Chamber and committees

Good morning. What is the single agency model that was just referred to?

I would like to dig into the housing, childcare and infrastructure issues. Addressing them would help across the board, in terms of public servants moving to rural and island communities. When I have asked during evidence sessions whether boards are having conversations about housing with local authorities, I have found that that does not seem to have been happening. I totally appreciate the challenging fiscal environment that we are in at the moment in terms of capital, but is there a role for the Scottish Government in providing guidance or a framework that would enable public bodies—local authorities, health boards and so on—to pool their resources, such as the land and buildings that the NHS has, and perhaps bring in private investment, too, to develop housing solutions and childcare solutions that would serve the communities and help with sustainability?

I will ask about education and training. Obviously, for the sustainability of a workforce, growing your own is helpful, and certainly the folk who we have spoken to in rural areas have pointed to that. As I ask this question, I am conscious that some of the solutions would address issues across the country and not just in rural areas.

First, I want to ask about the work on NHS apprenticeship roles. We have heard about roles in dietetics, occupational health, physiotherapy and radiography. It would be helpful to hear more about the development of those apprenticeship roles.

I am sorry to interrupt, but I would like to jump in. How are the numbers of apprenticeships available to each health board decided? Do boards have a certain proportion that they are allowed to support? How does that work?

That is helpful. I am sorry that I interrupted you. Do you want to continue on that previous point?

My other question is on how the Scottish Government can encourage universities to support more flexible training opportunities. Most of our references are to Skye, as the committee has just been there. Would it be possible to deliver access to nursing in Portree, for example? We heard from an advanced nurse practitioner that they had offered to deliver that, but had not been able to do so. Obviously, I do not know the full details, but what work can be done to make the most of such opportunities?

In response to Tess White, you spoke about people who are in hospital when that is not the right place for them. An issue that has struck me both in my local area as well as during our visit to Skye is the number of folk who are in hospital because of legal complications, if you like—no one has a power of attorney, so decisions about their care are challenging. Is there more that can be done about that? Do we need to raise awareness of the requirements for families to have powers of attorney and other arrangements in place, or does something need to be done in respect of the power of attorney process?

It will be appreciated by victims that the Scottish Government accepts the very clear case for compensation for infected blood victims. The establishment of the scheme, as a priority for those who deserve redress as soon as possible as part of their meaningful apology, is crucial. Can the First Minister provide assurances that the Scottish Government will seek to engage with those who are infected and affected, and that their voices will be central to informing the next steps?

The use of tainted evidence that was provided by the Post Office in criminal cases right across the United Kingdom is one of the biggest miscarriages of justice to have occurred in recent history. Some sub-postmasters were suspended or dismissed; others were prosecuted for offences of dishonesty, with a number being convicted and, in some cases, imprisoned.

That miscarriage of justice has had profound impacts on the people who have been affected by it. They experienced bankruptcy and the loss of family homes. Individuals were hounded as thieves in the communities that they lived in and provided a trusted service to. There were breakdowns in relationships with partners, children and friends and the mental and physical health problems that result from the devastating toll of such a distressing and unjust situation. Several died by suicide.

Estimates from across the UK suggest that almost 1,000 individuals were convicted on the basis of evidence from the Horizon system over a 20-year period. In Scotland, those prosecutions were brought by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. In 2020, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, which investigates possible miscarriages of justice in Scotland, wrote to 73 potential victims of the Horizon scandal.

In line with the approach that is being taken by the UK Government, the Scottish Government believes that anyone who was wrongly convicted as a result of the impact of the defective Horizon IT system should have their conviction quashed and should, as a result, be entitled to UK Government compensation.

A number of the cases affected by the Horizon IT failings are more than 20 years old. Some victims have passed away, while many others are in declining health or have lost faith in the justice system and, understandably, do not wish to engage further with it. The current system relies on sub-postmasters choosing to lodge an appeal, which many will not want to do, for obvious reasons. It also relies on there being evidence that the conviction is unsafe when, in many cases, that evidence no longer exists. Continuing with the current system would not achieve the objective of ensuring that all wrongful convictions are quashed.

The effect of the bill is both symbolic and practical. By quashing the convictions of sub-postmasters, it removes the stain from those who were wrongly convicted. However, it also has a practical effect. Under the overturned convictions scheme that has been established by the UK Government, anyone who was wrongfully convicted as a result of Horizon evidence is eligible to receive compensation, but only after their conviction has been overturned, which means that the many sub-postmasters and others who were wrongfully convicted but who have not appealed through the courts are unable to access the compensation that they deserve. The UK bill will remove that barrier to access for those who ought to be entitled to financial redress through the UK Government’s compensation schemes and the bill before us today seeks to do likewise for Scottish sub-postmasters.

Given the unique circumstances arising from the endemic failings of the Horizon IT system, it is absolutely right for our Scottish Parliament to take unprecedented action in the form of primary legislation to quash the relevant convictions, rather than relying on the existing justice system to cure the miscarriages of justice that arose.

That said, the quickest and easiest route to overturn those miscarriages of justice would undoubtedly have been for the UK Government to extend its Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Bill to cover sub-postmasters in Scotland. I think that many Scottish citizens will find it strange that the UK Government excluded them and I remain unclear as to why the Scottish Government’s repeated requests for the inclusion of Scottish victims were refused.

However, the requests were refused, so the Scottish Government bill before us mirrors the UK legislation to ensure parity between affected sub-postmasters in Scotland and those elsewhere in the UK and, crucially, to ensure access to the UK Government’s compensation scheme.

I am heart sorry that justice has taken so long and that it is coming far too late for some, but I will be glad to vote to progress this bill and to move us towards delivering action to ensure that sub-postmasters in Scotland who were affected by wrongful convictions can receive justice by having their convictions quashed and can have access to the compensation that they so gravely deserve.

Will the Lord Advocate expand on the reasons for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service’s decision to stop relying on Horizon-related evidence only from 2015? What had been expected from, but not supplied by, the Post Office at that time?