Seòmar agus comataidhean

You have said that you like to think of having a workforce of 22,000. Is that by necessity? I wonder what the public think about that and what your view is. Given my role, I know that constituents want to see police officers protecting them from threat, harm and risk. In paragraph 24 of your submission, you say that you are

“working to establish a clear position on the right size”

of the police force. What does that amount to?

Is that for police budgets?

My question was whether the Government has given you an indication of its response on multiyear funding.

Chief constable, I would like to set the context for my line of questioning. I recognise the constraints of the police budget and you have clearly set out your concerns. I will follow on from Liam Kerr’s questions about the modelling that you have been asked to do for a flat cash settlement and for a cash reduction of 3 per cent. Has the Government responded to your plans for a multiyear funding arrangement and, if so, what was the response?

That is a point well made. After all this time, there is no point in not rolling it out properly. We want to make sure that we minimise any issues that arise. Thank you for that.

I have one other question. In answer to another member, you said that Wales has a higher per capita—

I understand. I can see the sense in that: you want to ensure that front-line policing is the best that it can be. You do not mean that you would civilianise police jobs.

Would the channels to change that be through the Scottish Government to the UK Government?

I remembered that Karyn McCluskey gave strong evidence to the committee the last time she was here, so I went back to look at it. You said to the committee that community-based disposal orders are an issue, and that 80 per cent of sheriffs would like to give such sentences but cannot, because users of drug services simply lead chaotic lives and the disposals take place at specific times. Sheriffs end up giving short-term sentences because they cannot see a way around that. Is there a way around the problem of sheriffs not having confidence that structured community sentencing in its current form can work?

The sheriffs have a problem when they are looking at whether someone is a drug user, because drug services are available at specific times. I am trying to establish whether there is a way around that in a community sentence. If you cannot fix that bit, there will be an unending cycle.

Are you saying that we need to combine the community service orders that anyone could get with community service orders for people who have drug or alcohol addiction issues, so that sheriffs can be confident that they can apply a community service order as part of a prison sentence, because they are satisfied that, within that, they can work around the issues, so that a prisoner can get access to the drug services that they need. Is that correct?