The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 757 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
Is that a methodology that you have devised yourself, or is it prescribed?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
Presumably, though, some complaints that might be found to be vexatious might not even reach the threshold of saying that it constitutes a matter worth investigating and that the person who has made the report requires that level of sanction. There must be some that you can look at and pretty quickly see whether there is a sufficiency of evidence.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
Those are obviously cases that would require investigation. I am thinking more of ones that were referred to earlier, such as someone saying that an officer was rude to them when they went into the station to make a complaint. How is that type of thing looked into? Are you able to determine that there was a case鈥斺渃ase鈥 with a lower-case C rather than an upper-case C鈥攖o answer?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
Do you not record that?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
It is interesting that you do not record it that way. I wonder if it does not give quite the full picture of the pressure.
The reason that I ask about that is that I notice that, in just the first six months of this year, you had a 49 per cent increase in applications for complaint handling reviews, which is significant. I am trying to get a sense of what is driving that. Is something going badly wrong in policing, which we would want to know about, or is there a lower threshold among people who might make a request for a review? We would know that only if that information was recorded鈥攖hat would enable us to better understand the situation.
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
Sorry, what number was it that you said?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I would have鈥
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
The whole area of collaboration will be for our successor committee to determine, but it should be an area of interest to it.
I have one final straightforward question that I have asked everyone, and you might or might not have the answer to it. It is about the impact of increased employer national insurance contributions. Could I get a reminder of what the impact of that was this year鈥攏ot so much the proportion that was allocated to mitigate it but the overall cost鈥攁nd whether there has been an assessment yet of what the cost is likely to be for this coming financial year?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
I have a question that relates to annex A of the helpful letter that you sent to us, which gives a breakdown by year of the number of people who receive short-term sentences. It sounds self-evident to say that the challenge that we face here is that people keep getting sent to prison, which drives up the prison population. However, the Parliament legislated for a presumption against short-term sentences. I recognise that we cannot cut across the judge鈥檚 right to make a determination in considering any particular case, but the information that you have given us shows that, for the past two years, there has been an increase across all three groups: sentences of up to three months; sentences of three months to six months; and sentences of six months to a year. Do you have any sense of why that might be the case? As I said, we cannot second-guess the determinations that are made by the courts, but do we know why that is happening?
Criminal Justice Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 4 March 2026
Jamie Hepburn
Good afternoon. I have a few questions. You have referred multiple times to the process of categorising the cases. You described the A-plus cases as being the most serious, and, although you did not describe the C categories as less serious, I suppose that that is implied. I appreciate that you will not be able to give a comprehensive answer, but can you give us a sense of what that means in practical terms? What constitutes an A-plus case in comparison with a category C case?