Seòmar agus comataidhean

Sorry.

When I read that, it made me think about how challenging it is to get an appointment with a GP within five days these days. My concern is that, if the approach is rigid, some people will fall by the wayside. What happens also depends on what day people are released from prison and what system their GP has. I wonder whether there is some flexibility around the five days.

Good morning. I read in the notes that you have provided that

“Approximately 21% of the SPS Resource budget is for payments to the private sector for the provision of 2 private prison establishments”.

That seems to be quite a high figure, but you go on to say that the

“contracts have contractual built in Inflation mechanisms based on CPI and RPI increases.”

The two private prisons are getting an increase of 11.4 per cent. It seems to be grossly unfair that the public sector prisons must operate within a budget that is being reduced by 7.8 per cent, but private prisons under the service will benefit by 11.4 per cent. Is that right?

It must be acknowledged that no one thought in 2008 that inflation would reach double figures, but it has. Is there any scope for going back on the contracts, given the extraordinary circumstances that we are all living in, and notwithstanding the line of questioning of my colleague Russell Findlay about the cost of energy, let alone of running the estate? Is there any scope for asking whether we really want to put such extraordinary pressure on the public sector when the private sector is not feeling pain that the public sector is feeling.

So even in the best scenario, in which you would save £22 million by 2026-27, shutting courts is not going to take you far.

Based on what you have said, then, is it fair to say that, in making reforms, you quite often need to spend money at the beginning to save money at the end? Is that something that the Government should consider? I know that there is the £50 million for the recovery programme, but would you say that reforms could receive funding at the beginning of all this if it could be demonstrated that savings would come towards 2026 or 2027? Is that fair?

We heard evidence from the police service that virtually no more savings can be made. Transformational change and moving to a single service have used up a lot of that room. I think that you said something similar. It sounds like we are hearing comparable evidence from the fire service and police service that there is nowhere else to go.

Do you have concerns that we might lose fire service officers from the front line if there is no satisfactory pay settlement? Do you have any concerns about retaining firefighters in the long run?

In your last sentence, you said that you are monitoring police officers leaving and coming back as civilians. Are you suggesting that they would not be able to do that because it is encouraging them to take retirement if they come back as civilians? Is that what you meant?

Good morning. My question has kind of been covered. I was going to ask about the implications of having a flat cash budget. You have outlined stark terms to the committee, and I want to confirm that I have understood things correctly.

I will start with David Page. All three witnesses seem to be saying that, if the issue is not resolved, there will be a serious reduction in service and, perhaps more fundamentally, a change in the model that we have been used to of an exemplary Scottish police force. I agree with Jamie Greene. The role that the force has played in Scotland, and its exemplary record on big events, is different from the model in other forces across the UK.

I presume that you have put that to the cabinet secretary and to the Scottish Government. Given what you have outlined to the committee, which is very concerning, what response are you getting from the Government on the stark reality if a flat cash settlement remains in place for the next four years?

Lynn Brown, have you similarly expressed those views to the Government, and what response are you getting?