Document Sample
					J1/S2/05/32/3 J1/S2/05/26/3



J1/S2/05/32/3 J1/S2/05/26/3
SUBMISSION BY ACPOS TO INFORM THE JUSTICE 1 & 2 COMMITTEES CONSIDERATION OF THE POLICE BUDGETS FOR 2006/2007 AND 2007/2008 1. 1.1 INTRODUCTION The Secretary of the ACPOS Finance Management Business Area has been invited to attend a joint meeting of the Justice 1 & 2 Committees on 26 October 2005 to discuss aspects of the Police Budgets for 2006/2007 and 2007/2008. In particular the Committee is looking for an ACPOS view on the following budgetary considerations: • the additional £56/£109m for the police service in Scotland to cover pay and pension increases to allow for additional recruitment to offset a peak in other officer retirements around 2009/2010. Is this figure realistic? Justice “Target 1”: To continue to increase the police clear-up rate for serious violent crime. What is the desired level of improvement? some comment on proposed efficiency savings: Time releasing savings and cash releasing savings. The effect of these measures from an ACPOS perspective.


• •

2. 2.1

BACKGROUND As part of the 2004 Spending Review process ACPOS produced an Assessed Needs statement covering the 3 year period 2005/2006 to 2007/2008. This identified the cost of maintaining existing levels of service. It did not include additional funding to meet new legislative demands nor the cost of ill health retirals which the Executive have hitherto been reluctant to fund and consequently have been absorbed within Police Force budgets for a number of years. Included were a number of items, which had been funded by 100% grant up to 2005/2006, but were to be absorbed within GAE from 2006/2007 onwards. The Assessed Need figures for the three years were: £000 1,007 1,048 1,097

2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008 2.2

The 2004 Spending Review outcome provided some additional resources for accelerated recruitment to mitigate the impact of the peak in retirements around 2009/2010 (see paragraph 3.6 of this note) and also for a levelling up of GAE to facilitate the transition to the new GAE Distribution formula. A comparison between the Assessed Need and the published GAE figures for Police is shown below:


J1/S2/05/32/3 J1/S2/05/26/3
2005/2006 £000 1,007 1 1,008 1,004 4 2006/2007 £000 1,048 2 3 1,053 1,045 8 2007/2008 £000 1,097 3 7 1,107 1,099 8

Assessed Need Accelerated Recruitment GAE Levelling Up Police GAE Shortfall 2.3

It can be established that forces are currently required to achieve efficiency savings of £4m/£8m/£8m in 2005/2006 to 2007/2008 in addition to the cash and non cashable efficiency savings targets imposed by the Scottish Executive. This has been acknowledged by the Executive and the cashable efficiency targets for the Service over this period is £4m/£4m/£4m. In addition forces are required to absorb the cost of meeting new legislative demands and ill health retirals within their cash limited budgets. Of the additional funding made available for pension increases in the 2004 Spending Review, £29m was provided for the first peak of retrials in 2005/06 and £13 each year for 2006/2007 and 2007/2008. In 2005/2006 the position has been helped by the pay award for police being 0.5% less than budgeted for. This has contributed some £2.5m towards plugging the funding gap. Many forces have invested considerable effort into improving both their absence levels and reducing the number of ill health retirals. The reduction in the number and cost of ill health retirals has assisted in reducing the funding gap whereas the improvement in attendance levels has produced time releasing efficiency gains. In summary forces are already achieving cash and time releasing efficiency savings to ensure service levels are maintained in the face of a funding shortfall within the current financial year. The level and type of efficiency savings achieved by forces is illustrated in the ACPOS Best Value Annual reports for 2003/2004 and 2004/2005.





3. 3.1

ADEQUACY OF THE BUDGETS FOR 2006/2007 AND 2007/2008 The funding shortfall experienced in 2005/2006 persists and in fact increases to £8m per annum in 2006/2007 and 2007/2008. In addition to meeting this funding shortfall forces will also be required to absorb the cost of ill health retirals and the impact of new legislative demands. Continued efforts in managing down the cost of ill health retirals will be essential to achieving these challenging financial targets. The Police service in Scotland continues to meet the challenge of enforcing new legislation, however the pace of legislative change coupled with insufficient additional resources places a great strain on the already stretched resources. Examples of these demands include Community Planning, Anti Social Behaviour, Freedom of Information,




J1/S2/05/32/3 J1/S2/05/26/3
Public Reassurance, level 2 crime, Bichard and increased costs associated with Counter Terrorism. 3.4 ACPOS has already highlighted the need for additional resources to assist in combating terrorism and it is essential funding is on a par with England and Wales if an effective and co-ordinated approach to terrorism is to be achieved. Arrangements are in hand to put in place new provisions to fund Police pensions in England and Wales. At present the "pay as you go" system leads to volatility in pension costs and an ever increasing percentage of Police budgets required to meet pension costs. The new system provisions will see the introduction of an employer’s contribution, which along with officers’ contributions, will be used to fund future pension costs. This will reduce volatility in this area but will cost more than the present system. It is essential that additional resources be allocated to forces if the new arrangements are to be implemented in Scotland within the current spending review. The 2004 Spending Review acknowledged the requirement to offset a peak in Police Officer retirements forecasted for 2009/2010. Additional resources of £1.5m in 2006/2007 rising to £3m in 2007/2008 will enable the accelerated recruitment of 60 Police Officers in 2006/2007 and 120 in 2007/2008. This will mitigate the impact of retirals in 2009/2010, which are projected to be 300+ more than the average. A 2 year lead time is necessary to ensure new recruits have at least probationary training. This will mitigate but not eradicate the significant loss of experienced officers, which will impact on service delivery. The ability of forces to meet existing and increasing demands on the service relies on a number of factors: • • • • • • continued efforts to improve attendance levels and managing down the number and cost of ill health retirals recognition that aspects of new legislation have a significant impact on Police resources and without the introduction of additional resources it will not be possible to enforce new legislation and maintain existing levels of service a review of resources provided by the Executive to combat terrorism and also other key areas of national policy if new pension funding arrangements are to be introduced in Scotland, additional funds will be required police pay awards in line with or less than budgeted for forces continuing to attain current levels of efficiency gains.







J1/S2/05/32/3 J1/S2/05/26/3
4.1 The ACPOS Policing Priorities for Scotland 2003 – 2006 is the foundation upon which the police service in Scotland created a framework to determine and deliver strategic operational priorities. The engagement of criminality is highlighted as a key concern and and in particular addresses violent crime. Two targets were set; • • 4.2 reduce the incidence of serious violent crime by 5% by the end of 2005/6 increase the clear-up rate for violent crime by 2% by the end of 2005/6

ACPOS intended to monitor progress towards these targets by using the Audit Scotland definition of serious violent crime however the criteria applied has altered in succesive years making comparison at a national level difficult. The Scottish Crime Recording Standard has also impacted on statistics. ACPOS will endeavour to establish meaningful data on performance in this area at the end of the specified period but accurate information is not easily or readily available at present. The Scottish Crime Recording Standard (SCRS) was introduced on 1 April 2004, although a number of forces took some of the changes on board in advance of that date. The new standard is based on the victim oriented approach of the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) introduced in England and but has incorporated additional elements around victimless crime, auditing procedures and circumstances where police officers happen upon a crime. In practice, this means that no corroborative evidence is required initially to record a crime related incident (as defined by the SRCS) as a crime, if it is perceived as such by the victim or another person. In effect, this move to a prima facie model of crime recording is resulted in an increase in the number of crimes recorded by the police during 2004/2005. Introduction of the recording standard and national guidelines has regularised recording practices within and across forces, providing a more consistent base for operational planning and performance evaluation. Full impact of this significant change to recording practices and its effect on recorded crime figures continues to be examined. For the first time, all eight of Scotland’s police forces began to use the same methods to record crimes and offences allowing crime levels to be compared accurately across the forces. This will lead to a more realistic picture of crime to emerge and will assist in identifying trends and problem areas at a strategic level. The Scottish Executive Draft Budget for 2006/7 was published in September 2005. The Justice Division proposes; Objective 1 Targetting the causes of crime, and tackling directly, especially violent crime To increase the police clear-up rate for serious violent crime. Desired level of improvement to be discussed with police forces




Target 1


For many people, recorded crime remains the definitive measure of police effectiveness and yet headline figures can be misleading and open to misinterpretation. They do not always reflect the real level of crime as not all crimes are reported to the police or are detected by them.


J1/S2/05/32/3 J1/S2/05/26/3
4.7 Recent significant academic work (Mollar & Sheridan 2004) and Crime Surveys such as the Scottish Crime Survey can provide a more complete picture of the extent of most types of personal victimisation. For a number of reasons it is believed that violent crime is widely under reported. The extent of under reporting has a direct relationship to the seriousness of the crime. It is likely that all murders are made known to the police and most attempt murders. Significantly fewer robberies and serious assaults are reported but nonetheless are serious crimes of violence. There are occasions when police action to tackle crime more effectively, for example drug crime, may lead to an increase rather than a decrease in recorded crime and that increase may be an indication of success. In addition, where public confidence in the police service grows, it is almost inevitable that people will report more crime in the expectation that the police will be in a position to assist. Experience in recording child abuse, domestic abuse and racist incidents in particular, tends to suggest that this is the case. ACPOS is keen to establish a more accurate picture of Violence in Scotland. A Violence Reduction Unit based at Strathclyde Police has been established to promote policies that will encourage victims of violence to make these crimes known to the police. A draft reluctant witness protocol has been prepared and a system of Injury Surveillance is being developed to allow an accurate flow of data between Scottish Hospitals and the police offering a more detailed picture of violence and its true nature and extent. Each of these strands is contained within the Violence Reduction Strategy which seeks in the long term to reduce violence in its entirety. ACPOS are in discussions with the Scottish Executive for support to apply the Strategy throughout Scotland. In the immediate future the effect of this Strategy is likely to produce an increase in the levels of reported crime and a consequential proportional decrease in clear-up rates. If effective, the strategy will cause short-term pain but produce long-term benefits. EFFICIENCY SAVINGS The Police Service in Scotland has been proactive in demonstrating its commitment to achieving Best Value and value for money. In 2003/2004 ACPOS produced an annual report on how forces had performed in terms of Best Value. This report identified efficiency savings achieved in 2003/2004 and the process has been refined with the production of the 2004/2005 Annual Report on Best Value. The latest report identifies that efficiency savings from the Scottish Police Forces have risen from £7m in 2003/2004 to £15m in 2004/2005, a rise of 114%. As far as we are aware Police are unique in producing such a report which captures activity across the whole service in Scotland. The 2004/2005 Annual Report on Best Value analyses the efficiency savings by the Efficient Government classifications of: • • • • • better procurement improvements in internal organisation and management investing in the workforce investing in technology joint working and shared services




5. 5.1



J1/S2/05/32/3 J1/S2/05/26/3
• • • managing absence streamlining bureaucracy asset management.

Savings and improvements have been made across all of the above categories. 5.3 The Police Service in Scotland has also participated in the Efficient Government initiative and many of the bids put forward, including some of those accepted to move forward to stage 2 have Police involvement. In this context Police forces have expressed a willingness to work collectively and/or in collaboration with other emergency services, local authorities and other agencies in pursuit of efficiency gains. Discussions have taken place between representatives from ACPOS and the Crown Office Procurator Fiscal Service with a view to exploring opportunities to work closely together to unlock efficiencies within the Criminal Justice sector. This recognises how the actions of each body impacts on the other and shows a willingness to work together for the good of the public purse. ACPOS has been aware for some time of the cash releasing efficiency saving targets of £4m/£4m/£4m over the period 2005/2006 to 2007/2008. It is noted that the Scottish Executive recently published targets for time releasing savings of £10m/£35m/£50m over the same period. These figures were produced and published on the Executive’s Website without advanced notification to or consultation with ACPOS and it has been difficult to establish the basis for these levels of savings. A degree of confusion also exists in relations to cash releasing eProcurement efficiency savings set for all ‘Public Sector bodies’ in Scotland of £50m in the current year, rising to £100m in 2006/2007 and £150m in 2007/2008. It is not clear if this has already been taken account of in the police targets and, if not, what proportion of the total the Police Service is expected to achieve. Again there has been no discussion with ACPOS in relation to this and, unhelpfully, efforts to clarify the position through the Justice Department have to date proved unsuccessful. While little guidance exists on how this process is to work in practice, ACPOS has already turned its attention to how it will deal with this matter. Meetings have taken place between Force Finance Officers and those with responsibility for best value in forces to discuss how information on efficiency savings is to be captured and how progress towards achieving the targets is to be monitored. It has been suggested that Force Finance Officers will lead on this issue with governance provided by ACPOS Finance Management Business Area and reported to ACPOS Council. Preliminary discussions have taken place with our colleagues in England and Wales to establish areas of good practice which exist. As part of this work ACPOS are drafting counting rules for presentation to the Scottish Executive to ensure clarity on what will or wont be regarded as efficiency savings. Thought has also been given as to how we apportion savings targets among forces while capturing and scoring efficiency gains which arise from national projects such as Airwave. Previous work undertaken by ACPOS in developing templates for capturing savings as part of the Best Value Annual Report will assist in taking this work forward. During discussions between forces it has been established that work on achieving efficiency savings is ongoing in each force.







J1/S2/05/32/3 J1/S2/05/26/3
5.9 The targets set by the Scottish Executive of £10m/£35m/£50m are extremely challenging, particularly in years 2 and 3. However, ACPOS has already demonstrated a commitment to achieving efficiency savings and has evidenced this in its Best Value Annual Reports. This provides forces with a base to work towards achievement of the efficiency targets. Many of the efficiency savings achieved to date are necessary to bridge the funding gap which exists and also to meet additional demands placed on the Police Service. It is important that achievement of efficiency savings are recognised in this context rather than viewed as an opportunity to reduce funding in the future.


RESPONSE TO THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT JUSTICE COMMITTEES Submission by the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland October 2005


1. 1.1

INTRODUCTION This paper represents the latest response by ACPOS to the ongoing consultation process between the Scottish Police Service and the Finance Committees of the Scottish Executive on the Budget Process 2006 -2007. Specifically, it responds to a request for detail arising from matters arising in the course of an appearance of Mr Doug Cross, ACPOS Finance Business Area before the Justice Committees on 26 October 2005. Whilst received on the 27 October, ACPOS was required to respond by 16.00hrs on 28 October 2005. The additional information requested was, as related in the e-mail of 27 October 2005 from Mr Douglas Wands, Senior Assistant Clerk, detail in respect of: “1. Consultation between Scottish Executive and ACPOS regarding Justice portfolio Target 1 "To continue to increase the police clear-up rate for serious violent crime. Desired level of improvement to be discussed with police forces." The Committees requested details from ACPOS of the consultation process which has taken place between police forces and the Scottish Executive to determine the "desired level of improvement" since this target was published in Draft Budget 2005-06. 2. Resources devoted to implementation of Antisocial Behaviour etc. (Scotland) Act 2004. The Committees requested details, on a force by force basis, of the resources devoted to implementing the provisions of the Act (including numbers of officers deployed (FTE)) and details of any bid for additional resources which forces intend to make to the Scottish Executive as a result of pressures created by the provisions of the Act. 3. Resources released by the Reliance prisoner escort and custody services contract. The Committees requested figures, on a force by force basis, for resources released as a result of the implementation of the prisoner escort and custody services contract”.



1.4 Methodology 1.4.1 This response has therefore been collated in a fashion so as to provide empirical data where available and contextual information where it is considered this may assist the Committees understanding. 1.4.2 Whilst all forces were asked to provide empirical detail in relation to questions 2 & 3, consultation on the Serious Violent Crime was ingathered via the Violence Reduction Unit at Strathclyde Police. 1.4.3 Responses were collated and are provided for the consideration of the Committees as follows: empirical data (Appendices) contextual commentary



The former is intended to support the financial calculations requested. The latter is related in this report. Provision of contextual information is considered particularly significant to inform the Committees understanding of the challenges and on-cost burdens facing the Service associated with specialist services, such as Legal Services, meeting the duties and expectations of the legislative regime.

1.4.5 Clearly, not all forces operate similar administrative support structures and therefore, where commentary and data is provided from specific specialisms, these are intended to be illustrative of the issues facing the Service, rather than a definitive and proscriptive representation. 2. ACPOS RESPONSE TO JUSTICE COMMITTEES

2.1 - Serious Violent Crime 2.1.1 The Violence Reduction Unit (VRU) was established through ACPOS in January 2005 as a dedicated resource to develop strategies to achieve sustainable reductions in the levels of violence. Close consultation has been maintained with the Scottish Executive from point of creation, with discussion leading to an agreement that the VRU should, in light of operational experience within the West of Scotland, be initially based in Strathclyde Police. 2.1.2 An initial action of the VRU was to undertake research that would improve understanding of the scale and scope of violence within Strathclyde and Scotland.

2.1.3 Research by Mollar & Sheridan (2004) had already established that there was significant under-reporting of violence to the police when compared to hospital presentations, confirming that violence reported to the police does not accurately represent the actual levels of violence that exist. 2.1.4 Fundamental to the development of sustainable solutions are policies that encourage the collection and collation of comprehensive statistics on violence. Only by having a clearer understanding of the scale of the problem is this possible. To this end the VRU seeks to promote policies that will encourage victims of violence to make these crimes known to the Police. At the same time it is anticipated that a Scottish wide system of Injury Surveillance will be developed to allow an accurate flow of data between Scottish Hospitals and the Police offering a more detailed picture of violence, its true extent and nature. 2.1.5 The VRU has taken every opportunity to communicate this essential element of the strategy in an effort to contextualise those statistics that relate solely to levels of reported violence, including clear up rates. This has included presentations to the Scottish Executive; the majority of Strathclyde MSPs, ACPOS Crime Committee, with the subject receiving widespread media attention. 2.1.6 Consultation between ACPOS and the Scottish Executive continues to present day and an officer has been seconded to the Scottish Executive to further enhance established communications links and develop work in this area. Scottish Executive officials have also been engaged with the Association on the question of national targets for the period 2006/7 to 2008/9.



The Mollar and Sheridan research indicates that Hospital A & E Departments are dealing with many more victims of violence than are reported to the Police, therefore any fluctuations in the levels of reported violence and any targets for violent crime reduction or clear up rates must be viewed against this background. ACPOS considers this qualitative approach to violent and serious crime presents considerable advantages over the current arrangements. It will lead to a much more reliable measurement of the full extent of violent crime in Scotland and therefore allow meaningful targets to be set to assess performance.


2.2 - The Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 2.2.1 The Scottish Police Service has dealt with ‘anti-social behaviour’ in its various guises for a considerable number of years through common law and statutory provision predating the above legislation. This commitment continues and as such, there are challenges associated with divorcing the detail requested by the Justice Committees from general performance statistics, especially within the limited timeframe made available. This has also, in part, been influenced by the changes to the Scottish Crime Recording Standard over the relevant period. Definition 2.2.2 The Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 came into force with effect from 28 October 2004. The Act states that a person engages in antisocial behaviour if they “Act in a manner that causes or is likely to cause alarm or distress; or pursue a course of conduct that causes or is likely to cause alarm or distress to at least one person not of the same household as them”. Costings 2.2.3 The details requested by the Committees in relation to costings are not held centrally, but to inform this response, Forces were asked the following questions: How many resources (full-time and part-time) have you redeployed to support the introduction of the ASB? Have you created any new resources (full-time or part-time) in support of the introduction of the ASB? 2.2.4 Estimated figures have been collated on this basis and are presented in this order. This same process has sought to distinguish from internally and externally funded posts. 2.2.5 The estimated Full-Time Equivalent posts devoted to implementing the provisions of the Act are related, on a force-by-force basis in Appendix ‘A’. This indicates that ASB accounts for FTE posts to a value of approximately £7.23 Million (Fig (c)). This includes FTEs which are in whole or part funded by alternative funding streams, managed mainly through Local Authorities.

2.2.6 As revealed at Fig (a), the Service has supported ASB through redeployment or creation of new posts to the value of approximately £2.9 Million FTE and further supported such work through partnership arrangements to approximately £4.3 Million (Fig (b)). 4


Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that as accurate a picture as possible has been presented to the Committees, the methodology used is unlikely to have captured the full extent of the Service’s commitment to ASB. Some forces were unable to provide all of the information requested in the time available. Accordingly, it is anticipated that the attached represents an underestimate of resources dedicated to this area of work.

2.2.8 It should be noted that these figures have not been subject to any quality check i.e. they have not been returned to Finance Officers for comparison with others. 2.2.9 In relation to details of any bids for additional resources, as with some of the other new burdens identified, the costs for ASB will be addressed as part of the next Spending Review. Contextual Detail 2.2.10 The extent of commitment to ASB is also revealed in Appendix ‘B’ & ‘C’. Relating some of the most obvious tasks arising from ASB, it provides some insight to the workload associated with this legislation. 2.2.11 The nature of the inquiry posed presents some challenges in accurately reflecting the full resource commitment in Full-Time-Equivalent (FTE) terms for all work undertaken in support of Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB). Therefore, whilst every effort has been made to present clear figures in the time available, it needs to be recognised that these cannot accurately reflect the resource commitment from, or implications to, the Service associated with ASB. The attached samples of responses from forces are therefore an attempt to contextualise the current commitment of the Service to this important area of its business.

How many requests for Acceptable Behaviour Contracts have been received since 1 November 2004 further to the provisions of ASB? - What impact have these had on your operational deployment?

Forces indicated that some 827 ABCs were received in the above time period. Approximated at 2 hours per request, this represents a notable increase in workload terms.

How many ASB case conferences have you held since 1 November 2004? -What impact have these had on your operational deployment?

478 Case Conferences have been held by Scottish Forces, each of which generates abstractions from existing tasks or requires to be supported through additional resourcing.


How many requests for joint home visits have you dealt with since 1 November 2004 in support of ASB? - What impact have these had on your operational deployment?

343 Joint Home visits have been held in support of ASB, with two officers engaged for an estimated visit time of 1 hour per visit.

How many Breaches of ASBOs have occurred in your area since 1 November 2004? - What impact have these had on your operational deployment?

Some 334 Breaches of ASBOs have occurred. Whilst some of these are straightforward, taking a matter of hours, others can require considerably more time.

How many Dispersal Orders have you used since 1 November 2004? - What impact have these had on your operational deployment?

The Service operates a number of strategies to support communities in respect of Anti-social behaviour. Dispersal Orders have now joined this toolkit, with some 4 taken out in the period under scrutiny. Of note and considered of value, is the indication by a force, that two orders had required a combined total of approximately 3,850 resource hours. The extent of operational commitment is therefore apparent.

How many Closure Orders have you used since 1 November 2004? - What impact have these had on your operational deployment?

Forces related different experiences of the 9 Closure Orders used by the Service. One cited approximately 30 hours associated with application and support, with another 130 hours for a single instance.

Legal Services 2.2.12 As revealed in Appendix ‘C’, the demands placed by the legislation on professional services such as solicitors merit particular comment. In this regard, commentary was sought from Legal Services, Strathclyde Police, on their experience of time devoted to supporting the ASB Legislation. Their review, which was of necessity, limited in nature, provided an insight to the hours involved. 2.2.13 Demands take a number of forms, from providing advice to drafting and instruction. All tasks involve senior legal staff at proportionate salary rates.


Incident Data 2.2.14 It may be of some assistance to relate the experience of Strathclyde Police of incident data over the relevant period. An examination of data taken from the force’s STORM Command and Control system for the period 01 October 2003 to 30 September 2004 and compared against 01 October 2004 to 30 September 2005 established that: 2.2.15 The total number of Incidents received by the Force in 2004/05 was 991,150. This represented an increase of 1.4% over the same period the previous year (2003/04), being equivalent to 13,666 calls. 2.2.16 During 2004/05, 50% of the calls received would fall to be considered under the definition of anti-social behaviour. The comparable figure for 2003/04 was 36%.

2.3 - Reliance 2.3.1 An examination of resources released as a result of the implementation of the prisoner escort and custody services contract was last conducted earlier this year. At that time, figures were provided by all forces and are related at Appendix ‘D’. 2.3.2 The effective and efficient integration of the prisoner escort and custody services contract into established working practices, offset against the need to ensure maintenance of public order within the court environment, was however recognised as a critical area from the outset. Accordingly, it was always intended that a phased implementation would operate, with this reflected in the attached figures.

3. 3.1

CONCLUSION The Association welcomes the opportunity to provide further information and to this end, every effort has been made to supply the detail requested and represent this in terms of FTE posts.



STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES = 12 hours CLOSURE ORDERS = 80 hours MISCELLANEOUS Antisocial Behaviour Bill CVRS and ASBOS Exclusion Order Scheme, Glasgow Football Banning Orders 3 hours 2 hours 3 hours 4 hours

Antisocial Behaviour Order (General Advice) 2 hours Antisocial Behaviour Order Working Group 30 hours



Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 - Full Time Equivalent Posts

(FTE redeployment from other duties to support introduction of ASB)

KEY Central Superintendent Chief Inspector Inspector Sergeant Constable Support Staff New
(FTE new posts created to support introduction of ASB)

D&G 0.5





S/clyde Tayside 0.1

Total 0.6 0.25

Cost (£) 42,214 13,321 481,582 398,597 1,519,085 75,000

0.25 1 1 1 0.9 1 0.5 2 1.5 8 1 1 1.3 2 3 3 5.5 3 1.75 2.25 26.7

9.75 9.95 44.7 3

Internally Funded These represent FTE posts which the Service has funded from established resources to support ASB. These are separated into two types, Existing and New. Existing FTE resulting from redeployment or attachment of responsibility for ASB matters to existing posts. New Substantive FTE created to deal with ASB matters, rather than as an extension of established remit.

Central Superintendent Chief Inspector Inspector Sergeant Constable Support Staff








Total 0 0

Cost (£)

1.5 0.25 1 1.25 1 1 3.5

1.5 2.25 4.75 1
Fig (a) -

74,090 90,135 161,424 25,000 Total Internal £2,880,448

Externally Funded FTE supported through alternative funding streams, e.g. Local Authority partnership working, Community Regeneration funding etc.

EXTERNALLY FUNDED Central Superintendent Chief Inspector Inspector Sergeant Constable Support Staff 4 6 5 6 0.75 6 42 36 0.5 1 2 17 9 1 7.6 D&G Fife Grampian L&B Northern S/clyde Tayside Total 0 0.5 1 2.75 75 64.6
Fig (b) Fig (c) -

Cost (£)

26,643 49,393 110,165 2,548,800 1,615,000 Total External TOTAL £4,350,001 £7,230,449

APPENDIX 'B' - Contextual Information

Central Scotland
No. of requests for Acceptable Behaviour Contracts received since 1 November 2004 further to the provisions of ASB No. of ASB case conferences held since 1 November 2004

Dumfries & Galloway



Lothian & Borders















Estimate of Time Provided (per conference 1 hr unit) No. of requests for joint home visits dealt with since 1 November 2004 in support of ASB No. of applications for an ASBO called upon to support No. of ASBOs currently in operation No. of Breaches of ASBOs occurring since 1 November 2004












43 43

71 71

59 59 105

40 24

929 190

67 8








No. of Dispersal Orders used since 1 November 2004 No. of Dispersal Orders currently in operation

0 0

0 0

2 0

1 1

1 1

0 0

0 0

No. of Closure Orders used since 1 November 2004









Force Central D&G Fife Grampian L&B Northern S/clyde Tayside Total

No. Of Officers Redeployed 14 6 4 3 35 1 134 12 209

J1/S2/05/32/4 J1/S2/05/26/4 Justice 1 Committee and Justice 2 Committee Budget Process 2006-07 SCOTTISH PRISON SERVICE KEY ISSUES: 2006-07 BUDGET SPS is content that the proposed Budget for 2006-07 provides a satisfactory level of funding to allow the SPS to accommodate the projected prisoner population and to achieve Ministerial targets for this period. The Budget also supports the on-going modernisation of the prison estate and the provision of additional prisoner places in advance of the addition of the 2 new prisons in later years. Efficient Government Initiative SPS has a successful track record in introducing efficiencies measures across the full range of activities performed by the Service. As a matter of good management practice, SPS seeks to deploy taxpayers money as efficiently and effectively as possible to support the operation and development of the prison system in Scotland. In the last year we sought to save 5% in ongoing costs across all of SPS. These savings are reinvested in Reducing Reoffending services and estate development. We regard the Efficient Government Initiative as an extension of the practice already operated by SPS and welcome the challenges posed by this initiative which requires SPS to deliver cash releasing savings of £7m in 2006-07 and £10m in 2007-08. We are working in partnership with our trade unions to achieve this. Time-releasing savings are used to improve correctional work with prisoners. The implementation of the Prisoner Escort and Court Custody contract has produced savings of nearly £1 million a year which help improve the quality of our work within prisons. We plan to deliver the required efficiencies in 2006-07 and 2007-08 by a combination of local and national initiatives (in both cases, in partnership with our TUS). We launched a major structure and organisational review earlier this year which aims to deliver efficiencies of 5% per annum during this period. Both the objective and methodology have been discussed and agreed with our trade union partners. Whilst SPS acknowledge that efficiency savings can become more difficult, but not impossible, to achieve following delivery of initial ‘quick-wins’, both parties accept that options are available and should be fully explored through this process. This approach is consistent with the principles that provide the basis of our Partnership Agreement with our trade union partners. The delivery of the required efficiency savings is being greatly assisted by the on-going modernisation of the prison estate. The replacement of buildings which are unfit for purpose with modern custom built facilities has enabled efficiencies and service improvements to be achieved on the opening of these new developments. Prisoner Compensation Claim Management SPS is responsible for managing any claim made by prisoners against Scottish Ministers. SPS reported the implications of the Napier judgement to Parliament and others in the SPS Annual Report and Accounts 2004-05, published in July 2005. The statement is reproduced below for ease of reference.


J1/S2/05/32/4 J1/S2/05/26/4 ‘In April 2004, the Outer House of the Court of Session found that the conditions experienced by Robert Napier while on remand in C Hall, HMP Barlinnie, during May and June 2001 had breached the European Convention of Human Rights. The judgement drew particular attention to the fact that Mr Napier had spent long periods sharing a cell in which he had to ‘slop-out’. The court awarded damages of £2,000 because it held that these conditions had exacerbated Mr Napier’s eczema. The judgment was upheld on appeal. The judgement in the Napier case reflects the particular circumstances experienced by Robert Napier. However, the judgement exposed SPS to the risk of claims for compensation from other prisoners. SPS made a provision and declared a contingent liability in its accounts for 2003-04. During 2004-05, SPS has made significant progress in improving conditions, including in July 2004 ending slopping-out at HMP Barlinnie and in February 2005 ending (subject to prisoner numbers) the shared use of slopping-out accommodation throughout the prison estate. SPS has re-estimated its exposure to claims for compensation using data and legal advice, which became available in 200405. The resulting revised provision and contingent liabilities are noted in the Accounts.’ SPS included a provision in its 2003-04 accounts in light of the court’s judgement and created a contingent liability of £136m for other cases that may arise in connection with the European Convention of Human Rights. The 2004-05 accounts recorded an increase in the provision to £44m and a reduction in the contingent liability to £24m. The underlying circumstances have not changed significantly but, as indicated in the above statement (extracted from the Chief Executive’s Statement on Internal Control), there is now better information available on both the number of prisoners who may be involved and the likely value of any settlement. Scottish Ministers have now proposed a scheme for settling out of court personal injury cases which have been caused or exacerbated by slopping-out. SPS has contacted agents for prisoners claiming compensation for injury caused by slopping-out and given them details of a proposed Alternative Dispute Resolution scheme. The SPS considers that resolving outstanding personal injury claims by Alternative Dispute Resolution could substantially lower its settlement costs compared to these being pursued through the courts. The Scottish Executive has provided SPS with full Budget provision to cover the financial implications of these claims. SPS has taken a number of steps to manage the risk actively, including operational changes to how our accommodation is used, the introduction of an ADR scheme and preparation of an approach which balances the need to consider the legal issues with the best use of court time. Despite this, SPS anticipates that additional funding will be required from SE to cover new liabilities arising in 2005-06. We are working on such estimates which will be reflected in next year’s Annual Accounts. Estate Development It is widely recognised that the SPS prison estate requires to be modernised to provide fit-for-purpose facilities to accommodate the prison population and to support staff working with prisoners to reduce the risk of them re-offending on release.


J1/S2/05/32/4 J1/S2/05/26/4 Over the last few years, SPS has made substantial progress in creating a fit-for-purpose estate. Unsuitable facilities at Longriggend (Young Remand Unit), Dungavel, Penningham, Glenochil (Young Offenders Institution) have been closed and replaced with modern facilities at Castle Huntly, Cornton Vale, Edinburgh, Glenochil, Perth and Polmont and a new prison was set up at Kilmarnock. In addition, major refurbishment has taken place at Barlinnie and 2 new prisons are being added to the prison estate. To date some 1,600 new prisoner places have been delivered with contracts already awarded to provide another 1,000 new places during 2007. Contracts for the latest phase of the estate development programme were awarded in September/October 2005, with an overall project value of £125m. Capital investment in the modernisation of the prison estate has risen from some £500k per week in 2003-04 to some £1.5m per week in 2005-06 and beyond. All projects have been delivered by SPS on schedule and budget. These developments also provide more compact modern facilities with built in efficiency savings due to the design being fit-for-purpose. Ending of Slopping-out As a result of these investments, the number of cells with no access to night sanitation has reduced from around 1,900 in 2001 at several sites to around 450 at 2 sites, Polmont and Peterhead. Slopping out has been eliminated at Barlinnie, Edinburgh, Glenochil and Perth and substantially reduced at Polmont. Where prisoner numbers require the use of cells with no access to night sanitation, operational processes are in place to ensure that such cells are not used as shared accommodation. The practice of slopping-out will be eliminated at Polmont on the completion of the new houseblock which is in progress and expected to be ready for occupancy in early 2007, leaving only Peterhead. A consultation on the options for ending slopping-out at HMP Peterhead was launched in September 2005. New Prisons Following planning approval by West Lothian Council, SPS acquired a site at Addiewell, West Lothian for a new prison development and commenced the procurement process for a 700 place prison. In August 2005, SPS announced the appointment of a consortium led by United Kingdom Detention Services (UKDS) as preferred bidder for the prison at Addiewell. Contract negotiations are being finalised with a view to awarding a contract in due course. Progress with the second new prison has been prevented due to delays in the planning process and the recent refusal of East Dunbartonshire Council (EDC) to grant planning permission for the proposed new prison on the site of the existing prison at Low Moss, Bishopbriggs (and adjacent SPS owned land). SPS lodged a planning application with EDC in July 2003 (prior to submitting a similar application to West Lothian Council). Over 2 years later (end August 2005), EDC considered the application and, despite EDC planning officials recommending approval subject to normal planning conditions, refused to grant planning permission for the proposed new prison. SPS has lodged an appeal with the Scottish Executive Independent Reporters Unit in September 2005 and currently await an opportunity to progress matter through the appeal process.


J1/S2/05/32/4 J1/S2/05/26/4 This planning delay will increase the amount of shared accommodation in use within the Scottish prison estate and extend the use of unsuitable facilities at Low Moss, which we aim to close shortly after planning permission is obtained. It may also delay the ending of slopping out. Prisoner Population Since the start of October 2005, SPS have been accommodating around 7,000 prisoners on a daily basis. This represent a peak for the current year to date but is consistent with the projections of average prisoner population published in November 2004 (Annex A) which projected an average prisoner population of 6,900 during 2005-06, increasing by 100 to 7,000 in 2006-07. The next set of projections will be published in November 2005. Based on the historical accuracy of previous projections (Annex B), this is expected to project a growing prisoner population. It may help the Committee to place the recent and projected prisoner population issues in context to have the attached graph (Annex C) showing long-run crime and imprisonment rates. Care is needed when making comparisons over such long periods but the graph is based on published figures. It shows a long-term rise in both crime and prisoner population until the early 1990s since when crime has fallen significantly: however the prison population has continued to rise. Shared Accommodation As a result of these high levels of prisoner numbers, some prisoners are sharing accommodation, particularly at times of peak numbers and in local prisons. In such situations SPS increase the resource budget of prisons in line with the additional prisoners being accommodated to enable the normal standard of service to be maintained. Increasingly, as we modernise the prison estate, prisoners sharing are doing so in cells designed for multiple occupancy. Higher numbers inevitably increase the management challenge in delivering our services and meeting our targets. SPS will continue to work on this. SPS Performance As reported in the SPS Annual Report and Accounts, 2004-05 was an extremely challenging year for SPS with high prisoner numbers and an increasingly litigious population. We have, in most areas, further improved our performance against last year (and previous years), and met all but 2 of our KPIs (prisoner on prisoner assaults and mandatory drug testing). Such performance demonstrates good progress in our drive towards achieving Correctional Excellence, progress that will continue through our developing Criminal Justice System. The same challenges continue into 2005-06, however, we aim to achieve similar performance against the targets for this year.

Scottish Prison Service 20 October 2005


Annex A

November 2004 prison population projections



Average Daily Population







11 /1 2 99 /0 0 01 /0 2 03 /0 4 05 /0 6 95 /9 6 91 /9 2 85 /8 6 87 /8 8 89 /9 0 93 /9 4 97 /9 8 07 /0 8 09 /1 0 13 /1 4

83 /8 4

Annex B

Comparison of actual prison population and projections
8000 7500
Average Daily Population

7000 6500 6000 5500 5000 4500 4000
/9 4 /9 5 /9 6 /9 7 /9 8 /9 9 /0 0 /0 1 /0 2 /0 3 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02

Actual population 1996 projections 1998 projections 2000 projections 2002 projections 2004 projections
/0 4 /0 5 /0 6

1995 projections 1997 projections 1999 projections 2001 projections 2003 projections

/0 7

/0 8 07





Financial Year


/0 9

Prisoner per 100,000 population and crimes per 1000 population

Annex C


Prisoners per 100,000 population



Crimes per 1000 population


19 50 19 52 19 54 19 56 19 58 19 60 19 62 19 64 19 66 19 68 19 70 19 72 19 74 19 76 19 78 19 80 19 82 19 84 19 86 19 88 19 90 19 92 19 94 19 96 19 98 20 00 20 02


J1/S2/05/33/1 J2/S2/05/27/1 Submission from Scottish Legal Aid Board on the Draft Budget 2006-07 SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE LEGAL AID SPENDING PLANS – DRAFT BUDGET 06-07 As outlined in the Scottish Executive’s draft budget there are two elements of legal aid funding: • • legal aid administration legal aid fund £000s Administration Fund Total The Legal Aid Fund The cost of civil, criminal (including the Public Defence Solicitors’ Offices) and children’s legal assistance is met by the legal aid fund. This includes fees for solicitors, advocates and the cost of outlays. Legal aid expenditure is demand led and not cash limited. The cost of legal aid has been increasing since 2000/2001. Most of this increase has been in criminal legal assistance. The volume and cost of summary criminal legal aid cases has grown by 26% over this period. The volume of solemn cases granted by the courts has increased by 16% while the costs have increased by 55%.1 Net Legal Aid Expenditure 2000/01to 2004/05 £000s Criminal Civil Childrens 2000/01 80,094 38,595 2,501 2001/02 85,905 38,623 2,827 2002/03 93,071 38,124 3,952 2003/04 102,680 39,872 3,378 2004/05 109,152 39,662 3,617 2005-06 Budget 12,059 139,800 151,859 2006-07 Plans 12,459 149,400 161,859 2007-08 Plans 12,659 155,700 168,359

Total Net






Over recent years we have been developing our legal aid forecasting model. The model is complex and the underlying data sets are large. The model uses a range of assumptions including the average cost of cases and volumes of applications by legal aid type. Whilst the Board is able to make reasonable estimates on many of the elements in the model, estimates of changes in the number of cases in the justice system need to take account of information from other justice system partners, such as the police, Scottish Courts Service and Crown Office. We are engaged with these other partners to further improve joint working in the development of forecasting. We are rerunning our forecasting model to take account of the most recent trends and other changes in legal aid up to September 2005. This work indicates that the previous growth in legal aid expenditure has slowed and may reverse over the next couple of years. During 2005/06 there has been a reduction in the volume of summary criminal legal aid applications in contrast to substantial increases over the previous 5 years. This has a significant impact on our
A summary criminal case is heard in the Sheriff or District Courts. For example, less serious assaults, road traffic offences or breach of the peace.A solemn criminal case is a case heard in the High Court or before a sheriff and jury. For example, serious assaults, murder or rape.


expenditure since summary criminal legal aid accounts for £51m which is 33% of our net legal aid fund expenditure. We are also seeing the impacts of the change in Sheriffs’ sentencing powers from 1 to 3 years in May 2004 which allowed cases which were previously heard in the High Court to be heard by Sheriffs. Sheriff Court solemn cases are substantially less expensive than those in the High Court. We are beginning to see impacts on expenditure of some of the efficiency savings beginning to come through the system. For 2005/06 we expect expenditure to be around £150m against the Executive’s published provision of £139.8m. However, for 2006/07 our model, based on current trends, suggests expenditure will be around the Executive’s planned provision of £149m. For the following year the model also suggests that expenditure will be within the planned provision. However, the estimates must be read with a substantial health warning. Legal aid expenditure is a function of a range of factors. For example, if there are substantial increases in the volumes of cases, especially in criminal legal assistance, then our expenditure will increase. In addition, changes to legislation or new legislation will very often impact on legal aid expenditure. There is also a substantial package of reforms to legal aid underway and planned and these will have to be factored into Ministers’ views on funding requirements. Legal Aid Administration The administration budget pays for the following: • • • Board staff and associated costs; capital investment; ring fence funding for projects under Part V of the Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986 whereby the Board places solicitors employed by it in projects operated by other organisations to pilot innovative ways of providing legal assistance; funding for the legal aid quality assurance schemes.


The Executive’s current spending plans for the administration budget are unlikely to be sufficient to meet the additional requirements being placed on the Board. For example the introduction of a quality assurance scheme for all solicitors and advocates undertaking criminal work will need an injection of funds. Ministers’ decisions on the outcome of the consultation on the future delivery of legal aid – “Advice For All” – may also have funding implications. We expect to have further discussions with the Executive on future legal aid administration requirements over the next few months. Efficient Government A package of efficiency savings have been developed by the Justice Department in conjunction with the Board. These are within the context of modernising legal aid. The Justice Department’s published figures for the planned efficiency savings are: 2005/06 Cash (£m) 5.5 2006/07 9 2007/08 12


The savings are to be achieved through a range of mainly regulatory changes. The series of packages of regulatory change commenced in July 2004 and will continue. The savings so far have included – • • • • changes to fixed fees in summary criminal cases to include failure to appear work, advice on appeal etc, and notional diets; changes to cap the growth in counsel’s fees; reducing multiple grants of advice and assistance; ability to recover the cost of civil legal assistance where assisted persons fail to cooperate with the Board in providing information.

Some of the savings will flow from the legal aid consequences of other reforms in the justice system, for example High Court Reform, disclosure of evidence to the defence, etc. Decisions as to which elements of the savings package are to be taken forward and when rest with the Justice Department. Separately, the Board has its own programme of efficiency measures. The Board has about 14 million pieces of paper going through our doors each year. We are investing in new computer systems which will increase efficiency for the Board and solicitors in practice through legal aid online. We have piloted our online advice and assistance system and around 150 firms of solicitors have signed up for the system. Civil and criminal legal aid will be online by the end of the year. We have recently introduced a new computerised case assessment and case management system which does away with the need for paper files. This is leading to reduced times for dealing with civil applications and reduced staffing requirements. As a result of our investments we have been able to reduce staff numbers, on a like for like basis, from 322 WTE in April 2001 to around 280 by April 2006. We also have a “spend to save” programme which is leading to savings on the legal aid fund and reduced administrative expenditure, for example – • • • creation of an Independent Checking Unit. This has contributed to increased accuracy in our decisions on cases; increased verification of applicants’ financial circumstances leading to savings for the fund; increasing our audit and investigation resources to identify and prevent applicant or solicitor fraud or abuse of legal aid (£0.8m in 2004-05), compared to the cost of this Unit at £144K per annum.

Over the next few months we will review our efficiency plan and roll it forward as part of our next Corporate Planning process.


J1/S2/05/33/02 J2/S2/05/27/02

Scottish Executive
Finance and Central Services Department
Victoria Quay Edinburgh EH6 6QQ Telephone: 0131-244 7508 Fax: 0131-244 7524 «email»

Miss Anne Peat Senior Assistant Clerk Justice 1 and 2 Committees Room T360 The Scottish Parliament EDINBURGH EH99 1SP

26 October 2005

_____ Dear Anne BUDGET PROCESS 2006-07: JUSTICE BUDGET I attach for the Committees’ interest additional budgetary information for the Justice Budget relating to the years 2005-06 onwards. • • • A reconciliation of the Justice budget between the Draft Budget 2005-06 published in October 2004 and the Draft Budget 2006-07 published on 1 September 2005; A table breaking down the Justice budget to level 4 data; and A rolling forward of the table provided last year which illustrates the overall planned spend within the Scottish Executive which contributes to the fight against crime.


Yours sincerely


SE Approved Version 1.2

JUSTICE BUDGET RECONCILIATION BETWEEN DATA PUBLISHED IN THE DRAFT BUDGET 2005-06 (SEPTEMBER 2004) AND THE DRAFT BUDGET 2006-07 (SEPTEMBER 2005) DRAFT BUDGET 2005-06 SHOWN IN PLAIN TYPE DRAFT BUDGET 2006-07 SHOWN IN ITALICS £m 2006-07 100.956/100.956 25.049/24.302 75.890/76.806 40.566/40.566 7.414/7.418 117.511/115.354 0/33.365 0.574/0

Level 2 Community Justice Services Miscellaneous Scottish Court Service Courts Group Accountant in Bankruptcy Police Central Government Antisocial Behaviour Civil Defence Grant Police GAE Fire GAE

2005-06 92.856/91.906 23.269/22.522 70.890/72.936 39.466/39.286 5.614/5.618 109.411/107.254 0/1.777 0.574/0 1,003.550/1,003.554 276.513/276.813

2007-08 103.056/103.056 25.679/24.932 76.890/77.806 41.766/41.766 6.614/6.618 117.511/115.354 0/34.180 0.574/0

Note 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 9

1,045.200/1,045.204 1,098.930/1,098.932 282.023/282.319 291.533/291.833

Notes: 1. 2005-06 only – transfer of £950k to Scottish Court Service in respect of Youth Courts.

2. Total net change in each year is £747k, which is comprised of 3 separate transfers. Transfer out to the Met Office as they have taken responsibility for funding the severe weather warning service of £1.112m; transfer in from the Home Office for the Immigration Advisory Service of £405k; and a transfer out to Police Central Government for the SDEA emergency planning responsibilities of £40k. 3. 2005-06 – total net change £2.046m which is comprised of 3 separate transfers. Transfer in of £950k from Criminal Justice Services (see note 1); transfer in of £180k from Courts Group for judicial car services; and transfer in of £916k from Crown Office for cost of capital charges. 2006-07 & 2007-08 – only one transfer - £916k from Crown Office for cost of capital charges. 4. 5. 2005-06 – transfer out to SCS for judicial car service – see note 3. Transfer in of £4k in each year from Scottish Executive Administration budget for certain staff costs.

6. Total net change in each year is £2.157m, which is comprised of 3 separate transfers. Transfer out to the Communities budget for equality work, which arose through a change in Ministerial portfolios of £2.771m; transfer in from emergency planning of £40k for the SDEA (see note 2); and a transfer in from the Civil Defence grant of £574k, which ceased as a specific grant in 2005-06. 7. 8. 9. Transfer to Justice from Communities of £1.777/33.365/34.180m for antisocial behaviour arising from a change in Ministerial portfolios. Transfer to Police Central Government due to cessation of civil defence specific grant – see note 6. Reconciliation of previous rounding discrepancies between the Justice budget and the Local Authority settlement.

Criminal Injuries Compensation Administration Costs CIC Scheme Total Criminal Injuries Compensation 2005-06 2.990 25.491 28.481 2006-07 2.990 25.491 28.481 2007-08 2.990 25.491 28.481

Community Justice Services Offender Services Accreditation Panel Addiction Services Arrest Referral Bail Bail Pilots (Electronic Monitoring) Community Reparation Orders Community Service Consultancy Court Services Deferred Sentences Diversion Domestic Violence Drug Courts DTTO Electronic Tagging Employment Services Fairbridge Home Detention Curfew Intensive Probation IT High Risk Young Offenders Mediation & Reparation Capital Evaluation Services Retention of Grant Placements Probation Reducing Reoffending Roll out of Accredited Programmes 0.040 1.445 0.472 1.101 2.153 0.546 12.030 0.075 2.892 0.288 1.284 0.375 1.921 6.971 6.600 0.555 0.180 0.000 1.812 0.500 0.500 0.327 0.300 0.145 0.532 0.200 9.501 1.000 0.200 0.040 1.445 0.472 1.101 4.000 1.000 12.030 0.075 2.892 0.288 1.284 0.375 1.921 7.470 6.600 0.555 0.308 4.000 1.812 0.500 1.100 0.327 0.300 0.000 1.799 0.200 9.501 1.000 0.500 0.040 1.445 0.472 1.101 4.000 3.000 12.030 0.075 2.892 0.288 1.284 0.375 1.921 7.970 6.600 0.555 0.308 4.000 1.812 0.500 1.100 0.327 0.300 0.000 1.299 0.200 9.501 1.000 0.500

SAO First Instant Pilots SAO Pilots (Ayr & Glasgow) Secondee Sex offenders Social Enquiry Reports Stationery & Printing Supervised Attendance Orders Support Programmes Supported Accommodation Throughcare Throughcare Pilots Timeout Youth Courts Total Victim/Witness Support Miscellaneous Total Community Justice Services

0.250 0.780 0.110 1.621 11.266 0.010 1.480 0.881 4.094 6.862 0.300 1.693 2.150 85.442 5.676 0.788 91.906

0.250 0.780 0.110 1.621 11.266 0.010 1.480 0.881 4.094 6.862 0.300 1.693 2.150 94.392 5.776 0.788 100.956

0.250 0.780 0.110 1.621 11.266 0.010 1.480 0.881 4.094 6.862 0.300 1.693 2.150 96.392 5.876 0.788 103.056

Fire Central Government Scottish Fire Service Training School SFSTS - current SFSTS - capital Total Miscellaneous Total Fire Central Government 4.329 0.254 4.583 2.351 6.934 4.329 0.254 4.583 2.351 6.934 4.329 0.254 4.583 2.351 6.934

Legal Aid Administration Fund Total Legal Aid 12.059 139.800 151.859 12.459 149.400 161.859 12.659 155.700 168.359

MISCELLANEOUS Civil defence and emergency planning Residential accommodation for children Other Miscellaneous Criminal Law Research Parole Board Criminal Justice Working Fund Lord Lieutenants Expenses Prisoner Complaints Commission Security Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission Risk Management Authority Scottish Prison Service Inspectorate Scottish Crime and Victimisation Survey Sentencing Commission In-Court Advice Civil Law Research Part V Projects Scottish Legal Services Ombudsman and Civil Justice Publications Civil Law Public Information Sheriff Books EU Justice and Home Affairs Iniatives Immigration Advisory Service Grant Aid to National Family Support Mediation Project Tribunals Training Private and International Law Legal Costs Civil Justice Conferences Civil Justice Advertising Bankruptcy and Diligence Human Resources Projects Ad hoc miscellaneous Timing Adjustments Capital Charges Human Rights Commission Family Bodies Total 0.617 0.800 1.281 0.045 0.137 0.040 1.300 2.955 0.320 1.000 0.250 0.320 0.246 0.270 0.373 0.100 0.336 0.025 0.060 0.405 1.438 0.207 0.015 0.036 0.041 0.015 0.110 0.015 2.643 1.600 0.048 0.000 0.000 17.048 0.617 0.800 1.281 0.045 0.137 0.040 1.300 2.955 0.320 1.000 0.250 0.320 0.246 0.270 0.373 0.100 0.336 0.025 0.060 0.405 1.438 0.207 0.015 0.036 0.041 0.015 0.110 0.015 2.643 1.600 0.048 1.000 0.300 18.348 0.617 0.800 1.281 0.045 0.137 0.040 1.300 2.955 0.320 1.000 0.250 0.320 0.246 0.270 0.373 0.100 0.336 0.025 0.060 0.405 1.438 0.207 0.015 0.036 0.041 0.015 0.110 0.015 2.643 1.600 0.048 1.000 0.800 18.848 1.974 3.500 2.454 3.500 2.584 3.500

Total Miscellaneous




Scottish Prison Service Direct Running Costs Other Current Spending Capital Spending Total Scottish Prison Service 208.160 71.898 41.643 321.701 228.160 71.898 96.643 396.701 258.160 71.898 97.643 427.701

Scottish Court Service Operating Expenditure Capital Total Scottish Court Service 62.602 10.334 72.936 66.472 10.334 76.806 67.472 10.334 77.806

Courts Group Courts Group Judicial Salaries Total Courts Group 14.135 25.151 39.286 14.315 26.251 40.566 14.315 27.451 41.766

Accountant in Bankruptcy Total Accountant in Bankruptcy 5.618 7.418 6.618

POLICE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT Scottish Police College Scottish Criminal Record Office Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency (SDEA) Crime Prevention Central support services & representative associations 12.450 9.800 25.540 5.233 13.450 10.200 18.000 5.433 14.450 10.600 18.900 5.433

SPIS Disclosure Scotland PITO CPS Review Restorative Justice ISJIS & Linets NCIS (incl Europol) Ports Policing Comms & Surveillance Payments to HO and MOD PNB, Police Associations SEMPER Finance Analysts Special grants L&B Capital city L&B Parliamentary Unit Superannuation HMIC Publications Mountain rescue Airwave Authorities Share of SDEA Seconded Officers Total Total Police Central Government

3.000 3.000 2.000 0.400 0.500 0.500 5.496 6.300 3.700 1.000 0.908 0.050 1.000 2.750 0.600 0.200 0.369 0.100 0.300 16.116 5.942 54.231 107.254

3.000 3.000 2.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 6.100 6.500 4.100 1.000 0.935 0.050 1.000 3.400 0.600 0.250 0.369 0.100 0.300 27.947 6.120 68.271 115.354

3.000 3.000 2.000 0.500 0.500 0.500 6.100 6.500 4.100 1.000 0.935 0.050 1.000 3.400 0.600 0.250 0.369 0.100 0.300 22.967 6.300 63.471 112.854

Reducing Re-offending and Court Reform Reducing Re-offending Total Reducing Re-offending and Court Reform 0.000 0.000 6.000 6.000 12.000 12.000

Antisocial Behaviour Total Antisocial Behaviour 1.777 33.365 34.180

NOTES TO ACCOMPANY EXECUTIVE JUSTICE TABLES JUSTICE AND CROWN OFFICE The data relating to the Justice budget and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal budget is extracted from the Draft Budget 2006-07, pages 14 and 32. The Executive total data is extracted from the same publication, Table 0.01 on page 2. EDUCATION The figures included in this table are consistent with and included in the Education and Young People spending plans published in the Draft Budget 2006-07, pages 37 – 46. INTEGRATED CHILDREN’S SERVICES Alongside general and specific grant funding for schools, youth justice etc, the Executive is providing £170 million between 2003-04 and 2005-06 to help agencies better integrate services for children and young people. The Action Team report, For Scotland’s Children (2001), emphasised the importance of better integrating services, in particular for those children and young people most at risk of becoming excluded from mainstream provision. Research on local youth justice projects has also confirmed the benefits of effective inter-agency working, for example in providing support for improved behaviour and enhancing parenting skills. The Changing Children’s Services Fund total also includes allowance to help integrated working to tackle drug misuse amongst young people. The Fund is supported jointly by the Scottish Executive Education, Health and Development Departments. COMMUNITIES Data extracted from table 7.01 on page 112 of the Draft Budget 2006-07. DRUGS There is a growing body of evidence that demonstrates that engaging and retaining people in effective drug treatment services can both reduce levels of illicit drug use and reduce drug related offending, including theft from both shops and individuals in order to support such use. The provision of education, training and employment opportunities is a critical part of the overall treatment and rehabilitation process.

With this evidence in mind, there has been considerable investment in treatment and rehabilitation programmes within the Health budget, supported by further investment in training and employment opportunities from the New Futures Fund (administered by Scottish Enterprise) and UK-wide initiatives such as Progress2Work initiative. In addition to treatment and rehabilitation, the Executive also seeks to influence demand for drugs through a series of education and communication activities in schools and through the media. The most high profile of such actions is the Know the Score Communications strategy which highlights the risks involved in drug taking and provides non-judgemental information about drugs, including volatile substances, aimed particularly at young people and their parents. LOCAL GOVERNMENT QUALITY OF LIFE FUND As part of the Local Government Settlement announced in December 2004, support of £170m was confirmed for Quality of Life funding over the 3 years 2005-2008. This includes an additional £100m over the 2 years 2006-07 and 2007-08 (£50m per year) allocated to all 32 local authorities. The use of these funds will reflect the shared and central local government priorities for improving the environment and community wellbeing. Councils have flexibility in how they use this funding, but will be expected to show that projects reflect policy priorities.




£m 2005-06



Justice core Local Authority support: Civil Defence grant Police GAE (including Police Grant) Fire GAE District Courts GAE Civil Protection GAE Police Loan Charges TOTAL






1 889 232 4 4 14 1,950

1 939 263 5 4 14 2,086

1,004 277 5 4 14 2,209

1,045 282 5 4 14 2,405

1,099 292 5 4 14 2,515

2003-04 Justice Budget Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service Education – Local Authority Support for children leaving Local authority care Early Intervention 1. pre school education 2. childcare strategy 3. Surestart 1,950 2004-05 2,086 £m 2005-06 2,209 2006-07 2,405 2007-08 2,515











137 19 23

137 30 35

152 43 53

157 44 57

157 45 60

National Priorities Action Fund 1. integrated community schools 16 2. alternatives to exclusion 11 3. discipline 10 4. supporting parents 8 5. inclusion 20

21 11 10 8 20

26 ( (29 ( 20

See note below re future of National Priorities Action Fund

Note: As signalled in Ambitious, Excellent Schools – an agenda for action in Scottish schools published 1 November 2004 – the Executive plans to introduce additional flexibility into the National Priorities Action Fund (NPAF) in order to provide discretion for authorities to target NPAF resources according to local circumstances. This discretion will be introduced in 2006-07.

Education – Central Government Youth Justice & children’s hearings 38 Integrated Children’s Services Changing Children’s Services Fund 45









Communities The Communities portfolio was restructured in the Spending Review 2004 which resulted in changes to the Level 2 categories. As a consequence, while there has been no change to the portfolio totals, the Level 2 and Level 3 figures do not match those previously published. Therefore there can be no direct read across from the previous ‘Regenerating Communities’ Level 2 as published in the Annual Evaluation Report 2005-06 to the new Level 2s as published in the Draft Budget 2005-06. The closest is the ‘Building stronger, safer communities through regeneration and tackling anti social behaviour’ Level 2. Building stronger, safer communities Through regeneration and tackling Anti social behaviour 88 Drugs Treatment (Health) 17 Rehabilitation (Health via GAE) 7 New futures fund (ELLD) 2 Know the Score (FPSD/HD) 2 Scotland against Drugs (HD) 2 Schools education 1 Local Government Quality of Life Fund Neighbourhood safety (CCTV installation, improvement to street lighting etc)





20 7 1 2 2 mainstreamed

26 26 26 7 7 7 To be determined 2 2 1 1 To be determined To be determined following review




To be determined

Tackling graffiti and vandalism (Anti vandalism initiatives, graffiti removal etc.) 1 EXPENDITURE ON 2,490 JUSTICE THROUGHOUT EXECUTIVE TOTAL

1 2,741

1 2,948

To be determined 3,104 3,222

Increase from 2003-04 to 2007-08 £732m or 29.4% over the period. EXECUTIVE TOTAL (EXCL. CONTINGENCIES)






Increase from 2003-04 to 2007-08 £7,124m or 30.3% over the period.