Seòmar agus comataidhean

Normally, as a committee, we try to avoid party-political issues, but I think it important to get on the record a response to the points that were made by Fulton MacGregor. The Scottish Government makes decisions about how it spends money. It is in receipt of a record £41 billion block grant from the UK Government. In June, the chief constable told the SPA that the Scottish Government had

“clearly set out its spending priorities”

and that

“Policing is not among those stated priorities”.

Perhaps that helps to give some context to the bigger financial picture.

Yes, to Addiewell and Kilmarnock.

You have said that you cannot speak for the chief constable, but a lot of what is in your submission and what you have said to the committee will affect him and his officers. Is not it important that we hear from him directly?

Frankly, a lot of what we have heard and what you have said so far is terrifying, and I really appreciate your candour. It is necessary, but it cannot be easy to be so forthright with some of this stuff.

I have two separate questions, the first of which relates to body cameras. I suppose that they are an example of equipment issues and how the proposed budget will affect things.

In your opening statement, you said that body cameras have been rolled out pretty much universally in England and Wales and that, in fact, second-generation body cameras are now being used there. Despite the fact that the security guards in any supermarket will have body cameras, Police Scotland has only around 500 such devices, most of which are with armed officers. The level of provision seems pretty basic.

Given that we now face really serious financial pressures, is there not an element of your not having fixed the roof when the sun was shining? Is there not a sense that a huge opportunity has been missed and that someone somewhere should have prioritised the provision of body cameras or found the money to make that happen?

More generally, you also mentioned that 23 scenarios have been modelled, which sounds like the equivalent of wandering through a smoke-filled room. I presume that those go from one extreme to the other, and include everything in between. Do they include worst-case scenario things such as ending the policy on no compulsory redundancies, or is that off the table?

Is that particular policy set in stone as far as the service is concerned?

I have two quick and specific questions about capital—one to do with buildings and the other to do with vehicles. You are talking about the need to rebuild 14 buildings at a cost of £70 million. I understand that, right now, there is a building that has gone significantly over budget, going from somewhere in the region of £4 million to something like £14 million—I do not know whether you recognise that and, if you do, whether you think that £70 million for 14 new stations is, therefore, in any way realistic.

I would like to quickly recap. Is it correct that we will not see body cameras any time soon, and, on mental health, there is no extra money but there are some organisational issues that can be improved?

So this appliance costs more, but is not double the price.

I note that the letter does not mention the two prisons that are not under SPS control, and I just wondered whether we need to seek the same information from those operators.