Penal Reform: working towards a sustainable prison population – Consultation

Annex A – Summary of Consultation Questions

Question 1 – Please share any views you have on the proposal that justice social work reports should be mandatory in all cases where a short custodial sentence is being considered.

Question 2 – Please share any views you have regarding the most effective ways to improve judicial and public confidence in community sentencing options - including their content, local availability and outcomes.

Question 3 – Please share any views you have on the proposal that the legislative test in the presumption against short sentences should be strengthened.

Question 4 – What do you consider would be the most effective way to strengthen the legislative test?

Question 5 – Please share any views you have on the proposal that when sentencing a person to a short sentence, sentencers should have an obligation to set out in writing the specific details regarding what other options have been considered, and why they concluded these would not have been suitable.

Question 6 - Do you have any other comments in relation to the potential impact on victims, equality or human rights of these measures to further strengthen and support the use of the presumption against short sentences?

Question 7 - Please share any views you have on the proposal that the presumption against short periods of imprisonment of 12 months or less be extended to 24 months or less.

Question 8 – Please share any views you have on the proposal that if the presumption against short sentences is extended to 24 months or less, summary sentencing powers should also be increased so that the maximum custodial sentence is also 24 months.

Question 9 – Do you have any other comments in relation to the potential impact on victims, equality or human rights of the proposals related to extending the Presumption Against Short Sentences (PASS) from 12 to 24 months?

Question 10 – Please share any views you have on how effective CPOs are in their current form and whether the legislation underpinning them is appropriate.

Question 11 - To what extent do you think the current framework allows sufficient flexibility to tailor CPOs to individual circumstances, including the roles of both sentencers and justice social workers?

Question 12 – Please share any views you have on how the current CPO legislative framework could be improved to ensure CPOs are a credible alternative to custodial sentences.

You may wish to consider:

• removing any unnecessary or ineffective requirements.
• adding new or revised requirements.
• addressing practical or legislative barriers to the use of existing requirements.
• any other changes.

Question 13 – Please share any views you have on the extent to which CPOs provide sufficient support to address the underlying causes of offending behaviour and whether there are any barriers to ensuring support needs are met.

Question 14 – Please share any views you have on the introduction of an Enhanced Combination Order model in Scotland.

In your response, please consider which elements (for example, psychological assessment or restorative approaches) would be most valuable, and any potential benefits or challenges.

Question 15 – Please share any views you have on the proposal to amend how CPOs are set out in law, so they are clearly framed as a sentence that can be used where justice social work intervention could address the underlying causes of offending behaviour.

Question 16 – Please share any views you have on what changes, if any, would be required to make CPOs suitable and effective for more serious offending behaviour.

Question 17 – Please share any views you have on the proposal that there should be more opportunities to incentivise good behaviour on CPOs through reductions in, or early discharge from, unpaid work or supervision requirements.

Please give reasons for your answer including any views for how this could be achieved in practice, as well as any alternative suggestions to enable incentivisation of good behaviour on CPOs.

Question 18 – What changes, if any, do you believe are needed to improve breach processes for CPOs to ensure timely, proportionate, and consistent responses to non‑compliance?

Question 19 – Please share any views you have on retaining Drug Treatment and Testing Orders as a distinct community disposal for addressing substance-related offending.

Please give reasons for your answer, including:

• views on whether they should be reformed or replaced;
• views on the current effectiveness of DTTOs;
• how they compare to alternative disposals, including Community Payback Orders (with or without treatment requirements);
• what a future community sentence for individuals whose offending is related to substance use should look like.

Question 20 – Do you have any other comments in relation to the potential impact on victims, equality or human rights of these proposals to enhance and strengthen community sentences?

Question 21 – Please share any views you have on the proposal that there should be a formal mechanism to enable bail cases with an electronic monitoring requirement to be brought back before the court or dealt with administratively in chambers. This would be used when administrative issues arise that may prevent the order being monitored, and currently require judicial consideration, but where there may be no evidence of criminality.

Question 22 – Please share any views you have on the proposal that there should be a power of arrest for breaching the order or licence relating to an exclusion zone.

Question 23 – Please share any views you have on the proposal that there should be other improvements to the system of electronic monitoring either to help facilitate any of the other reforms in this paper, or more broadly.

Question 24 – Do you have any other comments in relation to the potential impact of these electronic monitoring proposals on victims, equality or human rights?

Question 25 - Please share any views you have on the proposal that people should not be remanded to custody unless they have a reasonable prospect of a custodial sentence of 24 months or more.

Please give reasons for your answer, including whether there are any circumstances in which remand should remain available even where such a sentence is unlikely.

Question 26 – Do you have any other comments in relation to the potential impact of this bail and remand proposal on victims, equality or human rights?

Question 27 - Please share any views you have on the proposal that the automatic release point for long-term prisoners (excluding those on extended sentences) should be amended to the two thirds point. Please include what the potential impacts could be on reoffending and rehabilitation into the community.

Question 28 - Please share any views you have on the proposal that if amending the automatic release point for long-term prisoners to the two-thirds point, those subject to extended sentences should be included.

Question 29 - Please share any views you have on the proposal to amend the definition of short-term prisoners from “less than four years” to “less than five years”.

Question 30 - Do you have any other comments in relation to the potential impact of these proposals regarding prisoner release arrangements on victims, equality or human rights?

Question 31 - Do you have any comments on the overall package of reforms contained within this consultation, potential interactions, and whether taken together they would help work towards achieving a sustainable prison population?