Chamber and committees

Our next panel of witnesses consists of Dr Hannah Graham, senior lecturer in sociology, social policy and criminology in the faculty of social sciences at the University of Stirling; Professor Fergus McNeill, professor of criminology and social work at the University of Glasgow; and Professor Lesley McAra, professor of penology at Edinburgh law school, University of Edinburgh, who joins us online. I extend a warm welcome to you all.

We move straight to questions, for which we have around an hour. I will open with a general question in reference to the joint submission from Dr Graham and Professor McNeill in which you comment on the grounds for refusing bail. Your joint submission says:

“The proposed two-part test for grounds for refusing bail, centring on public safety and risk of harm, is reasonable. It is constructive that safety considerations of complainers are acknowledged within this.”

We have just heard evidence from Victim Support Scotland, which is keen to put victims’ voices at the heart of the process of considering bail. In the context of the comments that you have made, do you have further comments given what we have heard this morning? Perhaps Dr Graham could start, followed by Professor McNeill, and then I will bring in Professor McAra.

Thank you for that. I will open up the questioning. Fergus, I think that you wanted to come in. I am sorry—I meant Fulton; I am getting my Ferguses and Fultons muddled up. Then Jamie Greene has a question. In fact, Jamie wants to ask a quick follow-up question now, after which I will bring in Fulton MacGregor.

I make a plea for fairly short and succinct questions and answers. Members have lots of questions and I am trying to balance constructive responses with nice, neat questions.

Might I—

We have run well over time, but it has been an important and valuable session. I have a final question; I ask for succinct answers. As Fergus McNeill said, we have found it difficult to move away from discussing bail, but I would like to ask about release planning and throughcare support.

With the aim of supporting the successful reintegration of prisoners into the community, the bill includes provisions on release planning and standards of throughcare support. In your view, are the proposals in the bill helpful? What changes, if any, would you like to be made to the provisions that are outlined?

We will start with Fergus and then go to Lesley.

Does Russell Findlay want to come back in?

Thank you. That completes our public business.

Emma Bryson, would you like to come in on that?

I will follow up on some of Collette Stevenson’s questions and ask about communication with victims.

The witnesses might be aware that the committee had a private meeting with survivors. One thing that came through to me loud and clear from that was the mixed picture that exists in relation to contact and communication between, in particular, the courts and a victim while a case is being processed to make clear to the victim what is happening and enable them to plan their and their family’s life around it.

What opportunity might the bill provide on that? We are focusing on bail, remand, throughcare and release, but a key part of that work is communication with victims. Is there an opportunity for the bill to improve the lines of communication? If so, how would you like them to be improved?

That is helpful; we appreciate that.

Do any other members have questions?