Chamber and committees

I would have thought that those were quite simple matters to deal with, although I do not know. I am thinking about serving police officers. We have heard about many instances in which it has taken up to two years to deal with such matters. To me, as a layperson, it seems a simple matter that should not take two years. We are trying to strike the balance of fairness. Despite what you have said about the power of police officers, it seems an awful long time to have a case hanging over them, so time limits might be appropriate in simple cases.

After 2015, why did the Crown Office not apply its on-going duty of disclosure to all the people who had been convicted using Horizon evidence? No cases were revisited and no convicted postmasters were written to until well after—

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Glasgow City Council and representatives of the taxi trade, in light of reports of potentially significant job losses in the sector as a result of the implementation of the low-emission zone. (S6O-03450)

How can Scotland, in the long run, repair its reputation with regard to holding prisoners in humane conditions? Severe overcrowding is impacting on rehabilitation, which is absolutely necessary in reducing offending, and, worryingly, time out of cells is, as the cabinet secretary said in her statement, impacting on access to services. That last point concerns me the most, and I wonder whether she can elaborate on it.

Moreover, will all victims be properly notified of early release cases? How will that be done? Can it be done in enough time to give victims reassurance that there is no risk to their personal safety?

In answer to a question from Annie Wells last week, the cabinet secretary said:

“Unlike other major cities in Scotland, Glasgow City Council does not have an age limit on taxis, so there is a higher proportion of older... taxis”.—[Official Report, 9 May 2024; c 3.]

I would like to highlight to the cabinet secretary the fact that, at a recent meeting of taxi drivers in the city, older workers with older vehicles said that they were unable to finance a new vehicle and were ineligible for a grant from Glasgow City Council. Hundreds of older drivers are in that situation, but the city council has offered them no options, so they will be forced out of business—and we are talking about up to 300 licences here. Does the cabinet secretary agree that this is unfair to older drivers, who do not have another option? They are experienced drivers, and they will be a loss to the city. Indeed, not granting a further exemption might be considered as indirect discrimination against older drivers.

I thank the Lord Advocate for coming to the Parliament and for the full and frank responses that she has given so far.

It is clear from the Post Office Horizon inquiry that senior Post Office officials came to Scotland in 2013 because they were concerned that procurators fiscal were, rightly, questioning the reliability of the Horizon system and because of the recommendation by procurators fiscal at the time that all cases based on the Horizon system should be stopped. After that meeting, the policy changed to one based on considering case by case. Why were Crown Office officials satisfied to change the policy at the time, having asked for further evidence to support the integrity of the Horizon system but not yet having it?

I thank the Lord Advocate for her letter to me this week. In it, she notes that, regrettably, four cases have been identified that were prosecuted after that meeting in 2013 and that resulted in convictions, on the basis of admissions or pleas of guilt. As we know, however, many sub-postmasters pled guilty to avoid jail. We should have all the factors fully explained so that we can learn lessons.

Thank you. Can you clarify something that you said to Sharon Dowey? This matter came up in previous evidence. In a particular case that the committee looked at, the police officer was, I think, suspended or put on restricted duties, and he was not allowed to know what the allegations against him were. The suggestion in that evidence session was that there might be legal reasons for that. What is the position on that?

And, if you think there is a reasonable inference of criminality, that is where the PIRC—

So, in all other cases, there is a certain standard of sufficiency that is applied, but, when it comes to police officers, you have to do something completely different. Is that not quite an odd approach for a prosecutor to deal with?

I am trying to get my head around all the different categories of complaints and criminality that police officers might be accused of. You might have alluded to that earlier in response to one of my colleagues. I suppose that a typical example of a complaint might be when a member of the public says that excessive force was used in the middle of an arrest and that, in effect, they have been assaulted. Given that low test, is there not quite a fine line in those cases?