Seòmar agus comataidhean

Good morning, Lady Elish, and thanks for joining us. In an answer to Rona Mackay a couple of questions ago, you indicated that the system in Scotland is actually pretty good, and that it has got better over the years since you were a prosecutor. That is great to hear, but I was a wee bit surprised by that. I have a general question. I am wondering in what areas you think the bill will make a difference. Is the bill big enough in its scope? Is it doing enough, or is it, to coin a phrase, tinkering round the edges? Is tackling the cultural issues that you have identified as a problem one of the things that the bill is trying to do? I apologise, as that is quite a general question.

That is very helpful.

I have one other question—and you have already talked about this in response to Pauline McNeill. You made a recommendation on body-worn cameras, and we have heard about the issue from others, too. There seems to be a general consensus that they would be a good thing. When you were speaking to police officers and doing your research, did you get any sense of how much churn the use of body-worn cameras could prevent within the complaints system? I am not looking for figures, but did you get any sense of how transformational or otherwise they could be?

That is what I was going to ask you about. Do you think that you need those teeth or that extra clout—whatever way you want to put it?

Good morning. I was going to ask questions on the same area as Sharon Dowey, but she has covered quite a lot and received good responses, so I will ask questions on another area.

I have a general question, which is probably for Michelle Macleod. Do you feel that provisions are in place to ensure that there are adequate and timely responses from organisations when the PIRC makes recommendations?

My final question is about support for whistleblowers. You have said that you do not feel that it is necessary for the PIRC to be added to the list of prescribed organisations in the Public Interest Disclosure (Prescribed Persons) Order 2014, as recommended by the Angiolini review. Will you expand a wee bit on your thinking on that?

That is helpful. Thank you.

You said that almost reluctantly, convener—you have to bring me in?

Good afternoon. I have a couple of quick questions to give you an opportunity to give your views on parts of the bill. First, what are your views on the provision that introduces the ability to commence or continue gross misconduct proceedings against former officers?

What would those certain circumstances be? Would that perhaps be if gross misconduct was proved?

That is really helpful. Do the other two witnesses have any thoughts on that part of the bill? I will come to Stephanie Griffin first.

I want to go back to Kate Wallace’s point about the bill allowing misconduct proceedings against former officers to commence or continue up to 12 months after an officer has left the force. What are your views on that? I think that you said at the time that you would give a view on that later, so this is your opportunity to do so.