Seòmar agus comataidhean

That would be my understanding.

There are no statutory time limits in the bill. I understand the point that Ms McNeill makes, which is about efficiency and fairness. It is also about how the person who is being complained about and the complainer are treated. Across the justice system, we talk a lot about trauma-informed practice. That is germane to the matter.

A number of strands of work on police complaints handling processes are being carried out by Police Scotland and the PIRC and they should improve timescales. I mentioned the front-line resolution process. That is about broadening the opportunities for early engagement and, where possible, early resolution. That has coincided with some structural changes in the professional standards department. There is also the PIRC statutory guidance that was introduced in 2021.

There have also been further improvements to audit and review practices in Police Scotland, the PIRC and the SPA. That is about the regular cycle of monitoring and understanding where people are in the resolution of complaints to avoid backlogs, for example. However, there are no statutory time limits.

I suppose that the duty of candour, being rooted in legislation, recognises what is already implied. Legislation makes it crystal clear, and the expectations are crystal clear around that culture of co-operation. That raises the significance of the duty of candour. It was a clear recommendation in the Angiolini review that the office of constable needs to be held to a higher level of duty. Raising the significance of that by locating it in legislation would allow case law in and around this area to grow.

Absolutely. I am pleased that the committee, along with Government, is very much focused on the work of HMICS in that regard. If we want the public to continue to have confidence in policing, it is vital that we have robust vetting in place. Vetting is a key strand in providing that assurance. As you would expect, I welcome the “HMICS Assurance review of vetting policy and procedures within Police Scotland” report.

In a broader sense, we are committed to exploring the legislative basis for vetting; I know that officials are talking to Police Scotland, the SPA and HMICS in that regard. Back in 2021, Police Scotland introduced some additional checks for new recruits, which were very welcome. It has also massively increased its vetting resource, by 50 per cent since 2020, with the number of Police Scotland staff who are involved in the area going up from 29 to 50. All that work, which flows from the HMICS report, is under way in Police Scotland to address the recommendations in that report. The SPA will hold Police Scotland regularly to account, and all SPA meetings are in public.

I also take some comfort from what Craig Naylor said last October: that Police Scotland vetting is very good and HMICS thinks that the risks are diminishing every day.

Where there is an organisational duty, it applies to everybody collectively.

Sorry?

In broad terms, the bill should not be looked at in isolation. I hope that I made that clear in my remarks to the convener. The non-legislative work is fundamentally important, but we need to complete the process of satisfying the statutory recommendations that were made by Lady Elish. I see the legislation and the non-legislative recommendations as being part of a bigger package. Given that we all value the principle of policing by consent, it is important that we continue to do everything that we can to ensure that there are rigorous processes in place for dealing with issues of misconduct and gross misconduct. That is imperative to there being public confidence in policing.

On what is happening in England and Wales, I will happily pick up on any specific issues that you want to raise. Generally, we look at what is happening south of the border as they are the jurisdictions that are nearest to us. As you would expect, there is cross-border co-operation in the course of day-to-day business, and there is an important cross-border issue related to the barred and advisory lists, which is an issue that we might come to.

I do not have an opinion either way on that, but I am alert to the evidence that the committee has heard that there is, perhaps, a need for an explicit power for the PIRC to do so when appropriate.

No, not in my time as cabinet secretary.

The bill enables existing regulations to be revisited under the small number of enabling powers that it includes; it is an amending bill that provides the opportunity for that to be done, particularly where secondary legislation is required. Ms Dowey and other committee members will be aware that police conduct regulations are all contained in secondary legislation and have been for many years. The appropriate parts of the bill provide an opportunity to revisit current procedures and policies in consultation with organisations, such as the Scottish police consultative forum. The bill provides the vehicle for that, as opposed to me inadvertently stepping into Police Scotland’s operational matters.

It is important to remember that Police Scotland is directly accountable to the Scottish Police Authority, because of the separation of powers. The Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012 is crafted to ensure that. Perhaps officials want to add something at this point.