Seòmar agus comataidhean

The crimes that the regulations would cover are summary cases but those can include acts of violence. Victims often complain that the system is opaque: they are not kept in the loop, are not told of disposals and are often left in limbo for significant periods. Has any consideration been given to informing victims about disposals as part of the change? It seems that there will be even less chance of their being told if there is no formal hearing because it is not needed.

Churn has been a huge problem in the sheriff courts for decades and I guess that that is what we are talking about. However, is there not a risk that it might financially incentivise a defence lawyer to recommend to their client that they should enter a guilty plea, which might not be in the client’s best interest?

I understand that this is the business of the court and the Crown Office, but could there be a stipulation or requirement with regard to the need to inform witnesses and victims as the work is progressed? Otherwise, there will be a real risk of their being left not knowing the outcome of cases. For victims of violence, in particular, or some other crimes of that nature, it seems only right that that consideration is front and centre of any such change.

Thank you.

I echo that the proposal is a good development. It was in our party’s manifesto during the last election and is in my colleague Jamie Greene’s member’s bill—that development will push the bill forward.

We should be grateful to those who responded to the consultation. There were of course those people who one would expect to respond, but also quite a lot of members of the public who have suffered from the verdict—including Miss M and families who have lost members to murder—and have not had justice as they see it. There are really compelling responses in there that are worth taking time to read.

The letter that we received happened to be dated the same day as the first meeting of the new group. The letter also says that details will be made available on the Government website. I do not know whether that is indeed the case, but I certainly would like to know when the group is planning to meet next and to have a rough idea of schedules. Given that there are international members among the 20 listed in the letter in front of us, I would like to know what the format of meetings will be. I presume that they will not be travelling to Scotland every time the group meets—I am curious about that.

I am happy to go first. There is a lot in both letters. Are we taking both at the same time?

I know that this is primarily about pensions but other issues are referred to. David Page mentions—this is near the top of his letter—the importance of being mindful of police officers’ physical, emotional and mental wellbeing. We have heard evidence of suicides among police officers and what appeared to be a lack of any meaningful attempt to get to the bottom of that. A particular phrase was used in an exchange between SPA and Police Scotland in response to the former asking the latter for some information. Police Scotland explored the issue and said:

“Based on the information available at that time, there was nothing to suggest that any of the recent cases were caused directly by the pressure of work.”

I do not think that that is the case; I think that the matter is worth revisiting. I am familiar with cases where it very much looks as though the pressure of work, the work environment and other issues around that were contributory factors. I wanted to put that on the record.

I will return to the pension issue. Will Kerr is one of two senior officers who chairs the operational priorities, capacity and resilience group, which is looking into the issue of the change in pension rights and the large numbers of officers who have left and might continue to do so. That particular officer has, ironically, just announced that he is leaving to take up a post with another police force, so it would be interesting to know who is taking his place on that group.

However, the main issue, on which I am sure that other colleagues will have plenty to say, is David Page’s very stark warning towards the end of his letter about the impact that the proposed budget will have on policing in Scotland. I will not read it out, but it is clearly extremely concerning. That comes just a couple of months after the chief constable told the SPA that the proposed budget would have a significant impact on the numbers of officers who would be serving communities.

I have just one point to make. Obviously, this is one of the most serious subject areas in which the police are working. The letter touches on the point that Jamie Greene made about bigger budget concerns. Its writer acknowledges that, given the current financial circumstances, putting in more money will probably not address the issue and is probably not a feasible option. It will therefore be interesting to see in December what is proposed. We should just put that in the diary and give it a good look when it comes along.

Subsequent to the correspondence from the minister, we have had some correspondence from the Edinburgh Bar Association. It might therefore be worthwhile, if we are writing to the minister on that issue, to incorporate some of the points that the EBA has made in response to her.