Seòmar agus comataidhean

I want to draw you back to the question and what you spoke about earlier. You teased out in your response that bond, camaraderie and, perhaps, culture within Police Scotland. Thinking about the provisions in the bill and the bill being an opportunity to address some of the issues that you have described, what key things does Police Scotland need to think about in relation to how that bond and its implications can be addressed?

A moment ago, I think that you said that this took up 10 years of your life. One of the issues that we are aware of is the extraordinarily long timescales that some people experience. I come back to what the bill contains. Does it do enough to address the issue of the lengthy timescales that people are experiencing? How do you think that should be changed?

I want to ask about the duty of candour. The bill contains a proposal to create a duty of candour for Police Scotland, so that officers and staff are required to be truthful and candid and to co-operate in proceedings.

From your experience, do you think that that is sufficient to give you more confidence that police officers would co-operate with investigations, for example, including those against other officers? If not, what do you think should be put in place in that respect with regard to a duty of candour?

Linked to that, another provision in the bill places a legal obligation on Police Scotland to create a code of ethics. Would that give you more confidence in the behaviour of the police? Should there be some sort of sanction or implication should an officer breach the code of ethics?

Thank you very much for attending. It has been very valuable to hear your views. We will have a short suspension and a change of witnesses.

I welcome Magdalene Robertson to the meeting. Ms Robertson is joining us online and I believe that she prefers to be addressed as Maggie. Welcome, Maggie, and thank you for taking the time to give evidence today and for kindly providing some background information about your experience.

I intend to allow about 45 minutes for this evidence session. Mr Findlay, do you need to declare an interest before we start?

Thank you.

One of the issues that has come up in the evidence that the committee has taken this morning is timescales, which I think that you will relate to. May I ask you about that? How do any potential delays in the system impact on people involved in it? What should we be thinking about with regard to how that should be addressed in the bill that we are looking at?

That is very interesting. Goodness me.

I am interested in what you think about the intention to allow proceedings against former officers to commence or continue. The timescale for that is up to 12 months after an officer has left the force, unless, according to the bill, specific criteria are met. Do you have a view on that?

A very good morning and welcome to the 14th meeting of the Criminal Justice Committee in 2024. We have apologies from Pauline McNeill. Sharon Dowey joins us online.

Today we begin taking our stage 1 evidence on the Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill. Before I begin, I declare that I was a police officer for Grampian Police and Police Scotland. I invite other members to declare any interests that they might have.

From what you say, it seems that those actions contributed to the lengthy timescales that you experienced.