³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Item 2 is consideration of the Scottish Government’s response to the committee’s pre-budget scrutiny report. I refer members to paper 2. I thank the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans for his detailed response.

I invite members to share any views they have or follow-up action that they would like the committee to take in response to the cabinet secretary. I will bring in Russell Findlay, Pauline McNeill, and I think that I saw Fulton MacGregor’s hand go up.

I thank all members for their comments, which are balanced, measured and set out our thoughts on the evidence that we have heard and on some of the aspects of the SSI that we would like to monitor and follow-up.

As Russell Findlay alluded to, we need to look at the measures from the perspective of prisoners and prison staff. I was fairly reassured by the evidence that we heard last week, given that the process had been introduced in relatively quick time. However, I feel that we would benefit from getting more information on the practicalities of the process of monitoring and testing mail. It all comes down to ensuring that the practice of monitoring mail that prison officers will be involved in is proportionate.

I highlight that we as a committee have written to the Scottish Prison Service and Police Scotland to seek information on how they respond when psychoactive substances are found. We have also written to the cabinet secretary with additional questions about issues that we identified at last week’s session.

I completely agree with Katy Clark’s comment about the sentimental value of correspondence and the need for careful consideration of how that is handled and managed.

Jamie Greene made a relevant point about other correspondence and communication options. I think that we included some questions on that in some of our follow-up letters. I am more than happy for us to publish our responses. I also note that we will monitor and review the matter going forward.

On that basis, and the basis of members’ comments, are we content that we have no further recommendations to make on the SSI and the evidence that we have heard?

I see that we are agreed. Perfect.

Before we move on, I thank everyone who contributed to our evidence session with written submissions: the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research, Families Outside, and, as Pauline McNeill alluded to, the Miscarriages of Justice Organisation, for their submissions. They were helpful to us so we appreciate their support in that.

Thank you for those follow-up comments.

As Jamie Greene said, we are at the draft budget stage, and I have no doubt that we will return to some of the issues that we feel quite strongly about. As we progress through our work programme, we will have an opportunity to monitor budgetary issues and aspects of the work that we are looking at. When issues come up around a particular topic, we can raise them at that point and in the appropriate way. Do members agree?

I see that no one disagrees.

Finally, I would like to pick up on Russell Findlay’s point about the task force and the recent resignations. I understand where he is coming from with that, but I am not sure that it is necessarily directly a budget issue. However, I am sure that we will have further discussions about that in the context of the issue that Mr Findlay raised.

If we are content not to issue any further correspondence to the cabinet secretary on the budget response that he provided us with, I will bring this agenda item to a close, and thank members for their comments and contributions.

That concludes the public part of the meeting. Our next meeting will be on Wednesday 26 January.

I will bring in Jamie Greene, who will be followed by Katy Clark.

I thank members for their comments. There is a lot in there. I agree with some of the issues that have been raised, including Jamie Greene’s question about the capital budget, particularly for policing. There is a lot in what has been said about issues such as FAIs and deaths in custody. We all acknowledge that a lot of work has been done and progress made on that, but we must keep an eye on the issue.

I propose consolidating the points that have been made. We may wish to follow that up with some correspondence to the cabinet secretary, seeking clarity on those points, or we may be content with the reply that he has provided. Do members agree to some follow-up correspondence with the cabinet secretary?

Thank you—that is helpful.

There is a lot of interest in the issue, and we have a lot of questions on it. I hand over to Russell Findlay.

I invite Ms Medhurst to respond.

Good morning. Welcome to the first meeting in 2022 of the Criminal Justice Committee. I hope that you all had a pleasant break.

I ask everyone to ensure that their mobile phones are switched to silent, and to wait for the sound engineer to switch their microphone on before speaking.

Our first item of business is consideration of the Prisons and Young Offenders Institutions (Scotland) Amendment Rules 2021. I welcome Keith Brown, Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans, and, from the Scottish Prison Service, Teresa Medhurst, interim chief executive, and Fiona Cruickshanks, head of operations and public protection.

I intend to allow up to one hour for this evidence session. I refer members to papers 1 to 3. I invite the cabinet secretary to make some brief opening remarks.

We move to questions. I will kick things off with a general question, after which I will hand over to Russell Findlay.

Cabinet secretary, it is interesting to note the early feedback since the introduction of the changes. You mentioned that concerns had been expressed about a lack of wider consultation before the regulations were made, although we appreciate that the Prison Service was keen to make progress on the matter before the festive season. Are there any plans to carry out a review of the new powers, in which input could be sought from those who work in the field and a wider range of experts as part of that?

I will bring in Fulton MacGregor to ask questions on photocopying and testing.