Chamber and committees

One standout point in your submission related to the significant pressures arising from investigations of deaths and the increasing number of post-mortems. That point certainly caught my attention. It is helpful that both your submissions are very detailed. There is a lot for members to ask about, so thank you for that answer, Mr Logue.

I will come back to funding provision and multiyear funding. You might be aware that a similar process of pre-budget scrutiny has been undertaken by the Finance and Public Administration Committee, which has heard strong evidence from the Scottish Fiscal Commission and Audit Scotland that the Scottish Government should adopt a longer-term approach to budgeting, including multiyear plans. That is nothing new for this committee. Obviously, that would offer greater flexibility for managing challenges, balancing future needs and so on.

Do you agree with that analysis? I am interested in hearing about how a multiyear funding approach would support Scottish courts and tribunals.

I will give you the final word if you wish, Mr Logue. You do not have to add anything.

For our next panel of witnesses, we are joined by representatives of the Scottish Prison Service. I extend a warm welcome to Teresa Medhurst, chief executive; Linda Pollock, deputy chief executive; and Gerry O’Donnell, director of finance. I intend to allow about 75 minutes for the session. I ask for concise questions and responses, and for brevity, as there is a lot to get through and a lot that we are interested in.

In addition to papers 1 and 2, which members already have, I refer members to the written submission from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland, which was circulated separately and is relevant to our questions.

I will kick things off with general opening questions for Teresa Medhurst. In your view, what are the main financial challenges that are facing the Scottish Prison Service? What advice has the SPS given to the Scottish Government on the budget resources that are needed for prisons in 2025-26?

I have a couple of questions that I am interested in picking up on from the submission from HMIPS. Theresa Medhurst touched on Castle Huntly prison in earlier evidence. I note that, in the recently published thematic review on progression, there was a reference to significant improvements being required in individualised case management, and in training and development of staff, if people in prison are to progress to less secure conditions—such as in Castle Huntly—in preparation for release, thereby optimising the benefits of the underused capacity. Are there specific blockages or challenges—for example, around staff training and development—that are adding to that and which, from a budgetary point of view, are of interest to the committee?

Agenda item 2 is pre-budget scrutiny. Our focus today is on the courts, the prosecution service and prisons. We have two panels of witnesses this morning. Our first panel consists of representatives of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. I am pleased that we are joined by Malcolm Graham, the chief executive of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service—welcome to your new role—and John Logue, the Crown Agent at the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. I offer you both a very warm welcome.

I refer members to papers 1 and 2. I also refer members to the FDA union’s written submission, which was circulated separately and is relevant to our questioning of Mr Logue. We thank the FDA union for its submission.

I intend to allow about 75 minutes for this session. I will begin by asking the witnesses an opening general question to set the scene, after which we will move on to other members’ questions.

What do you see as being the main financial challenges that your organisation faces, and what is the latest position on any discussions that you have had with the Scottish Government on your budget for 2025-26?

I should say that we still have three members seeking to come in, and there will probably be a couple of supplementary questions, so I will just stop you there, Mr Graham.

Liam Kerr has a supplementary question.

Thank you very much, chief constable—that is very helpful. I will open up questions to members. As usual, I will come in with the first question, which is about capital funding.

In your comprehensive submission, you indicate that you require capital funding of £83 million to deliver your basic rolling replacement programme of things such as fleet, systems and equipment. You also set out that, in the longer term—up to 2029—you will require capital investment of around £565 million. You explain how investing in areas such as new technologies, improved working conditions and better equipment leads to more efficiency in the service, particularly from the point of view of delivery to the public. In other words, there is a spend-to-save benefit. Could you provide a bit more detail on what those benefits would be and what the impact would be of not receiving the increased capital investment that you have set out?

Good morning and welcome to the 32nd meeting of the Criminal Justice Committee in 2024. We have no apologies today.

Our first agenda item is to welcome Liam Kerr as a new member and to invite him to declare any interests relevant to the work of the Criminal Justice Committee.

I am sorry to interrupt, but is that £22.5 million the current figure per annum?