Official Report 1201KB pdf
The next item of business is a statement by Angela Constance on the Scottish Government’s response to fatal accident inquiries into the deaths of Katie Allan and William Brown. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement, so there should be no interventions or interruptions.
14:23
First and foremost, I express my deepest condolences to the families of Katie Allan and William Lindsay. I am deeply sorry for their deaths. Suicide is a tragedy, but it is also preventable, and the deaths of those two young people should not have happened while they were in the care of the state.
Sheriff Simon Collins KC has issued a comprehensive and hard-hitting determination that resonates deeply. Accountability starts with acceptance. The Scottish Government accepts Sheriff Collins’s finding that those deaths were preventable and that systemic failures contributed to their deaths. Systemic failures require a systemic response. I hear and fully understand the families’ demand for action and agree that we must take action, and we will.
Sheriff Collins has made 25 thoughtful and substantial recommendations. I accept those recommendations and commit to addressing in detail each and every one of them in our full formal response. I will report to the Parliament again when we provide that.
I will set out to the Parliament today six specific and direct actions that will contribute to the systems-wide reform that must now take place. I am determined to lead change across the Scottish Prison Service, the national health service and broader partners in order to take forward the necessary reforms. Although many changes have already taken place, further improvements are needed at operational and procedural levels. I also expect to see cultural change in the way that agencies work individually and collectively.
To ensure that we drive change and implementation and achieve the impact that is needed, we must strengthen oversight and accountability, and that needs to be independent. Starting now, we need oversight of the actions that are taken as a result of Sheriff Collins’s determination, including those that I will set out today. I have therefore asked His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons in Scotland to provide oversight and monitoring of implementation and, crucially, to review the actions that are taken to ensure that they meet the required outcome. I have asked the inspectorate to involve families and prisoners, just as it should involve prison staff, and to seek other expert advice. The inspectorate will report directly to me.
We also need independent national oversight in relation to deaths in custody. Work is already under way on that, but I will ensure that specific proposals are brought forward by March this year. Those proposals will strengthen accountability in relation to fatal accident inquiry recommendations and ensure that thematic and systemic issues are identified and addressed, which will also inform and support work on prevention.
I turn to the actions. The first relates to the physical environment in prisons and focuses on ligature and risk assessments. Sheriff Collins stressed the need for greater recognition by the SPS of the importance of ligature prevention. I confirm that the SPS will urgently and immediately review and revise its policy on items that can be used as ligatures. The SPS has taken action to address and refurbish the physical environment and has introduced trauma-informed training for staff that focuses on support for young people. It will do more by developing an anti-ligature risk assessment, which will further support work to ensure that spaces can be as safe as possible. In addition, the development of suicide prevention technology will be accelerated and, if viable, piloted and reviewed.
The second action relates to mental health services and information sharing. The Scottish Prison Service’s suicide prevention strategy, talk to me, will be completely revised and overhauled. William Lindsay’s case was, sadly, not unique. He was let down by many services before he arrived in custody, and there were failings in sharing information about his needs. We need to ensure that that can never happen again. The Scottish Government, the SPS, the national health service and the Scottish courts will work urgently and immediately to ensure that all the written information and documentation that are available to the courts are passed to the SPS at the time of a person’s admission to prison. A standardised approach to sharing relevant information from agencies will also be developed.
The third action relates to death in prison learning and audit reviews. Those reviews will now include consideration of the safety of the prisoner’s physical environment and the means by which they were able to die by suicide. That was a specific recommendation made by Sheriff Collins. The reviews now also allow for input from families, following engagement with the family reference group. However, there is more that we must do. I therefore confirm that, with immediate effect, independent chairing of DIPLARs will be extended to all deaths in custody. I also confirm that the learning and key actions from those reviews will be available to those performing the independent national oversight role.
The fourth action relates to legal aid for bereaved families who participate in fatal accident inquiries. Currently, families are entitled to legal aid on the basis of means testing, with the majority of families receiving support. However, in recognition of the special significance of a death in custody, we will change the legal aid system to make legal aid free, with no means testing, in relation to fatal accident inquiries into deaths in custody. That will require primary legislation, which we will introduce at the earliest opportunity. Alongside that, I will bring forward proposals in relation to family advocacy and support outside the formal FAI process.
The fifth action relates to the FAI process. I agree with Sheriff Collins, among others, that the period of five years between the deaths and the first notice of inquiry was far too long. It is clear that the process is letting families down and that the time taken for FAIs to start and conclude needs to be addressed. I understand that the families do not want another review. However, unless we specifically look at the efficiency and effectiveness of the whole system, we will not see the improvements that are needed. I have discussed that with the Lord Advocate, who shares my view. I am therefore commissioning a focused independent review of the FAI system that will look at the efficiency, effectiveness and trauma-informed nature of investigations into deaths in prison custody. I will ask the inquiry chair to report to me by the end of this year on the solutions and the tangible actions that need to be taken.
Finally, although this is not in my gift to introduce, I will continue to pursue the lifting of Crown immunity with the United Kingdom Government. I believe that that should change in line with the position with other public bodies.
We also need to take more steps to improve alternatives to custody. Since I became justice secretary, I have said that there needs to be a shift in the balance from custody to justice in the community. People who break the law must face consequences for their actions, and sometimes there is no alternative to the punishment of depravation of liberty. In other cases, that can be done safely and more effectively in the community. Let me be clear: people need to stop calling that “soft justice”. If our mindset is that jail is the only option, we will never be able to stop the impacts that imprisonment can have on people, families and society, which lead to further societal costs that we all pay for.
I want to go further on community justice and to drive more innovation in that area. Last year, I visited Northern Ireland and heard at first hand about the positive impact that has been achieved through its system of enhanced combination orders, which enable judges to address offending behaviour through alternatives to custody while providing for support and intervention to address the underlying drivers of such behaviour. Such examples speak to the whole-system approach that we need here. I will come back to the Parliament with plans to strengthen our community order system, and I want members to remember this day when I do so.
Like everybody here, I do not want there to be any preventable deaths in our prisons, and there should be no suicides. I assure members that we will address the systemic failures that were identified by Sheriff Collins and strengthen oversight of and accountability for the reforms that must be made. I expect services to be provided within a culture of transparency, candour and compassion. That is particularly true in relation to all people who are in the care of the state. Accountability starts with acceptance, but it does not end there. Accountability must also result in answers and actions that lead to lasting change.
I again extend my heartfelt condolences to the families of William Lindsay and Katie Allan, and to all families who have been affected by a death in custody. I know that they do not want condolences or hand wringing. It is action that they seek, and it is such action that we will deliver.
The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues that were raised in her statement. I intend to allow about 20 minutes for questions.
I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement, and I extend my deepest condolences, too, to the families of Katie Allan and William Lindsay. I have three questions for the cabinet secretary, which I will keep brief to ensure that she has time to give full answers.
The cabinet secretary has signalled that she will pursue the lifting of Crown immunity. Will she set out for us when she anticipates real progress—and, I hope, success—with that?
Secondly, the cabinet secretary referenced the system of investigating the deaths of prisoners, but she said that it will take a further year to report. Will she explain why that further delay is needed to point out what seems to be obvious to everyone in the system, which is that it is not working?
Finally, the cabinet secretary says that she will extend legal aid to bereaved families participating in FAIs, but the legal aid system is already very short of money and resources. What extra funding and resources does she consider are necessary in that respect, and when will they be made available?
I very much appreciate Mr Kerr’s questions. He will know that Crown immunity is not in my gift to deliver—it is a reserved issue. Nonetheless, I have made a commitment today to Parliament and, indeed, to the families who are sitting in the public gallery that I will pursue that matter in good faith.
I know that other members in the chamber will have party connections on both sides of the border. There was live discussion at stage 2 of the Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill about the much broader issue of good conduct or misconduct in public office. It is imperative that we all recognise that public confidence and trust in all our public services is what binds us together.
On the underpinnings of the work on fatal accident inquiries, I will come back to Parliament with a more detailed timetable, but I must be up front and say that I do not expect any work on fatal accident inquiries to be straightforward or plain sailing. I really hate the word “complex”, but in this case, that is what it is. I will consult others, but I want to ensure that we set the terms of reference for the work correctly so that it can be completed timeously.
I know that there are many issues to address and many asks for improvements around fatal accident inquiries, but first and foremost, in order to deliver for families who have been affected by death in custody, we must take a focused look at the death in custody fatal accident inquiries.
Legal aid is, of course, demand led. I have had a number of discussions with Cabinet colleagues on the work that we are about to commence. Inevitably, there will be implications in relation to the financial and human resources that are released to focus on that work.
I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of the statement, which I found helpful.
This must be a turning point for Scotland’s prisons. Our system lacks accountability and transparency when there are deaths in custody. Sadly, there have been more deaths since the tragic and preventable deaths of Katie Allan and William Lindsay Brown.
Now is the time to adopt all the recommendations, which the Government has done, and to go beyond them and use them as the basis for whole-system change. For too long, the prison system, which we trust to look after people on behalf of the state, has let down families. They have been immediately shut out of a system whose first response is to defend its own interests.
Communication to families immediately after the death of their loved one has been poor. The unfettered access to information following a death in custody that families were promised by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland in its recommendations is meaningless, unless those families have rights to their own representation.
I have one specific question. Will the cabinet secretary commit to legal aid support for all families in the first 24 hours following a death in custody so that they have a chance against the system when it comes to asking immediate questions about the circumstances of the death of their loved one? Families tell me that they feel closed out of the system during the first period after a death in custody, and such a move would go a long way to making sure that we have whole-system change.
I very much embrace the point that Pauline McNeill articulated—that today should be a turning point not just for those in the care of the Scottish Prison Service, but in what more we need to do to prevent people from going to prison in the first place. As Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs, I do not demur for one moment from the recommendations and the changes that now require to be made in the prison service.
My challenge to other Government colleagues and colleagues across the political spectrum is that we also have to look at what happens to people and what their life experiences are before they have any contact with the criminal justice system. When we do, we quite often see a litany of failures for the most vulnerable in our society.
I very much want to see equality of arms. That is particularly acute when there is a death in custody. I will look at Pauline McNeill’s suggestion about the timing of legal aid support. As I hope that I have indicated to Liam Kerr and other members, there is, indeed, work—of breadth and depth—to do to ensure that we deliver on the promises that we have made today.
I, too, express my deepest condolences to the families and friends of Katie Allan and William Lindsay, whose deaths were preventable.
The cabinet secretary spoke of much-needed operational, procedural and cultural change across multiple agencies and institutions, as well as specific actions and the monitoring of implementation. Prevention must be paramount, both the prevention of behaviour that leads to imprisonment in the first place and ensuring that those who must be incarcerated have the support that they need when they need it.
Can the cabinet secretary say more about the mental health services that are available and whether the revision of the talk to me programme will be sufficient? Can she also provide reassurances that suicide prevention technology will not replace the human, in-person support and contact that are important in sustaining and improving mental health for those who are in prison?
Prevention is, indeed, paramount. First, it is paramount that we prevent people from having contact with the justice system in the first place and, secondly, that we prevent unnecessary incarcerations. Prevention work must be pursued to ensure that, once they are in our care, our people are kept safe at all times.
I have heard Ms Chapman make the point, which I would endorse time and again, that prison is not and cannot be the end of the line. People cannot go to prison and be out of sight, out of mind. The work that is done in our prisons is imperative not just in keeping people safe, but in their rehabilitation and, ultimately, the wellbeing of our society.
Suicide prevention technology should not and cannot replace human contact. It will have to be tested in a prison environment, but it does have the potential to give more dignity and protection to people who are at risk. If staff have to check on someone every 15 or 30 minutes, we can imagine how that disrupts the person’s sleep. If we can use technology that is, perhaps, radar-based, so that we can monitor people’s respirations and movements, as well as the blind spots in the cell, that will be a more dignified approach and in keeping with trauma-informed care.
The decisions that we take in this Parliament matter, and that could hardly be more striking than it is today. It is very emotive to see the families here today—I am sure that we all feel for them.
I have been frustrated and, frankly, annoyed that, for years, fatal accident inquiries have taken so long to begin. First, will the cabinet secretary consider removing the responsibility for fatal accident inquiries from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and ring fence the responsibility in a separate organisation?
Secondly, can the cabinet secretary explain why it took almost three years for the prison suicide prevention strategy not to be renewed? It has taken all that time, when it was essential for it be renewed.
I have often heard Mr Rennie articulate his annoyance and frustration. I hope that we all share a sense of anger and that, going forward, we can hang on to it.
The question whether the responsibility for fatal accident inquiries should be removed from the Crown Office has not been at the forefront of my mind; my focus is on what I can do in the short and medium term, in the remaining time in this parliamentary session, to deliver for families. I am very focused on deaths in custody and fatal accident inquiries in relation to deaths in custody and on seeing those timespans become much shorter.
I know that there has been an increase in the resource invested in the Crown Office—with good reason, because of the demand on its role in independently investigating deaths. The Crown Office is dealing with 14,000 to 15,000 cases per annum; it regularly publishes performance statistics in and around that, and there is an improving trajectory. Where we all share a sense of frustration is around mandatory fatal accident inquiries that relate to people in custody who die while in our care.
I extend my deepest condolences to the families of Katie Allan and William Lindsay.
I welcome the cabinet secretary’s recognition that the fatal accident inquiry process between the deaths and the first notice was far too long, which added to the trauma of the families, and that there must be consideration of how that can be improved. Will the review include the issue of sharing information with families to ensure that that process improves, too?
Audrey Nicoll’s question follows on from Willie Rennie’s. Notwithstanding the work undertaken by the Crown Office in more recent times—for example, to improve its existing family liaison charter—I know that the Lord Advocate shares my views on how we are all delivering or not delivering for families. The fatal accident review that I am commissioning will, as one of its key themes, consider the sharing of information, which the member rightly highlights as an issue.
Another aspect of information sharing is the information that must come to the Crown Office from other agencies. We need to be able to ensure that investigations and initial inquiries are robust, but I am conscious that all of that is pinned on good and timely sharing of accurate and full information.
With regard to families, we will bring forward proposals that consider support outside the fatal accident inquiry process, particularly through family advocacy.
Fatal accident inquiries have been mandatory for all deaths in custody since 2016, yet Scotland still has one of the highest rates in Europe of suicide in prison. Would the cabinet secretary consider making it mandatory to implement all fatal accident inquiry recommendations so that lessons are learned and we can avoid making the same mistakes again and again?
Sharon Dowey is quite correct to say that, compared with our European friends and neighbours, Scotland has one of the highest rates of suicide in prison. It is quite stark—the rate is higher than south of the border and elsewhere in western Europe.
I have given some thought to the question whether to make the implementation of fatal accident inquiries mandatory. However, I have noted much of the good research carried out by the University of Glasgow and, indeed, Mrs Allan on the variability of fatal accident inquiries in terms of what the research describes as their quality and quantity. If they were made mandatory, there might be the issue of getting somewhat contradictory recommendations. I hope that what I have outlined today with regard to the oversight from HMIPS and, crucially, the oversight of the national mechanism, and the six actions that I have commissioned today, many of which are in direct response to Sheriff Collins’s recommendations, gives the strongest indication of my intent on the matter and how we will see things through.
At the age of 16, William Lindsay should have been in secure accommodation, not prison, but there were not enough spaces. Although I welcome the fact that no under-18s are now in prison, can the cabinet secretary assure me that there are enough secure accommodation spaces to accommodate the people who need to be housed there?
Members will be aware that, as a result of the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Act 2024, as of 28 August 2025, no under-18s will be detained in a young offenders institution; instead, they will be held in a suitable setting such as secure care.
Secure accommodation capacity can be tight and capacity can change on a daily basis but, as of 9 o’clock this morning, there were six places available. I also confirm that I expect on-going work to further alleviate those pressures shortly. I assure the member that we pay very close attention to the number of available spaces on a daily basis.
My thoughts today are with the families whose lives can never be the same. Katie Allan grew up in East Renfrewshire, as I did, and we have all heard that she did so in a family, a school and a community where she was loved and had the fullness of her life and potential ahead of her.
The findings should make us ashamed that Katie, William and so many others were failed. The cabinet secretary knows that Katie’s family has fought for a long time for investment in safer cells, and particularly the removal of ligatures. She knows of the backward steps that they have experienced and of their battle to access information.
However, I note the clear recommendations that have been made on that issue and the cabinet secretary’s agreement in principle with them in her statement. Can she outline clearly a process for the SPS to deal with ligature risks across the estate and a timeline for doing so? What capital investment will support that work?
The total investment in the Scottish Prison Service for the new financial year will be in excess of £881 million, in both resource and capital. I am, of course, realistic and am aware that additional actions always have a cost, in terms of both resources and people.
I expect some of the actions that I outlined in my statement to happen either immediately or urgently. I have given a commitment to come back to Parliament in March, when there will be further detail on the timelines. I am acutely conscious that it is all very well to commit to action and implement recommendations, but that has to go hand in hand with a full and detailed implementation plan. That is what I will be invested in going forward.
I, too, pass my condolences to the families.
I appreciate that the cabinet secretary has referred to the issue of Crown immunity a couple of times already, but I wonder whether she believes that the change in Government at Westminster allows for an opportunity to pursue that issue with renewed urgency.
I very much hope that the change in Government will allow for more fruitful discussions on the matter. I have already laid out, in answers to others, that I will pursue the matter in good faith.
The previous UK Government did not reply to earlier correspondence from the previous First Minister. I think that there is a wider interest right now in misconduct in public office, and various other inquiries have led us to that position. I reiterate that public trust and confidence in public services help to bind our society and our communities together.
I will add one thing that I said to the family. I want to be clear to the families and to Parliament that I will not call for action in another place that is the responsibility of others at the expense of the action that I can take. I will pursue the issues on Crown immunity, but I make it clear that that action will not be at the expense of the action that is in my gift.
I echo the condolences to families who have waited too long for answers. The Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Act 2024 means that most people under the age of 18 will now be housed in secure accommodation, which has capacity issues, as was highlighted in the statement to Parliament a couple of weeks ago by the Minister for Children, Young People and The Promise. Will the cabinet secretary assure me that all the lessons will be applied, where appropriate, across secure settings where young people are in our care? Will she shed any light on where any young offenders will be placed in the event of full capacity?
Let me be clear to Ms McCall that we closed the legal route—the legal loophole—that allowed our children to be placed in prison in order to ensure that it just cannot happen. Under no circumstances do our children belong in prison. Therefore, the system has to get with it—it has to get with the legislation. The Government and others just have to get with it, put our shoulders to the wheel and make sure that there is enough capacity.
There are issues that we need to discuss with the UK Government. One of the issues that I am aware of from Ms Don’s statement and the passage of the legislation is the placement of children hundreds of miles away from their home when they should be placed nearer their homes in England. I am not saying that we are not or have not been guilty of doing that, but there are important issues that all the home nations need to take on board.
At the end of the day, those children are our children. They need to be nearer to their communities in a way that is safe for them and the community when a placement is necessitated, but they should not be passed from pillar to post. It was a decisive moment when the Parliament said that. I regret to say that it was not unanimous, but it was a decisive moment when we said that we are not having our children—under-18s—in our prison system.
I welcome the cabinet secretary’s comments on shifting the balance to justice in the community and her point that that is not soft justice. Does she agree that we need to ensure that penal reform is not a political football? Does she also agree that we need grown-up and sensible debate and discussion to find the solutions to reduce our prison population and to have safe alternatives to custody in the community that sheriffs can use?
I am absolutely determined to do everything that I can to boost the confidence that the people of Scotland and, indeed, the judiciary have in the potential of community justice. I have increased investment in community justice—between the current and the next financial year, there will be additional investment of £25 million—but we have to have the courage to follow the evidence, which tells us that, in many circumstances, robust community disposals will provide far better outcomes not only for the individual concerned, in mending their ways and paying back to the community, but for the community and keeping families and children together. We need to own that.
If I convey only one thing today, it is that our accountability has to lead to action and change. As a country, we need to turn up the dial in the shift from our use of custody to the use of community justice. I very much hope to come back to Parliament in February with a Government-led debate on the next steps around our sentencing and penal reform work.
The powerful report on these tragic events is speaking truth to power. I welcome the statement, and also the tone and approach that the cabinet secretary has taken. The deaths of those young people should not have happened. I invite the cabinet secretary to reaffirm her and the Scottish Government’s absolute commitment to implementing the proposals that were set out in the statement, irrespective of unseen events and as swiftly as possible.
The 419 pages of the fatal accident inquiry determinations certainly are, to use the old Quaker phrase, speaking truth to power.
In short, my message to the families and to people across Scotland is that accountability starts with me. I have the same expectations of myself, my officials and my colleagues in Government as I do of those in senior leadership roles and on the front line. Accountability starts with acceptance, but it cannot end there. The report is damning about systemic failings, and they will require systemic improvement.
I am conscious that the families have had enough of condolences, regret and politicians like me greetin and wringing our hands. We need to put our shoulders to the wheel, collectively, and ensure that, as others have said, today is the turning point.
None of us here can adequately understand the grief that the families are shouldering, but all of us must understand that it could happen to us and our families at any time. I recognise that it can take time for legislation to be developed, consulted on and dealt with in the Parliament but, given the urgency and the immediate needs of families who are faced with circumstances and tragedies such as those that we heard about from Pauline McNeill, can the cabinet secretary provide a timescale for introducing legislation on swift and universal legal aid for families for fatal accident inquiries?
I am absolutely committed to making changes in the legal aid system to ensure that legal aid is free and non-means-tested in relation to deaths in custody. The member and others have highlighted that it can take time to introduce and pass primary legislation in the Parliament—that is not all within my gift, but I am committed to introducing such legislation as soon as possible.
In the meantime, I am urgently considering whether there are ways to deliver the changes in the shorter term while we are developing the primary legislation. I want to leave no stone unturned and to check whether there are other opportunities to deliver on our aspirations more quickly. When the Criminal Justice Committee and I can get through the legislation that is currently on our books, I would certainly be up for doing a bill in year 5 of the session. However, I am conscious that I am probably stepping beyond my scope there, and I may be entering the territory of the Minister for Parliamentary Business and other parliamentary authorities.
A number of concerns have been raised about the procedures in the Scottish Prison Service. Unannounced inspections are practically non-existent. The inspections that do take place are announced in advance and only happen every several years. Will the cabinet secretary work with HMIPS to ensure that more unannounced inspections take place?
I give a commitment to members that I will discuss that with the new chief inspector when she comes into post. I am due to meet her very soon. Sara Snell has significant experience in the prison system elsewhere on these islands. In addition, she has been working on an international level with the Red Cross for the past several years, looking at the changing nature of detention. She comes well briefed on the challenges and on how Scotland compares with other countries. That issue will be one of the many that I will discuss with her.
That concludes the ministerial statement. I will allow a moment or two for members on the front benches to organise before the next item of business.
Air ais
Portfolio Question TimeAir adhart
National Care Service