łÉČËżěĘÖ

Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 15 August 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1673 contributions

|

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 May 2024

Russell Findlay

Do you refer everything, even a complaint about excessive force?

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 May 2024

Russell Findlay

The figures in the financial memorandum might actually go down—you never know.

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 May 2024

Russell Findlay

The PIRC previously raised with the committee a particular shocking case in which an individual was wrongly arrested, locked up for a number of days and subsequently apologised to and compensated. That was a number of years ago. Are you now confident, post-Angiolini, that that type of incident is not likely to reoccur? Does it require legislation to prevent such matters from reoccurring or will the non-legislative parts of the Angiolini report’s recommendations, which are mostly implemented, prevent something like that from happening again?

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 May 2024

Russell Findlay

Sorry, what does the number 140 relate to?

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 May 2024

Russell Findlay

Thank you.

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 22 May 2024

Russell Findlay

Section 6 of the bill will allow for the continuation of gross misconduct proceedings once an officer retires or resigns. In response to that, your submission says that, when that happens, it should be subject to a public interest test, which obviously makes sense—it should not be so prescriptive as to require every case to be pursued when there may be good reasons not to do so. Could you offer a definition of what that public interest test might look like, and whether it should be set out in the bill? Does the bill need to be amended so that it is clearer about what sets of circumstances the provision might apply to?

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill:Stage 1

Meeting date: 16 May 2024

Russell Findlay

Sure.

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill:Stage 1

Meeting date: 16 May 2024

Russell Findlay

Yes, such as in medical, legal or social services. If there is sensitive information, the chair or judge can clear the room or put reporting restrictions in place.

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill:Stage 1

Meeting date: 16 May 2024

Russell Findlay

Absolutely.

One of your recommendations is for gross misconduct hearings for officers of all ranks to be held in public. The version in the bill covers officers of senior rank only. In its evidence, the Scottish Police Federation described such hearings as being “like a public flogging”. The Association of Scottish Police Superintendents said that it was like putting officers “in the stocks”. The ASPS also expressed concerns about the sensitivity of personal information. What would your response be to those concerns?

Criminal Justice Committee

Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill:Stage 1

Meeting date: 16 May 2024

Russell Findlay

I believe that, when you were conducting your review, you spoke to a number of witnesses, both members of the public and police officers, past and present, and I think that we have heard from some of the same individuals. In many cases involving police whistleblowers, careers have been destroyed, people’s health has been harmed—often for life—and they have suffered huge financial impact. In the cases that we have heard about, much of that was avoidable and good people were lost from policing. Does the bill do enough to protect whistleblowers?