Seòmar agus comataidhean

Yes—I will just get it up on my screen and I will be able to tell you exactly what I was told.

Good morning. I want to raise the case of a constituent who came to me this week. I will not go into any detail, obviously, and I do not know the rights and wrongs of the issue, but I will speak to the process as they experienced it, which might touch on some of the issues that have been raised today, and perhaps some others.

The main issue that my constituent said that they experienced when making a complaint through the process was the length of time that the whole process took. There was also a feeling that they were intimidated by police while the process was on-going, whether that was intended or not; my constituent accepts that it might not have been, but there was a feeling that my constituent was up against the whole of a local police station, that the PIRC did not have teeth to any great extent, and that their concerns around the complaint were minimised and not taken as seriously as they merited. In fact, the process had an impact on my constituent’s health, particularly their emotional health. The complaint was made some time ago, and my constituent has been triggered by the evidence that this committee has been taking.

I realise that my question is quite general and that we cannot comment on the actual facts of the situation or the rights and wrongs of it—and it is important to say that my constituent accepts that the matter is now closed and is trying to move on—but what I have said about their feelings and experiences reflects what we have heard from witnesses. These are general concerns that we have heard from other people who have experienced the process. What do you think that the bill will do to help people with those experiences, particularly on the emotional health aspect? That is probably quite a big thing, particularly if something has taken a long time to come to any sort of resolution.

Good afternoon. I think that each of you was in the room when I asked my question at the end of the previous witness session. I broadly raised the case of a constituent, which I will not go over again, but I want to ask you about the emotional impact of complaints processes on officers and members of the public. That links to evidence that we have heard about the possible weaponisation of the complaints system by PSD, and tactics of intimidation that are used against complainers. We have heard of that from people who have given us evidence. Included in that is the length of time that the processes take. Is PSD best placed to do the job, or can it be done in another way? Have improvements been made and can further improvements be made? What can be done to support people’s emotional wellbeing as they go through the system?

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?