Liam Kerr
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“Producing the same amount of electricity through ground-mounted solar—a technology that I stress I support and that must form part of our energy mix—requires many times more land. Most of us would agree that reducing emissions matters.”
“In the years since I first contributed to a debate in this Parliament on new nuclear power in Scotland, four of the six parties in the chamber have come to support the proposition that I put forward, in some form or other. In that, they are on the side of the majority of the public, which supports nuclear power.”
“No wonder: electric vehicles, heat pumps, hydrogen production, advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence and high-tech industries all require enormous amounts of reliable power. That means nuclear. However, we do not just need reliable power. We need local power.”
“In 2019, it even legislated for a 75 per cent reduction in emissions by 2030, although it scrapped that target five years later because it could not meet it.”
“In fact, over the year, wind turbines operate only around 25 to 40 per cent of the time. The point is that we must be able to guarantee electricity when homes, businesses and hospitals need it.”
“For more than 65 years, the STV North news programme has done far more than simply report the news. As Maggie Chapman said, it has given a voice to rural and regional communities. It has reflected local priorities and provided scrutiny, balance and accountability at every level of Government and public life.”
The complete record
Every one of 538 lines we hold for Liam Kerr, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 11.
“The SNP motion says that the Scottish Government wants control over North Sea oil and gas, yet it quietly ignores the Scottish Government’s January 2023 energy strategy, which states that the Government has “a presumption against new exploration for oil and gas.” In other words, while oil and gas remains reserved, a Conservative Government could—and would— reverse Labour’s economically, strategically and environmentally disastrous ban on new exploration and production. However, if the SNP got control, its energy strategy makes it clear that it would shut the North Sea. The worst of it is that current domestic production from the North Sea meets around 40 per cent of UK gas demand, and nearly half is brought in from Norway, which is drilling the same basin.”
“Westminster has failed—does he not agree? Liam Kerr: I fundamentally disagree. We only need to go and look at the current infrastructure that is out there. That is what the money has bought, because, thankfully, we are part of a wholly integrated United Kingdom. To suggest otherwise is deeply irresponsible, and that irresponsibility is most stark in the Government’s position on oil and gas, to which my amendment principally speaks.”
“Then, there are the constraint payments, which in 2025 totalled somewhere between £340 million and £380 million. It is deeply irresponsible for the minister to propose the motion without addressing issues such as replication of the CFD regime, ways of meeting those constraint payments or the funding of the transmission and storage updates that are required to integrate Scottish offshore wind, which it is estimated will cost up to £20 billion by 2030. Stephen Gethins: Does the member think that the £400 billion that has gone to Westminster has been well spent, given that no resource has been given back and no future generations fund has been established? What does he make of the constraint payments that are holding back renewables, an issue that, even in my first week in post, industry has been raising with me persistently?”
“For example, the Government demands control over renewables generation and continues to bank on intermittent and variable wind power, but it fails to mention that it already has power over, for example, seabed rights for offshore wind projects yet its handling of the ScotWind licences was so botched that, last November, Shell handed back the CampionWind lease, having spent 18 months trying and failing to sell it. In February, Audit Scotland launched a formal investigation into the ScotWind leasing round. The Government also fails to mention that, without the UK’s contracts for difference regime providing crucial stability for high upfront cost projects, it is unlikely that any of Scotland’s 3GW of operational offshore wind would have been built, let alone the fact that the ScotWind projects would not even have got off the ground.”
“I congratulate Stephen Gethins on his appointment as energy minister and I commiserate with him for having to prosecute such an evidentially lacking and, indeed, threadbare motion. Listening to the debate exposes the perils of reducing nuanced, data-driven policy areas to the narrow nationalist rhetoric of the SNP. The consequences of what the motion calls for would be calamitous, whether that is in regard to energy generation, household bills, the economy or, indeed, the environment.”
“I ask colleagues to back our motion today, and I move, That the Parliament believes that Scotland’s energy should be in Scotland’s hands, and calls for all energy powers to be immediately devolved to the Scottish Parliament.”
“In conclusion—I think that I am reaching my conclusion—a more energy-secure Scotland will see us building renewable energy generation that will lower bills, protect us from international shocks and secure good jobs for those who are currently employed in our offshore sector and who bring so much to our economy. Scotland has the energy; it does not yet have the power. Our vast resources are among the best in Europe, but the people are not feeling the benefit. Westminster has had its chance and has failed. Today, I am asking members to empower this Parliament to be part of the solution for energy security across Europe and to be part of the solution locally, nationally, internationally and— vitally—in people’s homes.”
“We will support the creation of 500 additional jobs in the Grangemouth industrial cluster and, at the same time, we will invest £9 million in support for workers at Mossmorran. Let me turn to the idea of community benefit. We must reject the Liberal Democrat amendment, because it knocks out the idea of devolving those powers, which the Liberal Democrats were once in favour of. I have great respect for the member for Orkney, Liam McArthur, and look forward to working with him on how we can expand the work that has already been done. However, let us not forget that, last year alone, community benefits delivered £30 million to our communities.”
“However, the transition is being put at risk by the current energy profits levy, which is accelerating the decline of North Sea oil and gas while failing to give the support that is needed to renewables to ensure a just transition. The approach that is taken must be fair for the North Sea. That is why, I am afraid, we cannot back the Greens’ amendment. As the First Minister said earlier today, that approach must be evidence led and determined on a case-by-case basis, with climate compatibility and energy security tests being met. When I was in Aberdeen, I heard about the need for a joined-up approach. I was glad that, on his first ministerial visit, Stephen Flynn went to Grangemouth, which has been so badly let down by Westminster. Climate action and a just transition to net zero will bring benefits across Scotland.”
“Few industries know the price of Westminster failure better than our oil and gas sector. North Sea oil and gas plays a vital role in Scotland’s energy system and security mix. That excellent workforce in the north- east has been let down by our wealth being squandered by successive Westminster Governments. There is no future generations fund. Let us look next door at Norway. It has a sovereign wealth fund that is worth £1.6 trillion, which is six times Scotland’s gross domestic product. Just think what we could have done with that. The North Sea is a mature and declining basin, so it is vital that we have a parallel-track approach to the transition, with oil and gas production being managed alongside the increasing deployment of renewables.”
“During the parliamentary session, we will establish a ScotWind health fund. We will also establish a future generations fund for the oil and gas sector, which Labour and the Conservatives failed to establish. We will encourage more community ownership—we are already delivering £15 million for that. We will deliver on the £500 million just transition fund, as well as supporting the Acorn carbon capture and storage project for the north-east. Do the Tory members remember carbon capture and storage? More immediately, we want updated guidance to be provided to public bodies on community use of public land and an assessment to be undertaken of the potential for installing solar panels in underused spaces. That cannot be done within the current devolution process to enable us to meet our full potential. That leads me on to oil and gas.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Stephen Gethins: I want to make some progress. I am not sure that I got a particularly good response from Mr Fraser. High energy bills might not matter to the Conservative Party, but they matter to the people of Scotland. Labour came into government promising that bills would be £300 lower, but yesterday another eye-watering increase was announced that will mean that they will be £300 higher. That is not good enough. The future lies in providing clean, sustainable and secure power, strengthening affordability, resilience and competitiveness, and protecting Scottish people and businesses from our energy bills being dictated by international events. Within the limited powers that we have, we are already reforming the energy consents process to enable us to bring forward more low-cost renewable energy.”
“I might also say that my party’s internal governance is in a very strong position, as we have just demonstrated by the way in which we prepared for and took forward an election campaign that resulted in the fifth successive term of an SNP Government and the election of 58 members of the Scottish Parliament with over 38 per cent of the vote. In my view, that is a party in good shape.”
“Does the First Minister agree with those who suggest that it is inappropriate for serving Government ministers to sit on the SNP’s national executive committee while serious questions hang over its handling of concerns around SNP finances? The First Minister: No, because the constitution of my party requires, for example, that I am a member of my party’s national executive committee. The Parliament has chosen me to be the First Minister of Scotland, and I cannot see how I can lead my party if I am not a member of its national executive committee. The internal governance of my party is a matter for my party.”
“Let us give ourselves and our country a fresh start with independence. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move on to winding-up speeches. I remind members that the convention is that, for a first speech, no interventions should be made. 16:11”
“However, if we want lasting prosperity, the focus must be on our workforce and on skills, baby, skills. Liam Kerr: Will the member give way on that point? Jackie Dunbar: Not just now, Mr Kerr. Then we have the Labour UK Government, which has increased and extended the windfall tax and now wants to close down Aberdeen’s biggest industry altogether while opening the doors to Russian oil. The Labour Party—irrespective of who is in charge—is betraying thousands of energy workers. The UK Government has failed to match the just transition fund, failed to fully back the Acorn project, failed to fix the windfall tax, failed to invest in renewables, failed to invest in the north- east, failed to support oil and gas workers, and failed to bring down energy bills. What can I say? The UK is a failing state, so let us be ambitious and do better.”
“The energy profits levy and the years of lost investment that it led to are the legacies of the Tories. Now, they have the cheek to come out with the mantra of “Drill, baby, drill”. However, even if drilling started again tomorrow, it would still only be, by itself, a short-term solution. The Tories consistently fail to outline what should come next, let alone invest in it. They are actively campaigning against investment in renewable energy and infrastructure, which will support the next generation of jobs. The biggest asset that we have in Aberdeen is not oil and gas, wind or tidal power, but our workers—that innovative, pioneering, highly skilled and world‑leading workforce. We need those workers for our long-term prosperity and for whatever comes next. In the short term, yes, we should drill, baby, drill.”
“My other ambitions are somewhat more humble. For example, it is my ambition that, in the energy capital of Europe, nobody should be afraid to put the heating on because they are worried about their energy bills. In a city that is surrounded by farms and fishermen, it is also my ambition that no bairn should go to bed hungry. All that ties in with the Scottish Government’s commitment to eradicate child poverty, build a more prosperous economy, help folk during the cost of living crisis and tackle climate change. All those commitments have been undermined by the UK Government, whether it is run by Labour or the Tories. I will start with the Tories, the party that introduced the windfall tax, which was brought in under Boris Johnson and maintained throughout the premierships of Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak.”
“Will the member confirm that the SNP not only wanted a higher energy profits levy but wanted it without the investment allowances that the Conservatives brought in? Jackie Dunbar: That was history. We then went and—[Interruption.] I am surprised that it was the member from the north-east, Liam Kerr, who asked me that question, and not his colleague, who I cannot see in the chamber. Perhaps he is not getting on with the day job but is instead out trying to find another day job. One of my ambitions, which is perhaps rather lofty, is for Aberdeen to become the net zero capital of the world—I will never stop trying to push for that for Aberdeen—in order to reap the benefits of the well-paid jobs and strong local economy that would come with that. It would ensure that our region experiences a lasting legacy from North Sea oil.”
“At the risk of raking over the coals of old arguments, it is this Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs who negotiated with the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government to provide record funding of £1.7 billion for police in Scotland. If I recall, I was the only person in budget negotiations to make that pitch; no members or spokespeople of the previous Opposition parties made such a request to”
“Scottish Police Federation joint central committee minutes from May 2025 warned of “low staffing levels” in public order policing. Given the appalling disorder in Glasgow, the estimated 3,000 people involved, the serious injuries to officers and the fact that we have 1,000 fewer officers since 2020, will the cabinet secretary seek assurances from the chief constable that Police Scotland is funded and resourced sufficiently for the specialist public order capacity that it needs? Angela Constance: One advantage of having a national police force is that more than 900 police officers were deployed. I mentioned in an earlier answer that if there had been an organised celebration event, the requirements placed on policing would have been less.”
“I, Matthew Liam Philip Kerr, do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles, his heirs and successors, according to law. So help me”
“What does the cabinet secretary understand to be the estimated average build cost of a small modular reactor? Gillian Martin: Obviously, I do not have that information in front of me, because we do not plan to build small nuclear reactors, which are unproven technology that has not been deployed. The Scottish Government has a policy against new nuclear fusion. Forth Valley College (Funding) 7.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how it expects NHS Grampian to address a projected deficit of £76 million for 2026-27, in light of it having already made £62 million of savings in 2025-26 and requiring a further £40 million of budget reductions in 2026-27. (S6O-05665)”
“Published in Edinburgh by the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, the Scottish Parliament, Edinburgh, EH99 1SP All documents are available on the Scottish Parliament website at: www.parliament.scot Information on non-endorsed print suppliers is available here: www.parliament.scot/documents For information on the Scottish Parliament contact Public Information on: Telephone: 0131 348 5000 Textphone: 0800 092 7100 Email: sp.info@parliament.scot”
“On a point of order, Presiding Officer. [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: I would be grateful if we could hear Mr Kerr. Liam Kerr: I had indicated that the Conservatives were going to oppose motion S6M- 21126, and my party and I spoke against that particular SSI, but it did not go to a vote. It is clear that the Presiding Officer did not hear anyone shout no, which I respect. [Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Your points are on the record, Mr Kerr. It was the case that I did not hear anyone dissent. It is just a case of making sure that we can all hear one another and that the chair is clear, too. That concludes decision time. Meeting closed at 21:15. This is the final edition of the Official Report of this meeting. It is part of the Scottish Parliament Official Report archive and has been sent for legal deposit.”
“The reduction to 40 per cent has not even been assessed yet, and here we are being asked to reduce the figure further, to 30 per cent. Presiding Officer, I will tell you what is not reducing: crime. Since 2021, recorded crime is up by 6 per cent, sexual crime is up by 10 per cent, shoplifting is up by 137 per cent and violent crime is up by 13 per cent—all of which stands to reason, since the reoffending rate is at about 44 per cent.”
“The cabinet secretary’s justification at the Criminal Justice Committee was that automatic release at 30 per cent of sentences is necessary to keep prisons “safe and effective” and that it could reduce the population by up to 312 individuals. However, members will remember that, in November 2024, the Parliament was asked to change the automatic release point from 50 per cent of sentences to 40 per cent. In committee, the question was put plainly to the cabinet secretary: did that change ease the prison population? Despite that reduction and the repeated so- called emergency releases, the prison population rose from 8,350 in February 2025 to a record 8,430 in October 2025. In fact, the success—or otherwise—of the move to 40 per cent is not even due for statutory review until next year.”
“I rise to speak against this SSI, which, if passed tonight, will mean that any prisoner who is sentenced to four years or less will automatically be released after serving just 30 per cent of their sentence. No ifs, no buts, and no governor’s veto—no matter how dangerous a prisoner may appear, there is no power to prevent their release. Let us examine which criminals we are talking about. As of February this year, there were more than 1,500 eligible short‑term prisoners, of whom 43 per cent were in prison for non‑sexual crimes of violence and about a third were in prison for crimes against society or crimes of dishonesty. They will be automatically back on our streets and automatically back in our communities.”
“To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the impact on Police Scotland of the budget 2026-27 allocation being £50 million less than the amount requested by the Chief Constable. (S6T-02951)”
“I believe that that is a proportionate way of ensuring that appropriate standards are set and maintained over time, in the interests of, I anticipate, a relatively small number of individuals who might seek to access such services. On that basis, I cannot support amendment 207.”
“When I first saw the amendment, I thought that it might restrict rather than reinforce or expand the rights, but from the explanation that Ross Greer has given, I can see ways in which that can be safeguarded against. On Murdo Fraser’s amendment 207, I am not persuaded of the benefits of replacing section 14B on advocacy service standards with an advocacy oversight board and accreditation scheme. Advocacy services are well established in Scotland. Ross Greer set out the academic expert input on that. Section 14B requires ministers to set out in regulations the relevant standards in relation to the provisions of the bill.”
“I largely agree with the other amendments in Ross Greer’s name that are of a technical nature, and I have no further specific comments to make on the remaining amendments. Liam McArthur: I thank Ross Greer not just for these amendments but for the work that he did on the advocacy provisions in the bill throughout stage 2. They have improved the bill and strengthened the protections in it. I do not have anything to add to what he has already said about the range of amendments that have been lodged to address concerns that have been raised by Law Society of Scotland, the Government and others. On the substantive amendment 200, when I reflected on the concerns that have been expressed by some colleagues, I shared some of those concerns.”
“From a legal perspective, amendment 207 would place on the Scottish ministers a duty to establish a body but would not provide the usual suite of powers that accompany the establishment of a body, so it is not clear what type of body it would be. There is no enforcement provision in relation to the bar on providing services without accreditation, and the provision might also encroach on the B2 data protection reservation of the Scotland Act 1998 by providing the body with powers to issue guidance to ministers and others on the protection of individuals’ privacy. I also note that the setting up of a fully funded independent advocacy oversight body would be a significant new financial undertaking.”
“Establishing advocacy service standards and putting in place arrangements to oversee compliance with them would require extensive consultation and significant additional resourcing. With that being said, amendment 206 is necessary to correct a technical issue in that, although section 14B(1) references a duty under section 14A(2) as it relates to advocacy service providers, the duty under section 14A(2) is placed on Scottish ministers. Amendment 206 also resolves a practical issue with section 14B(1) to clarify that providers of independent advocacy services must comply with the advocacy service standards, and that not complying would be treated as a breach of contract. That amendment has been worked on with support of the Government.”
“Amendment 207 says that the Scottish ministers must fully fund the new body. Can the member indicate how much that might end up costing? Murdo Fraser: I am afraid that I cannot give Mr Kerr a figure; nor could I give him a figure for what the cost of providing advocacy services under the bill as it stands might be. We are all in the same place in that respect. I urge colleagues to support amendment 207, which represents a necessary measure to underpin the safe and effective operation of the legislation. Neil Gray: From a delivery perspective, there remains a lack of clarity around how an advocacy service would be funded or monitored in practice. I note what I have just heard from Mr Fraser about any estimations of cost.”
“Today, we go a small part of the way to remedying that, but I urge, in the strongest possible terms, any MSPs who return to this place in May to urgently take forward the comprehensive misogyny legislation that Baroness Kennedy demanded, that this Government promised and that women and girls deserve. 22:12”
“Not only that, but these protections will not even come in until April 2027, despite the Government having had more than a year to work out how to bring them in. I will vote for the SSI, but I recognise that it is not the full answer. It is not the legislation that women and girls were promised, and today must not be the end of the matter. Women and girls deserve to be protected by a justice system that fully recognises the scale and nature of misogynistic behaviour. The previous Government made promises of protection; this Government has failed to deliver.”
“I recall my, and many colleagues’, doubts that that law would be delivered—and, sure enough, last summer, the Government abandoned its promise of a misogyny law. Now the Government offers these regulations, which insert the characteristic of sex into the existing hate crime framework. That change goes some way to providing additional protection, and for that reason, I support it. However, we should be under no illusion—it is not the comprehensive response that Baroness Kennedy recommended and it is not what women and girls were promised. Indeed, many have made it clear that the hate crime model is ill suited to tackling the wider forms of misogynistic behaviour that women experience: behaviour that may not present as overt hatred but which is nevertheless vicious, harmful and pervasive.”
“I support this SSI, which adds the characteristic of sex as a protected characteristic to the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021, because women and girls deserve protection in law and we must seek to address prejudice based on sex, exactly as I, Adam Tomkins, Johann Lamont, Jenny Marra, Pauline McNeill and so many others argued in the chamber when the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill was going through Parliament. At that time, the Government rejected our arguments and whipped its MSPs on the promise of a stand-alone, dedicated misogyny law that would be specifically designed to address the misogynistic abuse, harassment and hostility that women and girls experience daily.”
“The cabinet secretary trumpets the funding and says that it will deliver community outcomes, but there are about 1,000 fewer police officers in Scotland than there were five years ago. How will the funding that the cabinet secretary has announced directly increase officer numbers by 1,000—or is she happy to leave the figure as it is? Angela Constance: I am quite sure that Mr Kerr is aware of the manifesto commitment that this Government stood on and was elected on in 2021 and, indeed, the one before that, in 2016. It is, of course, a matter for the chief constable of Police Scotland to come to a view on the number of officers. I am pleased that, as a result of the £1.7 billion that the Government is providing for policing, the chief constable’s establishment figure for police officers will remain at 16,500. Cashback for Communities 4.”
“I have been listening carefully, and I wonder whether Stephen Kerr might respond to the point that I think that Emma Roddick was making. Sue Webber’s amendments in the group say specifically “are not pregnant”, but Stephen Kerr has confined himself to talking about 24 weeks as a crucial part. He did not answer the challenge that Emma Roddick posed. I wonder whether he might do so now. Stephen Kerr: In taking the intervention from my learned colleague Liam Kerr, I recognise that Sue Webber is trying to make clear the doubtful nature of the law that would be passed if we did not identify the issue of pregnancy as a consideration—hence the simple amendments that she has lodged.”
“We all remember the financial crisis and how the banks received billions of pounds in public support. The public that funded that rescue is the same public that is now volunteering at food banks and organising care for elderly neighbours, and being charged for the privilege. The public bailed out the banks, but the banks are now billing the public’s charities and voluntary work. That cannot be right.”
“Let us not forget, too, that the issue is compounded, as Jackie Dunbar reminded us, by structural changes in banking provision. More than one in five people over the age of 60 in Scotland are not digitally connected, and the proportion is higher among disabled older people. Many community groups rely on cash donations, as that remains the most accessible way for members to contribute, and digital banking is not necessarily appropriate for volunteer treasurers, who might lack confidence in online banking services. We have debated recently in the chamber how bank closures severely restrict practical access to in-person banking. At a time when demand for community services grows ever larger, the charges, coupled with bank closures, are truly devastating. We cannot be blind to the second part of Jackie Dunbar’s motion.”
“For others, in particular those handling regular cash donations or cheque payments, annual costs can approach £300. Those charges have to be taken from hall hires, subsidised transport for the elderly and the cost of essential supplies, thereby steadily eroding the funds that are available for front-line activity. That places such groups in an invidious position. Do they reduce services, increase fundraising simply to cover those administrative overheads, ask volunteers to shoulder additional pressure, or all of the above? None of that enhances community resilience. Across the thousands of voluntary organisations that operate in Scotland, we are talking about millions of pounds potentially flowing from community hands into bank profits.”
“They are not complex commercial bodies; they are local lunch clubs, art clubs and exercise classes. They are organisations that plan carefully, and they often raise income locally through raffles, subscriptions and small grants. Expenditure is allocated with precision. However, Jackie Dunbar’s motion highlights the ever-increasing instances in which a portion of that money goes not to where it was intended to go but, instead, to the banks that hold it. An increasing number of banks have introduced charges on accounts that are held by charities, community councils and other non-profit organisations. Those include monthly account charges, transaction fees, costs for depositing cash and additional charges for writing cheques. For some groups, as Jackie Dunbar mentioned, those charges might amount to more than £50 a year.”
“I thank Jackie Dunbar for bringing the debate to the chamber, and I acknowledge the contributions of Danestone church, in particular, and Age Scotland, which have sent in contributions to assist us. Across Scotland, thousands of volunteers raise money for their communities to support older people, maintain local facilities, organise community events and step in where statutory services cannot always reach. They give their time freely, and they accept responsibility for managing funds carefully and transparently. In turn, the public gives generously, trusting that what is donated will be used directly for the community benefit. Every pound is raised with intent, and every pound is to serve a purpose. Most of those groups operate on a modest turnover and thus have very straightforward banking needs.”
“I will allow a moment or two for members on the front benches to organise themselves. Local Government Finance (Scotland) Order 2026”
“As a committee, we have made 50 recommendations across six themes. They are practical and evidence based and they reflect consensus that has been reached after extensive evidence gathering. Our report is comprehensive and coherent. Today’s debate is important, but what matters far more is what follows it. When members in the next session of Parliament consider the issues, they must look for evidence that harm has reduced, that safety has improved and that custody in Scotland is delivering the rehabilitation that we need to see in practice. That is the standard that the committee has set and it is the standard to which the Parliament must be held. The Presiding Officer: That concludes the debate on the substance misuse in prisons inquiry, on behalf of the Criminal Justice Committee.”
“Importantly, staff safety concerns, particularly around exposure and implementation of the MORS policy, must be understood and formally reviewed, and maximum protections must be put in place. On all those issues and more, the committee’s position is that our Parliament in the future must be able to assess measurable change, with full, honest transparency that enables scrutiny of impact, not only process. Members across the chamber have rightly spoken about trauma, inequality and mental health. The report addresses those drivers directly and demands firm, concrete action, but it also recognises that recovery cannot take root in an environment of instability. Prevention cannot succeed where regimes are repeatedly disrupted, and staff cannot deliver safe, effective custody if they feel unprotected.”