The report for the commission that I chaired looked at women offenders, so it examined only a specific aspect of offending: how women came into the system, how they were dealt with and their custodial status, as well as community service and what happened thereafter.
The overall conclusion was that a very significant proportion of the women in Scotland who go to prison should not be there. Many of them—or at least a very significant percentage—serve very short sentences of imprisonment, many suffer from significant mental health difficulties and prison does nothing whatever to reduce their behaviour thereafter. Many of them come out many weeks later and then go back in as soon as they hit the closest dealer or off-licence, and that particular cycle is not being dealt with by imprisonment.
We also looked at the framework and structures around prison after a very important issue was brought to our attention by those in the Scottish Prison Service. They found themselves having to deal with so many different authorities with regard to throughcare for prisoners afterwards that the process had become utterly fragmented. When we looked at the community service structure at that time and why it was not being used more extensively or given a greater opportunity by judges, we found what seemed to be a lack of faith in the efficacy of community justice. To some extent, prison was a very tempting default position, because it meant that a person would go away and at least be off drugs for a period of time. However, even though that was tempting, the fact that so many were in prison was a very significant flaw in our justice system.
The impetus of our report was the need for a very strong structure for community justice and very robust alternatives. We saw that the effectiveness of community justice was not being measured at that time, which meant that judges could not be convinced that it made a difference. There was no extensive research, and the provision of projects was very short-term. A project would exist for 18 months and then the personnel would disappear or it would metamorphosise into another project in order to gain funding from the Government. Such short-termism meant that the whole system was very bitty and not cohesive, and we recommended that there be a structure with very strong leadership on a par with the prison service, the police service and the prosecution service in the justice system to give it just as strong a voice and ensure that it was just as accountable for its effectiveness. There were examples of very good work that was being done, and we asked why that work was not being taken forward extensively throughout Scotland. The fact is that people were not looking at it, and it was not being taken forward.
That is what we looked at. However, the Community Justice (Scotland) Bill does not look at all of that. Clearly, it does not look at custody—measures on custody and the women’s prison have already been taken—and it does not deal with diversion, which to me is a very significant aspect of keeping people out of the system. However, it might well be that diversion is being dealt with elsewhere.
In short, the bill will go some way towards achieving a stronger structure, but I am not convinced that it will be strong or cohesive enough to deliver what we hoped for in our report.