³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Teresa Medhurst, would you like to attempt to answer that?

I talk to every partner in the justice system about the problems that are associated with the high prison population. That includes the Lord President. He is a defender and protector of the independence of the judiciary—as I am and as we all are, by law. I talk to each and every partner in our justice system about the problems that are associated with a high prison population, because it will ultimately require a whole-system solution. It is beholden on me to raise awareness, increase the visibility of community disposals, discuss with people how they think the implementation of, or response to, the presumption against short-term sentences is going, and articulate the effectiveness of robust community disposals. That does not take away from the independent decision making of partners. In short, I discuss the matter with everybody, Mr Findlay.

The proportion was 25 per cent.

Well, we have—

There are a number of factors in that. I will specifically address the issue of long-term prisoners. Although the statutory instrument runs for a short period of time—that window is short—the effect on the prison population will be longer and should get us past the summer and into autumn.

That is why, as I outlined in my statement on 16 May, we will do a short exercise over the summer to consult on release arrangements for long-term prisoners. We will openly discuss the question of what proportion of a long-term sentence should be served under community supervision. For people who are not released on parole, that is currently six months. If sentences are going up and someone has served six, eight, 10, 12, or 14 years, is six months of compulsory supervision at the end of their sentence long enough to reintegrate them?

We need to have that conversation and look at the evidence. I am not prejudging the specifics, although I am strongly of the view that now, almost 10 years since the Prisoners (Control of Release) (Scotland) Act 2015 was passed, is the time to look at that, because it is one of the underlying factors behind our high prison population.

I also said in my statement that, depending on the response to that consultation, and with the approval of colleagues, I would seek to bring forward expedited legislation. We must do more. Emergency release is absolutely necessary right now, but we cannot take our foot off the gas. We must bring forward additional proposals, over and above what I have already reported to Parliament, and that is one of them.

I understand and take absolutely seriously the legitimate and real concerns that victim support organisations raise. I will not repeat the safety measures or safeguards in the arrangements. Collectively, we will continue to engage with victim support organisations.

However, with regard to being trauma-informed, that is why we implemented the sections in the 2023 act, whereby victims can, if they choose, have the information shared with a victim support organisation, either instead of, or at the same time as, the information being given to the victims.

I am sure that Mr Findlay is aware of the existing victim notification and information schemes.

Those lists are important, particularly in cross-jurisdiction terms. To be candid, we need to bring Scotland in line with other partners in Great Britain. It is not acceptable for anyone who has been dismissed from Police Scotland to turn up and get a policing job elsewhere on these islands. That was a recommendation from Dame Elish. As things stand, in terms of corporate cross-jurisdiction responsibility, we have put the administration of the lists on to the Scottish Police Authority, although there is a power for the SPA to delegate that to Police Scotland, for example.

It is important that lists in Scotland speak to lists that exist elsewhere on our islands as well as the lists that cover the non-territorial forces, whether that is the British Transport Police, the Ministry of Defence Police or the Civil Nuclear Police Authority. Those lists can be published, but I will ask officials to speak more about the nature of publishing and how that is achieved.

I take the point about closure. It is important for all parties that, irrespective of the outcome, everyone has confidence in the process. At its heart, the bill is about ensuring that our public have confidence in the processes that are set up to deal with the minority of misconduct cases that involve police officers. More broadly, to address the point about a more welcoming and solution-focused approach to complaints resolution, I will not repeat what I said earlier about the importance of the measures that are already in train on the efficiency and effectiveness of processes, or the work that is being done on timescales, which is about engaging earlier in the process and seeking earlier resolution, where appropriate.

I will ask officials to speak to the issue of heads of complaint.

With regard to the PIRC, I will not repeat what I said earlier about its cornerstone role in the policing family in holding policing to account. However, it might be of interest to Mr MacGregor’s constituent to know that it is now a minority of PIRC staff who are former police officers; 52 per cent of PIRC staff come from a non-policing background. That speaks to the diversity of talents and skills, and to the independence of the organisation.

I do not know which of my officials would like to speak to the heads of complaint issue.

Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the committee about the Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill.

The bill will embed ethics in the legislative framework to ensure that human rights are front and centre of policing in Scotland. It will pave the way to reforming how police conduct is dealt with and will enhance the independent scrutiny of policing.

The bill draws on evidence led by the former Lord Advocate Dame Elish Angiolini, who undertook an independent review of police complaints investigation and misconduct issues. She heard from many individuals from different organisations and members of the public, as well as numerous focus groups.

In 2022, a 12-week public consultation was held. That consultation demonstrated broad support for the legislative changes that were recommended by Dame Elish Angiolini. The measures in the bill build on the non-legislative improvements that have already been made by policing partners. It is important that the bill has been shaped by those who have lived experience of the police complaints system, many of whom felt that the whole system was against them, that they became the victim and that there was no independent body to turn to.

In seeking to raise and embed ethical standards, the bill places a statutory obligation on the chief constable to prepare, regularly review and disseminate the code of ethics, reflecting its significance. Those who hold the office of constable and the powers of that office have a higher duty than others to account for their actions and record what they did or saw in the execution of their duties. Therefore, an explicit duty of candour on individuals, constables and Police Scotland as a whole will be introduced.

To enhance independent scrutiny and remove any perception of familiarity in relation to misconduct proceedings, the bill will amend regulation-making powers to allow the transfer of certain functions from the Scottish Police Authority to the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner. It provides that the legislation governing disciplinary procedures can be amended to apply to former constables in particularly serious cases, and it provides for the consequences of gross misconduct by the application of barred and advisory lists to ensure that constables who do not meet the standards required of the police service are prevented from being able to work in policing.

To avoid the police investigating someone with whom they have a connection or with whom they might even have worked, the PIRC will have the ability to investigate when it is suspected that the offence was committed by a person who formerly served with the police. If officers and staff experience poor service in a personal capacity, the bill clarifies that their complaint to Police Scotland will be able to be reviewed by the PIRC. That will give constables and staff an external body to go to.

To strengthen the role of the PIRC with regard to any recommendation that it makes to Police Scotland on its handling of individual complaints, there is a requirement that the outcomes of those reviews are published and that the chief constable must respond.

The bill provides the PIRC with the power to take over the consideration of complaints that are being dealt with by the chief constable or the Scottish Police Authority. To improve the transparency of processes around how public interest matters are investigated, the PIRC will have a duty to audit the arrangements for investigating whistleblowing complaints. That will encourage people to speak up when they see wrongdoing.

The PIRC will also be given new functions to investigate serious incidents or criminal offending that occur in Scotland that involve constables from forces outside Scotland. To support Police Scotland to improve, the PIRC will have a new power to review a policy or practice of the authority or Police Scotland if the PIRC considers that that would be in the public interest.

To improve efficiency, transparency, independence and public confidence in the police complaints process, the bill paves the way for the PIRC to independently and remotely have direct access to audit and review files in Police Scotland’s complaints database. To strengthen the PIRC’s decision making, the bill puts in place a statutory advisory board to advise the PIRC on governance and administrative matters.

I want to ensure that the public have confidence in the police complaints and misconduct system, and I am committed to working with members, policing partners and, importantly, people with lived experience to ensure that the bill achieves its aims.