Exclusive:'Expensive' Scotland’s sentencing council branded 'irrelevant' as costs soar by 355%
The Scottish Sentencing Council has been branded ‘expensive’ as costs have soared
Scotland’s sentencing authority has cost the public purse £4.6 million in its first decade amid allegations it is “expensive, opaque and functionally irrelevant”.
Since its establishment in 2015, staffing costs at the Scottish Sentencing Council have soared by 355 per cent.
Now a leading law academic has issued a coruscating critique of the public body, calling it a “masterclass in institutional preservation”.
Dr Graeme Brown, a senior law lecturer at Aberdeen University, alleges the sentencing council has produced a “limited output” over ten years.
In a new article in Greens Criminal Law Bulletin, he cites the “intense controversy” over the council’s Sentencing Young People guideline, which he says led to unduly lenient sentences for under-25s who commit serious crimes.
Dr Brown goes on to cite a laundry list of issues with the body, which is funded by the Scottish Courts and Tribunal Service.
Among them are what the academic says is poor quality research commissioned by the council; an unacceptable delay in issuing sentencing guidelines on rape and other sexual offences; and the soaring costs of the body when other public servants have faced pay erosion.
“If bloated budgets and an ability to squander public funds equalled effectiveness, then the council would be world leading,” Dr Brown writes.
“Instead, the council is a monument to inertia: expensive, opaque and, insofar as the legal profession and most sentencers are concerned, functionally irrelevant.
“The council has singularly failed to produce anything of real value for sentencers or the legal profession in its first ten years, delivering only a masterclass in institutional preservation.”
Dr Brown’s essay also assesses the costs of the Scottish Sentencing Council, looking at its first nine annual reports. The costs are incomplete as the council has not yet published its most recent report.
However, available data shows its annual expenditure has ballooned by more than 338 per cent in its first ten years from £198,635 in 2015/16 to £871,140 in 2023/24.
Staff costs at the council have surged by 355 per cent between 2015 and 2021 from £147,102 in 2015/16 to £669,073 in 2023/24.
Yet, Dr Brown adds: “The council’s remit has not expanded over the past decade.”
The council was established in October 2015, with some staff first taking up post in January 2016.
Dr Brown said: “At a time when other public servants have faced pay erosion, job cuts and increased workloads, this is unacceptable. It is remarkable that a publicly funded body can consume so much in terms of resources and yet produce so little.”
His essay goes on to say the council has published three general guidelines which, he argues, largely re-state existing practice, and one offence-specific guideline that deals with an issue already addressed by the appeal court.
Dr Brown also highlights the council announced an intention to start work on rape sentencing guidelines seven years ago, yet they have still not been finalised.
In the meantime, he said, the number of successful Crown appeals against sentence in cases of rape continues to grow.
Referencing a case from 2023, Dr Brown says Lord Justice Clerk Dorrian, then chair of the council, refused the Crown’s motion to issue a guideline judgment on sentencing rape.
Lady Dorrian claimed the council would “shortly consult on a draft guideline for the offence”.
Dr Brown adds: “Despite Lady Dorrian’s assurances, the council’s draft guideline on sentencing rape was, in fact, only issued 19 months later.”
He calls this “a shameful, and completely unacceptable” length of time after the council first announced its intention to commence work on it in its second business plan, issued in October 2018.
Since the 2023 decision, a total of 11 Crown appeals against sentence on the grounds of unduly leniency in cases of rape have been successfully argued.
Dr Brown’s essay adds: “It is a paradigm example of how not to run a sentencing council.”
Scottish Conservative shadow minister for victims and community safety Sharon Dowey said: “The public will be appalled by the staggering costs being racked up by this quango.
“They are already angry that the sentencing council pushes the SNP’s soft-touch justice agenda through its perverse sentencing guidelines for under 25s, and will be wondering why so much money has been squandered by them.”
Ms Dowey added: “The Scottish Sentencing Council must be upfront about how they are spending taxpayers’ money and focus on properly supporting the needs of victims.”
A Scottish Sentencing Council spokesperson said: “Every sentencing guideline developed by the council is a result of a process of careful and evidence-based decision making, involving thorough research including with judges and victims, consultation, and testing prior to the submission of a final guideline to the High Court for its approval.
“This process takes time, but is essential in ensuring guidelines are fit for purpose for all their users, including courts, court users, and the general public. Considering the harm caused to victims is a fundamental part of the sentencing process and is addressed in all the council’s guidelines.
“Sentencing guidelines and other materials developed by the council are intended to be as accessible to as wide a range of audiences as possible.
“With four sentencing guidelines now in effect, the council will soon submit two rape guidelines to the High Court for approval: rape, and rape of a young child under the age of 13. If these guidelines are approved by the High Court, as with all other guidelines in force, the council will review their operation in line with its statutory duty and its published methodology.”
The spokesperson added: “The council is also continuing its work on guidelines on sentencing domestic abuse offences, sexual assault, indecent images of children, environmental and wildlife crime, and sentence reduction after a guilty plea.
“In due course, it intends to begin development of guidelines on assault and the sentencing of people with mental health conditions and related issues. Alongside this, the council continues its robust public engagement and education work.”
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: “The Scottish Sentencing Council is an independent body established by statute. The council fulfils important statutory functions in relation to sentencing and has produced four finalised guidelines with a further six in development.”