Seòmar agus comataidhean

We continue to take forward a range of initiatives to strengthen victims’ rights and ensure support and information is available to them. The Victims Taskforce is leading the development of a victim-centred approach to put victim’s needs at the heart of the justice process and provide more compassionate and trauma-informed support at every stage. The Taskforce is also directly informed by victims’ voices and experiences through the work of reference groups set up by Rape Crisis Scotland and Victim Support Scotland. All Taskforce papers, including a detailed work plan, have been published on the Scottish Government website https://www.gov.scot/groups/victims-taskforce/

We are investing £18.7 million during 2020-2021 to support victims of crime, including funding for victims’ organisations who provide practical and emotional support. This includes increasing Victim Support Scotland’s victims fund to £100,000 to help meet immediate financial needs of the most vulnerable victims. We’re also investing in specialised services for families bereaved by crime and have consulted on plans to give more victims of serious crimes the right to explain to courts how it has impacted on them.

In addition, since April 2019, under the Victim Notification Scheme, victims of prisoners who are serving a life sentence have been given the opportunity to make representations in person, orally or in writing before any decision is taken on the first occasion that the prisoner is considered for temporary release.

Progress has also been made on parole. We are discussing with the Parole Board options for victims attendance at hearings, improved communications and greater use of electronic monitoring, including GPS technology. We have also recently commenced work to rewrite the Parole Board for Scotland Rules.

The Scottish Government will continue to listen to the lived experiences of victims and their families in helping to shape our victim-centred approach within the justice process. If the Stewart family wish to meet with the Scottish Government again my office can facilitate a meeting.

The Aberdeen to Central Belt Reference Group met six times between May 2017 and September 2019, with representatives from Transport Scotland, Network Rail, ScotRail, Nestrans, Aberdeen City Region Deal and Tactran. A Key Stakeholder Group, involving these organisations, now meets quarterly to review project progress.

The Reference Group had commissioned a study exploring the possibility of doubling the line between Montrose and Usan Junction. However, this concluded it would be prohibitively expensive and have a major environmental impact on the Montrose Basin and its wildlife, while only delivering negligible journey time improvements. The Reference Group concluded that the investment would be better focussed on signalling enhancements between Aberdeen and Dundee.

A major milestone in delivering the Laurencekirk Junction Improvement was reached on 19 December 2019 when draft Orders for the scheme were published. In response to the publication of draft Orders Transport Scotland received four statutory objections to the proposed scheme.

As with all trunk road schemes, it is only right that those affected have an opportunity to express their views and this is a statutory obligation that cannot be ignored or simply swept aside. Accordingly effective engagement with affected parties is something that Transport Scotland takes very seriously.

Transport Scotland is currently negotiating with objectors to try and resolve objections where possible. However, should Transport Scotland be unsuccessful in removing all objections a public local inquiry may be required. As with all trunk road projects this is the statutory forum for considering objections received and not withdrawn.

As confirmed in my answer to question S5W-26809 on 8 January 2020, progress of the scheme is dependent on the public reaction to the published draft Orders and whether a public local inquiry is required to consider objections received and not withdrawn. Delivery of the scheme itself can only commence when the scheme is approved under the statutory procedures and thereafter a timetable for construction can be determined.

All answers to written Parliamentary Questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at:

http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx .

I have asked Teresa Medhurst, Interim Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS), to respond. Her response is as follows:

Mobile phone handsets were purchased via SPS’ existing mobile telephony service supplier. This followed an assessment of the availability of the required 8,000 entry level mobile devices and SIM cards; and a value benchmarking exercise on unit prices.

I have asked Teresa Medhurst, Interim Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS), to respond. Her response is as follows:

The mobile phones will operate with the same restricted security controls in place for the existing prisoner pin telephone system namely:

• the receiving party will be notified that the call originates from a Scottish Prison;
• the mobile phone can only call the phone numbers that are already on the individual’s call list. In addition, people in custody will be able to call the Samaritans at any time;
• calls can only be made from the mobile phone and cannot be received; and
• all calls will be recorded.

In addition to these controls:

• the mobile phones cannot access the internet or send or receive text messages;
• security seals have been fitted to each battery, if these are damaged, then the phone will be removed from the individual; and
• all calls can be traced back to the individuals and any identified misuse may be subject to disciplinary measures as laid out in the Prison and Young Offenders Institutions (Scotland) Rules 2011, including removal of the service from individuals.

I have asked Teresa Medhurst, Interim Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS), to respond. Her response is as follows:

The introduction of in-cell telephony will provide important family contact as restrictions on visits are in place during the COVID19 pandemic. These changes are intended to remain in place after the outbreak so as to continue to maximise the contact that prisoners can have with their family and friends while detained in prison.

All mobile phones are individually allocated and registered to people in custody and must be returned upon liberation. Under Rule 62(10)a prisoner must return any authorised personal communication device in the prisoner’s possession to an officer where the officer orders the prisoner to do so. Failure to do so may result in disciplinary proceedings or the matter being reported to the police.

I refer the member to the answer provided for question S5W-30084 on 6 July 2020 which provides a comprehensive response in relation to the easing of restrictions around prison visits. All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx .

I have asked Teresa Medhurst, Interim Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS), to respond. Her response is as follows:

I refer the member to the answer to question S5W-29998 on 13 July 2020 All answers to written parliamentary questions are available on the Parliament's website, the search facility for which can be found at http://www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/28877.aspx .

I have asked Teresa Medhurst, Interim Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS), to respond. Her response is as follows:

The cost of the mobile phone provision during the COVID19 pandemic is expected to be met within budget.

I have asked Teresa Medhurst, Interim Chief Executive of the Scottish Prison Service (SPS), to respond. Her response is as follows:

The mobile phones were purchased on a bulk basis and it is assessed that the unit cost of a handset is approximately £20.

Section 14(7) of the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill defines ‘transgender identity’, which is a broader definition than the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. It is recognised, for example by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, that because the Equality Act 2010 bases the protection it provides on the process of undergoing gender reassignment, transgender people may not all have legal protection from discrimination; for example those who do not intend to take steps relating to gender reassignment because of age or medical condition. Transgender identity as defined in the Bill more broadly encompasses all people whose gender identities are different from their sex at birth. This includes those who identify as male, but were registered as female at birth, those who identify as female but were registered as male at birth, non-binary people and cross-dressing people.