Katy Clark
Scottish Labour · Scotland
“I welcome the fact that we are taking steps to reduce the prison population, but there needs to be a wider discussion—I think that we are all agreed on that. Community justice must be expanded.”
“The chamber has been designed so that members speak through the chair, which also means that the microphones will work. If you face me, your microphone should work. Alyn Smith: I am grateful to Amanda Bland for her comment. She is a good colleague on the Criminal Justice Committee, and, as ever, that was a sensible question.”
“Yesterday, I met constituents outside the Parliament who are concerned about the potential impact on local communities and the environment of the energy consumption of proposed AI data centres in Irvine, Bishopbriggs and Hunterston, in my region. At least 24 controversial sites are being considered across Scotland.”
“The member cannot take an intervention, as she is already in additional time. Pauline McNeill: I will conclude with a specific point on deaths in custody, which the Criminal Justice Committee had a brief chat about on Wednesday morning.”
“I move amendment S7M-00469.2, to insert at end: “; is concerned that the current prison population crisis is chronically hampering effective rehabilitation; calls on the Scottish Government to increase its investment in GPS technology and speed up its roll out, and notes that the current approach to rehabilitation, community justice and e…”
“I understand that there is a request for national guidance, but that would be a deviation from where we are as a Parliament. However, if the mood of the Parliament is changing, the Government is open to listening, and that is a conversation to be had.”
The complete record
Every one of 635 lines we hold for Katy Clark, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 13.
“To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on whether the reported increased annual cost of Scotland’s prisons to over £77,000 per prisoner represents good value for public money. (S6F-03996)”
“To ask the Scottish Government how many patients in hospital are waiting for a social care package assessment from North Ayrshire health and social care partnership. (S6O-04524)”
“It is our understanding that the Scottish Government intends for families to be kept closely advised of the available facts. We believe that the bill must reflect an understanding that there is no universal, blanket approach to the publication of sensitive information but that there needs to be a trauma- informed approach and that we need to learn the lessons of what has happened in other jurisdictions to ensure that Scotland has the best possible process. 16:36”
“We understand that that approach is being taken in Wales, based on lessons learned from what happened in England, where much of the detail is provided to the public. Liam McArthur spoke about the cluttered landscape of reviews in Scotland and how we must ensure that they do not overlap. The committee considered that issue, and we also believe that it needs to be addressed. I appreciate that these review proposals represent an effort to fill a gap in Scotland’s statutory framework and to reflect on areas for reform and improvement in order to prevent future abuse and deaths. We very much support that Scottish Government intention. However, we believe that, as well as looking at the issue of anonymisation, we need to look at the process of full disclosure for victims’ families during the development of those reviews.”
“We welcome the intention behind the bill to make virtual hearings more of a reality, but we do not believe that we have fully heard the detail of what happened with pilots previously, and we believe that there needs to be a great deal more scrutiny of that before we have permanent provisions in law. We very much welcome the proposed domestic homicide and suicide reviews in part 2 of the bill. Such reviews already exist in England and are being brought into effect in Wales. I was pleased that the convener of the committee spoke about why the reviews should be anonymous and about the risks of retraumatisation, particularly for the family, if details of what has happened in a domestic homicide or a suicide become public.”
“As stakeholders have highlighted to the Criminal Justice Committee, it might often be in the best interests of the court to request witnesses and, indeed, the accused, to attend in person in order to obtain the best evidence. That is particularly the case when, for example, evidence is in dispute. It is also an issue in relation to physical evidence. In such instances, if the court is to request that evidence be given in person, the bill outlines in detail how that test would be applied. Furthermore, I note that, during pilots for virtual court attendance, there were frequent difficulties with internet access.”
“I appreciate that those proposals represent an effort to streamline and renew the efficiency of the court system in a modern technological landscape. However, the bill does not outline in detail the criteria on which a determination in favour of virtual attendance in particular categories should be made. I noted the cabinet secretary’s comment on that issue earlier in the debate. We are concerned that the provisions relating to whether there should be virtual attendance or physical attendance need to be clarified. We also believe that the provisions relating to evidential objects being produced in court by the Crown need to be strengthened. We would be looking for more safeguards on some of those aspects at stage 2.”
“The reliability of technology is another consideration that has been a real concern over recent years, although it is one that I hope will be addressed over time. As Pauline McNeill outlined, the evidence that the committee was given pointed to substantial additional court time being required due to failures with internet connections. We also know that defence agents, in particular, expressed concern about the difficulty in taking instructions or getting an impression of the client in virtual hearings. That is also a concern for the Crown and for the court. As members before me have outlined, there are two parts to the bill. Part 1 seeks to allow digital paperwork, witness testimonies and evidence in order to make permanent provisions that were introduced during the Covid pandemic.”
“I welcome the opportunity to close the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour. We welcome the general principles of the bill, but we have concerns about aspects of the detail, which we hope can be addressed at stage 2. As the cabinet secretary said, many of the provisions seek to make permanent some of the practices that were brought into effect by the emergency Covid legislation. Some of those practices have been accepted by all as good practice and are uncontroversial, such as the electronic signing and sending of documents. Other practices, such as aspects of virtual attendance, have either not really operated or operated with difficulty—the custody courts are an example of that. The drafting of some sections has given rise to concerns about overreach.”
“We need to educate our boys about such issues, but we also need to educate our girls and provide our teachers with the skills and support that they need to respond to the challenges.”
“What seems to shine through from the NASUWT report is the challenge of translating our work at a national level into action in our schools. We need that to be translated into action in our schools. Strong behaviour action plans or strong behaviour management plans in schools always have the buy-in of parents and carers. Ms Clark talks about the buy-in of the whole school community, and I think that having the buy-in of parents and carers for how that approach works in schools is absolutely key. I very much agree with her on that. In response to Ms Duncan-Glancy, I spoke about the work on misogyny, but I very much agree with the sentiment behind Ms Clark’s question. There is undoubtedly a need for further education, and I look forward to working with members on a cross-party basis to address the issue, which is not going away.”
“Does the cabinet secretary agree that we need a cross- campus strategy to address violence and abuse against women and girls in schools and that we need more education to ensure a better understanding of why abuse and violence are unacceptable? What more does she believe can be done to support staff in schools? Given what she just said about criminality, does she agree that there is a role in this for the police and the criminal justice system? Jenny Gilruth: The member spoke about a cross-campus strategy, and my understanding is that that would mean cross-school community support. One of the challenging issues that has been raised by, I think, the NASUWT—it might not have been in the most recent report, but I have certainly discussed it with Mike Corbett—is teachers’ understanding when there is a behaviour action plan in their schools.”
“A number of my constituents have got in touch with me to raise concerns about sub-audible sound noise pollution caused by wind turbines. Does the Scottish Government plan to issue guidance to local authorities regarding the siting of wind turbines and the potential health issues associated with living in close proximity to turbines? The Deputy Presiding Officer: That subject is slightly off the topic of the substantive question, minister, but you may respond if there is anything that you think it would be useful for you to add. Ivan McKee: I do not know exactly what guidance is in place, but I am sure that there is already guidance in place with regard to the siting of wind farms. If the member wants to clarify precisely what guidance is in place on the specific issue that she raised, I will be happy to meet her separately on that.”
“That has been the case for many years, and it is severely constraining navigation on the upper part of the river—it is, in effect, sterilising much of it for navigation. Katy Clark: Lack of maintenance has been an issue in many areas. Indeed, some of us are very aware of the situation at Ardrossan harbour, where the failure to maintain the port is having devastating economic consequences. The proposed conservancy fee represents just one of a number of decisions being taken by this multinational that I put to the Scottish Government are not in the public interest. I am pleased to support the motion and, on this particular issue, I call on the Scottish Government to take direct and immediate action to intervene and urge Peel Ports to scrap its plans for implementing the fee. 17:40”
“The briefings that were given to members before the debate indicate that Peel Ports does not investigate and respond to accidents in the Clyde, except at the request of the owner or operator. The aids to navigation that are maintained by Peel Ports have been installed for the benefit of large vessels carrying cargo rather than that of the leisure or passenger vessels that would be captured by the fee, and there is no evidence that Peel Ports conducts regular environmental surveys or considers environmental protection. Paul Sweeney: My friend has made very powerful points about the lack of accountability. Does she agree that one of the key challenges on the upper Clyde is the lack of regular dredging of the river?”
“The scale of the Clydeport area is unique in the UK—it is estimated that up to 50 per cent of Scotland’s leisure craft operate there. Many people in our boating communities have been lobbying us and have been very clear that they believe that the unconstrained and weakly justified nature of the fee makes it look like a tax on recreational boating. That imposes an economic detriment on the marine tourism industry, which many coastal businesses depend on and which many of our constituents enjoy. So far, Peel Ports’ justifications for the fees do not seem to stand up to scrutiny, and it appears increasingly difficult to see how the fee might benefit the community or visitors.”
“Despite the fact that Peel Ports’ assets are strategic national assets, its shareholders are a number of investment groups, and decisions are consistently taken that are not in the public interest. I agree with the speakers who have said that we need to re-examine the model, whether by considering ownership or, perhaps, as a first step, regulation. Internationally, it is highly unusual for a private company to be a port authority; that is only the case in the UK because of the ideological privatisation that we experienced in the 1990s. As many speakers have said, Peel Ports is proposing to levy a fee on all leisure vessels between 6m and 24m long that use the waters in the Clydeport authority area. The fee is to be introduced very soon—on 1 April 2025—and I hope that there is a way to ensure that that does not happen.”
“I congratulate Stuart McMillan on securing the debate, and I congratulate every member who has spoken. I agree that the proposed fees are far from reasonable, and I hope that a strong, unified message goes from the chamber today that the proposals are unacceptable. A number of speakers have said that the Clyde belongs to the people of Scotland, and I agree. However, we must accept that the operating model fails to deliver on that statement. The Clyde Port Authority was formed as a public trust by an act of Parliament in 1966; it was then privatised in 1992 and became Clydeport. Clydeport was floated on the stock exchange in 1994, subsequently becoming part of Peel Holdings.”
“To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider an independent external evaluation of the pilot scheme that provides victims in rape and serious assault cases with access to transcripts, in light of reports of some waiting a year for transcripts of their court cases. (S6T-02446)”
“The Scottish Government must do more to protect children from criminal gangs or individuals who use children to commit criminal acts. We know that the exploitation of children in Scotland is increasing, and we must do more to ensure that no child is abused in that way in the future. 13:09”
“The Scottish Government must bring forward a legal definition to ensure that people who are committing those acts of abuse are brought to justice. I noted what Michael Matheson said about the potential of extending aspects of legislation from down south. We know that Scotland is failing when it comes to keeping the Promise to some of the most vulnerable children in our care. I know the commitments that the Scottish Government has made, but we are not close to keeping the Promise commitment by the deadline of 2030. That will lead to the criminal exploitation of many more children, who might be in care and who will have much poorer life chances and health outcomes, and it will cause many of those children significant trauma that might have lifelong consequences for them and, indeed, their families and future generations.”
“Violence, concealing contraband such as drugs and weapons, giving false alibis, committing theft, begging in the streets or vandalising properties are just snapshots of some of the criminal acts that children in Scotland are being forced to undertake. We must do all that we can to protect them from that. The charity Action for Children has told us that nowhere in the UK, including in Scotland, do we have a legal definition of what the criminal exploitation of children consists of—that point was made by Bill Kidd. The charity has told us that that matters, because of the lack of a shared understanding of criminal exploitation of children. That prevents co-ordinated, joined-up responses to such exploitation, particularly with regard to what happens in the early stages, when children are groomed for child criminal exploitation.”
“I congratulate Michael Matheson on securing this important debate, because no issue is more serious than the safety of children; their wellbeing and life chances must be paramount when we make decisions in the chamber that affect their lives. I also thank Professor Jay and Action for Children staff for all the research and hard work that they have done to bring to light the facts surrounding the criminal exploitation of children. Their work is hugely important. We should be under no illusions: as Michael Matheson has said, the criminal exploitation of children is a form of child abuse. For adults to force children to commit crimes and take advantage of an imbalance of power to coerce, control, manipulate or deceive a child into criminal activity is abhorrent.”
“I welcome the news that negotiations have taken place and are on-going to potentially purchase Ardrossan harbour, which many have been calling for over a number of years. However, we now need a viable plan for upgrading work to take place as a matter of urgency. I hope that the Scottish Government will make it very clear today that it prioritises bringing Ardrossan harbour into public ownership, developing a compensation plan for Ardrossan and Arran and learning lessons from this fiasco. 15:21”
“However, eight years on, we still do not have certainty on whether the lifeline ferry service will continue from Ardrossan harbour, due to the disastrous failure to commence work there. Despite both ferries having been delayed for many years, the harbour work has not started, and no tender process has been put in place to ascertain costs. The Scottish Government decided to commission the Glen Sannox and the Glen Rosa with a design that would require Ardrossan harbour to be reconfigured and upgraded to enable the vessels to berth. The Scottish Government knew that the port and fuel infrastructure was not in place, but it decided to proceed with its chosen design. The port is owned by Peel Ports, and it was obvious to those with experience of that owner that there might well be problems in coming to a decision to proceed.”
“It is the most convenient route for people on Arran, and the infrastructure around the Ardrossan port, which includes the railway stations, has benefited the local community. However, as a result of Government decisions, no ferries have been running from Ardrossan since January, which is devastating for both the town and islanders on Arran. Both communities now have active groups to save Ardrossan harbour. I have repeatedly asked the Scottish Government to put together a package of support for businesses that are affected by cancelled ferries and by the ferry moving to the port of Troon. So far, however, those pleas have fallen on deaf ears. I hope that the Scottish Government will commit today to providing support to local businesses in Arran and Ardrossan. Eight years ago, it was decided that Ardrossan would retain the Arran route.”
“Thank you, Presiding Officer, for the opportunity to speak about the continuing economic and social damage that is being experienced as a result of poor decision making in relation to our ferry services. I will focus particularly on the situation of the ferry service between Ardrossan and Arran. That route was chosen for the Glen Sannox and the Glen Rosa, which were originally estimated to cost £97 million. That has now risen to £380 million. As has been said, the Glen Sannox was brought into service only earlier this year, although I saw a plaque on the ship on Monday that says that it was launched by Nicola Sturgeon in 2017. As Claire Baker said, we still await the Glen Rosa. Ardrossan has been the main port for Arran for 190 years. That is because it is the fastest and shortest route.”
“I very much welcome, for example, the post-trauma support that is offered to all police officers and staff who are directly involved in potentially very traumatic incidents, and the enhanced employee assistance programme, which provides direct access to occupational health services and has a greater focus on officers’ mental health. The Thistle (Community Safety Measures) 2.”
“As the cabinet secretary knows, the Criminal Justice Committee spent a considerable amount of time considering the mental health of police officers, and it expressed concern that specialist counselling services were not available. I appreciate that counselling is provided. However, has the cabinet secretary had the opportunity to look at the issue? Is it included in the action plan? Angela Constance: I recall the evidence that I gave to the committee, which was about the role of police officers and how that needs to be refocused on criminal justice matters, as well as the need for better linkage with health services in relation to their work to signpost and support some of the most vulnerable people in our society. I have outlined various mechanisms through which police officers can access specialist counselling through Police Scotland.”
“Although a lot of attention has been given to the funds that have been given by the Government to deliver the Glen Rosa and the Glen Sannox, that is not the same as investing in the yard itself. The £14.2 million is based on a list of equipment and infrastructure priorities at the yard that Ferguson Marine has supplied to us that will make it globally competitive.”
“I outlined my concern last summer, although I did not make the final decision—that is for CMAL—that, in a very litigious industry, going down the direct award route would have created significant levels of risk that could have resulted in the contract being in the courts, which would have ensured that Ferguson Marine did not get the work when it needed it and that the islanders did not get the vessels. The member might shake her head at that but, looking at the legal advice and the analysis that was done, I am afraid that that was a real and pressing possibility. The route that we have taken ensures that we have reached the significant milestone of delivering seven new vessels for our islanders. The member is right to talk about investment.”
“Does the cabinet secretary accept that there is a social and economic value in the yard and that there would have been public value in a direct award? Does she accept that, although no shortage of money has been spent, there has been a lack of investment and that the investment now is too little and too late? Does she accept that we now need investment to ensure that future contracts are made to Port Glasgow? Can she outline how the £14.2 million that she has referred to is to be spent? Kate Forbes: I thank the member for those questions, which are very fair. On the point about the public value of a direct award, I take that question seriously.”
“The First Minister will also be aware of the concerns raised by those who live near wind turbines. Does he agree with me that the regulations on them need to be updated? What more does he believe could be done so that those who live near wind turbines get more benefits? The First Minister: I favour the suggestion that people who are in close proximity to wind turbines should get economic and community benefits, and that has been built into the schemes that the Government has taken forward. If there are specific points that Katy Clark is worried about on the existing regulations on wind turbines, I would be happy for ministers to consider those proposals if she wished to submit them to the Government. Universities (Support) 5.”
“It is impossible for organisations to plan if they do not know what their funding is. Collette Stevenson spoke about trusted relationships and the importance of lived experience, and that point was also made by Sue Webber. Members have previously discussed the significant issue of stigma. Audrey Nicoll spoke specifically about the criminal justice aspect. As a member of the Criminal Justice Committee, I am aware of the massive challenge that drugs pose in our justice system. This is a complex debate. However, we cannot say that we accept what the Scottish Government is doing on the issue. The reality is that the number of deaths continues to get higher, and urgent action needs to be taken to address that. 16:55”
“However, we must recognise that the facility is in Glasgow and it will do little to help those outside Glasgow city who suffer from addiction. As Annie Wells pointed out, the Thistle is a small part of the solution, and the real challenge is how we address the root causes. I am pleased that the people’s panel made 19 recommendations and that the Scottish Government and the cabinet secretary have indicated acceptance of them all. However, I agree with Maggie Chapman that the problem is not that we do not know what needs to be done but that we need political will. Alex Cole-Hamilton spoke of the consensus, and I think that there is a consensus across the chamber about what needs to be done. Clare Haughey made an important point about the need for multiyear packages.”
“The council areas that are bearing the brunt of the crisis are the urban centres and the post-industrial heartlands that have also suffered the sharpest decline in their public services following years of austerity. It is political choices that cause communities to crumble. People in desperate situations sometimes see no other option than to turn to drugs, and that is where Governments have let them down. The cabinet secretary and Elena Whitham spoke of the highly toxic drug supply that is in circulation, particularly in Scotland. I welcome the opening of Thistle, the United Kingdom’s first safer drug consumption facility, which I hope will prevent further deaths and create a rise in the number of people who choose to move towards rehabilitation.”
“We owe it to the loved ones of those people who have died to take immediate and radical action. That is what members expects from the Scottish Government. As a number of members have said, Scotland remains the worst nation in Europe for drug deaths. An emergency of such severity is the result not only of underfunding of drug prevention and rehabilitation services, the criminal legal framework and our health services, but of a far wider societal crisis. The cabinet secretary accepted the link to deprivation. Carol Mochan spoke about the range of factors involved and the complex nature of the challenges. It will come as no surprise to anyone in the chamber that the mortality rate of people who live in the poorest areas is more than double the Scottish average.”
“I am pleased to close the debate on behalf of Scottish Labour. I am grateful to the people’s panel for its time and engagement in considering this national emergency, and to the committees for commissioning the work. As Bob Doris said, the panel was asked to come to a consensus on an issue that has been identified as a national emergency for a number of years, and on proposals that have been discussed in the chamber on a number of occasions. The report is very interesting in showing us what a group of that nature made of the issue. Although the issue has been identified as a national emergency for a number of years, the latest figures show a 12 per cent increase in drug deaths from the previous year. As the cabinet secretary said, we lost 1,172 people to drug- related deaths in 2023, and we all know that those deaths were preventable.”
“She has my absolute assurance, and I am very happy to work across the political spectrum to do all that we can to improve the cultural attitudes and approaches of men and boys in our society, because I believe that to be fundamental to addressing the serious issue that she puts to me.”
“It has recently been reported that almost 10 per cent of the 2,000 women who have died at the hands of men in the United Kingdom over the past 15 years have been killed by their own sons. What more does the First Minister believe the Scottish Government can do to raise awareness of that risk and improve support for women? The First Minister: Katy Clark puts an incredibly serious point to me. It comes back to the answer that I have just given, which is that there is a responsibility on all society to try to help boys and men to improve their conduct and actions. That will be the route to addressing the fundamental issue that Katy Clark puts to me, which will result in the protection of mothers and women who face danger.”
“The Parliament must be clear in the message that we send that we will honour international law and that we stand in support of human rights and with the people of Palestine. 15:34”
“According to responses to freedom of information requests from Amnesty International, in the due diligence process that Scottish Enterprise carries out, the level of checks that it performs on a company is measured only against “the level of financial support it receives, rather than the company’s involvement with or links to human rights abuses.” That due diligence process seems to go against the United Nations guiding principles on business and human rights and neglects consideration of the end use of components, which is the central issue. I listened with interest to Richard Lochhead’s contribution in that regard. I very much hope that, as a result of the debate and the focus that it has brought to the issue, the Government will ensure that there is a full review of the due diligence processes that are used by Scottish Enterprise.”
“That includes companies, for example, that the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights has named for potential complicity in unlawful air strikes in Yemen. The test that the UK Government applies in relation to arms export licences is whether the use of a component is likely to lead to the abuse of human rights or to be used in a way that is in breach of international law. We know that the targeting of civilians and of facilities such as hospitals, the bombardment of Gaza, the illegal settlements in the West Bank, the use of white phosphorus and the blockade of essential supplies are among the breaches of international law that have taken place in Gaza and the West Bank.”
“With regard to the specific companies to which the motion refers, we know that Leonardo manufactured 30 Aermacchi M-345 aircraft for the Israeli Air Force, and that Raytheon supplies smart bombs for the IDF—weapons that are among the most lethal targeting technologies to have been used on Gaza’s so-called safe zones. We know that those companies are among a string of US arms firms that have seen dramatic jumps in their stock prices from the onset of the war. Indeed, executives of those firms have described the past 14 months as a business opportunity. Not a single company has failed any of the 199 human rights checks that Scottish Enterprise has conducted since 2021, nor indeed any of the 178 checks that were conducted between 2019 and 2020.”
“I welcome the motion from the Greens and will vote for it if we are given the opportunity to do so later today. I also welcome the indication from the Scottish Government that it will support the Scottish Labour amendment “to review ... due diligence checks”. It is fitting that we are debating the funding of companies that supply arms and munitions that are used in human rights abuses in Gaza. The Parliament has previously voted for a ceasefire, and I hope that, today, a clear message will be sent in support of international law, and that it is unacceptable that Government agencies should give financial support to companies that supply arms that risk being used as part of multiple and repeated contraventions of international law, which have been, and are, taking place in Gaza and the West Bank.”
“One of the significant differences between our system and those of many of the countries that she referred to is the role of the victim. As I said, I believe that there is a great deal of consensus in the debate. I very much hope that we will be able to focus on how the Parliament can start to deliver on that consensus and on making sure that we make the changes in the criminal justice system that will make a difference to communities in Scotland. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Sharon Dowey to close on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives. 16:21”
“From responses to freedom of information requests, we also know that, in many cases in which community disposals are made by the courts, they are never implemented. As Pauline McNeill said, Scottish Labour will give our full co-operation to any attempt to drive the use of community disposals in Scotland where they are appropriate. In particular, we will support any attempts to increase community justice budgets. We are pleased that the debate is happening today, but we are concerned about the lack of focus on victims and the need for restorative justice. Jamie Greene was correct when he said that the word “victim” was not used at all in the cabinet secretary’s opening speech. The cabinet secretary spoke about international comparisons.”
“As Pauline McNeill said, work with offenders in the prison system is vital for offenders who need to be incarcerated, but the courts need to have the confidence to use community disposals, which will be the appropriate disposal on many occasions. The evidence that the Criminal Justice Committee has heard on a number of occasions is that that confidence simply does not exist in the judiciary and the sheriffdoms. We know that community justice budgets make up less than 5 per cent of the total justice budget. I was pleased that there has been an increase this year, but we know that it still does not provide the levels of funding that are needed to match the ambitions that the Scottish Government has set out over many decades.”
“It would be helpful if the cabinet secretary could respond to that in her summing-up speech. There are not significant differences between Scottish Labour’s position and the Scottish Government’s policy on the use of prison. However, it is clear that the Scottish Government has not taken the action that is required to implement that policy. It would be useful to know why the cabinet secretary believes that the piece of work that she is suggesting today will make the shift to get the action that is needed. As predicted, the Scottish Government’s recent early prison releases led to high reoffending rates, due to the failure to allow time for effective planning.”
“I hope that that discussion will happen more in the future. I agree with what the cabinet secretary said about the approach in many Scandinavian countries and what we need to learn from international experience. However, her speech simply repeated what has been said in the chamber on many occasions since the creation of this Parliament. In 2008, the Scottish Prisons Commission, which was also known as the McLeish commission, published its report, “Scotland’s Choice”. The commission examined Scotland’s prison system and prison population and the factors that influence those. It set a target to reduce the prison population to 5,000 people per day and to use more community sentences. It is unclear how the work that is being proposed today differs from that and other pieces of work that have been commissioned.”