łÉČËżěĘÖ

Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 9 August 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1198 contributions

|

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Liam Kerr

I have a small point, but it is based on the same line of questioning. As someone who is coming to this issue later than many of my colleagues, it has struck me that the stage 1 report raised concerns about creating the commissioner, suggesting that it would lead to extra bureaucracy, financial issues and opportunity costs. In your response to Sharon Dowey, cabinet secretary, you noted that there are voices in support—and, of course, there are—but this morning the committee received representations from Scottish Women’s Aid reiterating those exact concerns and saying:

“We maintain our opposition to the creation of this Commissioner”.

I believe that other colleagues have submitted amendments to remove the concept of the commissioner completely. Throughout this process, you have shown a commendable willingness to change position based on committee recommendations or representations from groups. How do you respond specifically to the stage 1 concerns and, perhaps more importantly at this stage, the Scottish Women’s Aid representations?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Liam Kerr

My final question is about juries. The committee’s stage 1 report included evidence from Professor Leverick, who expressed the view that, if we are to move to a system that is similar to those in other jurisdictions, we should consider whether a majority of eight out of 12 jurors—in other words, a two-thirds majority with a reduced jury size—is appropriate. There is a proposal to retain the jury size at 15. I am not aware of any other system that has 15 jurors, so Scotland is potentially an outlier already, but that makes sense if, as the cabinet secretary acknowledged, we have a balanced system involving the not proven verdict and corroboration.

In relation to moving to a two-verdict system, changes to corroboration, which the cabinet secretary mentioned, and closer alignment with other jurisdictions on majorities, what does the cabinet secretary say to those who say that it is better to move to a 12-juror system to ensure that the whole system is more closely aligned with those in other jurisdictions where things have been tried and tested?

Criminal Justice Committee

Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Meeting date: 26 February 2025

Liam Kerr

Indeed.

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Liam Kerr

Thank you.

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Liam Kerr

One operational challenge that the committee has heard about is that the current temporary provisions on time limits in solemn cases are scheduled to end in November this year, but the solemn court system is not on track to be able to cope with pre-Covid time limits by that time. You will have seen that the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service suggested some solutions. What is your view of those solutions, and, in any event, what is the Government doing in response to those concerns?

11:00  

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Liam Kerr

I am grateful for that answer. To stick with the issue of definitions, you may have seen that, in a previous evidence session, it was suggested to the committee that the definitions in section 9 of “child” and “young person” are used a little loosely, interchangeably and insufficiently clearly. What is your view on that, having reflected on those evidence sessions? Is that something that you propose to tighten at stage 2 or that you would welcome the committee tightening?

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Liam Kerr

Practical solutions require resources, of course. On a related note, we have heard the provisions being described as “enabling”, such that they allow for certain developments but do not require them. The financial memorandum does not seem to provide figures for the costs of expanding any virtual attendance. Is there a risk that what is enabled is not progressed because there are not any associated resources?

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Liam Kerr

Good morning, cabinet secretary. The committee heard—or it has been suggested to us—that, by not sticking to the definitions in the 2018 act, there was a risk of undermining the current understanding of domestic abuse. Is that a risk, or is that not going to be a problem?

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Liam Kerr

I am very grateful.

Criminal Justice Committee

Criminal Justice Modernisation and Abusive Domestic Behaviour Reviews (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 19 February 2025

Liam Kerr

Cabinet secretary, I wish to ask about virtual appearances from police custody. The committee has heard various concerns about the practical arrangements for such virtual appearances—regarding the ability of defence solicitors to consult clients, for example. You have obviously been through the evidence that we have heard. Do you recognise those concerns? Do you think that the solution is a legislative one or a practical one?