Chamber and committees

Policing is one of the most accountable and highly scrutinised services in Scotland. An entire organisation, the Scottish Police Authority, is in place to hold the chief constable to account. In addition, several other organisations have a key statutory role in the oversight of policing, such as His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland and the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner. The Scottish Government, the Scottish Parliament and Audit Scotland also take a keen interest in matters of accountability, as demonstrated by the member’s question.

I meet the chair of the SPA regularly, as I do the chief constable and Her Majesty’s—pardon me, I mean His Majesty’s—chief inspector of constabulary. The subjects discussed are relevant to policing issues at the time.

Our report, “The Vision for Justice in Scotland”, sets out that justice services must be person centred and trauma informed. I understand that those are almost buzzwords these days, but if they are properly realised, they can be transformative for people’s experience.

It is recognised that people in the criminal justice system can be affected by psychological trauma in many different ways, and that the system can be retraumatising. As set out in the strategic workforce plan, Police Scotland is committed to working with a wide range of partners, recognising that the majority of police demand is rooted in complex social need with the aim of protecting vulnerable individuals. To support that, all officers and staff within Police Scotland’s partnerships, prevention and community wellbeing division are trained in trauma-informed policing. Additionally, we are funding trauma specialists to develop a knowledge and skills framework to create a more trauma-informed and trauma-responsive justice system. That framework will be published later this year.

I assure the member that further steps are being taken to shift the balance towards a greater use of community-based disposals. A delivery plan to support implementation of the revised national community justice strategy is being developed with partner organisations; its publication will drive actions at national and local levels. In addition, we introduced the Bail and Release from Custody (Scotland) Bill to Parliament in June. We are supporting effective use of new powers to electronically monitor the use of bail. We are continuing to invest in community justice services within the parameters that were set out in the resource spending review. That includes sustaining additional investment of £15 million in justice social work services this year. Of course, public protection remains paramount as we work to reduce reoffending and assist with rehabilitation, which leads to fewer victims and safer communities.

I have just said that I am unable to comment on individual cases. However, I confirm that Police Scotland approaches its job firmly on the basis of human rights legislation and, of course, operates under the principles of policing by consent. It has confirmed that there will be a formal debrief process for operation unicorn, and I understand that the operation will be discussed at the Scottish Police Authority board meeting later this month, which is the appropriate forum for that. I understand that that will include reviewing at least one of the incidents that took place while the operation was active.

I will meet the chief constable tomorrow. I will discuss the issues with him, with a view, as ever, to what lessons can be learned from the operation and how those can be applied to future policing operations. I will also congratulate him and his force on a superb job, notwithstanding the issues that have been raised by the member.

For the member’s information, whenever police officers from other jurisdictions come to serve and help under mutual aid arrangements with Police Scotland, control always rests with the chief constable and, of course, with the Lord Advocate. Similarly, Police Scotland had 1,000 officers in London and throughout England and Wales to help with events this week. At that time, they were under the control of local police chiefs. That is the way that it should be done. Of course, in Scotland, the chief constable will always be in control.

It will be up to the Scottish Police Authority how the discussions that it has with the chief constable are discussed and the extent to which they are made public. The chief constable will provide an update on the policing activities that supported the operation. I have already mentioned the extent to which that will be subject to review, but it will be for the SPA to make such decisions.

The figures that the member mentioned are produced independently of the Scottish Government, so we are right to place some faith in them. They show, as the member mentioned, a substantial reduction.

The member mentioned drug deaths. My colleague Angela Constance is perhaps better placed to respond to this, but it is true to say that there is a lag between when those deaths take place and when people first start taking drugs.

It is the police’s responsibility to provide the reassurance that the member mentions. Notwithstanding the fact that members of the public have come to speak to Mr Kerr, there is some reassurance in the police figures, which show that there is a reduction in drug dealing.

However, through the different methods that I mentioned, it is possible for people to raise those issues—either with the SPA or individually, as they have done with Mr Kerr. I encourage people to do that. The police are always willing to listen and they rely on that local intelligence to find the best deployment of their force. That might also be a factor: the more information that the police have, the more effective they can be.

I hope that that is helpful to Mr Kerr, but I am happy to have a further discussion if he would find that helpful.

The bill will progress the ambition and priorities that are set out in “The Vision for Justice in Scotland”. It will deliver reforms building on our recent consultation on improving victims’ experiences of the justice system and the recommendations from Lady Dorrian’s review on improving the management of sexual offence cases. The bill will include proposals to introduce a statutory right to anonymity for complainers in sexual offence cases and to abolish the not proven verdict—a verdict that people do not understand, that can stigmatise the acquitted and may cause additional trauma for victims.

In the programme for government, we have laid out the proposals to have that brought forward this year. That verdict has been used for centuries. It is also true that we resisted the member’s and other members’ pleas to scrap that verdict that more quickly, because we think that there are other parts of the criminal justice system that will have to change in order to accommodate the change.

The consideration of those matters is supported by the Law Society of Scotland, the Faculty of Advocates and the senators of the College of Justice in Scotland, and we have to take people with us on such a fundamental change. That is why it is right that we consider other aspects as well as the not proven verdict, which is what we have done up until this point and what we will continue to do. However, for the first time, a Government has said that it will abolish the not proven verdict in Scotland, which has stood for centuries. I think that that should be welcomed.

Although, as the member knows, responsibility for military conduct is a reserved issue, the Scottish Government remains absolutely committed to improving access to support for all those who have experienced rape or sexual assault and funds a range of front-line specialist support services. For example, through our victim-centred approach fund, we will provide £48 million to 23 organisations across Scotland over the period from 2022 to 2025. That includes £18.5 million for specialist advocacy support for survivors of gender-based violence, underlining our absolute commitment to putting victims very firmly at the centre of the justice system.

I certainly agree that more should be done to stamp out that culture. That has been true for many decades. When I took up this ministerial position last year, one of my first engagements was to go to a new veterans centre in Fife, where a woman, who was one of the first Wrens to be stationed on a ship, recounted some of her horrendous experience from the 1980s onwards. Much more should be done and should have been done over many years.

Of course, I agree that the more serious cases should be dealt with in the civilian criminal courts. We continue to push the UK Government to commit to the future implementation of recommendation 1 of the Lyons review. In January, I wrote to the Secretary of State for Defence to ask how the UK Government will address that important issue and how our service personnel can be assured that they will not be affected by such awful behaviour during their service. Although those were very reasonable questions, I did not receive even the courtesy of a response from the secretary of state.