Chamber and committees

Fulton MacGregor, do you have a follow-up question?

I welcome the crime statistics that were released this week, which show a fall in the number of crimes recorded by police last year. The Scottish Government’s vision for justice aims to shift the balance from short-term sentences to community-based interventions, which we know are more effective in reducing reoffending. How will the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Bill help to reduce reoffending, crime and future victimisation?

I thank Alex Cole-Hamilton for bringing this debate to the chamber. It offers us a real opportunity to discuss an issue that we should be debating a lot more: our national security. I want to reflect on what the Chinese balloon incident means for us all going about our daily lives and enjoying the freedom of living in a democracy.

There has been much commentary about that recent incident in the context of the wider threat that is posed to the west by China. Last summer, General Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff warned that China is

“increasing in their aggressiveness in their rhetoric, but also in their activity”,

noting that Chinese intercepts in the air and at sea have increased drastically over the past five years. Further, John Bolton, former US security adviser, recently described China as

“the existential threat in the 21st century”.

Other observers acknowledge that surveillance in the 21st century is an expected and everyday part of international relations. A recent commentary piece by the Royal United Services Institute described the event itself as

“neither new nor particularly notable”,

although it accepted that the balloon

“stayed in the country’s airspace for a longer period of time than its predecessors.”

Scotland is a safe place to live in, but the United Kingdom is not immune from the threat that is posed by bad actors. Many of us will recall the tragic terrorist murders of Jo Cox MP and David Amess MP, and the radicalisation of British citizens and their recruitment to Daesh during the Syrian conflict.

The current threat level for the UK is “substantial”, which means that an attack is likely. In his recent annual threat update, the director general of the Security Service, Ken McCallum, reiterated that

“No-one should be under any illusion about the breadth and variety of the threats we face”.

He said that those threats include

“Putin’s illegal invasion of Ukraine bringing war to Europe”

and

“an increasingly assertive Chinese Communist Party using overt and covert pressure to bend other countries to its will.”

He described how the

“Chinese authorities use all the means at their disposal to monitor ... and ... intimidate ... the Chinese diaspora”,

“from ... forcibly repatriating Chinese nationals to harassment and assault.”

Recent media coverage has focused on so-called overseas Chinese police stations, including one that was reported in Glasgow—a matter that Ross Greer raised with the First Minister late last year. I also note Alex Cole-Hamilton’s comments on his interaction with local students on their experiences.

The reach of the Chinese state also extends to using organisations such as the United Front Work Department to apply pressure on anyone who challenges the regime’s core interests, whether on democracy or human rights abuses. According to the director general,

“We can expect it to increase further as President Xi consolidates power on an indefinite basis.”

I welcome the establishment of the UK Government’s defending democracy task force, which will focus on protecting the democratic integrity of the UK from threats from foreign interference, including that of China. I ask the minister to provide an update on the task force’s engagement with the Scottish Government on its work.

In the meantime, I value and cherish the fact that we live in a nation in which police officers are not routinely armed; in which we can walk around our communities safely; and in which we can speak freely on the things that matter to us. We will not and must not be complacent as we maintain our focus on China’s growing sphere of influence in a volatile international environment, while defending our freedom and democracy.

I again thank Alex Cole-Hamilton for bringing forward an important motion for debate today.

Perhaps I can—

We are just about coming up to time, but, in recognition of the importance of and interest in this issue, I am happy to bring in a couple of final questions. I will start with Russell Findlay, who I know has a question, and then I will bring in Pauline McNeill.

I will shortly invite the cabinet secretary to make any further comments as he wishes. However, I will stay with the issue of revealing the whereabouts of a victim’s body. The cabinet secretary specifically referred to some of the circumstances where there are ECHR rights considerations. Would that include a situation where, for example, an individual who has been convicted of a murder is unable to disclose the whereabouts of a body? That could be because of a health condition that that person has, or, as the cabinet secretary mentioned, because they cannot remember: they might remember the broad area, but they cannot be specific about it because of the passage of time. Essentially, including a requirement to reveal the whereabouts of a victim’s body as part of the parole hearing process is akin to having two bites of the cherry, given that the refusal to reveal the whereabouts prior to sentencing would have already been taken into account when the sentence was imposed.

Our next item of business is consideration of the committee’s action plan. I refer members to paper 3. I intend to go through the paper section by section, just to confirm whether members have any comments, wish to make any amendments or, in fact, disagree with the assessments of progress to date.

The first section is on “The impact of COVID and recovery”. Do members wish to flag anything?

As members have no comments, we will move on to the section on “Prisons and prison reform”. It might be worth mentioning or including reference to the Promise, particularly in the part on women and children. In March 2022, there was an update on the Promise. Given that it is supporting young people who are care experienced and, ultimately, seeks to reduce the number of young people in care, it might be worth including that for reference.

Thanks. We have taken a note of that suggestion so that we can follow that up.

Thank you. Could you move your motion?

Thanks. Those are all relevant updates. I think that there is support from members for facilitating a visit to Cornton Vale once it is ready to receive visiting groups. We will pick that up.

This is perhaps not totally relevant to this section, but it is relevant to the action plan. I recently attended a meeting of the cross-party group on health inequalities, at which Wendy Sinclair-Gieben provided an update on the work to address health inequalities in prisons. She made the point that, in relation to the inspection work that she undertakes, her desire is that there will be an opportunity to undertake a review of the healthcare model in prisons, which members would agree is highly relevant to women. That is something to note.

The Scottish Drug Deaths Taskforce has done quite a bit of work on recovery cafes for its report, but I do not see an awful lot of specific reference to recovery cafes. We should monitor progress on that action.