Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 12, 2023

Official Report 1002KB pdf

---

Topical Question Time

---

Police Scotland (Recorded Police Warnings)

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that Police Scotland has issued more than 100,000 recorded police warnings over the past five years. (S6T-01529)

The use of recorded police warnings is an established part of the Scottish justice system. The purpose of such warnings is to provide police officers with a speedy, effective and proportionate means of dealing with certain less serious offending behaviour. The current system was introduced in 2016, replacing the previous system of formal adult warnings. In England and Wales, there is a long-established system of simple cautions, which is broadly similar.

The Lord Advocate issues guidance to Police Scotland on its operation of the scheme. Decisions about when to issue recorded police warnings are an independent operational matter for Police Scotland.

In 2016, the Scottish National Party Government said that recorded police warnings would be used only for “very minor offences”. Police Scotland said that they would

“not be used for any offence of violence.”

We now discover that they have been used for offences involving violence, fraud, housebreaking, theft and fire raising, and—most shocking of all—in response to almost 50 sex crimes.

Does the cabinet secretary really think that those crimes are minor? Will she explain why the public was misled?

I challenge Mr Findlay on his narrative, which does not always stand up to scrutiny or address the substance of the matter at hand.

It is important to note that the operational guidelines to which Police Scotland operates are publicly available, and they are clear about the types and severity of offences for which a recorded police warning is not appropriate. That information is publicly available.

As, I am sure, Mr Findlay is well aware, under the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012, Scottish ministers are unable to investigate alleged crime, nor do we have the power to instruct the police to investigate alleged criminal activity. That is an important part of our system with regard to the separation of powers, and to keep our policing free from political interference. I support that, and I am sure that Mr Findlay does, too.

If individuals are unhappy with the outcome of any case, they can raise that directly with Police Scotland. If they are unsatisfied—

Thank you, cabinet secretary.

—with the response from Police Scotland, they can go to the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner for Scotland.

There is a fundamental lack of transparency about exactly how or why recorded police warnings are being used, which risks creating a parallel system of secret justice.

New statistics show that more than 7,500 shoplifters were issued with such warnings instead of being prosecuted. Scottish retailers are in despair. They tell me that there are no consequences for organised gangs that terrorise staff and prey on shops that serve our communities.

Why has the SNP Government, by stealth, effectively decriminalised shoplifting?

Again, Mr Findlay’s narrative does not stand up to the facts. As I indicated in my earlier response, the operational guidance to which Police Scotland works, which is publicly available—there is nothing hidden about it—states clearly that “persistent or alarming conduct” should not be considered for a recorded police warning, and neither should major disturbances or offences in which there are repeat victims.

As I stated clearly, the issuing of a recorded police warning is a matter for individual police officers in order to allow them to make greater use of discretion once they have fully assessed each individual incident.

Chief Superintendent Gordon McCreadie has said that the recorded police warning

“allows officers, in appropriate circumstances and on a case by case basis, to use their discretion to deal with offences on the spot.”

Can the cabinet secretary outline what the impact would be if we did not have a system with the option of a recorded police warning for minor offences?

The benefit of having such a system is to ensure that the court system can focus on cases that need to be prosecuted. The delivery of quicker justice is also important, and the option helps to free up officer time to focus on more serious offences.

A recorded police warning is also a proportionate response for someone who has committed an offence that is considered less serious, once the facts of the circumstance have been investigated. It also avoids the potential harm that might arise from someone receiving a criminal conviction for the first time. Clearly, prosecution in court is needed in many cases, but the use of recorded police warnings, where the police use their judgment and knowledge in assessing how best to deal with an offence, is a sensible way to help to develop justice.

---

Covid-19 (New Variants)

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to keep people safe, in light of reported concerns about the spread of new variants of Covid-19. (S6T-01524)

The increases in Covid activity in Scotland appear to be driven by the usual mix of waning immunity and the circulation of variants of omicron. The risks continue to be low, but in response to the identification of changes in one variant—BA.2.86—we have taken the precautionary measure of bringing forward the planned vaccination of people at highest risk. Vaccination remains the best way to protect oneself, and we encourage all people who are eligible to take up their invitation when they are offered it.

The Government will continue to work closely with Public Health Scotland and other partners to monitor, assess and be ready to respond to any new outbreaks of Covid-19.

I think that we agree that vaccination remains an important defence against Covid. Last week, I raised the issue of constituents in Helensburgh not receiving their Covid vaccinations and, this morning, I have received an apology from the cabinet secretary explaining that it was because of human error and that supplies of the vaccine had not been ordered on time. That was in NHS Highland.

I was then contacted by Graham Collie, who lives in NHS Grampian. Graham has cancer, is on chemotherapy and is classed as a vulnerable adult. He was told that the

“new version of the vaccine”

was “not available yet” and that, even if it were, he would

“not get an appointment until January.”

Is a new version of the vaccine coming? In any event, why would Graham Collie have to wait until January to be vaccinated, given that he is vulnerable?

In relation to the point that Jackie Baillie made on the issues that she raised at First Minister’s question time last week, I wrote to her setting out that an error had been made at a local level in Helensburgh in ordering the vaccine for patients who were due to attend for vaccination. There was no problem with the availability of vaccine; it was human error. Staff then failed to escalate the matter to the local immunisation team, which was therefore not in a position to notify us at a national level. That situation has now been corrected by NHS Highland to ensure that the right arrangements are now in place where the error was made.

In relation to any future vaccines, at the present time—as members would imagine—vaccine manufacturers are tracking new variants to ensure that the vaccines that they have available are relevant for dealing with them and any other new variants that develop. That work is on-going. However, the existing vaccines are still viewed as being appropriate to meet our needs.

On the specific case that Jackie Baillie raised, I do not know the circumstances of the individual; however, if she wants to provide the details to me, she can do so.

I want to finish on this important point: there is adequate vaccine available for those who require it. The vaccination programme is being taken forward in the usual systematic manner in which it has always been delivered. The people who are entitled to vaccination will be called forward to take up that offer. Some boards have started earlier than others because they were in a position to start. Others will start slightly later than we had hoped they would be able to start because of changes in the arrangements that we have put in place. We are confident that all boards will be able to do everything that they can to start the programme as early as possible.

I welcome that, because having adequate supplies of the vaccine and vaccinating as quickly as possible are essential. We should consider that, last month, Edinburgh was the worst Covid hotspot in the UK—not least because of the Edinburgh festival, I suspect. The number of hospital beds that were occupied by patients as a result of Covid was 200 in August—and winter has not even started yet. Wards are already closed down because of Covid outbreaks. A care home in Dumbarton had to close down part of its facility and to restrict visiting because of Covid, and other care homes are in a similar position. For the majority of people, vaccination has yet to commence. Experts including Professor Sridhar and Dr Donald Macaskill are calling on the Scottish Government to extend vaccination to people over the age of 50, and others are calling for the reintroduction of free testing, as well as access to personal protective equipment for health and social care workers. Will the cabinet secretary agree to those measures to protect front-line health and social care workers and vulnerable people, in our continuing fight against Covid?

There was a lot in there. It is important that Jackie Baillie does not give the impression that there is significant concern at present, although there is a danger that she might do so. Although there has been an increase in infections, the risk of Covid and the impact on our healthcare system are still low.

It is also important to note that we are looking to implement what was set out by the joint committee on vaccination and immunisation, which is the expert group that set up the vaccination programme. The vaccination programme for those who are most vulnerable to Covid was due to begin in October. As a precautionary measure, following identification of the new variant, we have brought that forward into September.

The advice from our clinical advisers is that the existing approach to testing here, in Scotland, is proportionate. For example, we have retained testing for patients who are leaving hospital and going into a care home or hospice so that they are tested for Covid before being discharged. The proportionate approach that we are taking here, in Scotland, is the right one. I hope that people will be reassured by that, because anything that creates uncertainty or concern about the matter is misplaced.

Given the cabinet secretary’s comments and the particular vulnerability of people in hospital, what guidance has the Government issued about the use of high efficiency particulate air filters and air sterilisation, particularly in hospitals, to prevent airborne transmission of Covid-19?

The Scottish Government expects all territorial health boards to follow the national guidance within the “Hierarchy of controls” section of the “National Infection Prevention and Control Manual”, which sets out how to prevent airborne transmission of Covid-19 in hospital and clinical settings. NHS Scotland boards and health and social care providers should seek assurances that their ventilation systems are working effectively and delivering the recommended levels of air changes for which they are designed. They should also ensure that ventilation systems are well maintained. Those are all parts of the recommendations that are set out in the control manual.

Given the concerning rise in cases of Covid, would the cabinet secretary encourage supermarkets and shops to reinstate hand sanitisers and trolley wiping stations, many of which have been removed?

As I said earlier, given that we are no longer in a global pandemic, we are now taking a proportionate approach to dealing with Covid-19. It should be treated in the same way as other viral infections that occur throughout the course of the year; the monitoring and surveillance arrangements that we have in place are appropriate to that.

It is for individuals to choose whether to use hand sanitiser, and some establishments might wish to continue providing that, but there is no longer any direct requirement for them to do so as there was during the lockdown arrangements that we had previously.

---

Chinese State Surveillance

To ask the Scottish Government whether it has considered undertaking a comprehensive review into the reach of any Chinese state surveillance in Scotland. (S6T-01525)

Mr Cole-Hamilton has a long-standing interest in the issue of Chinese state surveillance and will therefore be aware that national security is a matter that is reserved to the United Kingdom Government. It is also the long-standing convention of successive Scottish Governments not to comment on national security matters.

As the First Minister made clear yesterday, we take any threat to our security or cybersecurity very seriously, and I assure the member that we are working very closely with the UK Government to understand the current situation and how we can work together to ensure that our security continues to be protected.

We all remember how global security concerns were triggered by images of Chinese spy balloons above America and Canada at the start of the year. In March, members of the Scottish Parliament were strongly advised to remove TikTok from all devices, amid concerns about Chinese state surveillance. Any suggestion that our democratic institutions are open to infiltration by agents of the Chinese Communist Party should worry us all and should be treated with the utmost severity. What discussions has the Government had with the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body and the UK Government about the heightened risk, and does it believe that a review of security and vetting processes is now required?

I hope that I can reassure Mr Cole-Hamilton—notwithstanding the constraints on me with regard to the level of detail that I can share—that both I and my officials engage very closely with the National Crime Agency, the Ministry of Justice and the Minister for Security, and that Police Scotland works with justice partners across the UK and provides me, the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister with briefings and appraisals of current and emergent threats. It might also reassure Mr Cole-Hamilton to be aware that other colleagues are also engaged in the agenda; Mr Robertson has had meetings at the Cabinet Office and with the Foreign Secretary.

Although we are somewhat constrained—in that it would not be appropriate to comment on the detail in and around security matters—I reassure Alex Cole-Hamilton that we treat those matters with the utmost seriousness, particularly where they impact on our devolved responsibilities. We are engaging positively and working on all emerging threats as they are assessed.

Again, I am grateful for that reply. Chinese national intelligence law requires Chinese companies to co-operate with China’s intelligence services, which leaves the data that companies hold open to potential intrusion and misuse. Hikvision is one such company. It makes closed-circuit television cameras that are spread across Scotland in large parts of the public sector. The UK Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner has likened their use to “digital asbestos”.

After we raised that, the Scottish Government undertook to remove Hikvision from its estates, and Lib Dem councillors in Edinburgh have persuaded the City of Edinburgh Council to do the same. In February, when I held a debate on the matter in Parliament, the Scottish Government admitted that its guidance was out of date and said that it would issue fresh guidelines and keep Parliament updated on progress. I ask the minister whether such guidance has now been written and issued.

Mr Cole-Hamilton raises a number of very important and detailed issues. On CCTV, I advise him that the Scottish Government is in the process of a multiyear improvement programme that commenced back in 2018. That is about all existing CCTV kit and equipment, including Hikvision and other company products, being replaced as part of a new integrated system.

On the progress that has been made since the very useful and informative debate that Mr Cole-Hamilton led earlier this year, we have commissioned research as part of the refresh of the public CCTV strategy. We are awaiting that final research report, which will inform our future considerations. Aspects of the matter are reserved—for example, data protection. I can advise Mr Cole-Hamilton separately from this question of some of the detail of how we are ensuring that we have the utmost resilience in and around cybersecurity.

That concludes topical questions.