---

Mrs. Adams: Does my hon. Friend agree that sentences passed on women are often much harsher than those passed on men who have committed a similar offence?

Ms Squire: Yes. A man in circumstances similar to those of Louise Clarke would have been dealt with far more leniently.

Mr. Michael Forsyth: I simply want to say that I am sorry if the hon. Lady's constituents did not receive an acknowledgement of their petition. It has been the policy in the Scottish Office, as a financial saving measure, not to acknowledge correspondence and representations when they are received, but to wait until there is a substantive response. However, we have just changed that policy, although it does involve additional cost, for the very reason that the hon. Lady gave--it causes concern to people who think that nothing is happening because they have received no acknowledgement. I shall look into the case that the hon. Lady raises.

Ms Squire: I thank the Secretary of State. I am sure that the family, friends and several hundred people who signed the petition will be glad to hear his statement.

Mrs. Fyfe: A little earlier, my hon. Friend the Member for Paisley, North (Mrs. Adams) said that a woman is likely to receive a harsher sentence than a man for a similar crime, including murder. That may come as a surprise to at least some of our colleagues but it is certainly the case. Women Members of Parliament probably follow those matters a bit more closely because we receive many letters about them. For example, I recall a case in an English court where a man got away with murdering his wife because she nagged him. Here is a case of a woman who suffered domestic violence for years and years before she finally snapped and committed murder. It is obvious that the woman is not a danger to society but that years of abuse drove her to those desperate straits. It was therefore completely unjustified to give her a harsh sentence.

20 Jan 1997 : Column 673

6.45 pm

Ms Squire: I thank my hon. Friend for those sentiments. I am confident that my constituents and the woman's family will take great comfort from her comments, with which I fully agree.

Such cases show the importance of greater monitoring of people placed in a position of trust and responsibility, particularly for young people. I know that that matter has been raised in the House.

That case emphasises the importance of prison and other staff being available for rehabilitative work with the women at Cornton Vale prison. My constituent's mother emphasised that the Cornton Vale staff were very understanding and supportive of her daughter, but she made it clear that the pressures and strains on staff meant that sufficient time and resources were not available.

Indeed, the staff must at times feel that they are as much prisoners of the regime in which they work as the prisoners themselves. They are imprisoned by overcrowding, insufficient staffing levels and too few resources. As was said earlier, they work in a tinderbox environment, which puts tremendous stress and strain on them. It does not allow them the job satisfaction that they would receive if they could offer the support and rehabilitative services necessary to ensure that women prisoners were discharged to lead full, happy and healthy lives.

Dr. Godman: Does my hon. Friend agree that one consequence of the new clause would be to lift some of that burden from the hard-working staff at Cornton Vale?

Ms Squire: I certainly agree with my hon. Friend. The new clause would benefit all the women at Cornton Vale prison, both prisoners and staff.

Earlier in the debate, my hon. Friend the Member for Greenock and Port Glasgow (Dr. Godman), in response to something that the Minister said, mentioned the role of highly skilled and qualified social work staff in providing rehabilitation and support services, and their involvement in the rehabilitation of young women such as those at Cornton Vale. I am extremely concerned by press reports over the weekend, which show that the Government are determined to add to their privatisation list by privatising social work services and removing the highly trained and qualified group of staff available to work with young women in prisons and elsewhere. Doing so will benefit the private sector rather than provide the high-quality, professional support and rehabilitative services that are needed if we are to reduce our prison population and create a safer and more stable society for everyone.

Mr. Menzies Campbell: Part of the debate so far has concentrated on the sentencing of women offenders. I do not wish to trespass on that aspect, but I urge caution in attempts to compare one case with another. There is no doubt that the circumstances of each criminal case are almost always unique. For example, while the family of the person convicted may consider a sentence to be unduly harsh, the family of the person who died may have a diametrically different view.

It is legitimate to argue that, so far as possible, there should be greater consistency in sentencing. The fact that the former Lord Justice-Clerk, Lord Ross, is now to have responsibility for the continuing professional education of

20 Jan 1997 : Column 674

judges seems a substantial and worthwhile step in the right direction. Perhaps out of that and other such initiatives, greater consistency may emerge.

We must also be careful not to form our judgment on the basis of newspaper reports of various cases. Often an important factor, tending towards leniency or suggesting that a more severe sentence should be imposed, is omitted from the report.

I shall begin my substantive remarks by congratulating the hon. Member for Dumbarton (Mr. McFall), who I see has slipped out for a moment, not just on the way that he proposed the new clause, but on the remarkable determination he demonstrated in ensuring that his constituents, to whom he referred in his speech, were afforded legal aid for the purpose of representation at the conjoined fatal accident inquiry that is to be held into the deaths of three unfortunate young women at Cornton Vale.

It was extraordinary behaviour on the part of the Scottish Legal Aid Board--the legal aid authorities in Scotland--that legal aid was not immediately allowed when an application for that purpose was made to it. It is difficult to conceive of any issue in which an individual has a greater interest than in being represented at an inquiry whose purpose is to seek to determine the cause of death of that individual's daughter, in this case.

I was a member of the old Legal Aid Central Committee and for a year before entering the House was a member of the Scottish Legal Aid Board. From time to time, I had to deal with such applications or appeals in relation to such applications. I find it extraordinary that the board should have taken the view that it took. I hope that we will see no repetition of that. The board operates under statute. If its conduct is unreasonable, it will be open to judicial review. We would all regard it as an unnecessary waste of public funds if applicants for legal aid were compelled to go the Court of Session seeking judicial review of what seemed patently unreasonable decisions. In that regard, we should all recognise the determination of the hon. Member for Dumbarton, and congratulate him.

Dr. Godman: I offer the hon. and learned Gentleman my compliments on his remarks about the Scottish Legal Aid Board. I hope that they are brought to the board's attention. In the near future, there is to be yet another fatal accident inquiry into yet another suicide at Greenock prison. I hope that the board will act much more sympathetically than in the case to which the hon. and learned Gentleman referred.

Mr. Campbell: The hon. Gentleman contributes often to these debates and, on this occasion as on many others, he makes a perceptive and constructive contribution.

Cornton Vale prison was designed in the 1960s and built in the early 1970s. Its design and construction were a direct response to the physical inadequacy of Gateside prison in Greenock, in the hon. Gentleman's constituency, where the physical conditions were generally regarded as wholly inappropriate for the proper treatment, care and imprisonment of female offenders.

It is now 30 years since the original conception of Cornton Vale. In the aftermath of the most recent suicide, I put forward the view, not as a panacea or an easy response, that it was now time to consider whether

20 Jan 1997 : Column 675

Cornton Vale is a suitable institution, in terms of its physical characteristics, for the care of those who are on remand or those who have been imprisoned.

I am not an expert in penology of this kind, but if the physical characteristics of Cornton Vale are inappropriate, we should not shrink from considering whether to close the facility and build somewhere else something that contains the physical characteristics appropriate to deal with the young women on which much of the debate has centred.

Mr. Michael Connarty (Falkirk, East): Does the hon. and learned Gentleman accept that Cornton Vale will not have been enhanced by the fact that the Secretary of State proposes to give over one of the wings to young offenders? That would reduce the complex, where I used to be a prison visitor, to two thirds of its previous size, and mix the prisoners, placing women prisoners and young offenders side by side.

Mr. Campbell: The hon. Gentleman has an advantage over me if he has been a prison visitor at Cornton Vale; I have visited it only in a professional capacity, and therefore may not have seen all parts of it, as the hon. Gentleman has.

When a series of suicides has occurred, as has been the case, one must be willing to think the unthinkable. My argument is that we need a root-and-branch approach to the question of how we deal with women who are caught up in the criminal law system, whether on remand or after conviction. If, as a result of such a review, it became clear that the physical characteristics of Cornton Vale were inappropriate, as Gateside was in the 1960s, we should be prepared to take the step of closing the facility and building a more appropriate one.

---