Official Report 975KB pdf
The next item of business is topical questions. In order to get in as many members as possible, short and succinct questions and responses would be appreciated.
MV Caledonian Isles
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the reported announcement that issues with the gearbox of the MV Caledonian Isles have been identified, resulting in a further delay to its return to service on the Arran route. (S6T-02111)
As Cabinet Secretary for Transport, my response is to express deep frustration and concern that the people and communities of Arran are facing a further day and a half with one ferry operating to Brodick rather than two, in addition to the Lochranza service. I have spoken to CalMac Ferries this morning and relayed my serious concerns about the latest mechanical issue on the MV Caledonian Isles, which I have been told is a gearbox failure that was identified during berthing trials as the vessel returned from a nine-month overhaul.
The MV Isle of Arran must go for its annual overhaul on Wednesday, and that cannot be delayed. Its last sailing was due today at 1.55 pm. Sailings to Arran on Wednesday will be from Troon, on the MV Alfred, and CalMac will advise later today how it intends to provide resilience cover from then. I have impressed on CalMac the Government’s requirement that the Arran route—the busiest on the network—is supported this week from Thursday and for the September weekend.
The cabinet secretary must be getting a real sense of déjà vu. I have lost count of how many times I have stood at the front bench and heard words such as “regret”, “sorry”, “frustration”, “concern” and “apologies” over endless breakdowns and cancellations on the route.
We are talking about a 1,000-passenger, three-decades-old vessel—it is no wonder that it is breaking down. It is utterly unbelievable that it has been out of action since February this year. It was due back in service to take over from its replacement, the MV Isle of Arran, which is now off for its annual service. That means that, today, there are no vessels—no services—running out of Ardrossan to the Isle of Arran. People cannot book on the MV Alfred tomorrow; we tried to do so just five minutes ago. That service is now full—understandably, because of its reduced capacity. The limited capacity is really affecting our island economies. None of that is good enough.
The cabinet secretary mentioned the Government’s frustration. What about the islanders’ frustration in all this? The problem has been in the making for nearly a decade. How on earth is CalMac going to magic a new vessel out of thin air to cover the Ardrossan to Arran route, and which other island will have to suffer as a consequence of that decision?
In my answer, I specifically stated that I shared the concerns of the people and communities of Arran. I am sure that part of the reason why the member is aware of these issues is that, since Sunday evening, CalMac has been engaging directly with all the various relevant stakeholders. The Isle of Arran ferry committee has already replied with its preferences about what should happen as part of the resilience and prioritisation measures that will now take place to ensure that the capacity is there.
The member is right to identify capacity as an issue—that is why CalMac is moving swiftly to ensure that there is capacity, especially for the coming busy weekend. Arran is obviously not the only community that will be affected, and that is why engagement is on-going. As I set out, there will be an announcement later this evening.
I really feel sorry for CalMac in all this, because it is constantly engaged in one big juggling act with vessels that are old and are breaking down. It is pulling vessels from other routes, and other islands are suffering. The whole thing is just one endless movement of vessels from one route to another—routes that those vessels should not be on in the first place.
Of course, it is not just the vessels that are breaking down; the whole port infrastructure is crumbling. Even when the Glen Sannox enters service on the Arran route—which I hope will be soon—it will operate out of Troon instead of Ardrossan. For how long that will be the case is anyone’s guess. Is it for weeks, months or years, or is it for ever? That is the problem—the people of Ardrossan simply do not know the answer to that question, because the Government decided to build a ferry that is not fit for purpose for the port from which it is intended to operate. That is unbelievable.
I want to raise the effect that the situation is having on Ardrossan’s economy, which we do not talk enough about. Tens of thousands of passengers are now trafficking through Troon and not Ardrossan, which is having a substantial effect on local businesses and the local economy. What does the cabinet secretary have to say to local businesses across North Ayrshire, which are in a situation that is the by-product of such catastrophic handling by the Government?
The focus on business is important. The member will be aware that, for the Isle of Arran in particular, measures to improve the situation have been taken as part of the current budget—for example, on business rates for hospitality businesses on the island.
That is on the island, but the member talked about port support issues on the mainland. Addressing the economic impact of that is part of the on-going work with North Ayrshire Council to help to finalise a business development plan. The frustration with that plan is that aspects of the legal and commercial negotiations are still outstanding and need to be resolved.
I urge all partners to work with my officials at Transport Scotland to find an expedient and beneficial conclusion in order to allow that business case to be finalised, because it can help to provide greater certainty. People—and especially businesses, because they want to be able to plan ahead—are looking for that certainty, so I appreciate the point that the member makes.
In the past 24 hours, a number of constituents have been in touch with me—people concerned that they will not make hospital appointments; a farmer who will not be able to get their lambs off the island to market tomorrow and so will have to wait another month; and a visitor, whose family of six, in two cars, including a disabled person, are stranded on the island. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the ferry crisis is becoming a national emergency?
On resilience, I made reference to the issue that will arise tomorrow. Katy Clark has laid out the personal impact that that will have on a number of people. The Lochranza service will be available to some, but not all—not least, perhaps, those in the examples that Katy Clark gave. That is why we need far more certainty and resilience, and why it is important that we expect the Glen Sannox to enter into service in the next few months, after delivery in the next few weeks and familiarisation. That will allow for the resilience aspect.
We have this period, which I recognise is a challenge. It is frustrating for individuals. As we have heard, it is also frustrating for CalMac, because it has to deal with reorganisation and with customers and passengers who have serious needs.
I recognise the situation. If anybody has a hospital appointment and there is an issue, they should contact CalMac. There might be capacity issues with booking the MV Alfred, but part of the new changes is about enabling reservations for people who are in emergency situations. I cannot guarantee that, but I encourage Katy Clark to let her constituents know about that.
Mr Petticrew, who is currently the chief executive officer of Ferguson Marine, seems to be suffering from more and more delays. David Tydeman was sacked after two; Mr Petticrew has had at least three.
What bunkering arrangements have been made at Troon to handle the liquefied natural gas fuel that is required for the new ferry? We have had 10 years to get that ready, and I would like to know what has been done.
The original question was about a gearbox on another vessel, but I will answer on the basis that I just mentioned the Glen Sannox, which Edward Mountain has asked about. The bunkering is as planned. The fuel will be delivered by vehicle, which was always the intention until such time as the Adrossan port was built. There will be more permanent bunkering as far as that is concerned.
Part of the current delays that we have seen with the Glen Sannox in the past few weeks related to the original issue of the temperature of the LNG. That has now been resolved and successful sea trials have commenced. There will be some further activity, as I just identified in my answer, but I hope that that gives Edward Mountain an understanding that the position has not changed.
Recent press reports suggest that the MV Isle of Lewis and the MV Isle of Mull will be sold from the fleet when the new ferries join. For more than a decade, I have been asking the Scottish Government to keep capacity in the fleet to provide cover for dry docking and for times of high demand, and to avoid the very circumstances that we are talking about today. Will the cabinet secretary reconsider the sale of those ships and ensure that there are two ships in the fleet at any one time to cover breakdowns, so that communities are not left high and dry in the future?
I will not speculate on media reports. What I can say is that Rhoda Grant makes a point about ensuring resilience in the fleet once the new vessels come in. Of course, that is about not only the Glen Sannox but the Glen Rosa and four other vessels. By 2026, there will be six new major vessels in the fleet.
The important point is how we sensibly use that resilience and how the cascading of vessels is used. I discussed that issue with leaders from our islands at the islands transport forum just last week. Again, this is about not only the six vessels that are coming on stream but the seven, after that, given the small vessel replacement programme. It is not just about the routes that the new vessels will go on; there will be a cascade impact, which we hope will provide the greater resilience that Rhoda Grant and others want to see.
Prisoners (Early Release Scheme)
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is regarding whether the early release scheme for prisoners has been a success. (S6T-02115)
The previous emergency release process was necessary to ensure that prisons could continue to function safely and effectively following a sharp and unexpected rise in the prison population. The emergency release power was limited to those with under 180 days left to serve; 65 per cent of those who were eligible had 90 days or less left to serve.
Important exclusions were put in place for domestic abuse and sexual offences, and there were additional ways in which victims could find out about the release of the prisoner in their case. I did not take that decision lightly, but it provided some critical breathing space for the Scottish Prison Service.
I made it clear to the Criminal Justice Committee that that was a short-term measure and that a number of other actions were needed. That is why we have increased investment in community-based interventions, alongside wider measures to support a sustainable reduction in the prison population.
We have had two recent prisoner release schemes. We know that, after the Covid releases, there was, at first, a brief decrease in numbers, but prisoner numbers then increased at a faster rate. Does the cabinet secretary agree that that seems to have happened again?
I do not think that I could have been any clearer when I took the emergency release provisions through the Parliament. I will quote remarks that I made to the Criminal Justice Committee on 12 June:
“Emergency release is not the solution to the prison population crisis; it will, however, provide the Prison Service with some time and capacity in the short term. That is critical in order to ensure that prisons can still function safely and focus on those who pose the greatest risk of harm.”—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 12 June 2024; c 3.]
The emergency early release provision did what it was intended to do. That is why, when I made the announcement back in May, I made two further announcements that were, in my view, critical to achieving a sustained reduction in our prison population.
Only five victims were informed of the prisoner releases. Victim Support Scotland is calling for the victim notification scheme to be reformed. Has the cabinet secretary had the opportunity to look at my amendment to the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill that would create an opt-out scheme rather than an opt-in scheme?
First and foremost, I very much want to improve the victim notification scheme and expand the number of people who choose to be part of it. If we are to adhere to the principles of trauma-informed practice, it is important that we do not provide victims with information that they have not sought. Therefore, supporting registration for the two existing statutory schemes is important.
In due course, with the support of the Minister for Victims and Community Safety and the Minister for Social Care, Mental Wellbeing and Sport, I will respond to the independent review’s recommendations on the victim notification scheme. It did not recommend an opt-out scheme rather than an opt-in scheme. Nonetheless, there are vital improvements that we can and will make to the scheme, and I will respond to those recommendations in due course.
It is clear that action is required to ensure that our prisons function safely. However, it remains the case that, compared with the rest of western Europe, we incarcerate proportionately higher numbers of people. What action is being taken to ensure that we have an effective system of punishment that, at the same time, is designed to rehabilitate and prevent societal and other factors from pushing people back into the criminal justice system?
I have always been clear that sustained, whole-system action is needed if we are to reduce the prison population in Scotland. For example, we have taken steps to increase the capacity of community justice services across Scotland, including by investing an additional £14 million in this financial year, which brings the total funding for community justice to £148 million. We have also increased the number of criminal justice social workers.
Continuing to increase community justice capacity is only part of the answer; we also need further and deeper action and reform. That is why I stress the importance of a system-wide response, including cross-Government action, as I outlined to the Criminal Justice Committee previously. Principally, the response is about health, housing and employability. In addition, as we said in our recent programme for government, we plan to propose legislation relating to the release process for prisoners, and we are establishing an externally led review of sentencing and penal policy.
We now know that the Scottish National Party Government’s promises to respect victims were utterly hollow, with hundreds of victims being left in the dark. In May, the cabinet secretary also said that she was considering bringing back automatic early release for long-term prisoners. Is she going to do that? Victims deserve to know.
As I have outlined, we undertook a consultation, as I committed to do, during the summer recess. We have received full and rich responses from our justice delivery partners and, crucially, from victims and victim support organisations. We all care about victims. There is no monopoly on putting victims at the very heart and centre of our criminal justice system.
There has been much to reflect on in the detail of the consultation responses. There has also been some reflection on the measures that have been taken south of the border. Of course, we will not mimic the previous United Kingdom Government, which had a secret release scheme over a period of six months. Without parliamentary approval, it released around 10,000 prisoners. However, other measures are being taken across the UK, the detail of which we will also explore.
Has the Scottish Government done any analysis of the new UK Government scheme to change the release date of prisoners? As a result of that scheme, around 1,700 prisoners were released initially, and a total of around 5,500 will be released when further tranches take place. Would that be a useful tool for the Scottish prison population?
As I intimated in my earlier answer, the previous and current UK Governments have taken action on that basis, which demonstrates that, across these isles, we are grappling with high prison population and the potential consequences of that.
The member is right: the previous UK Government released more than 10,000 prisoners early, between October 2023 and July 2024, and the actions of the new Labour UK Government will see thousands more released early to ease the high prison population there.
Changing the point of release for prisoners clearly has the potential to reduce the prison population. We would always take a risk-based approach. Our plans to legislate will take into account the UK Government’s programme, as well as the response to our public consultation.
Sustained action is needed if we are to bring about a reduction in our prison population, and that is why the measures that we are taking in the very short term are part of a much broader and wider programme.
That concludes topical question time. I will allow a moment for front-bench members to get organised for the next item of business.