Seòmar agus comataidhean

I was about to get to that. I do not believe that it is all about the budget. I am not for a minute denying the importance of the budget in relation to sustainability, increasing capacity and flexible use of resources to get the increased budget to the front line. Of course, we do that with the criminal justice social work grant because it is ring fenced. I know that not everybody likes that word.

There are recruitment challenges, which can be harder in some parts of the country, but I am not denying that the quantum of budget has an impact. In every portfolio in which I have had the privilege of serving, I have found that, even though we are a small country, we have regional variation in practice and delivery. That is not necessarily a bad thing, but I am never convinced that it is all about money. Money is part of it, but it is not all about that.

That is why we need scrutiny and a focus on community planning partners. Community Justice Scotland has a statutory role in promoting and sharing good practice, highlighting the evidence and advocating for change, but we should not forget the role of community planning partners, who, under the community justice legislation, also have a responsibility to support community justice priorities.

I refer Ms Dowey to our more recent manifesto commitments and our programme for government commitment, which was to provide resource to enable the chief constable to return police officer numbers to 16,500. I am pleased that the chief constable has advised that that has been achieved.

Obviously, we want to do as well as we possibly can for our justice agencies. We have a good record to build on in that regard. Crown courts, prisons and community justice courts all received a significant uplift—the fire service as well—and for some of those organisations there was a significant percentage uplift in terms of capital investment.

As you will know, the Scottish Government has welcomed the UK Government’s autumn statement. It is broadly in line with our planning assumptions. Nonetheless, the financial challenges continue. It is a very welcome step in the right direction, but one budget does not end the impact of austerity. We have seen an erosion of the Scottish budget, in particular since 2021, and that is around the cumulative impact of consumer prices index inflation, which has seen price increases of nearly 20 per cent. That, of course, has a huge impact on households but also on Government.

Given the operational seniority and expertise of the deputy chief constable, I would accept her narration of scenarios and would always accept her assessment of any impact on public safety. I appreciate that Police Scotland, along with other justice agencies, is, understandably, scenario planning. They will submit budget bids to the Government and be very transparent on that with the committee, as well. On the one hand, you will see their asks on what they could do with additional resource. You will also see in those budget bids what they assess as the consequences if they do not receive their bid in full or, indeed, in the scenario that you have laid out, Mr Kerr, in terms of flat cash or reduction. Obviously, the pay award is an important factor in all that.

In an endeavour to give the committee as much comfort as I can, and given that the budget is not done until it is done—this is pre-budget scrutiny—I point out that the police budget has increased, year on year, since 2016-17. In this financial year, we have seen a record investment of £1.55 billion. That is a big chunk of public money that goes into policing, which has resulted in an additional £75 million for front-line policing. The budget that I secured for Police Scotland last year has enabled the chief constable to meet her commitment to increasing officer numbers to 16,500. I know that she informed the committee that that has been achieved.

I do not want in any way to downplay the significance, if hard choices have to be made. Nonetheless, one could say that past behaviour is the best prediction of future behaviour.

There was a 34 per cent reduction in the first citation of police witnesses and a 25 per cent reduction in the first citation of civilian witnesses in domestic abuse cases in the aggregated pilot courts. We will provide further information about that. The BBC covered the pilot extensively not that long ago. It is really good work, and our partners—the police and the Courts and Tribunals Service—need to be commended for it.

As I said earlier, I am aware of all the justice partners’ asks for capital. Nonetheless, we have clear commitments around HMP Highland and HMP Glasgow, the replacement for HMP Barlinnie. The current contract for HMP Highland is now signed, so we have contractual obligations in and around the funding.

If there were to be any additional costs in a contract that is signed and agreed, it would tend to be when there are overruns. I went to visit Inverness during the summer and I have been reassured that the revised timetable for HMP Highland is making good progress. I have been up to Inverness twice now.

The only minor caveat that I am always alert to, as the resilience minister, is the impact of weather on construction projects. That would be the only worry at the back of my mind about HMP Highland. However, we are anticipating that it will cost £209 million, which is baked in as a result of the contract.

I am told that the contract for HMP Glasgow is at an advanced stage. There are issues around commercial sensitivity. The design is complete and it informs the contract, so the detail of the contract will inform costs, the allocation and phasing of resources and the timeframe. We are committed to the replacement of HMP Barlinnie, which is a Victorian prison.

The discussions continue with Kier, the contractor for the stage 2 construction contract. It is important that we continue, because prisons are not cheap. If you look at the cost of prisons south of the border, you will see that any prison is a substantial investment. We need to make absolutely every effort on due diligence, value for money and the shaking out of any savings where we can do so. Once that contract is signed, I will be able to talk more about time and cost.

There are some very encouraging numbers on that. I am happy to send that information to the committee. In September, a report was published that said that, in the 19 months of the pilot, among the outcomes that were achieved,

“It is estimated that 530 summary trials did not require to be fixed”;

if summary case management

“had been in place at a national level during the pilot period, it is estimated that at least 3270 trials would not have been fixed, a potential 5% reduction in fixed trials;”

and summary case management

“mitigated the impact of higher levels of complaints registered in 2023/24 so that the volume of outstanding scheduled trials reduced by 31%”.

There are also statistics, which I do not have in front of me, on the reduction in witness citations for professional witnesses and victims. Those are encouraging as well.

I will focus first on the financials. It is important to recognise that the legal aid budget is demand led and that—unlike elsewhere—we have maintained the scope and resourcing of legal aid. To demonstrate that demand-led nature, the final spend for the previous financial year was £151 million, whereas the budget was set at £141 million, if I recall correctly. Demands for legal aid are one of the pressures in the justice portfolio. The figure could, of course, change, but the spend on legal aid is projected to come in at £171 million by the end of this financial year.

That is the other issue for the justice portfolio as a whole. As well as 80 per cent of our resource going on staff costs, a chunk of resource is demand led. Legal aid is demand led; criminal injuries compensation is demand led; and, on top of that, there are contractual obligations—for example, on HMP Highland, GEOAmey and so on. We have not cut the legal aid budget in any shape or form.

I note Ms McNeill’s comments about solicitors. I will look at those overall figures. I have recently had reason to look at the figures for criminal defence agents who operate in the legal aid sphere. For the past three or four years, that has been largely stable, at around 800. Having said that, I recognise that there are challenges for the profession and, in particular, for criminal defence agents.

I have an on-going dialogue with the finance secretary, as you would expect. That is particularly intensive in this part of the budget process, but bilateral and cross-Government discussions continue all year round. That is part of the necessity of the annual budget process. In many ways, you are never far away from budget planning and looking ahead. I take the point that we are all trying to look to the future, although I think that it is fair and appropriate that I point to our current investment.

I reiterate to Mr Kerr and the committee as a whole that the front line is an absolute priority. That is reflected in the programme for government and the vision for justice. To demonstrate the seriousness with which I take the front line with respect to police and other justice agencies, I say that the current budget has enabled the chief constable to reach her aspiration of 16,500 police officers and that, in this financial year, Police Scotland is having its highest year of recruitment since its inception in 2013.

One of the challenges that the SFRS and other large justice agencies such as Police Scotland will face is that their biggest cost is staff and pensions. Eighty per cent of the resource across the justice portfolio goes on staff and pensions, and in some justice agencies, that figure is even higher. That means that when there are budget pressures, whether they be expected or unexpected, the biggest lever that any justice organisation has is to slow down recruitment. That is not where I want matters to be; having the right support on the front line is pivotal. We will, of course, continue to work with the Fire and Rescue Service and its FBU partners and constantly look at the current challenges.

I support the work that is taking place to reshape the service. In essence, it seeks to ensure that resources are in place to deal with those risks. I know that, with the best will in the world, we cannot predict every risk at every moment in time, but there is a good wealth of information and evidence that points to a changing risk profile. There has been a 19 per cent reduction in the number of incidents that the Fire and Rescue Service is called out to attend, while the amount of fire incidents has reduced by 10 per cent and is now at its lowest on record.

One issue that has been difficult to progress, but which I would certainly like to see progress on, is the expanding role of firefighters. I see an appetite for change from the FBU and the SFRS, and we need to find a way of unlocking that progress. As the Government as a whole grapples with the affordability of pay in the public sector, we might be able to link negotiating future pay deals to workforce reform.

The fact is, though, that fire service terms and conditions are agreed at a UK level. Nonetheless, we have in the past engaged at a UK level around the reform of the firefighter role. It seems to be one way of unlocking the service’s potential.