Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Equal Opportunities Committee, 01 Nov 2005

Meeting date: Tuesday, November 1, 2005


Contents


“An Independent Review into Policing and Race Relations in Scotland”

The Convener:

Agenda item 2 is on the report "An Independent Review into Policing and Race Relations in Scotland", which was commissioned by the Commission for Racial Equality in Scotland. I am pleased to welcome Ali Jarvis, the interim director of the Commission for Racial Equality in Scotland. Unfortunately, Chief Constable Paddy Tomkins, whose name appears on the agenda, has been taken ill and is unable to appear today. However, we will invite written input from Mr Tomkins once he is back on his feet.

I hand over to Ali Jarvis to give a short briefing on the report, after which the committee will ask questions.

Ali Jarvis (Commission for Racial Equality in Scotland):

I will start by explaining our approach to the matter in Scotland, which was different from the approach that we took south of the border, where we conducted a formal investigation into policing and race relations. The catalyst was the documentary "The Secret Policeman", which highlighted shocking levels of blatant racism in the police service. I hasten to add that that programme was not filmed in Scotland and that those levels of racism have not been explicit in Scotland. The decision to review policing rather than carry out a formal investigation was based on the fact that the CRE in Scotland already had close working relationships with the police service and felt that it would be more beneficial and constructive to carry out developmental work that highlighted the good aspects and the failings and gave us a clear set of recommendations for the way forward.

We set up a steering group with representation from the Scottish Executive, HM inspectorate of constabulary for Scotland and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, because of its relation to police boards. The review had two objectives. The first was to consider, internally, the effectiveness of the equal opportunities training that is conducted in the Scottish police service and the recruitment and employment experiences of ethnic minority officers and support staff. The second was to consider, externally, the impact of the police's equal opportunities policies on the operational realities of policing and the public's confidence in the police in relation to good race relations.

The report was prepared in three stages. The first involved desk research and data analysis. The second involved formal interviews with the chief constables of all the Scottish forces, the individuals in forces who are responsible for race relations and representatives of the Scottish Police Federation, SEMPERscotland—the ethnic minority policing representative body—and the Scottish Police College. The third phase involved focus groups with different ethnic minority groups, including Gypsy Travellers, and with young people, women and people in businesses, in relation to whom we felt we had the least amount of information.

The report found clearly that the service is not failing, but that there is room for improvement. We are on a journey. We are progressing, but the commission's view is that that progress is not as fast as it could be. If we carry on progressing at the present pace, the changes that we need will not take place within the timeframe that we expect. To that extent, the review fully served our objectives, which were to give us clear recommendations and action plans to pick up the pace and catalyse movement.

The picture that we found was better than that which was found by the formal investigation in England, which had damning results on some of the racism issues. However, we must temper that to some extent with the recognition that, in the Scottish context, we perhaps have a degree of complacency about racism.

To set the context, I quote David McCrone, of the University of Edinburgh's institute of governance, who did some work with us recently on the fresh talent initiative.

"We celebrate the fact that we are a ‘mongrel' people, that our nation is a complex tapestry of peoples and traditions. On the other hand, we are an overwhelmingly white population—our openness might simply be rhetoric because we never had much opportunity to put our liberal ideology into practice."

We really have to keep that in mind. Anybody who saw the editorial in The Scotsman yesterday, which accused us of being a bit heavy-handed on such issues, would agree. We have to recognise the context in which Scotland is experiencing race, especially in relation to criminality. The number of referrals to the children's panel of children who have been involved in racist incidents has tripled in the past three years. It is not something that is cemented purely in one section of our population.

We saw in the crime statistics for 2004-05, which were released last week, that the number of racist incidents in Scotland has risen by 25 per cent and has increased fourfold since racially aggravated offences were introduced in 1999. Every day, 10 racist incidents are reported, although others go unreported. Against the context of a police service that is doing well, we need to recognise that the level of crime is rising and that incidents are increasingly being reported.

The service is not failing, but we need to do more. Several examples of good practice have emerged, but one of our biggest concerns is the inconsistency across Scotland and across the different forces. We did not set out to undertake a comparative analysis of the different forces, creating some kind of league table. We did not think that that would be helpful. Across the forces, there are different levels of progress and different levels of expertise. That is not to say that all forces are good at all things; sometimes, the good practice is quite patchy.

The downside is that the pace is not fast enough, as there has been a relative slowness in transferring good practice from one force to another. Although the policy documentation and frameworks are generally good and robust, the practicalities of implementing them at operational level are somewhat less clear. There are excellent examples of leadership—it is a shame that Paddy Tomkins is not here, as he has taken a positive stance and gives strong and effective leadership—but it takes time for that to translate right through the organisation to people at all levels, whether in or out of uniform.

We are not yet at the point at which good race equality practice is a standard part of the way in which things are done in the Scottish police service, which is what we aspire to. We are now following up the report with the same players—the Scottish Executive, HMIC, the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland and SEMPER—to put in place mechanisms that we are reviewing on a six-monthly basis. We are also working with those agents in the interim between those reviews.

The Convener:

Thank you. The committee would like to be kept up to date with those reviews. We want to see things moving forward.

The report of the review points to the gap between policy and implementation even after all the detailed and comprehensive pieces of work that have been carried out regarding race relations and the police in Scotland, which are referred to in the report. What factors have you identified that have contributed to that?

Ali Jarvis:

It feels as though it was only when the specific duties came in with the race equality duty that the concrete tools to measure and manage some of the progress became common practice. It was as if, once there was a legal requirement to do things such as monitor and address many of these areas, that work started to happen. Prior to that, there was no framework for it. As one reads the early pages of the document, it feels as though we have been here before so many times. As a famous American author said, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, each time expecting a different result. Somehow, we need to do something different in order to get a different result.

A number of the recommendations that are made in the independent review were, as you say, made in 2000 and 2003 in HMIC reports. Are there any areas in particular that have not been delivered on?

Ali Jarvis:

The area of greatest concern is the recruitment of ethnic minority staff to the police, either in uniform or in the staff support structures. That area will be one of the tipping points for a major breakthrough. Race will become a normal part of the Scottish police service, rather than something that the Scottish police service does. We have been concerned about the absolute failure, over the past four years, to move the number of people who are employed in the police service.

You alluded to the impact of having more diversity in the police. What would be the advantages in ensuring that there is more diversity in recruitment and therefore in relation to the men and women who work for the police on our streets?

Ali Jarvis:

There are two main themes to mention. First, more diversity in the police would result in ethnic minority communities being confident that they are being policed by an institution that visibly reflects the populations that it serves. The report identifies a perception among ethnic minority populations that there is racism in the police, although much of that perception comes from the media and is not necessarily borne out by individuals' experiences. In fact, many individuals from ethnic minority populations highlighted their very good experiences with the police. That visibility and the confidence that results from seeing oneself reflected in such a major and powerful institution as the police are important.

Secondly, diversity would to some extent normalise and increase the experiences of officers and support staff who execute operational duties. At the moment, such people almost feel that they must think about and concentrate on racial equality and that doing so is in addition to their work rather than a mainstream, core and normalised part of it. Once there is a more representative mix of staff, people will not have to think about racial equality as something that they learned about on a training course—they will inherently understand it.

Marlyn Glen:

I have a question about monitoring racist incidents. The review highlights the lack of consistent monitoring mechanisms for reporting racist incidents. Has any progress been made in developing a consistent recording mechanism for racist incidents since the publication of the report?

Ali Jarvis:

No, not yet. One of the key recommendations is that there must be consistency in how such incidents are monitored and in forces' broader statistical analyses. Currently, we cannot compare what happens in forces or across Scotland, the nature of the incidents that take place or recruitment and retention issues, although changes in the broad, computer-based infrastructures will help matters. That is a key area in which we recommend that there should be progress.

The report recommends that the police should use the census categories for reporting purposes. If that recommendation is progressed, do you envisage that any system that is adopted will include Gypsy Travellers as a category?

Ali Jarvis:

Including Gypsy Travellers is recommended. Again, that is an area of inconsistency that will obviously be a concern for members, given the committee's previous interest in the subject.

Forces have used the census categories differently, but a commitment has been made and an assurance has been given that the categories are consistent in all the forces. We are involved in the process of validating the information that we get back to ensure that that happens operationally. Sometimes it is easy for people to believe that something is happening, but when they check it out, they realise that old systems or measurements are still being used.

The issue is particularly important with respect to the Registrar General for Scotland's work on the 2011 census because people must be able to compare data relating to any new structures or categories that are used with previous data so that there can be longitudinal analysis of change and we do not have to start from a base point again in 2011.

Marlyn Glen:

The recommendation that I mentioned was originally made in the 2000 report entitled "Without Prejudice? A Thematic Inspection of Police Race Relations in Scotland" by HMIC. Do we have a good understanding of why that recommendation has still not been acted on five years later? How confident are you that the latest recommendation will be any more effective?

Ali Jarvis:

Those questions would probably be better directed at the police. From the research that we have carried out, our perception is that the recommendation was slow to be progressed because there was no central drive or motivation to achieve consistency. Different forces operate in different ways. ACPOS has only recently taken on more of a leadership, umbrella role on some issues, particularly those that relate to diversity. From the research, my best guess is that there was no great motivation to implement the recommendation.

Ms White:

I want to ask a couple of questions about support for minority ethnic victims. Bearing in mind what Marlyn Glen has said, I think that my question should include Gypsy Travellers, who are all too often completely forgotten about, as the convener has said in previous meetings. I hope that, when people listen to our discussion, they will realise that we are also talking about Gypsy Travellers.

Your report mentions concerns about support services. Is there a specific gap in respect of culturally aware victim support services, or is there a general issue with such services? For example, are you aware of any research having been carried out into victim support services in general that could be compared with the experiences reported in certain cases?

Ali Jarvis:

I am not aware of any formalised research that has been done into that matter. Our report highlighted two areas that were of concern. One is communication about what victim support services are available. I am sure that that extends to many victims of crime, not simply ethnic minority victims of crime, but the latter group often face additional barriers, such as language issues and even the level of confidence that is needed to come forward in the first place.

When I was on a ferry to Arran one Friday evening, I was surprised to get a call from a woman in Edinburgh whose husband had been taken into custody and who was very anxious. She had been given a custody sheet, on the back of which my mobile phone number was listed as our out-of-hours contact number. I asked her why she was ringing me, just to get it clear in my mind, and she said, "Well, my husband is black." However, there was no race dimension to the incident or to what had happened afterwards. That level of communication is unhelpful to people who want to know what to do in situations that are tense and difficult and in which they are under strain. There needs to be clarity about communication.

The second area relates to our point that many of the recommendations in the report are not simply for the police. Other agencies have a responsibility to do something. I know that Victim Support Scotland, for example, has done a lot to ensure that its volunteer base represents the communities that it serves, but it faces some of the same challenges in recruiting people from ethnic minority communities that we have discussed. I am not saying that there always has to be a match of ethnicity between someone who needs support and someone who is offering it but, given the stress involved, that can make it easier for the victim, just as it might be better for a male adviser to help a male victim or a female adviser to help a female victim.

Ms White:

The example that you gave involving your ferry journey to Arran indicates that there was a lack of support from the police, who just assumed that the Commission for Racial Equality would take on the responsibility.

Gypsy Travellers have said that they feel as though they do not get feedback when they report crimes. Do you agree that minority ethnic communities mistrust the police more than other communities and that the lack of interpreters contributes to any lack of trust in the police that might exist?

Ali Jarvis:

The Gypsy Traveller focus group that we worked with felt that they were overpoliced, in the sense that there were assumptions that, if there was a crime, they were probably connected with it—for example, they would be asked to show receipts for the goods that they had. That experience was patchy, in that the approach differed between police forces. Gypsy Travellers are a mobile group and can see quite quickly that they receive a different sort of treatment in one part of Scotland than they might in another.

The focus group highlighted some good practice in certain areas of Scotland and mentioned circumstances in which the police had helped and supported Gypsy Travellers. The picture is not all bad, but the difficulties that were described serve to create a feeling of mistrust in the police and concerns about going to the police, particularly with complaints of harassment. That was one of the things that we wanted to overlay in the report. Although much good work is being done by the police, it takes only one incident, which will be shared among populations that might have very different communication structures, to reinforce a long-held myth or preconception and put race relations back considerably. I agree that Gypsy Travellers, in particular, have experienced such situations.

In relation to interpreting services, again, the picture is patchy. There are parts of Scotland where the service is brilliant and where the police have good links with interpreting services and can quickly provide that support, but there are other parts of the country where the service is not so good.

One of the challenges that we have to overcome with that section of the population—particularly among new migrant communities, asylum seekers and refugees—is that many people's perceptions of the police are based on experiences in their home countries, where the police service is less a support and more an instrument of oppression. The communication needs to be twofold. It must raise people's expectations about what a good police service can deliver—and, in general, the Scottish police service is a good police service—and it must give people the confidence to approach police officers without fear of further oppression.

Elaine Smith:

You have talked about what a good police service can deliver. Is there any family liaison involvement to support people? Is that a matter for the police alone or could there be civilian input?

Police numbers have increased, but a lot of specialist units have been set up. Your report states that

"if public confidence in the police is to be improved it is necessary for forces to have good contact with communities".

Does that mean more police?

Ali Jarvis:

That is an operational question and I am sure that it is outwith my remit to answer it. Family liaison is part of what the report identifies as good community policing. The easy box to tick is the one for relating to and making contact with community leaders, and I say that advisedly. Many self-styled community leaders do not have connections to the communities that they purport to represent. One of the recommendations is that the police must find more ways of getting closer to actual communities, not just community leaders. If the Surjit Singh Chhokar case taught us anything about family liaison, it taught us about the importance of recognising different generational needs, different expectations and different understandings, and about the need to recognise additional sensitivities that might occur in race-related crimes.

John Swinburne:

The report mentions that a strong view was expressed at every level in every force that the culture was changing. It also points out that some difficulties were encountered with some forces in identifying volunteers and maintaining confidentiality. How confident are you that the strong view expressed was a true reflection of views and of the reality across Scottish forces?

Ali Jarvis:

I think that the strong view that the culture is changing is an accurate and genuinely felt one, but the climate is also changing, and sometimes it is the pace of the change that is important, not the fact that things are changing.

In relation to research among serving officers and staff, we were interested to see that, even though the review group said quite expressly that it wanted volunteers for that research, it was still quite common for people to be volunteered or included because they were working on race equality, not because they were ordinary members of the staff team. We found it difficult to attract ethnic minority volunteers, and some of the off-the-record comments showed that people feared that if they said something there might be a backlash. The fact that those fears still exist, whether or not they are founded, limits and shapes people's behaviour. That is what leads me to think that, although there is a belief—and this is the reality—that the culture is changing, it is perhaps not changing fast enough, and there are still too many incidents that reaffirm the old culture and prevent the arrival of the new.

John Swinburne:

Do you agree that police forces have a unique opportunity in this respect, given that 50 per cent of police officers will retire over the next 10 years? Are you satisfied that police forces are implementing training structures and so on to ensure that such problems are totally eliminated slowly in the next 10 years, if that is possible?

Ali Jarvis:

To achieve such a level of change takes a long time. We are naive if we hope that that change can occur overnight. I firmly agree that we have a unique opportunity. Five years of research tell us the same thing. We no longer need to question whether the research is accurate; we need to question why we cannot implement its findings. I hope that, in the recruitment opportunity that is imminent, we can achieve a step change forward.

Elaine Smith:

The report says that each force has its own approach to implementing the national policy on handling complaints against them from the public and that only one force pays clear attention to the instructions that are given to officers on how to deal sensitively with complaints from members of minority ethnic communities. Does that suggest that the national policy needs amending or that forces have too much discretion in how they implement the national policy?

Ali Jarvis:

I tend to feel that the latter is probably the case. The national policy is robust, but is implemented inconsistently.

How do you suggest tackling that?

Ali Jarvis:

My first suggestion is similar to many recommendations in the report. It is that the police should be quicker to identify good practice and transfer it between forces. They should have an overarching system for monitoring that, which should—ideally—be within the police service initially. Much monitoring could be self-monitoring and self-evaluation. A consistent strategic overview of all the forces is needed, instead of leaving it to external bodies such as HMIC or ourselves to consider race equality. The tendency is to operate force by force, because the legal accountability lies with forces, rather than to compare forces, which would concern the whole Scottish police service.

Elaine Smith:

I will take that a bit further and relate it to training, which I am about to explore with you. Could handling complaints from members of ethnic minority communities be included in the equality and diversity training that all officers receive?

Ali Jarvis:

That is important, but I would prefer a different approach. Complaints from all sections of the community could probably be handled better.

Yes.

Ali Jarvis:

Ethnic minority communities might feel that more than some, because they encounter additional barriers, but the robustness of the whole complaints system is the concern. I am wary about pushing too many of those issues into the equality and diversity agenda rather than getting them right in the main stream.

We can consider the matter the other way round. If we were assured that the Scottish police service could give ethnic minority communities an excellent complaints service, the reality would be that its service to the whole population would improve. If anything, the situation is more difficult when issues such as cultural sensitivity, lack of confidence in the police and linguistic matters arise. If the service is right for ethnic minorities, that means that it is excellent. That would improve it for everybody. Mainstreaming is an issue.

Elaine Smith:

What you say is right and brings to mind something that arose at a public meeting that I attended recently. Someone had phoned to complain about antisocial behaviour and then had phoned again to say that that had turned into racial abuse of her neighbour. She complained that the police did not respond to the first or second call. Hours later, someone turned up when those involved had dispersed. That highlights how right you are.

Ali Jarvis:

Some staff members and serving police officers—I stress that they were in the minority—gave feedback that they felt that ethnic minorities would somehow receive better or special treatment. That goes back to the old reverse discrimination argument. I stress that the review is not about that. The aim is to ensure that all members of society receive an excellent service. People can look at the service the other way and think about the fact that if they do it right for some of the more difficult sections of society, they will get the system right for everybody. It was a concern that people—albeit a minority group—still felt that ethnic minority people would have a better service than others in Scotland.

Elaine Smith:

I turn to what the report says about training. At the bottom of page 42, it states:

"The products which emerged emphasised that the focus and title should be on diversity awareness".

Although it identifies different areas, such as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues, disability awareness and

"dealing with racist incidents and race relations legislation",

it does not mention gender. I wonder why that is.

Ali Jarvis:

Given that the national equal opportunities training strategy covers gender, I am not sure why it is not mentioned in the report. I have trained on the NEOTS, so I know that gender is dealt with.

I found that omission slightly worrying. I wondered whether an assumption was made that gender issues had been sorted out. We might need to look into that further.

Ali Jarvis:

That might be a job for the EOC.

The report mentions that a review of the police's NEOTS is under way. Is there a timeframe for the completion of that review? Can you give us more details on how it is being carried out?

Ali Jarvis:

Yes. In many forces, the level 1 training has now been completed; indeed, in many forces, all three levels of training have been provided. I suppose that we are most concerned about the cases in which the training has not been provided and what pressure the forces concerned are under to complete that work.

However, we are not talking about a sheep-dip—it is not simply a case of plunking people in the bath of equality training only once. Awareness of equal opportunities has to be inculcated in the way in which people work. We are keen for the principles of the NEOTS training to be embedded in performance review processes and in the considerations of promotional boards, so that equality competences are measured on an on-going basis. Equality training is not something that people do only once, without having the opportunity to test it in practice or to operationalise it.

Is the review simply an internal process?

Ali Jarvis:

The review of NEOTS?

Yes.

Ali Jarvis:

Yes, that is an internal process.

Do you think that that should be the case or that it would be healthier to have members of other equality strands, such as ethnic minority communities, involved in the review?

Ali Jarvis:

I had not really thought about that. In general, the more widely informed a review is and the wider the range of stakeholders who are involved in it, the more effective it is likely to be.

Elaine Smith:

The report raised a significant number of issues to do with training. Given what you have just said, might there be merit in having a dedicated team to provide the same training for all police forces? That would ensure consistency and might avoid a situation in which a trainer had to deal with high-ranking officers in their own force, which could be quite an intimidating scenario. Would that suggestion have merit?

Ali Jarvis:

You are right—a number of issues were raised on training. At the outset, I should say that the national equal opportunities training strategy is good. It provides a robust and intensive piece of training, for which the Scottish police service should be applauded. The questions that have arisen have been to do with consistency and the difference between delivery of the training in two or three days and its delivery in a shorter timeframe, when there is a tendency for it to become didactic—chalk and talk—rather than more experiential.

The reality is that there are certain facts that people can know—for example, they can find out when Eid is or what the implications of certain cultures are—but they need to know how to use those facts, to interpret them and to operationalise them. That is often what proves to be the challenge. The training has to be as much about attitudes as it is about knowledge. We have found that that is where some of the challenges lie, especially when issues of rank and hierarchy are involved. In a training session, a trainer might find it extremely difficult to challenge someone who is of a higher rank and it is clear that that could set the tone for the whole session. That is partly why delivery of the training has been inconsistent and people have had varying levels of confidence in the material.

Is that an argument for getting an outside organisation to deliver the training, as that would ensure consistency throughout Scotland?

Ali Jarvis:

The fact that the training of trainers at the Scottish Police College at Tulliallan was delivered by an external agency was certainly greatly appreciated because there were no personal conflicts and people did not feel vulnerable as a result of having to challenge views that had been expressed by someone of a more senior status. That was widely appreciated by trainees and their organisations alike. Operationally, there are cost implications for doing that throughout the Scottish police service. Doing the training internally had the benefit of building trainees' skills and making them sustainable in the service.

Whether it is better to do training internally or externally is not a black-and-white issue, although doing training internally could be enhanced by more support. One of the recommendations that could be taken on in future is, for example, to get staff to train people in forces other than their home force. That might address issues of personal risk.

Would that also help with sharing good practice across forces?

Ali Jarvis:

Exactly. It would give people a chance to share what is happening and not simply to go with the norm of their own force.

Ms White:

We have touched on some of the matters—good practice, communities and community leaders—that I wanted to ask you about. The report highlights the difficulties in getting ethnic minority groups to come to lay advisory group meetings or to keep attending them once they have come along. Why is that? What can we do to improve the attendance of members of ethnic minority groups at such meetings?

Ali Jarvis:

The research highlighted some practical reasons: people cannot attend meetings held during the day if they work full time. It would have to be acknowledged that they would have to take a half day or lose earnings by closing their business.

However, another cause of low attendance was a sense of consultation fatigue that goes beyond consultation about the police. People felt that even though they participated, they never got any feedback. It is almost a one-way street: people put stuff in but do not get it back.

There were also suggestions that tokenism could be playing a part; that people were asked to attend meetings because their face fits. There is a danger that the relationship could be a little too cosy. The lay advisory group should sometimes be very challenging; it should have the confidence and capacity to feel not just that it is there to rubber-stamp predetermined decisions. We felt, looking at the research, that that would also help ethnic minority recruitment.

A longer-term investment in relationships at strategic levels and in operational community policing would make people in ethnic minority groups more inclined to think of the police as a viable long-term career choice.

Ms White:

You said that the head of a community might not necessarily represent the whole community. You also said that work and business were some of the reasons for people from ethnic minority groups not attending advisory group meetings. Do more men than women attend the meetings of the lay advisory group? I find that interesting.

Ali Jarvis:

That is the case. The police are aware of that, and there have been instances of good practice in trying to strike a different gender balance in some communities. A different gender balance can lead to different styles of working, solving problems and exploring issues. That is not to say that one is better or worse than another; it is just that greater diversity makes finding a solution more likely.

It also improves equal opportunities for everyone in the community.

Ali Jarvis:

Exactly.

How do you deal with gender imbalance at meetings? What strategies would make contact with women in those hard-to-reach groups? Would strategies at a national or at a local level help?

Ali Jarvis:

We have not formed a settled view on that. I do not believe that there are such things as "hard-to-reach" groups—there are organisations that do not have the capacity to reach them. We must invest in developing such capacity.

The balance between national strategic work and local work is very important. People at a local level often feel that they can do more in their street or neighbourhood, so they feel more inclined to engage. However, sometimes it can feel very isolating; people can feel that things are happening in a vacuum. The two should happen side by side. The most effective model appears to be national forums that enable people to feel that there is a voice and a structure into which local work can fit.

Yes. It is important for people to get feedback.

Ali Jarvis:

We should also recognise that it takes time to build relationships. Members of ethnic minority communities in Scotland are like anyone else. They have lives to lead, jobs to do and kids to bring up. They have the house to clean or whatever it might be. We have to stop expecting that those people will want to give up a Wednesday night to go to a meeting about their community any more than we would expect that from a majority community. Rates of volunteering and participation are down throughout the Scottish population, so we have to find creative ways to engage with people and we have to invest in that in the long term. Relationships build up only if there is consistent contact. We can't just say, "We did it for two months and no one came so we stopped."

The Convener:

Do the police have a role in working with other agencies that are already working locally? I agree that there are no hard-to-reach people, but it is a question of how people approach their work and good community development. That could include the police working with other organisations at various levels. Should that be encouraged?

Ali Jarvis:

It should. There are many recommendations in the report, but they are not all targeted at the police. Many other organisations also have to respond to the recommendations. We would be quick to say that, on many issues, the police are a lot further ahead than other parts of the public sector. The more people work in partnership, the more effective the work is. We have seen some good work, particularly in Dumfries and Galloway and Lothian and Borders, in which agencies work together so that they do not say to the same people, "We want to see you on Tuesday night and they will see you on the Thursday." That is simply unsustainable.

Also, many of the issues cross over, such as housing and antisocial behaviour. We can tie many things together. People do not live in silos, so the more creative public agencies are in working with the police, the better the results will be. There are opportunities for people to share lay advisory boards. I am not sure why we get caught up in worries about who is responsible for them and who pays them. The work should be managed according to the need and the person rather than according to the organisational structure.

Ms White:

In response to Elaine Smith's question about good practice you said that police forces should share good practice. Also, in response to Cathy Peattie's questions you mentioned examples of good practice in various communities—not necessarily just ethnic minority communities.

One example of good practice that springs to mind is the work of the police in Sighthill in Glasgow, who have interpreters available 24 hours a day. The police went around with an interpreter and mixed with the local community. How can we encourage such practice throughout Scotland? Should the police go to train other police forces, as you suggested to Elaine Smith? How can examples of good practice in the police be passed on so that they are introduced throughout Scotland?

Ali Jarvis:

The practical steps are obvious. They include the creation of more opportunities for forums, workshops and information sharing. That can be done thematically—for example, by holding a half-day seminar on community engagement and encouraging the police forces to attend. A sense of competitiveness between police forces in Scotland appears to inhibit that. In doing the research, we made it clear that it was not a force-by-force analysis but an analysis of the Scottish police service. However, there was an element of people saying, "What have they done? How have we done? Can we compare ourselves against them?" Sometimes competition can be healthy, but sometimes it is isolating. That is one of the challenges.

Again, I give credit to Paddy Tomkins because a lot of the work that he has done through the diversity standing committee has addressed those concerns and tried to bring people together by pointing out that we are all interested in good diversity practice. More support can be given for those leadership stances, and police boards and HMIC can encourage forces to regard the sharing of good practice as an additional competence, rather than looking behind them to see whether anyone else is catching up.

Do you agree that equal opportunities training at the Scottish Police College at Tulliallan is an ideal opportunity for the police to pass on examples of good practice?

Ali Jarvis:

Yes, and again, not just when they are at the college for equal opportunities training. Sometimes we target that training too narrowly; the opportunity exists to offer it in the context of operational policing training. Good community relations are not just about equal opportunities. That said, equal opportunities should be at the core of police training and not just a side issue.

Thank you.

Frances Curran (West of Scotland) (SSP):

You spoke earlier about issues that affect other agencies. Concerns are expressed in the report about the lack of action in schools on racist name calling. Funnily enough, I was at a school in Clydebank last week for a priority question session with MSPs. One of the pupils made the point that a lot of money and resources have been put into addressing bullying in schools, but not into addressing racism. We were asked what we, as MSPs, would do about that. The issue appears not just in your report; young people are also raising it.

Have you approached the local education authorities or the Scottish Executive on the subject? Have you asked them whether any action can be taken or policy pursued?

Ali Jarvis:

Yes, we have. Given the importance of education in young people's lives, racism in schools is of significant concern to us. Education can shape someone's performance, self-esteem and attainment throughout their adult years. Clearly, if we are to address racism—and racist bullying, in particular—schools need critically to address the issues.

The police share some of the frustration that incidents, which should have been dealt with as part of a school's policy and operational practice, escalate to the stage that they become criminal incidents and have to be dealt with through the criminal justice system. If the incidents had been addressed at an earlier stage, they could have been resolved more quickly.

Obviously, the education system at local authority and Scottish Executive level needs to take a clearer stance on the issue. The Executive is convening a leadership group on racism in education. Again, let us ensure that some of that discussion gets converted quickly into practice. There is a lot of research in the area and we do not need to do a lot more to find out what the problem is. We need to find concrete ways in which to address the issue.

Frances Curran:

My other question is about the media. You spoke earlier about the perception of racism—whether it is accurate or based on an old premise—and about the fact that the perception in the minority ethnic communities is on the whole negative. The issue is first about communities' engagement with the police and, secondly, the way in which police recruitment is affected by that perception. How should the police approach the issue in order to change it—sorry, how should the media approach it?

Ali Jarvis:

Again, the question is one for Paddy Tomkins when you speak to him, convener.

We have seen things that work well, some of which stem from a recognition that the desire of the national papers to do a big story can override much of the good, but not newsworthy, work that is happening locally. We learned some interesting things when we launched the report. Working closely with the ACPOS press team, we set up a regional story for either the evening paper or local paper in every region of Scotland. The idea was to put the human face on the story. We set up stories about the experience of the police and people in local communities. It took a long time to set up and prepare those stories, but we wanted to make things easy for the journalists.

The reaction to those stories was positive, especially in the communities where people read their local paper—The Barrhead News or whatever—but might not read The Herald or The Scotsman or even The Daily Record. A lot can be done by working with the local media to reach local communities. Again, although it is a challenge, the issue is about trying to interest the media in stories that are not sensationalist but about on-going good practice.

What you said shows that the situation is changing, but where on the scale is that change at? I know that we are talking anecdotally

Ali Jarvis:

I have much sympathy for the police service in this regard. The position seems to be that they are crucified whichever way they do things. For example, if the race-hate figures are rising, they will get high news coverage, but it is difficult to get news coverage on the fact that community relations are improving. The issue is not ethnic communities' perception of the police, but their impression of race crime. The police are responsible for solving and policing race crime, but not for causing it; the cause of race crime is the people who commit it. The challenge will be how to change the perception of the police in the media. The perceptions that the media promotes will not be changed through the media, but by sound operational and community policing and by people having the opportunity to say of what they hear in the media, "That is not my experience; that is not what I felt."

I return to my earlier point that it takes only one incident for people to say quickly, "The police reconfirmed everything we believe."

The Minister for Justice welcomed the report when it was published. Are you aware of any concrete action taken by the Executive in response to the report's findings?

Ali Jarvis:

The Executive's equality unit is represented in the group that was appointed to follow up the review. The group validates the reports from the police about where improvements are being made and prioritises the actions and recommendations. There are many recommendations, some of which are almost tangible, such as, "All people should use this monitoring system". Others are more generic, such as, "Better community relations should be sought". We can all agree with that, but what we do about it and how we drill down into specific instances is more challenging. The Executive is involved in that.

I have spoken previously to the committee about the need for the Executive to join up its many initiatives to enhance race equality and bring them together into a coherent strategy—an overarching framework, if you like—rather than a series of localised initiatives. I have been amazed by how much of the police report touches on virtually every other policy area with which we are engaged. We are glad that the Minister for Justice welcomes the report, but it is not just about work being done in education, justice or housing; it is about bringing the work together and making it a Cabinet-collective responsibility as well as giving it a Cabinet profile.

What is your impression of the police service's response to the report?

Ali Jarvis:

It has been positive. It is hard for the police because they often feel under attack. Every time they try to improve they get slated for not doing something else.

As we approached the launch of the report, we had robust discussions about matters in the report on which areas of the police service disagreed. However, as we pointed out, the report was independent research and we did not necessarily agree with all of it. The fact that we then had robust discussions was healthy because that enabled people to put over different perspectives that they felt were not picked up through the research and to challenge aspects of the report.

Our work with ACPOS leadership has been highly positive in the development of the review. I am well aware that working with ACPOS is not the same as working with the individual forces and we want the consistent, strong leadership that we have seen from ACPOS to be translated into strong leadership at local force level.

The report notes that many contributors to the work of the review requested that a process to provide feedback be put in place. Has that been done and, if so, what is the process?

Ali Jarvis:

We took that firmly on board because we are aware of people's frustration about contributing and then hearing nothing back. People contributed anonymously to the research and only the research group that conducted the work knew who they were. We used Law at Work's mechanisms to ensure that all contributors and organisations received the report and a letter from us highlighting the next steps. People know what has happened up to this stage.

The implementation steering group that is now meeting is due to make its first report in the spring and that will be the next point at which we will make a progress report. There is not much that we can tell people at the moment apart from the process, which we have already explained.

Thank you. Was the review intended as a one-off investigation or would it be beneficial to have a review at regular intervals?

Ali Jarvis:

There are regular reviews through HMIC's continuing inspections, but to have a review on such a large scale, looking at the situation across the piece, is a useful exercise. I would be wary, however, if, like many of the reports cited in the review, it was just considered to be something that has happened. People might note that it had taken place and they might find it interesting, but nothing might necessarily happen as a result.

Such a review could usefully be repeated at three-year or five-year intervals, which would allow a significant length of time to track the progress that had been made, although it is not clear whether or not the CRE could afford to do that. In fairness, the Executive was a sponsor of the review and provided part of its funding. The practicalities of delivering such a review also have to be considered. It would be useful if, in the interim, the HMIC inspections continued to keep race high on their agenda, so that inspecting forces are regularly looking at race equality and broader diversity issues.

Mr McGrigor:

There is an issue here about tracking progress. What do you plan to do to ensure that work progresses in the areas that were identified by the review, such as basic targeting, monitoring and the placing of responsibility with named personnel?

Ali Jarvis:

The first output of the implementation steering group following the review's publication will be in the new year. Each of the recommendations will be broken down. There will be an update on where the police and other agencies feel they are. There are specific things that still need to happen. There will be a detailed description of what success criteria will look like, and there will be a named allocation within each agency based on who is to deliver. That covers our first six months of work. Our aim is both to validate progress and to clarify the gaps between the recommendation and our current position. That all relates to the outcomes of the first six-monthly review.

The Convener:

We will write to Paddy Tomkins and ask for his written input. We will then consider what the committee would like to do next to progress this work. We will be interested to hear about any other work that you are involved in and about your reviewing the report. We are keen to see some work taking place as the result of the report. Thank you for your evidence this morning, Ali.