MSPs Vote To End Automatic Early Release

A new law designed to end automatic early release of prisoners will not do so for long-term convicts while others may still be allowed out early, MSPs have heard.

Holyrood has passed the Prisoners (Control of Release) Bill which ends the system of automatic early release for certain prisoners'' by 67 votes, with 46 opposition MSPs abstaining amid concerns over the drafting of the Bill.

Short-term prisoners are currently entitled to release halfway through their sentence, while long-term prisoners get out after two thirds.

Under the reforms, short-term prisoners will serve the full term of their sentence in jail unless the parole board decides they can be let out early.

Long-term prisoners will be let out six months early for supervision, but Labour and the Law Society suggested they should be let out even earlier for a longer period in the community.

Serious criminals such as sexual or violent offenders will face longer periods of supervision after their custodial sentence.

The Conservatives sought to delay the reform for further consultation, but this was rejected by Parliament.

Justice Secretary Michael Matheson said: Discretionary early release will still be possible following these reforms, but automatic early release is either ended or severely curtailed for long-term prisoners.

We think it is right to trust the independent parole board so that they can continue to consider cases of individual prisoners, and make decisions about whether to authorise on the basis of an assessment of the individual and what risk they pose to the public.''

Prisoners released automatically were seven times more likely to breach their bail conditions and five times more likely to be recalled to prison than those released at the discretion of the parole board, he said.

The Bill was amended to provide a six-month period of monitoring, to prevent prisoners being released cold'' with no supervision of how they were reintegrating into the community.

Mr Matheson said: This will mean in practice that a long-term prisoner without an extended sentence will be released with six months left on their sentence.

This release will include licence conditions for supervision to help the prisoner reintegrate into the community and ensure steps can be taken to recall the prisoner into custody if breach of conditions occur.''

Labour community safety spokeswoman Elaine Murray said: The Bill before us this afternoon does not end automatic early release, and nor should it.

The Bill provides that prisoners should serve the last six months of their sentence under licence and supervised in the community.''

Labour sought to extend the amount of time prisoners would serve on licence by up to one-sixth of their sentence, but this was rejected by Parliament.

She said the Bill is an improvement on the current situation, but the judiciary may alter the sentences imposed for serious offences to reflect the law which states they must serve longer in prison.

She added: Is six months an adequate time to serve in the community under licence?

The Law Society expressed its reservations stating that the reduced licence period of six months may be wholly inadequate to assist integration into the community and reduce the risk of offending.''

She added: The Government has not been able to provide evidence that a six-month supervisory sentence for all long-term prisoners is proportionate or sufficient.

It has not provided evidence that public safety will not be compromised if somebody has not actually engaged appropriately within six months.

There is also the argument that six months, if you didn't conform to the conditions of the licence, you would only be back inside for a short period and be back out again, so it wouldn't necessarily be effective for all prisoners.

It is for these reasons, and with considerable regret, that Scottish Labour cannot support this Bill.''

Conservative justice spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell MSP said the provisions of the Bill relating to automatic early release only cover 3% of prisoners.

Ms Mitchell said: Despite the Cabinet Secretary's efforts at stage two to attempt to justify the Bill, witnesses and stakeholders maintain that section one is not fit for purpose.

There has been absolutely no attempt to carry out the necessary, meaningful scrutiny and debate about the provisions which have been described by the Law Society of Scotland as possibly the most radical change in custodial sentencing for 22 years.''

She quoted from a briefing on the Bill prepared by a group which included academics, the Howard League for Penal Reform in Scotland, Apex Scotland and the Scottish Association of Social Workers.

They said: It will not end automatic early release, it will not reduce re-offending and it will not improve public safety in the longer term; indeed it is likely to jeopardise both public safety and reintegration.''

Ms Mitchell said: In these circumstances, it would be foolhardy to support this Bill.''

Commenting on the briefing, Alison McInnes MSP, the Liberal Democrats' justice spokeswoman, said: I have some sympathy for their argument that the Bill has not been entirely substantiated.

For example there is less than comprehensive evidence supporting the flat six-month release.

Nevertheless I think the Cabinet Secretary has today set out in some detail why he considers we should still proceed with the Bill as amended and I'm also mindful that the Risk Management Authority and the Parole Board are broadly supportive of the legislation.''

She urged the Scottish Government to develop a bold and ambitious'' strategy to bring an end to theprimitive, punitive approach'' causing people to be sent to prison.

Ms McInnes said: This Bill is a reminder of the Scottish Government's record of disjointed penal reform. It reforms early release for some prisoners in isolation and neglects many more pressing priorities.

Why haven't successes in reducing youth offending been rolled out more widely yet? Where is the concerted shift towards diversion from prosecution or effective community based sentences, and where are the plans to further reduce senseless, destructive short-term sentences or to reduce the numbers on remand?''