Mandy Rhodes interviews Cabinet Secretary for Justice, Kenny MacAskill about crime, punishment and black dugs
There must be something in the water of Linlithgow Loch that creates a political breeding ground. Tam Dalyell, Alex Salmond and Kenny MacAskill can all claim to be ‘Black Bitches’ because as natives of Lithgae, they are bestowed with that dubiously non-PC sounding title in honour of a black dog who swam repeatedly across the loch to carry food to its master who had been chained to a tree on an island and sentenced to starve to death.
And while politically MacAskill might be more worrying terrier than attack dog, he has that dogged determination that epitomises those long standing members of the SNP who have stayed true to their purpose gnawing on that old bone of independence, he is certainly loyal to his SNP master, Alex Salmond, who was four years above him at school at Linlithgow Academy and who he remembers as being very popular.
MacAskill is an old school nationalist whose politics spring absolutely from his belief that Scotland would be a better country for being independent. But for that piece of clarity he is also a man of many contradictions and hard to put in a box. There is something faintly old fashioned about him – he might have been more at home in the Edinburgh of Hume, Carlyle and Smith – which smacks of high morals, manners and an inherent concern in lofty matters of social justice but he is also an avid foot soldier of the Tartan Army, likes a guid swalley, owned a share of a bar in Estonia and also famously was arrested
but not charged during a Scotland/England game at Wembley.
He is a Scot through and through and in terms of stereotypes displays elements of all our famously Celtic natural traits but, and this is what gives him his USP, it is all done in moderation; so he likes a drink, likes the pub banter and enjoys the fitba’ but he is also a man of books, intellect and introspection. he is the Scottish everyman. The ‘Ordinary Jock’ who represents a nation that enjoys a good time but not too good a time and always with a nod to his Calvinistic roots.
As the man responsible for law and order in Scotland, he holds all the right cards; a lawyer who can talk the talk, as an intellect with a common touch, a believer in solutions not talking shops and most importantly a Scot who upholds the independence of the Scottish legal system something to be justly proud of. He has a big brain but keeps his knowledge in check. He’s not showy and he has a very practical side to him especially when it comes down to matters of right and wrong. His approach to matters of crime and punishment are instinctive rather than learnt which is rare in a parliament full of professional do gooders who have learnt more about prison from Irving Goffman’s ‘Asylums’ than from practical experience. And amid an opposition that begins to look more and more like a bunch of grumpy malcontents who kvetch about police numbers so much that they don’t notice the crime rates going down, he is a laconic voice of reason.
But as the whole ‘new/extra/additional/ recycled police-on-the-streets’ debacle revealed only too starkly, the justice brief is a complex one. There are no easy answers to Scotland’s multi-faceted crime and punishment issues – we now lock up more people per head of population than almost anywhere else in Europe and yet our overall crime statistics are falling and as a lawyer who over the course of 15 years built up a successful practice based on “a lot of Legal Aid work - social work related, children’s panels, opposing adoptions, freeing orders and divorces”, MacAskill knows better than most that it is those commonplace domestic breakdowns that can be blamed for many of our social ills - and they can not be cured overnight. He does not go for cheap headlines and is measured, fair and at pains to point out that his Labour predecessors, Cathy Jamieson, wanted the same outcomes as he does despite their political differences. He goes further and says that some of the criticism levelled at her lack of legal background was “unduly unfair”. The man has justice to his core.
“I suppose I am by nature an ideologue. I confess to that. I come from the perspective that nobody in Scotland enters into politics to make Scotland a worse place. There may of course be those of a fascist or racist perspective that are anathema to the rest of us in the body politic of Scotland and there are, of course, people I disagree with from across the Chamber but I think that I respect that they believe what they are doing is in the best interests of Scotland. And if we have that kind of culture or respect then I think we can recognise that in many instances, especially criminal justice, there is more that unites us than divides us because no body wants to see Scotland a more lawless place. Nobody wants to make Scotland a place in which crimes rises and victims suffer and therefore its how do we work together to achieve that
Nobody wants to make Scotland a place in which crimes rises and victims suffer and therefore its how do we work together to achieve that 
. There will be areas of clear disagreement, there will be areas where we dispute or disagree over priorities but I think the general ethos that there are good things that we must always preserve and there are things that we need to change is something which is uniform across the parties.
“Actually, I was having a perfectly nice chat with Pauline McNeil (his Labour shadow) today and I actually met the convener of the Justice Committee in a bar in Glasgow as I was returning from the football on Saturday and he was humorously commenting on my attire in the Committee because I hadn’t been in my suit. So, of course there are things that they (the Opposition) legitimately will criticise me on but there are things that I am sure I can rest on their support and that’s the way it should be. The law and order of our country is not something that should be played with for the sake of politics.”
But how can you have that level of cross party agreement when the SNP’s fundamental aim of an independent Scotland goes against the beliefs of the parties of Union?
“Well I think they know where we stand on that and I know where they stand. I think in terms of how we approach the
situation; on domestic violence, how we deal with the culture of alcohol in Scotland, how do we rid our society of knife crime and drug related offences. All of these matters are matters that have to be resolve in a devolved Scotland as they would be in an independent Scotland. So the constitutional issue will arise in some instances, for regarding al-Megrahi where we believe that the judicial system in Scotland was being exposed to not so much an attack upon our Government but on the integrity of our separate and distinct legal system which has served us for centuries. Apart from that, addressing problems of prisons, of police numbers and of the courts, these matters, I might and would argue that these matters would be better dealt with by us with the full powers of a full, normal parliament.”
How would independence make it any easier to deal with endemic problems of drug and alcohol related crime or indeed any of the underlying causes of crime in Scotland.
“Some of these matters are cultural, and I think it is part of a perspective. Independence is about Scotland taking responsibility. I think we have to take responsibility about whether our young men die in Iraq; we have to take responsibility about how we address taxation and make our economy competitive in the modern world. Those issues require independence for us to solve them. But we don’t require independence to address the culture that exists within society that reveres the machismo that manifests itself as domestic violence, or that fuels the alcohol problems or the knife related crime that we have in our culture in Scotland. So some of these matters we can make excuses for such as blaming Thatcherism, mass unemployment and the like but at the end of the day, the buck stops with us. Its our young men who are being culled on a Friday night, stabbing each other, its our people that are belting the wife all over the place and you can’t make any excuses for that. There is no excuse to be fixed on the lapel south of the Border or in international circumstances or whatever. This is us and we have to change.”
Perhaps as a nationalist, I suggest he should just accept these negatives as part of the way Scots are and to change means changing a national identity.
“That could be true but I think there are things in Scotland that we have to change. I think that is part of the crisis of confidence that exists in Scotland which means it has to define itself by who we are, not by who we are not. There’s nobody else who is going to sort out domestic violence, alcohol and a knife culture in Scotland, apart from Scotland itself. There’s no point in blaming London. One, I don’t think you can blame London and two; the only solution is to solve it ourselves.”
Fine words but how does a government solve entrenched cultural problems.
“I think some methods are hard to trigger, that’s why we supported the previous administration in ramping up the penalties because we have a culture of knife carrying in Scotland. The effects of it and the results of it are resulting in severe pressures on the prison estate and I have to live with that. But we have to make clear that we cannot go on as we are. We have to break the culture, and there’s a clear link in Scotland between violence and alcohol.”
With all Cabinet Secretaries singing from the same joined up hymn sheet on this, I ask if alcohol is to be the next theme of the Parliament in the same way as the smoking ban defined the last.
“There’s no one simple way with this. It’s not simply about legislation. Legislation has to be enacted but it’s not simply about the licensing regime although that is pivotal it’s also about a culture change so what we are seeking to do is make sure people realise that alcohol is not an excuse, alcohol is not another product like milk or eggs, and everybody has to take responsibility for their own behaviour. Those who are given the right to sell alcohol have to treat that with responsibility. So it’s all across the board there. It won’t be immediate. There are some things that I think can be seen fairly instantaneous in terms of what new powers come in and the implementation. These things will take time. But I actually think that there is a mood swing in Scotland that say we cannot go on this way. We are literally drinking ourselves the death. The problems it’s causing in health, in the economy and in criminal justice simply cannot go on. That doesn’t mean we stop enjoying a drink. I was out, as I was saying earlier, in a couple of pubs after the Scotland game; we come from a pub culture which was actually very enjoyable. People come from all over the world to Scotland and enjoy our pubs. It’s a sector of our economy that’s very important to us. It’s getting the balance right. We are not prohibitionists. And it’s about how we are drinking, not the drink itself.”
I remind MacAskill that we are all human and that he had his own unfortunate run-in with the law when he was arrested in 1999 for allegedly being drunk and disorderly at a Scotland/England match in London. Has that early scare made him more aware?
“Absolutely, I have had my road to Damascus or whatever you want to call it about these things so actually I reflected at a juncture earlier than others and perhaps in a way that I wouldn’t wish upon anybody else but you know, this is where we’re at. I am castigated because of my previous misdemeanours; I hold my hands up and acknowledge them. I think I have learned greatly from my mistakes.
“Alcohol abuse in Scotland is not just about kids hanging around on street corners, it’s a cultural problem that affects all classes and all ages and therefore that’s why we have to tackle it nationally and realistically.
“Personally, I enjoy a drink in the evening. I went to the football the other week I had a drink before and I had a drink afterwards but you know, I’ve discovered other pursuits as well and you know, I enjoy going to the pub? Yeah, pubs are part of Scottish life. There is a local along the road, I won’t give a name, it’s one of Edinburgh’s fine bars and I know that I can go along and have a chat about football with the local guys. It’s part of what many people miss when they are away from Scotland, the banter that goes on. But it’s getting the balance right between enjoying it and not having the mayhem and carnage that can occasionally spill out.”
Enacting a cultural shift is a hard brief but someone like Kenny MacAskill might just persuade Scots that it is the right thing to do. he doesn’t preach and he admits his own frailties and people like that kind of humility – it’s frankly, Scottish.
Does he think people are inherently bad?
“I think there are some people who are sociopathic and psychopathic and we don’t as yet have a medical way of treating them but I do not believe that people are inherently bad. I believe that everybody is consciously good or bad but I think in the main I have never been a supporter of the Lord of the Flies type perception of the human race. I actually do believe that everybody is capable of reform or reformation, even those who do suffer from some psychiatric disorder and that’s why I think we should be encouraging good behaviour as much as punishing bad behaviour. We should be encouraging our kids to be all they can be because the real tragedy in Scotland is that so many of our kids in some of our housing schemes have no hope or faith. They don’t have any self esteem and that actually is rather shameful. The behaviour can manifest itself in an outrageous manner. That has to be punished, and can never be condoned. But frankly, we have to give them some self-belief and some hope that actually life can get better.”
So how to deal with those offenders. Does he think prison works?
“I think prison is necessary in some instances. I mean that’s regrettable but we don’t live in a utopia
I think prison is necessary in some instances. I mean that’s regrettable but we don’t live in a utopia
. I think prison is essential because if you commit a serious offence, or if you are a danger to the community, then in prison you must be. Whether you think it doesn’t work well depends on what you think the outcome is supposed to be. Clearly, I think what we have to do is not only to punish, but we have to seek to rehabilitate people. At the present moment, all the evidence seems to be that we are managing to contain them but the pressure upon the prison estate is such that people are more likely to re-offend when they come out from imprisonment and on that basis it would certainly seem that it is not working at present. That doesn’t mean you abandon the ethos. There has to be a prison but you have to make sure that it serves its twin purpose of protecting communities and punishing, along with seeking to rehabilitate.
“There are some in prison who I believe, would frankly be better treated and in many instances are sometimes more to be pitied than punished. They have drug problems, they have mental health problems. The preponderance of those in prison with mental health problems is sad and shameful and that has to be tackled. That is not what we meant by community care, to move people out of one institution and incarcerate them in another. If somebody is committing petty offences that are frankly a nuisance, sometimes they are more often a danger to themselves than their community and then it seems to me that it might be better to treat them in the community. Not only would it be better, it would be cheaper.
“The other thing about prison, it’s not just whether prison works, prison has a cost. Prisons aren’t cost free. If we are to, as current predictions say, see our prison population escalate then we will be spending upwards of a billion pounds. So there has to be a prison estate but it doesn’t come cheap, and therefore I think prison should be used for those who need to be in, for whom there is no alternative and if there is a cheaper and more effective method for us, all the evidence says that community punishments actually have a better return in terms of a) cost to the tax payer and b) stopped re-offending, which is fundamental, then that’s the direction in which we should go.
“We are throwing more and more people into prison than frankly, is the ability of our prison service which serves us very, very well, to cope with. They are very professional, the staff of the SPS but they are simply having to contain and corral people and cannot work with people. I look forward to the day when the skills that our prison officers have can actually be used outwith the prison as well as in the prison because actually when we are dealing with some hard to handle young men, in particular where the bulk of our offending comes from, some of the best people and I don’t mean this in any disparaging way, are not necessarily the best educated, fresh faced from college with a social work qualification; it’s actually an experienced prison officer. They speak the lingo; they know how to deal with these people and I look forward to some stage where they are getting the balance right, where their work input is there to look at risk assessment. Actually some of the interface providing not simply the supervision but the mentoring for people who’ve had no adult role model or no adult male role model that you would want to model yourself on. Our prison officers do a great job and I would like to see some of them and others, whether it’s a former joiner who wants to do other things or whatever, involved out in the community offering these young men good strong, male, role models.”
It’s yet another practical, no-nonsense solution to a problem that MacAskill sees needs solved. As a nationalist, MacAskill sees being in charge of the justice brief as a huge honour and a responsibility. he is a man that respects etiquette, tradition and rules of play and cites the fact that the Scottish judicial system was one of the few institutional planks to remain distinctly Scottish following the Union. he sees it as an institution to be honoured, cared for and maintained while keeping it refreshed and up-to-date which is why he welcomes a review of the criminal justice process and has established a commission to review the work of the penal system.
“An SNP government owes a debt of gratitude to the legal bodies of Scotland. They have served Scotland well. We are distinct from south of the Border, not simply in our judicial system but because our society is distinct, our demography, smaller towns and cities, our rural communities, our law reflects much more of that. So I actually think things are quite good. It comes back to whether you see life as the glass being half full or half empty. In Scotland, the glass, I think, is half full. There are problems that we have to address but actually there’s a firm base to build upon and I’ve made it quite clear that many of the things that my predecessors did, we supported in opposition and we hope they’re grateful for that.”
And that’s MacAskill all over; he would prefer conciliation to conflict and in the justice brief that might be a much needed attribute in an arena where politicians warring with each other is a diversion from the fight against crime.
Has he ever broken the law, apart from that one transgression in 1999? he laughs. “I think like all people in Scotland, we have all broken the law, whether its speeding or illegal parking or whatever. Am I going to confess up to my transgression? Certainly not. Do I claim to be whiter than white? Absolutely not. But I have learned from my mistakes, some are public that I have fully accounted for and apologised for. I don’t claim to have been any angel when I grew up but I think that gives me an opportunity to understand that people can make mistakes and can learn from them and that’s a good lesson in life.”
No one has commented on this article. |
Holyrood magazine is the fortnightly insiders guide to understanding the complexity of Scottish politics and policy developments and is widely regarded as being the leading publication for political news and information in Scotland.
