Chamber and committees

For some data, such as any estimate of the number of serious misconduct hearings, we rely entirely on stakeholders, such as Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Federation, to provide information. The initial information subsequently changed, for reasons that I accept. The only caveat to my remarks is that, with the best will in the world, there is always room to improve processes, procedures and communication. In the world in which we operate, there will always be things that are unpredictable or that change. It is important to recognise that we are not entirely in control of the information that comes to us from independent organisations, although that information is always sought.

I am not going to speak to the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill, but I would be interested to go back and look at the process that was taken there—whether things were done by letter, by committee or by a new financial memorandum—and at what the status of that financial memorandum was.

It is important—I am very much in favour of this—that Police Scotland has revisited its policies and procedures in and around how it assesses the impact of proposed legislation on its organisation, bearing in mind the fact that Police Scotland is best placed to provide information on impacts on operational matters. That is a significant change, which I am reassured by.

As I said to one of your colleagues earlier, you should not think that I am in any way cavalier about public money. I am not content that there has been such an increase in the costs associated with the financial memorandum. We interrogate information as it becomes available to us, but I take considerable heart from the fact that Police Scotland has a new process in place to better assess the impact of legislation on its operations. I do not want the situation that has transpired in relation to the financial memorandum that is before the committee to transpire again in the future in relation to the financial memorandums to any of my bills.

Well, yes. I am just narrating what Police Scotland has said was one cause for reflection. In my comments to other colleagues—again, forgive me for repeating myself—I have said that Police Scotland has reviewed its approach and has adopted different processes in relation to how it assesses the impact of legislation on its organisation.

That was not done before the bill was introduced, and I am sure that both I and Police Scotland regret that. However, the fact that those processes have now been introduced should give us confidence about the information that we now have. At a corporate and an organisational level, Police Scotland has revisited its processes around how it assesses the impact of legislation on its organisation.

The other point that I intended to make was that there are some sensible reasons why the formal process exists for the revised or supplementary financial memorandum to be laid at the end of stage 2. As we all know, the nature of amendments is that they can incur costs.

I am also aware that, because of the revised timing for the Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill, stage 2 will take place after the October recess, so there is still some distance to travel. For example, although inflation is decreasing, it has not gone away, and there will be another round of pay settlements.

On the one hand, I am respectful of the committee’s position, but, on the other hand, there are sensible reasons why a revised financial memorandum should be provided after stage 2. It is my recollection that that was the practice that was adopted most recently with the Children (Care and Justice) (Scotland) Bill, a revised financial memorandum for which was provided post-stage 2.

Yes.

With pleasure, convener. I can very much give that reassurance. The admittedly increased costs that have now been communicated to the committee represent about 0.2 per cent of the overall Police Scotland budget. The most recent figure for Police Scotland’s investment in the functions of training is around £18 million. I appreciate that the change from what the financial memorandum originally set out to the information that is available now is not insignificant. However, it is manageable in terms of Police Scotland’s overall budget, and we will have another budget round later this year.

One of the reasons why the police budget for this financial year increased by £92 million was to demonstrate the importance that the Government places on operational and front-line policing.

We have narrated that collective responsibility and the processes that are involved in our collective scrutiny. I am not going to get into a debate about specific bills that I am not in charge of.

Yes. Because the code already exists and is being made statutory rather than non-statutory, given its importance to everyday policing and its value in relation to, for example, human rights, the previous understanding was that the training costs could be absorbed and the training could be done by being absorbed into existing modules, but Police Scotland has now come to a different view.

I did not realise that I was here to make people happy, tempting though that is. I will go away and look in more detail at what happened in relation to the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill, although I emphasise that the bill before the committee is not on a par with that bill in terms of size or magnitude, nor is it a framework or enabling bill.

When my officials were here, you mentioned the fact that there are additional risks with framework bills, in that significant decisions are taken further down the line. Therefore, I could see why there would be a case for a different procedure to be adopted with the National Care Service (Scotland) Bill, given its magnitude and the magnitude of public resource to be invested in the new service.

However, the Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill is small. It has 16 substantial provisions and three ancillary ones—it is not a massive bill. I absolutely appreciate the change in some columns from zero to not insignificant sums of money. I assure you that that is not how I would have wished events to be, but the cost of the bill to Police Scotland is somewhat small—it is 0.2 per cent of the organisation’s overall budget.

However, I will reflect on matters. I will not make any false promises about providing a revised financial memorandum earlier. After the previous evidence session, I took advice from parliamentary business colleagues. My one concern about updating the financial memorandum now is that we still have this year’s pay claim to come, so there are other potential changes coming down the track.