Seòmar agus comataidhean

As I have said, the respondents to the survey indicated that they felt that there was a pressure to interpret empire and colonialism in a negative way. Individuals have concerns about the whole process. How do you respond to that, when you are trying to strike this balance and get the lessons learned?

I have a quick supplementary question. You have talked about the lessons learned and the balance required, but there was a bit of negativity in the survey that you talk about in your submission. It said that

“a ... number of respondents expressed frustration with a perceived pressure on museums to interpret all links with empire and colonialism in a negative way”.

As that is part of the equation, how do you respond to it?

There is not a complete picture, as you identified. The issue has been addressed in the past, but it has not been resolved yet, so we still think that there is more room for improvement.

We have already touched on timescales and the length of the process. Adam Stachura talked about a timescale of four months and another of a year. In its submission, Age Scotland also commented on the length of time that the SPSO takes to consider a case, and on the backlog. We are aware of the backlog, which I am sure is getting bigger, depending on how many cases come through the system. That is frustrating for any individual. Their case will take a considerable length of time to progress and, even when it does progress, they do not necessarily get the result that they expect.

My question to all the witnesses is this: what impact does that have on the public trust in the whole complaints system? I can see that there is an impact, which may well be negative rather than positive. It would be good to get views on that. Perhaps Adam Stachura could start, given that Age Scotland put those comments in its submission.

The annual report sets out information on complaints. Only 4 per cent of complaints that were closed last year went through the SPSO’s full investigation stage. That is much lower than we have seen previously, when we compare it with seven or eight years ago. Is the SPSO fulfilling its functions if only a small number of complaints make it through to the full investigation stage?

Peter and Paul, you have already made your views on some of this quite clear. I am not disagreeing—the compelling evidence that we have heard today very much backs up what was said earlier about how the whole process seems to be stacked against you, even if you are in the right process and moving forward. If you are not moving forward—if you are at the back of the queue and you are waiting, waiting and still waiting—there is a bigger problem to manage.

We questioned the previous witnesses, Professor Gill and Professor Mullen, about some of the aspects of responsiveness. They talked about a lack of data, a mismatch of the data supplied and the need for more investigation into some aspects of that data. They saw a gap in some of that. I get the sense from you that you also believe that to be the case.

As a committee trying to understand how to respond to customer concerns about the SPSO, if we do not get the data and you as individuals or organisations do not get the data, it is difficult to make an assessment. Through data, we can understand the process. It may be the case, however, that data is limited or somehow manipulated. You have given evidence of seeing that, Paul. Age Scotland understands that people sometimes get run out of the process because of the length of time that a complaint takes. People’s cases are being run down and, because of their age, they may expire by the time that the case progresses. That may happen in some people’s processes. The data that we collect and the data that is provided is vitally important for trying to analyse where we take the whole process and how we, as a committee, can then manage to see how effective the SPSO is. Peter Stewart-Blacker, you want to come in.

Absolutely. You have indicated in your submission that there are no real concerns about the quality of the complaints handling service or the process. Assessing whether that is the case requires data, and you have also indicated that there is a lack of data when you are trying to analyse that. What data should be available to enable you to make a more informed assessment? That is where we want to try to get to. By having more data, you might then be able to assess how successful the service is or how the process is working. If there is a lack of data, you cannot really see whether the SPSO is fulfilling its role.

In some ways, individual rights seem to be diminished. I put that to Jan Savage, given her role

You identify the opportunities that might arise; it is undoubtedly the case that a number of opportunities might arise. Whether there will be conflict in the future depends on where the risks are and where there is potential for divergence. In the past, we have heard about power grabs and things being done in a confrontational way. A problem could still potentially arise if there was such a difficulty, given the amount of red tape and bureaucracy involved, to which you referred.

As we look to improve the situation—you have identified that you believe that the new UK Government might want to be more aligned with the EU than the previous one—what progress do you think that we will see in the next 12 months or whatever?