chapman that, in relation to the threat of terrorism and the assessment of it, Police Scotland holds the biggest piece of the jigsaw. It looks regularly at the issues that Maggie Chapman has raised.

Pam Gosal makes a very important point. We have dealt with this through the victims task force, whereby all the different groups that are involved in the area have said that we have to ensure that everyone who is involved in every part of the justice system has undergone trauma-informed training to make sure that they provide a trauma-informed response, as Pam Gosal mentioned. I have done my training, such as it is so far, and I am sure that I will do further training.

Pam Gosal is right to say that, for the victim, it is about the entire journey through the justice system. If they find that one part of the system is working very well and everyone is very well trained and informed, but they then get moved on to another part where that is not the case, their experience is going to be a bad one.

I am not saying that this is going to be done quickly. It is part of a justice vision that will take years to bring about. However, the biggest change that we can make with the justice vision is to get to a situation where the entire system is trauma informed and person centred, and where people get a trauma-responsive reaction from the agencies. That is what we should be trying to achieve and that is what we are setting out to do.

I agree with much of what Jamie Greene has said. I am happy to acknowledge his point about the progress that is still to be made, as would the police. I think that the chief constable would say that, when he started, the police response to domestic abuse was to send a constable. He would say that there has been massive progress. There used to be a closed door, beyond which the police would not go. That has fundamentally changed.

However, I acknowledge, and the police would acknowledge, that there is a cultural issue that must also be dealt with. The police are dealing with that issue through training and through the leadership that we have seen over a number of years from deputy chief constable Fiona Taylor and from the chief constable. That is the main thing that can be done.

The inspector’s 14 recommendations touch on issues that the police are well aware of. They know that they must do more. We will have further discussions with the chief constable and senior officers at our next meeting in two or three weeks’ time.

I acknowledge the report that Katy Clark mentions. I think that it is the report from last week, which has a small sample of around 69 people. It says very good things about the introduction of the new legislation, but it also points out where else we have to go.

If we look at the recommendations, we can see what has to be done to improve things. For example, it is very important to make sure that the gender of interviewing officers is right for the victims and that those officers are trained in how to deal with domestic abuse situations. The biggest challenge perhaps relates to prevention. This is a very hard matter to deal with, but if we can get to a situation where prevention can happen, especially in relation to possible repeat offenders, we will make massive progress.

I think that, between us, the police and what is happening in the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, where real priority is being given to dealing with this during the recovery from the pandemic, we can make further progress, and so we should.