Seòmar agus comataidhean

I merely say that I am intrigued to see how we will make a half-hour debate out of this subject next week. I look forward to hearing the minister’s comments.

I was referring to the letter from the cabinet secretary, at the third substantive paragraph on page 3 in our papers. It states:

“Each Health Board is providing access to a mental health clinician, accessible to police officers, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week”.

I presume that that means that each board is currently providing access—that is what the letter implies. That apparent 24/7 provision is a surprise to me. The feedback is very much that that is not the case out of hours, that police officers must deal with mental health assessments and that there is not 24/7 access to mental health clinicians for every officer. I find it difficult to believe the claim that every health board is currently providing a 24/7 mental health clinician service. If it is true, that is welcome, but we could perhaps benefit from more detail on that.

I want to comment on that second level. Obviously, the SPF has seen the draft—I presume that it is a draft—of the constitution that has been published. It has made specific comments as to the content of a number of paragraphs—3, 9, 37, 42, 43, 44 and 45. To go back to my original question, will there be scope for the constitution to be amended prior to being finalised?

Does the Government have any override function, in terms of decisions that are made?

Right.

Yes. Specifically on that, although the letter from the SPF is a matter of public record, it is worth saying on the record that the SPF feedback on section 37 of the constitution states:

“There seems to be scope for either of the Sides to prevent such a matter going to arbitration or for the Chairperson to decide not to refer a matter to arbitration and this could lead to a deadlock.”

On section 42, the SPF states:

“It is hard to envisage the Board failing to make recommendations based on an arbitration award. It seems to open the door for either Side to delay or block a PNB agreement based on an arbitration award and this would be highly unsatisfactory.”

I guess that I am looking for feedback on that.

Thank you for that clarity.

Finally, what role would the Scottish ministers play in any of these proceedings?

You supply the resource budget, so you have to sign off the cheque.

Good morning, cabinet secretary and other guests.

I apologise if I have not explained myself properly. I just want to ensure that the very specific comments that the SPF has made will be taken into account by the PNBS as it finalises the wording of the constitution.