Site news
Sign up to receive an
occasional bulletin about new content.
Sign up to receive an
occasional bulletin about new content.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Last week in Parliament a bill which seeks to ban the public display of tobacco cleared its stage 1 debate, and there were also some questions about marches and parades in Glasgow.
The Justice Committee
Once again, most of the Committee’s meeting was spent behind closed doors. There were a number of items of subordinate legislation to consider before they went into private recess which they noted without comment.
The minutes of the meeting reveal what was discussed in private afterwards. The Committee debated whether they should carry out an inquiry into the Government’s decision to release the Lockerbie bomber or not, which came down to a vote with the 3 SNP MSPs voting against and everyone else voting in favour. The Committee will therefore begin this inquiry in the near future. This will be a short inquiry which will focus on the way in which Mr. al-Megrahi’s application for compassionate release (and Libya’s application for prisoner transfer) were handled, rather than the merits of the final decision to release on compassionate grounds.
The minutes also reveal items that the Committee are considering working on in the future, including progress with the implementation of summary justice reforms and training for the judiciary.
You can read the minutes of the meeting in the Meeting Papers
The Chamber
Tobacco and Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Bill – Stage 1 debate
Last Thursday the Chamber debated Stage 1 of a bill which seeks to ban the public displays of tobacco products in shops. The Tobacco and Primary Medical Services Bill will also ban cigarette vending machines, introduce a registration scheme for some retailers, issue fixed penalty notices for retailers who sell cigarettes to under 18s, and banning orders to prevent retailers selling cigarettes if they continually flout the law. The Bill has been considered by the Health and Sports Committee.
The Chamber voted in favour of Stage 1 of the debate by majority, with only the Conservatives voting against. Their opposition was based on the argument that there was no conclusive evidence that banning Tobacco displays would reduce the number of smokers, and that this would have a serious and detrimental effect on small retail business. Despite this however, the Bill was passed and will now return to the Committee to be discussed further at Stage 2.
You can read the full transcripts of the debate in the Official Report, or watch it on Holyrood.TV. You can also read more about the Bill on the Official Bill homepage
Questions
Justice of the Peace Court Reform
During general questions, Elaine Murray (Lab) asked the Justice Secretary about the reforms of the Justice of the Peace Courts, which are taking place across the country. These reforms to the administration of summary justice flow from the Criminal Proceedings etc (Reform) (Scotland) Act 2007, and seek to rationalise the operations of the lower courts in Scotland. They have been criticised by several MSPs for closing district courts their constituencies, and the the previous attempt by the Justice Secretary to close this particular court was voted down in the Justice Committee.
The Scottish Court Service has ‘recommended’ to the Cabinet Secretary that the court in question, which is in Ms Murray’s constituency, should be shut down, but if the Government wishes to do this it has to secure a vote from the Parliament first, either in Committee or by the whole Chamber.
Elaine Murray urged the Cabinet Secretary not to proceed with this closure, reminding him that although the SCS have recommended it, it is unlikely that it would be agreed to by the Committee second time around and neither would it be likely to succeed in a vote in the Parliament.
Kenny MacAskill replied that he had received the recommendation from the SCS and he was still “considering” the options available, saying he was in discussions with the Justice Committee and others about how to proceed.
You can read the question in the Official Report
The Policing of Marches and Parades in Glasgow
There were a series of questions about the policing of marches and parades in Glasgow. Bill Butler (Lab) began by pointing out that although Edinburgh receives extra money which covers events such marches and parades, Glasgow in fact hosts over twice as many marches and parades than Edinburgh does, and should therefore receive additional funding as well.
Kenny MacAskill replied that Edinburgh receives the extra funding for ‘cultural events’ which occur because it is a capital city, which are very different from the sorts of parades, such as Orange marches, that often occur in Glasgow. He said that although he recognised the strain on resources that these parades cause, he trusted local authorities to ensure the correct balance between public safety and people’s rights to parade were met.
In supplementary questions, Bob Doris (SNP) drew the Parliament‘s attention to a proposed demonstration held by the ‘English Defence League’ outside mosques in Glasgow, and he urged the Justice Secretary to ensure that these parades could not take place. Mr MacAskill replied once again that whether these parades went ahead or not was a matter for local authorities only but that the Government would support local authorities “when they act in defence of their communities.”
In another supplementary question, Jack McConnell (Lab) asked whether the Cabinet Secretary would respect a written agreement between the Scottish police forces and marching organisations which was signed under the previous Executive. He said that the Government should continue to support the agreement, by taking an active approach to monitoring its implementation, rather than waiting for police to raise the issue. Kenny MacAskill replied by talking about the Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2006 which allowed local authorities to exercise discretion about deciding which marches were acceptable and which were not. Mr McConnell raised a point of order after the Cabinet Secretary had stopped talking, because he was referring to a written concordat and not the 2006 Act, but there was no more time for questions, so he was instructed to write to the Justice Secretary instead if he wanted more information.You can read this question in the Official Report.
Written Questions
There were a number of written questions about the number of crimes in the Lothian and Borders, the number of beds in drug and alcohol treatment centres and the number of prosecutions for drug possession. There was a question about the number of direct measures which had been issued for charges of assault and a number of questions about prisons, including the numbers held in the open estate and the future of prison visiting committees.
Posted by KM
on Tue 29th Sep 2009
at 9:25 am
• Permalink • Tell-a-Friend