Seòmar agus comataidhean

We heard yesterday, and have heard in previous evidence, that secondary legislation is urgently needed to address some shortfalls. Do you think that that should be urgently looked at? Should it be written into the bill if it is to have any meaningful impact?

We heard that when a police officer is suspended for gross misconduct, you have to wait until the criminal case is concluded before you can dismiss them. Could that be addressed in the bill, or is that a bigger problem?

In your letter to the committee, you talk about a culture of “error terror”, which is the fear of being investigated for simply making a mistake. That is a part of the culture that needs to be changed within the force and that the bill is aimed at correcting. In one of your recent inspections of culture in Police Scotland, you found that

“financial and resource constraint was one of the primary factors”

preventing culture change. The financial memorandum’s estimate of the cost of the bill has already increased from £1.4 million to £5.8 million. Do you think that there will be a further significant rise in the estimated cost of the bill?

So you think that it will rise.

We heard evidence from the Scottish Police Federation that some issues with the complaints and misconduct processes could be dealt with through the existing conduct and performance regulations, but they have never been enacted properly. They are now seen as a punishment, and the system

“investigates ... at the top level and not at the bottom level”.—[Official Report, Criminal Justice Committee, 8 May 2024; c 28.]

Could I get your comments on that?

When there is irrefutable evidence, do you still have to pay somebody in their employment up to the point that it gets to a court case, even though it is obvious that they will not be able to continue in employment?

So you need legislation for some things, but do you need training for other bits? Is there a lack of training in some areas? One of our witnesses heard that he had been put on to restricted duties, but he was never told why; since then, we have heard more evidence that there was no reason why that should have happened. I find it hard to believe that somebody could be either suspended or put on restricted duties without being told why. Is there a training or performance management issue there?

I want to follow on from your conversation with the convener and ask again about what difference a code of ethics will have if there are no sanctions. The code has been described as symbolic; you are saying that what we are putting in legislation is really just a guide and that the disciplinary processes should be separate.

So, it is something to aspire to. In that case, is there any benefit in putting it in legislation?

I perhaps need to get my head around what actually needs legislation and what can be put into your handbook, if you like.