Seòmar agus comataidhean

I am sure that you are absolutely right. I wanted to get that on the record and make sure that I have understood correctly. You have said that

“Adverse prisoner reactions are both traumatic and costly”.

In your submission, you said that

“The cost of the prison riots in England between April and May 1986 was estimated by the Government to be”

in the region of

“£5.5 million”

and that

“The riot in HMP Birmingham in 2016 ... cost the Government and the private operator £6 million”.

From what you say in your submission, there is a financial consideration as well as a public safety consideration, so I want to get you to speak to that. Do you have any further concerns? You have put it in your submission, so I have to draw the conclusion that it is a big concern of yours that we might face that possibility, if the budget is not adjusted.

You said that there are pressures on the contract with GEO Amey. Does there being more virtual court appearances mean that it is not moving prisoners, so there is a cost saving?

I understand. I am thinking of a scenario that I know about, in which some prisoners from London Road police station, let us say, have to go to the sheriff court on first appearance, whereas previously they would have taken all the prisoners to one place. That answer was helpful.

You have mentioned reforms with regard to Lady Dorrian’s review, including single-judge trials and a number of other innovations in that respect. These particular proposals are about trying to reduce delays and help recovery; indeed, that is the Lord Advocate’s position. There are so many women and children victims waiting for their cases to be heard in court, and such an approach would allow you to make progress. However, how can the committee judge whether such reforms are not simply being done on the basis of financial savings? You can see where I am coming from. It is all very well putting in place innovations to make the system more efficient, but I would be deeply concerned if we were making reforms just to save money in a way that was not in the interests of justice.

You have answered some questions to help us to understand the innovations and reforms. Some of those will require legislative change. Some are controversial and they may not see the light of day, but that is a matter for another day.

I will be honest. I am slightly clutching at straws in asking you this question, but it is in my mind. It seems obvious to me that, if the Government put a bit more money up front now, some of the changes, at least, could bring savings even without staff reductions, or with no compulsory redundancies. Is any modelling being done on the figures in that regard? Let us say that you asked the Government to give you X million pounds so that you could front load some changes and you said that you could then deliver savings in future years. Is that discussion taking place?

The reason why I ask that question is that, should we decide to say that we are concerned and suggest something to the Government, we will be required to say where the money would come from. That is the trick in the question that we have to answer. Can you provide any modelling on savings in future years?

Good morning. Whichever way you look at it, the situation is extremely bleak. Indeed, that is what you are telling the committee, and it is also clear from your submission.

Am I correct in saying that the closure of three or four courts, if it came to that, will save only about £4 million?

I was just saying to Rona Mackay that things could not be any bleaker. I have never heard anything like that in all the time that I have been here.

On the evidence that we have from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service—

Sorry.

When I read that, it made me think about how challenging it is to get an appointment with a GP within five days these days. My concern is that, if the approach is rigid, some people will fall by the wayside. What happens also depends on what day people are released from prison and what system their GP has. I wonder whether there is some flexibility around the five days.

Good morning. I read in the notes that you have provided that

“Approximately 21% of the SPS Resource budget is for payments to the private sector for the provision of 2 private prison establishments”.

That seems to be quite a high figure, but you go on to say that the

“contracts have contractual built in Inflation mechanisms based on CPI and RPI increases.”

The two private prisons are getting an increase of 11.4 per cent. It seems to be grossly unfair that the public sector prisons must operate within a budget that is being reduced by 7.8 per cent, but private prisons under the service will benefit by 11.4 per cent. Is that right?