Chamber and committees

I have asked Mike Ewart, Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) to respond. His response is as follows:

The following table illustrates the number of foreign national prisoners who have been released from the SPS from 2003:

Year	Individuals Released
2003 Count	273
2004 Count	254
2005 Count	262
2006 Count	598
2007 Count	828
2008 Count	338

 

The following table details the number of persons in relation to whom a recommendation for deportation was made following conviction in the High Court of Justiciary and sheriff court.

Recommendations for Deportation

Year	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007
Total	12	14	37	63	129

Note: Figures for the High Court of Justiciary only available from 2004.

24 cases were brought before Edinburgh Sheriff Court on 24 April 2008 on the basis of undertakings to appear in court.

Of these only one case was Not Called with two related charges of theft by shoplifting and assault.

The following table provides a detailed breakdown of the case outcomes:

Outcomes	Count
Initiating Warrant Issued	6
Trial Fixed	10
Plea of Guilty and Disposal with Fine  etc.	1
Petition for Further Examination and Bail	5
Plea of Guilty and Adjourned for Reports	1
Not Called	1
Total	24

 

The information requested is not held centrally.

The Scottish Law Commission (SLC) have not been asked specifically to review the requirement for corroboration in sexual offences.

In 2004, the SLC received a reference from the Scottish ministers to examine the law relating to rape and other sexual offences and the evidential requirements for proving such offences and to make recommendations for reform. The SLC published their final report on rape and other sexual offences in December 2007.

However, the SLC concluded in that report that issues relating to the law of evidence, such as mutual corroboration and character evidence would be better considered across the whole spectrum of criminal offences and not solely in respect of sexual offences. Accordingly, the SLC did not make any recommendations with regard to reform of the law of evidence in sexual offences in their final report.

On 20 November 2007, I wrote to the chairman of the SLC, inviting them to undertake a review of certain aspects of the law of criminal procedure and evidence. The terms of the proposed reference were as follows:

To consider the law relating to:

· Judicial rulings that can bring a solemn case to an end without the verdict of a jury, and rights of appeal against such;

· The principle of double jeopardy, and whether there should be exceptions to it;

· Admissibility of evidence of bad character or of previous convictions, and of  similar fact evidence; and

· The Moorov doctrine,

and to make any appropriate recommendations for reform.

The chairman of the SLC responded on 20 November, accepting the terms of the reference. In his response, he indicated that the SLC would be interested to examine the operation of the Moorov doctrine in the context of an examination of the law of evidence more generally, including the requirement for corroboration.

Between 10 December 2007 and 31 March 2008 106 reports identified by the police as arising from test purchase operations were made to the Procurator Fiscal. A number of these were wrongly classified and it is not possible to distinguish between on-sales and off-sales in terms of prosecution decisions. Information is currently available on 60 reports and the position is as follows:

Test Purchasing “ Reports Received by PF, 10 December 2007 “ March 2008

No. of Reports Received	Prosecution Decision Outstanding	Prosecution in process	Direct Measures	Convictions	No Further Proceedings
60	14	23	20	2	1

Notes:

Two convictions have been recorded since the test purchasing roll-out. In one of the cases there were two accused who both pled guilty to contraventions of the legislation. The accused were fined £135 each.

In the other case an accused was fined £60.

Prosecution arrangements for the roll-out of alcohol test purchasing are being monitored internally and a review will be undertaken in June 2008.

Prosecutors are always issued with guidance about any significant change in the law which is likely to have an impact on them. Guidance was provided to prosecution staff before the roll-out of test purchasing to all Scottish police forces on 10 December 2007. The approach to be taken in such cases is in line with the requirements set out in the Prosecution Code. Prosecutors will consider all the information provided by the police, including previous convictions, reliable intelligence concerning illegal activity of this kind on the premises, any aggravating circumstances and any test purchase failures referred to in the police report.

Prosecution arrangements for the roll out of alcohol test purchasing are being monitored internally and a review will be undertaken in June 2008.

During the test purchasing of alcohol pilot scheme in Fife the prosecutor assigned to deal with such reports took account of all the information provided by the police and made a decision on the merits of each individual case. He also was aware of the educational campaign to raise awareness amongst licensees and their staff about the illegal sale of alcohol to those under age which took place as part of the pilot. In the event licensed premises which failed only one test purchase were not subject to prosecution but there was no blanket policy not to prosecute in these cases. It remains the fact that there is no such blanket policy. In making prosecution decisions prosecutors will, of course, take account of the fact that most test purchase operations now arise as the result of police intelligence concerning illegal activity and premises are not visited routinely, as they were during the pilot.

Prosecution arrangements for the roll-out of alcohol test purchasing are being monitored internally and a review will be undertaken in June 2008.

I have asked Karen Watt, Chief Executive of the Scottish Housing Regulator, to respond. Her response is as follows:

When we inspected GHA in 2007, we looked at procurement of its investment programme. GHA entered a partnering agreement with a range of contractors in 2005 to deliver this programme, and we found that procurement of these contracts followed established good practice in the registered social landlord (RSL) sector.

The inspection did identify other weaknesses in GHA''s approach to procurement. We also found that GHA has been slow to understand the issues facing homeowners, and has not communicated well with them. We have now agreed an improvement plan with GHA, which sets out how it will address all of the weaknesses identified in the inspection report. We will monitor GHA''s progress with this.

We therefore have no grounds to refer matters to the Controller of Audit for examination.

I have asked Karen Watt, Chief Executive of the Scottish Housing Regulator to respond. Her response is as follows:

Glasgow Housing Association formed GHA (Management) Ltd as a wholly owned subsidiary in December 2003 to provide factoring services on their behalf to owners. Owners factored by GHA are obliged, through their Deed of Conditions, to take up the buildings insurance provided by the factor. GHA (Management) Ltd charge factored owners an administration fee on top of the cost of home insurance.