Seòmar agus comataidhean

Should that be part of the reform that we are discussing?

Ms Payne, do you want to add to that?

Why, do you think, did that happen? Was there more money in the system and people were not too protective of budgets? Was there more of an appetite to take some risks than there had been before?

Does Mr Clark have anything to add? I will ask one last thing, if that is okay, convener. We heard about a local governance review, but the Scottish Government seems to have gone quiet on that. It is meant to be coming back, but we have not seen it. I would have thought that that would be part of the key reforms.

I will stick with Ms Payne for a moment. You mentioned that there should be localism, on which we have heard a couple of things. We were expecting some sort of blueprint for public sector reform to come from the former Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Economy. The former Deputy First Minister then said, “We will leave it to the organisations—to each local authority or whatever. We will give them five themes and they can go and do their own thing”. Which way will it work?

The question is whether it is true reform or salami slicing for all the different organisations.

Does Professor Connolly have anything to add?

From reading the submissions and from what I have heard today, I have picked up that there is no clarity, that the pace needs to increase, that there are no targets, that there is no evaluation, that there is no real focus on prevention and intervention, and that there is an implementation gap between policy and delivery. How can the Scottish Government get the reform agenda back on track? What you have said seems to be quite damning so far. Professor Connolly, will you go first?

Before moving my amendment 100, I will set out some context around it.

I have been an MSP for just over two years. One of the first people to contact me after I was elected was a brave and determined woman called Sandra Geddes. Sandra told me the story of her brother, Alan Geddes. Alan stayed less than a mile away from my house, in an area called Ruthrieston, in Aberdeen. In December 2019, Alan was murdered by a man called Stuart Quinn. Dad-of-one Alan was stabbed 40 times by Quinn. Good samaritan Alan Geddes was murdered after offering a recently released Quinn a place to stay in his home. Quinn had been released from prison just hours before, without any proper support package and with no accommodation in place. That was because his sentence was backdated after he was held on remand, so he was released from custody with little preparation.

The Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland conducted an investigation into the circumstances leading up to the killing, with a particular focus on the care and treatment that the killer received prior to his sudden release from jail in 2019. The bill provides an opportunity for the Scottish Government to act on the recommendations outlined in the report of that investigation. That is why I am proposing my amendments 100 and 101.

Amendment 100 would establish a post-custody outreach service for offenders who have been released from jail, as recommended by the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland. In setting up the service, Scottish ministers would be required to consult with Community Justice Scotland, each local authority and each health board. That would enable a holistic approach to be taken across the whole system in which both the justice and the health perspectives are considered before establishing the service.

Amendment 100 goes on to commit Scottish ministers to provide a point of contact for every person released from custody who has at some point spent time detained in hospital. That was the case with Alan’s murderer. Clearly, a person who has been detained in hospital at some point requires additional support compared with other offenders, given the mental health problems that that person has encountered. It is therefore vital that someone is in place to proactively reach out to them.

My amendment would require that an offender who falls into that category be contacted by their point of contact in the post-custody outreach service immediately on their release from prison, so that they have someone to go to straight away. I hope that that will ensure that there is always somebody for a recently released prisoner to reach out to if they are experiencing trouble. The amendment provides for the service to last for a year after the prisoner has been released.

Amendment 100 would also allow Scottish ministers the opportunity, through regulations, to set out what else the post-custody outreach service should provide. I hope that, through consultation with other stakeholders, a comprehensive service can be developed that prevents a situation such as Alan Geddes’s murder from ever happening again.

Amendment 101 is consequential to amendment 100, as it would introduce the post-custody outreach service.

Sandra says that she wakes up every morning thinking about what her brother went through, and I would never want any other family to experience that. We can try to make sure that it never does. I am happy to work with the Scottish Government if it thinks that the amendment needs further work. I hope that it will be supportive of the principle.

I move amendment 100.

If the issue in question does not form part of this bill and if these amendments are not to be accepted, what will be the Government’s approach? Will there be additional legislation, or will there just be guidance? What is your thinking on that, cabinet secretary?

I listened to the cabinet secretary last week and she said:

“if not this, what? If not now, when?”—[Official Report, 9 May 2023; c 68.]

I have the same questions. I think that this is an ideal opportunity to put such support in place. We have the recommendations from the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland. If we do not put something in place now, when will that happen? If we do not put something in place now, that report could be another one that just gathers dust.