22/11/2011 Newsnight Scotland

much information needs to be On Newsnight Scotland. "Grossly

overcrowded" was the verdict on Scotland's largest prison in a

report last week. The Justice Secretary paid a visit to Barlinnie

to see the problems for himself this morning - we ask Kenny

MacAskill what the Scottish government is doing to fix prison

overcrowding. Also tonight: As the parents of a

teenager murdered 20 years ago give evidence at the Leveson Inquiry, is

it time to change our defamation laws?

Good evening. The Justice Secretary admits that something is going

wrong, but says there's no single solution when it comes to prison

overcrowding. The Scottish Government wants to reduce the

number of short term prisoners, but even with recorded crime at a 35-

year low, the prison population still shows few signs of falling.

In a moment we'll hear from Kenny MacAskill, but first here's our

Barlinnie prison was built over a century ago. Throughout the decade,

it has seen rising numbers of prisoners. And it just wasn't

designed for the numbers it accommodates now. It has reached

saturation point. A report from the Chief Inspector of Prisons last

week said it was grossly overcrowded. To be overcrowded by

well over 500 people set an exceptionally daunting challenge.

Barlinnie staff go out of their way and do so with commendable effect,

nevertheless, the situation is far The record shows that 50% of people

who of remanded in Scotland's prisons do not end up serving a

custodial sentence. -- Halloran minded. Today, the Scottish justice

to go tree came to Barlinnie to see what the situation is like in

Scotland's largest prison. They are having to deal with difficult

challenging people in difficult, challenging circumstances. We have

to try and improve the system hearing Scotland. There are too

many people in prison who don't need to be there. Barlinnie now,

let it 50% more prisoners than it That affect the daily regime, it

affects the life that the prisoners have, they're locked up more often,

it is more difficult for the staff to deal with people who have health

issues, mental health issues, people who just want access to the

open air cannot have access to what they should be getting on a daily

basis. There are too many people here, frankly. According to

government figures, attending his 3035 year low. So why does the

number of prisoners not seem to reflect this. The number of

prisoners in Barlinnie reached an all-time high in 2009. However, at

the end of 2008, this prison in West Lothian opened. It provided

another 700 spaces. Scottish Prison Service estimates around 400 of

prisoners here were traditionally Barlinnie prisoners. So without it,

the number of prisoners at Barlinnie could have been about

2000. The governesses this is not the right place for everyone who is

here. Have a look around, you see people on remand, who are unlikely

to be convicted, people with mental health issues, who live here

because there is no where else of safety for them. This is just what

we have to deal with. The Scottish government has abolished short-term

sentences and less than three months, aiming to reduce the number

of prisoners. There is also the question of what the public thinks

Britain is for. I'm not sure the public know what they want. They

expect us just to keep people locked up, but this time next week,

it could be you in here, you don't know how your life is going to pan

out. We need to have a prison system that is reasonable, decent

and safe. You cannot just bring in a punitive system, it just doesn't

work. A new prison in his Dumbarton share is set to open next year,

with 700 prison cells, and Annette extra 100 places will be created.

But with numbers as they are, it seems more has to change if prisons,

prisoners and staff are to cope. Just before we came on air, I spoke

to the Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill, and began by asking him

why there aren't enough prison places. They write enough prison

places, but clearly, there is overcrowding. We have invested 360

million over the last four years, 700 new places were opened and will

become available when the new prison opens in March, and a new

prison has been started next year - - will be started next year. Surely

if there were enough places, there wouldn't be overcrowding? Well, we

have invested 368 million, we face challenge didn't -- challenges. We

cannot build our way out of the problem. We have the lowest

recorded crime in 35 years. We have seen a decline in violent offending,

and did we see an escalating number of prisoners. But that shouldn't be

as surprise, because the trend of rising prison population has been

established. You have projections suggesting that will continue this

decade, and successive prison inspectors, almost always raised

this as in issue. Why haven't you build your way out of this problem?

We cannot build our way out of this. Prisons cost between 120 and 140

million to build. Everyone cost just �40,000 per annum. We have

invested over 360 million in four years. If we invest more, it comes

at the expense of homes, schools, hospitals. Prisons come at a cost,

and after time of challenging financial circumstances, austerity,

the priority of this government is to look after our pensioners as

well as make sure we have sufficient capacity for how

prisoners. But equally there is something manifestly wrong. Far too

many are going to prison, yet we have the lowest recorded crime in

35 years. As well as making sure we have new prisons, we are also

taking action. Why do we have record numbers of women prisoners

when we have a decline in the crime rate? But people will be looking to

you for on just, you have been in power as just a secretary for five

years. -- looking up to you for answers. What do you think has gone

wrong? There is not one simple solution. First of all we brought

into of community sentences, so that low-level offenders who are

not a danger to our communities do not twiddle their thumbs at

taxpayers' expense, they are out there playing for the harm they

have done. Equally, we have got to address underlying problems. People

go into prison quite often, they have to be dealt with by the

justice system, but they go in with underlying problems of alcohol

abuse, a significant problem in Scotland we are seeking to tackle,

drugs, mental health. That is why the solution for many low-level

offenders it is in the community from where they came and where they

have to go back to. It is about working with my Cabinet colleagues

to make sure as well as tough community punishment, we address

educational failings and health issues, all the other aspects had

damaged Scottish society. introduced a presumption against

the shorter sentences, those less than three months, why does that

It has made an impact. Things would be worse if you had not done that?

We faced challenges and we try to set I direction of travel. There

are some people where respite care is appropriate for the victims of

domestic violence, so that is a matter for the Sheriff. Everybody

accepts it routine, short sentences do not work. We have to break the

cycle of reoffending. But the point he mentioned about the discretion

sheriffs have, is it not the case that other judges and shares are

choosing to judge people to longer periods in jail rather than opting

for the alternatives that you put in place instead of the charges

sentences? No, I do not think so. Sheriffs are opting to use tough,

community punishment. But we have to deal with people who have

broader, wider issues, who are unemployed, who opted out of the

educational regime at an early stage and that has been mentioned

by the Inspector of Prisons, and who have underlying drug and

alcohol problems and mental health issues. These are difficult issues

and are very challenging to share it. Sometimes they feel the only

option open to them is a prison sentence and they become a very

challenging to the present estate. None of this is new. You knew all

of this when you became the Justice Secretary, yet five years later you

are presiding over a record high in our prison population. Why had he

not had the impact? Why has it not work? Let's get matters in context.

Every jurisdiction in Western Europe other than one is facing an

increasing prison population. These are broad aspects that affect

Western democracies. We have taken action as a Government here. We

have invested significant amounts in the prison estate to make sure

we have got a fit and proper prison estate, but we are not in the

position of being able to throw in even more in a time of austerity.

We are taking action in tough community punishments and we are

looking to tackle the underlying issues that affect so many of the

short term offenders who are in and out on a regular basis. Workless us,

addiction, mental health problems, it is across the board and that is

what we are seeking to do. We are about to talk about the evidence to

the Leveson inquiry on ethics in journalism today and the call from

one Scottish couple for there to be a change in the law to make it

illegal to defame and somebody who is dead. Are you sympathetic to

that call? We are aware of the pain and suffering caused to Mr and Mrs

Watson. We have decided as a Government to wait and see the

outcome of the Leveson inquiry. We have advised them we are going to

see what the Leveson inquiry reports, but we are aware of the

issues and it is a matter that causes concern to us. I use

sympathetic to a change in the there? We have to see what works,

we have had input from a variety of organisations. We want to see what

the Leveson inquiry says. Given we are dealing with the media, both

print and other media, we want to make sure we have got the

appropriate jurisdiction. Despite having consulted with them across

the south of the border, we want to see what the Leveson inquiry says.

In an all-star cast including Hugh Grant and Steve Coogan, the names

of Margaret and James Watson do not stand out, but the evidence they

gave to the Leveson inquiry today into journalistic ethics was

compelling. They described her press coverage following the murder

of their teenage daughter lead to further tragedy for the family.

The murder of Diane Watson was widely covered by the press in 1991.

She was stabbed by a classmate, 15 year-old Barbara Glover, in the

schoolyard in the East End of Glasgow.

The law says you cannot defamed the dead. Today Mrs Watson told Lord

Justice Leveson that what was written about her daughter in the

press, particularly in articles in the Herald, the Sunday Mail and

Marie Claire magazine amounted to defamation. Misreporting, malicious

lies, malicious falsehoods, just because a person is diseased you

can write what you want? They certainly did it. Just because a

person has died their reputation should not die with them. They

should not be besmirched at the well of some sick journalist,

because that is what they are, sick. 18 months after the death of Diana

her younger brother Alan took his own life. The Watson family say

that press coverage was directly responsible. The malicious

falsehoods published as too much for our son Alan who died with

these articles in his hand. Tonight they Herald group said it deeply

regrets any grief they caused the family. Marie Claire also said

sorry and the Sunday Mail said, no comment. The Watson family are

campaigning to have the law changed to make it an offence to defame the

dead. But the wider issue of how the press treats victims of crime

is likely to be a major theme in the Leveson inquiry. With me now is

someone from Victim Support Scotland. You support a change in

the law on what basis? I would like to pay tribute to the courage and

the dignity the Watson family gave in their events -- evidence today

and their real story about how families bereaved by murder are

created by the press. Victim Support Scotland has argued in the

Government's consultation exercise that there is a gap in the law. We

understand why it is difficult to match a law of defamation about the

dead in terms of Scott law. But we cannot allow the media to print

what we like about people who have been bereaved by murder. What's

changed argue seeking? There would be some extension of the law of

defamation and I am not a liar and it is incredibly complex. It is

about balancing out the human rights and the rights to privacy

and dignity of families with the right of the press to report on

trials are freely. Would it be an extension of the law which after

all is about protecting the reputation of the living? Or would

it be creating a whole new law? would have to be a new law because

the reputation of the living is about what reputation is about, but

when you die your reputation dies with you. But we cannot continue to

fail to protect people like the Watson family whose daughter was

vilified in the media. Are you suggesting there should be some

remedy to correct something wrong police said about a dead person, or

are you suggesting there should be some comeback for relatives,

business associates, friends, of a dead person who feel distress at

what has been said? There has to be a remedy and perhaps in the wide

lot of defamation, but particularly to stop the media intrusion. We are

talking about the law of defamation where you can take a newspaper to

court and can get punitive damages and that might force journalists to

behave more responsibly. But what is coming out is the need for much

wider solutions about the accountability of the media who

stand outside courts going their cameras and the faces of families

bereaved by murder. It needs to be a wider look at the privacy of