Stephen Kerr
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“My first priority is to prevent crime before it happens and, as a consequence, to reduce the number of victims. Therefore, the Government will continue to intervene early to steer people away from crime and focus on areas such as substance dependency, health, poverty, homelessness and employability, which are all significant contributing…”
“Alongside more places, a smarter approach to custody is needed, and I remain committed to using all levers at our disposal, including continuing to expand the use of home detention curfew, which supports reintegration of individuals by providing for their structured return to the community.”
“I expect HMP Highland to be completed in spring 2027— which is later than planned, due to construction issues—and HMP Glasgow, which I visited last week, is due to be completed in 2028.”
“I recognise that the proposed changes are bold, and I hope that they can contribute to a thoughtful debate today on the consequences of not addressing the rise in our prison population. The outcomes of any sentence for a crime committed should be that justice is served and no further reoffending happens.”
“That is why my priority is the prevention of crime and further reoffending behaviour. That approach makes financial sense: every prison place costs us more than £52,000 a year; this financial year, we are spending nearly £510 million in resource funding for the Scottish Prison Service to run our jails.”
“Yi-pei Chou Turvey sums things up very well. This whole issue has been at the bottom of the to-do list—that is exactly where we are. The title of the Government’s motion, which is the subject of today’s debate, is: “Achieving a sustainable prison population”. We can all share that perfectly reasonable objective.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,212 lines we hold for Stephen Kerr, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 25.
“I thank each of them for their willingness to serve, and I commend the motion to Parliament. I move, That the Parliament agrees to the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body’s proposal to appoint Miles Briggs, Michael Marra, Jenni Minto and Kate Nevens to be members of the Scottish Commission for Public Audit. The Presiding Officer: The question on the motion will be put at decision time. Parliamentary Bureau Motions 17:12”
“The Scottish Commission for Public Audit performs an important role in our system of public accountability. It does not examine the spending decisions of Government; instead, it oversees Audit Scotland, scrutinising Audit Scotland’s budget and helping to ensure that the organisation that is responsible for auditing Scotland’s public finances remains independent, is properly governed and is accountable to Parliament. That independent oversight matters, because confidence in public audit depends not only on rigorous scrutiny of public bodies but on confidence in the body that carries out that scrutiny. I am therefore pleased to move the motion to appoint Miles Briggs, Michael Marra, Jenni Minto and Kate Nevens as members of the Scottish Commission for Public Audit.”
“Stephen Kerr: The cabinet secretary has a challenge on his hands, because if that is an example of the kind of knockabout politics that members—[Interruption.]”
“How did we get to the point at which we have the worst record for deaths in custody probably in the whole of Europe—the figure is certainly three or four times that in England and Wales? How did we get to the point where rehabilitation opportunities are so under pressure and so limited in accessibility? Kate Campbell: Does the member recognise— most members across the chamber have agreed—that poverty is a significant driver of people ending up in the prison system and that his Conservative Government did so much damage to this country, particularly through the introduction of universal credit, which pushed thousands of families into poverty? Does he accept responsibility for his party’s impact on the increase in prisoner numbers?”
“We approach any appointment of a new cabinet secretary with high hopes that there will be words, yes, but also action and delivered outcomes. Therefore, I publicly welcome Neil Gray to his position and wish him, on behalf of the people of Scotland and all of us in the chamber, success in achieving the changes that we all know are needed in our justice system, because Pauline McNeill is right: we are at a low point of public confidence in it. Before we go any further in the debate about how to fix a problem, it is instructive to discuss how we got there in the first place. How did we get to the point at which there are 8,300 prisoners in a prison estate that is designed for 7,800?”
“Yi-pei Chou Turvey sums things up very well. This whole issue has been at the bottom of the to-do list—that is exactly where we are. The title of the Government’s motion, which is the subject of today’s debate, is: “Achieving a sustainable prison population”. We can all share that perfectly reasonable objective. Neil Gray: It has certainly remained at the top of my to-do list. I would reflect on the fact that, after a month in post, I have presented to Parliament a plan to achieve a sustainable prison population. Stephen Kerr: With the greatest respect to the cabinet secretary, a more accurate portrayal of his speech is that he presented a consultation on some ideas that might address the issue. I am not necessarily commenting on the few weeks that Neil Gray has been cabinet secretary.”
“I move, That the Parliament recognises the scale and complexity of the current prison population, which is above the design and operational capacity of the estate and causes significant associated operational and safety risks for prison staff; notes that Scotland has one of the highest prison populations in western Europe; acknowledges the underlying drivers, including the growing number of individuals convicted of serious violent and sexual offences who receive longer sentences, reflecting progress in how the justice system supports victims and holds offenders to account; notes that the cost per prisoner per year to the public purse is £52,000; recognises the importance of effective rehabilitation to reduce re-offending and to benefit the communities that individuals return to; agrees that public safety is paramount and that it is vital that victims are supported and have confidence in the justice system, and agrees, therefore, that a balanced package of measures to increase capacity in the prison estate, expand effective community sentencing, and enact preventative measures to stop people entering or re-entering the prison system, are necessary to achieve a sustainable prison population now and in the future.”
“They will ensure that prevention is at the heart of our system, with prisons housing those who pose the greatest risk, rehabilitating them to effectively support successful reintegration into society and, ultimately, reducing crime and protecting the public. Less crime and fewer victims are the outcomes that we all wish to see.”
“I recognise that the proposed changes are bold, and I hope that they can contribute to a thoughtful debate today on the consequences of not addressing the rise in our prison population. The outcomes of any sentence for a crime committed should be that justice is served and no further reoffending happens. Change is needed, and the consultation provides an opportunity to hear the views of victims, partners and the wider public on all those measures. I assure colleagues that my officials and I will continue to work with victim support organisations throughout that process. I believe that the proposals outlined today will help us to strike the right balance between recognising the concerns of victims and survivors and charting a clear course towards a sustainable prison population in the long term.”
“The proposal would enable a more proportionate approach, in which an individual still serves their sentence but with a greater proportion served in the community, under supervision, and therefore a greater likelihood of their successful reintegration into society, which will reduce the risk that they reoffend. Robust safeguards are in place to manage long-term prisoners in the community who are subject to individualised risk assessment and licence conditions. They must abide by all conditions on their licence and can be recalled to prison. Individuals convicted of sexual offences and some violent offences will also be subject to multi-agency public protection arrangements.”
“Therefore, the consultation will also seek views on release arrangements for long-term prisoners, including amending the point of release on non-parole licence for some long-term prisoners to two thirds of their sentence, with the remainder of their sentence being served in the community under strict supervision and licence conditions. That is the position that we had in place before 2016, and prisoners convicted before that date still have that in place. The consultation will also seek views on extending those changes to those on extended sentences. It is imperative that we find the right balance among punishment, rehabilitation, risk management and reintegration.”
“The Scottish Sentencing and Penal Policy Commission noted that the current arrangement for long-term prisoners, whereby some are released into the community on non-parole licence six months before the end of their sentence, does not allow for effective reintegration, and it recommended that those individuals should have more time under supervision in the community on licence. The vast majority of long-term prisoners will, ultimately, be released from custody. The question is, therefore, not whether those prisoners will return to the community, but how safely that return can be managed. I agree with the commission that an extended period of supervision could benefit the management of risk and, ultimately, reduce reoffending.”
“The consultation will also seek views on how we can deliver a more effective approach to custody, including—as the Scottish Sentencing and Penal Policy Commission recommended—extending the presumption against short sentences from a threshold of 12 months to one of 24 months, enhancing community payback orders to increase confidence in their effectiveness and support their wider use, and strengthening the bail test to reduce the number of people remanded with no real prospect of a custodial sentence of less than 24 months.”
“The consultation will seek views on amending the definition of a short-term prisoner from “those serving less than four years” to “those serving less than five years” to better reflect the existing sentencing powers of the courts and to bring Scotland into alignment with the Council of Europe’s position that sentences of five years or more constitute long- term imprisonment.”
“A statutory review of the national strategy for community justice, which sets out the long-term aims and priority actions that strengthen alternatives to custody, has been published today and will give stakeholders the opportunity to have their say on the direction of community justice. I am also publishing several proposed changes to make a sustained change in our prison population, with a focus on rehabilitation and reducing reoffending, which will be the subject of an eight-week public consultation period.”
“Alongside more places, a smarter approach to custody is needed, and I remain committed to using all levers at our disposal, including continuing to expand the use of home detention curfew, which supports reintegration of individuals by providing for their structured return to the community. We have already made GPS technology available, and I want to expand that: we will now introduce a geographical pilot of GPS with bail, building on action that we have already taken to allow radio-frequency monitoring of bail curfews. I also want to make full use of community-based alternatives where it is safe, proportionate and effective to do so, because we know that short custodial sentences can increase the likelihood of reoffending, whereas community sentences are more effective at supporting lasting rehabilitation.”
“Today, I am proposing bold reform that will strike the right balance across custodial sentences, community sentencing and the need to robustly protect victims and the public. Other countries have achieved reductions by changing their approach, and we can, too. I will outline those plans in more detail. First, I have instructed the Scottish Prison Service to exhaust all options for further maximisation of the existing estate and to set out an approach to further increasing the number of places, which will include the affordability and deliverability of additional capacity, with consideration of temporary modular accommodation and further housing blocks at existing prisons. I expect to receive business cases on those proposals soon.”
“That is why my priority is the prevention of crime and further reoffending behaviour. That approach makes financial sense: every prison place costs us more than £52,000 a year; this financial year, we are spending nearly £510 million in resource funding for the Scottish Prison Service to run our jails. However, evidence shows that community sentencing in areas such as non- violent crimes is more effective, with the reconviction rate for those people who were given community payback orders in 2022-23 at 28.6 per cent, compared with 53.2 per cent for those people who completed custodial sentences of one year or less. That approach is also significantly cheaper to the taxpayer, with an estimated cost of a CPO per unit between £1,251 and £6,778, depending on its requirements and complexity.”
“My first priority is to prevent crime before it happens and, as a consequence, to reduce the number of victims. Therefore, the Government will continue to intervene early to steer people away from crime and focus on areas such as substance dependency, health, poverty, homelessness and employability, which are all significant contributing factors to offending. I will be clear, as the Government has always been, that, for those people who pose the highest risk, the removal of liberty is an important and integral part of our justice system and that prisons will continue to be necessary. However, we want to see less crime so that we have fewer victims, which is why support is needed even after an offence has been committed if we are to minimise the risk of an individual reoffending and returning to prison following release.”
“Neil Gray: I have already referenced that we are building two new prisons and that we are expanding capacity. We already have one of the highest levels of custody per head of population in western Europe; we need to tackle that issue alongside the capacity issues that I will go on to discuss. Attainment of a sustainable prison population will require fundamental change. The independent Scottish Sentencing and Penal Policy Commission’s evidence-based report recognised the need for a greater focus on community interventions to reduce reoffending and for rehabilitative work in prison to support the effective reintegration of individuals into the community. The commission was clear that prevention is the most effective route to a sustained reduction in the prison population.”
“Therefore, further action is necessary now to put our prisons on a sustainable footing and ensure that our justice system can focus on rehabilitation and reducing reoffending without compromising public safety. Stephen Kerr: Will the cabinet secretary take this opportunity to accept, with some degree of humility, that the prison capacity situation is a direct result of the neglect of his predecessors in the office that he holds to deal with the issue as it came along? There was a lot of warning and expectation about the level of the prison population, but very little was done to deal with it proactively. Will the cabinet secretary accept that this is a moment for him, with humility, to say sorry for that lack of planning and action?”
“I believe that we can do better to address the reasons for breaches and improve that success rate, and I am working to identify what interventions and support will drive improvements in compliance and thus reduce avoidable, short-term custodial sentences. Despite those measures, today’s prison population stands at 8,549, having recently peaked at 8,603, which is about 800 places above the estate’s designed capacity. That poses an unacceptable level of risk to those living and working in Scottish prisons and to the wider justice system. Additionally, reasonable worst-case long-term projections indicate that without action demand for prison places will rise to about 9,500 within the next decade.”
“That is equivalent to the total design capacity of HMP Grampian. I am engaging directly across the justice system to identify areas where action can be taken quickly to help reduce the pressure further. We are embedding multidisciplinary teams in courts to ensure that critical and relevant information is available to judges ahead of decisions on custody, which is helping to reduce avoidable periods of short remand that are necessitated for further information. We are undertaking analysis to understand the complex reasons why individuals fail to comply with community payback orders and bail conditions. CPOs are delivering strong outcomes, with 71 per cent successfully completed—most of them without breaches—during 2024-25.”
“I expect HMP Highland to be completed in spring 2027— which is later than planned, due to construction issues—and HMP Glasgow, which I visited last week, is due to be completed in 2028. We have extended the eligibility for home detention curfew and have expanded the use of alternatives to remand, with bail supervision numbers in 2024 at the highest they have been in 10 years. We implemented the emergency early release scheme between November 2025 and April this year, which saw 614 individuals released early, 60 per cent of whom were released within three months of their original release date. We also incrementally changed the point of a sentence that certain short-term prisoners are required to serve in custody to 30 per cent, which resulted in an estimated sustained reduction of about 550 prisoners.”
“We are working on that and, based on my discussions with the Lord President, the Lord Advocate and others, I am confident that we will get through the High Court backlog. However, reducing the remand population presents an additional challenge, of which Stephen Kerr is aware, because a significant proportion of those currently on remand for serious offences can be expected to become part of the sentenced population. Therefore, regardless of whether individuals are on remand or otherwise, we must take action now. Scotland has taken a number of steps to alleviate the pressures. A reconfiguration of the estate realised about 400 additional places, and two new prisons will deliver 460 spaces.”
“I thank the cabinet secretary for giving way. He made a point about the remand population. He is quite right that one in four members of our prison population is on remand. The reality is, though, that there is a slow throughput of individuals held on remand, and that is because of the backlog of court cases, especially those heard in the High Court. What specific measures will the cabinet secretary introduce to speed up the appearance of such individuals in the High Court to face justice? Neil Gray: Stephen Kerr is correct. We have discussed that matter before, and I believe that the work that has been done on summary case management, which has sped up the process for summary cases, can and should be extended.”
“Why have ministers not delivered the level of proactive policing that is needed to disrupt knife carrying before lives are even put at risk instead of relying on investigations after another incident has happened? Kirsten Oswald: I am grateful to Stephen Kerr for his question, but I point him to some of the previous answers that I have given. There needs to be a holistic approach to this very serious issue, and I have outlined significant elements of the prevention focus that is a crucial part of our approach. Dealing effectively and sustainably with this issue will take prevention as well as detection, consequences and education. New Railway Stations 7.”
“Now we stand on the threshold of another thing that Alan Brown is happy to dismiss: small nuclear reactors. I ask him to consider France, which is an interesting case study for serious energy policy. We should consider how France has been able to weather the shock of global energy prices. Why? Because it has determined to become truly— [Interruption.]”
“England has expanded its nuclear ambitions and has attracted billions of pounds of investment. Ironically, that happened under the nuclear energy minister Andrew Bowie, who is a Scottish member of Parliament. Scotland has watched those opportunities pass by. Skilled workers have left, and expertise is migrating elsewhere. Projects that could transform local economies—as Liam Kerr pointed out, some of the areas involved have the most deprived local economies in Scotland— simply never materialise because of a simple denial of reality. Those are not abstract statistics. The apprenticeships were not created, the engineers were not employed and the scientists were not retained. Families were denied the security that comes from well-paid, highly skilled jobs.”
“Stephen Kerr: Alan Brown is again finding some spurious reason to deny the reality of the reliability of nuclear power. Yes, there may be bottlenecks in the transmission system, but it is for us, as policy makers, to deal with those issues. Most Governments would look at the achievements of Torness, for example, and ask how they could build on that success—but not the SNP Government. Its answer has been to say no—no to new nuclear, no to investment, no to jobs and no to opportunities. That is not a serious industrial strategy. The SNP would rather stick to outdated ideological positions, trying to tie in nuclear power with nuclear weapons and spreading fear and disinformation that has no basis in science or reality, rather than showing ambition for Scotland.”
“The story of Torness demonstrates exactly why that is. It has generated reliable, clean electricity for Scotland for decades. It has produced more than 300 terawatt hours of electricity, it has prevented more than 100 million tonnes of carbon emissions and it has supported hundreds of highly skilled jobs. Alan Brown: I will go back to the point about the reliability of nuclear power. Aside from the stat that I gave earlier—that nuclear is operational only 78 per cent of the time, on average over the long term—is it not a problem that, given that nuclear power is churning out all the time, if too much nuclear power comes on, even higher constraint payments will be required to turn off turbines? Nuclear cannot be turned off or ramped down.”
“The SNP should take note of the result of the Aberdeen South by-election, which was a referendum on the future of oil and gas licences. For all the charade of the SNP claiming that it is for oil and gas, nearly 50 per cent of the voters of Aberdeen South voted for a retention of that sector and for new licences to be granted. That is not the SNP’s position but, in my opinion, it is anti-science to oppose that. That is not the only issue on which the SNP has taken an anti-science position. Nuclear power is one of the lowest-carbon forms of electricity generation available anywhere in the world. It provides dependable electricity regardless of the weather, it strengthens energy security and it supports highly skilled employment. Countries around the world are increasingly recognising that achieving net zero will be far harder without it.”
“In the past 18 months, I have sat in a committee room of this Parliament with Scottish apprentices in the nuclear industry who lamented the fact that, if they were to pursue their career in nuclear, they would have to leave their own country. As a nationalist, Alan Brown should be ashamed to be responsible for such a luddite, anti-science approach to our country’s future energy needs. Scotland should be one of the world’s great leading energy nations, and Liam Kerr spelled that out in terms of renewables. We are for renewables. Alan Brown might seek to deny that, but renewables are with us today at the scale that they are because of the very subsidies that he was just attacking. Liam Kerr also mentioned oil and gas.”
“Alan Brown says that nuclear is not clean energy. He should tell his beloved European Union that, because it has redesignated nuclear as green and clean. He tied himself up in knots over the costs. I am afraid that he is denying the reality of the most recent contracts for difference round. Alan Brown is dismissive of what has happened at Hinkley Point C. One of the great opportunities that I had as a member of the House of Commons Business and Trade Select Committee was to visit Hinkley Point C. As I wandered round the site, I heard Scottish voices—those of young Scots with a career in nuclear energy in mind, who had left their beloved Scotland.”
“At a time when hostile states are becoming more aggressive and more sophisticated, consistency and deterrence matter, and the United Kingdom’s ability to act decisively in defence of its own national interest matters. National security is one of the clearest examples of the strength of the union. The threats that we face are shared. The intelligence services that protect us, and the armed forces that defend us, are shared. The response to hostile foreign powers must also be shared, for those who seek to undermine our security do not distinguish—”
“The issue before us today is a narrower one. The legislative consent memorandum ensures that those convicted of such offences in Scotland will be subject to the same sentencing and release arrangements that apply elsewhere in the United Kingdom. I welcome that. Scotland should not have a less robust release regime for those who are involved in activities that threaten our national security, nor should there be different standards of treatment depending on where in the United Kingdom an offender happens to be prosecuted. It is important that there are no gaps or inconsistencies in how offenders who are convicted of these offences are managed across the country.”
“The first duty of any Government is the security of its people, and that duty has become more challenging in a world where hostile states increasingly operate through proxies, front organisations and state-backed networks that are designed to undermine democratic societies and advance the interests of foreign powers. The purpose of the bill is straightforward: it gives authorities stronger powers to act against organisations that are involved in foreign state threat activity and creates offences for those who support, assist or benefit from them. The Conservative Party supported the bill at Westminster. Indeed, Conservative colleagues argued that some of its provisions should have gone further, but the principle is absolutely right: those who act on behalf of hostile foreign powers should face serious consequences.”
“We need good information to be available to the people of our country so that they can make good judgments and decisions. If information increasingly comes from tainted sources online— often sponsored by foreign bad actors, with a clear political agenda to create division and distrust between us in this country—we should wake up. I and my Conservative colleagues are delighted to support all the other parties and their voices in relation to this vital issue for our country’s national security. 19:13”
“I will say, though, that although ignoring viewers and communities is one thing, it completely bamboozles me that Ofcom has ignored the very licence conditions under which a licence was awarded. Michael Marra spoke well, as he always does, in my experience, even when I disagree with him. He talked about the importance of local news journalism, as did a number of other colleagues. I am running out of time, but I want to say how important that issue is. I find the state of local journalism heartbreaking. I pick up my local newspaper, and it is largely national news that has been stuck in to fill out the pages. Local news is increasingly relegated to a few columns and a couple of pages, which is not good for our democracy.”
“That is why members from across Parliament and from all parties, I think—we have yet to hear from Helen McDade, but I am sure that she will be broadly supportive—support the retention of the licences as they have been awarded. I have very little that is positive to say about Ofcom. Maggie Chapman mentioned STV’s online content. Ofcom has regulatory responsibilities for online content, which is a huge issue for this country, as it is globally. I worry that Ofcom will be as toothless in enforcing online safety, as per the Online Safety Act 2023, as it is in relation to broadcasting. I have a range of concerns about the current state of broadcasting, but I will not exercise your patience, Presiding Officer, or that of my colleagues, by detailing those.”
“I come from Angus, and I grew up with the great names of Grampian TV. I am one of the oldest members now, and I am replying to a debate secured by one of the youngest, so I do not expect Jack Middleton ever to have heard of Jimmy Spankie. There was Ron Thompson, the music of Calum Kennedy, and George Kidd, who was a celebrity in many ways in Dundee. I remember going to my grandparents for the weekend, and on a Friday night they always watched “Bothy Nichts” when it was on. Those of us who are old enough will know it—it was a celebration of our culture in that part of Scotland. They were much more than programmes; they were a shared experience. To create a cohesive society, we need more shared, local, identifiable experiences.”
“George Adam was right—this is a most unholy alliance, but he and I agree on the issue. I am genuinely concerned about the pattern of consolidation of ownership, which might result in there being very few UK- owned domestic broadcasters. It is all going the way of international global streamers and huge American conglomerates. I am not happy about that, which is why I have changed my mind a lot—for example, about the BBC. At one time, I was quite a critic of the BBC, but now I think of myself as a number 1 supporter. As a number of members have said, we need to retain UK and Scotland-based operations, for the sake of reflecting who we are to the world, let alone to ourselves. I grew up watching Grampian Television. That is why I am speaking in the debate and am passionate about the issue.”
“What is the point of Ofcom awarding licences, as it did to STV, only for the announcements such as those that we are discussing to be made only months later? Frankly, it is disgraceful that more integrity was not shown. I mentioned the word “honesty” in my intervention on Maggie Chapman. Would it not have been more honest for STV to surrender the licence? I genuinely mean that. I am sorry, but I have a real problem with STV making commitments to local communities, applying for and obtaining an extension of the existing licence to provide local broadcasting and then very quickly undoing all of that. I genuinely believe—I think that this was put to Ofcom—that Ofcom should have taken the licence back and had another go at finding someone who would meet its requirements. I also have wider concerns.”
“I did not enjoy Jack Middleton’s previous speech from the back of the chamber, but I did enjoy the speech that he gave this evening, because I think that he captured the essence of the debate. All the speakers who have followed have been excellent in airing the issue. I am not sure that I will say anything that is terribly original compared with what has already been said, but I will say that, in my many years of observing these matters, I have not yet seen a regulator that is any good. In my experience, they all seem to be toothless wonders. They have to be prodded, nudged and jabbed to do anything. This is a case in point. If we have to have monopolistic arrangements for the provision of public services such as public service broadcasting, we need to have regulators that are prepared to do their job.”
“Thirdly, the Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, led by Patrick Harvie, should ensure that one of its first acts is to haul in the senior leadership team at STV to answer a series of basic questions that they have so far simply failed to answer. Taking those measures forward together will ensure that we are in the best position to save STV North news. 18:35”
“The will of big money cannot be allowed to trample on the need to ensure that we have trusted local media. That is especially true in an era of widespread fake news and disinformation. In closing, here is what I believe needs to happen to save STV North and protect the future of quality local news more widely. First, the Scottish Government needs to stick pressure on Ofcom regarding its conduct during the process and make it explain how STV can possibly be sticking to its original channel 3 licence obligations. Secondly, the Scottish Government must look at avenues to support and incentivise broadcasting in editorial jobs to be maintained in the north-east and across the wider north of Scotland.”
“The strength of support for my motion demonstrates to me that the Parliament also has no confidence in the direction of the SNP’s—sorry, STV’s; I apologise—leadership team. [Laughter.] Ultimately, I believe that this plan is a rebalancing of the books. At the same time as trying to axe newsrooms and an institution that we have trusted for decades, STV launched a commercial radio station at a cost of half a million quid. It is hard for anyone to argue that sucking money out of the existing business model while reneging on an obligation to deliver a distinct local news programme is anything other than a poor decision. I am concerned that financial mismanagement, and a single set of financial results, can now become the driving force for a reduction in public sector broadcasting. That sets a dangerous precedent.”
“It took Ofcom three months to consider those responses, and we have had no credible explanation as to why 99.7 per cent of them were simply ignored. That is on the back of a poll that found that only 4 per cent of viewers in the north were in favour of the plans. I find it difficult to understand how, in the face of such emphatic opposition, those views have simply been cast aside. To rub salt in the wounds of STV staff, the chief exec said that he was delighted by the good news. That is an alarming level of disconnect that has led to 93 per cent of staff saying that they have no confidence in their senior management. A motion of no confidence in the chief exec and head of news has also passed.”
“I thank Jack Middleton for giving way, because he is making important points about Ofcom. One of the bizarre things that came out in the evidence that Ofcom gave to the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee, on which I sat in the previous session, was that it felt responsible more for the profitability of STV than for enforcing the terms of the licence that STV had sought, and which Ofcom had granted, for channel 3 broadcasting in STV North. Jack Middleton: I thank Stephen Kerr for that point—I will come to that very shortly; I could not agree more. On 1 June, Ofcom finally announced that it would back STV’s plans. A total of 1,292 consultation responses were received— embarrassingly for STV, four of those responses were in favour of the plans, and one of them was from its own chief executive.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to improve openness, transparency and accountability across the public sector. (S7O- 00104)”