Chamber and committees

It is not possible to say definitively, but we can probably get a good idea from looking at the establishment of previous commissioners’ offices. The establishment of the office of the Scottish Veterans Commissioner, which I was heavily involved in, might give you an indication of the cost. That can be readily obtained from SPICe.

I am happy to get further information on that and to provide the member with a detailed response. Obviously, it is predicated on the value of fines for convictions, and there has been a pretty big disruption to that process in our court system. I imagine that that accounts for it, but I am happy to look into it further and to provide any other relevant information, if that would help.

The Californian authorities were told to do that by the Supreme Court. We would want to avoid that. We want to try to remain in control of the situation rather than be told to do that. I cannot imagine the UK Supreme Court telling us to do that, but we do not want to be in that position. It is therefore important that we anticipate the situation as best we can. You are right that the backlog of cases and the nature of those cases—in particular, those involving sex crimes—will result in more people being in prison.

Despite some of the political banter that we have about the presumption against short sentences, people in the current prison population are serving longer in prison than was the case previously, partly because of the nature of their crimes. We have also had a big increase in historical sex offences, and we are accommodating a lot of people in relation to that.

We do not want to be forced by anybody to release prisoners; we want to try to manage the situation as best we can.

The first thing to say, as I mentioned in relation to another question, is that we are not through Covid. It is a very fluid situation right now. Some prisons are going back to a two-shift system, which has allowed them to increase the amount of purposeful activity that is taking place. It would be interesting to hear more from Neil Rennick on that.

Irrespective of whether we are talking about carrying out a review to the terms that Wendy Sinclair-Gieben, the chief inspector, has called for, or whether we are talking about the prison service looking at the situation holistically and at what it is able to do—part of the approach is driven by whether there is an outbreak of Covid and what the public health regulations are in a particular prison, given its facilities—the situation is very fluid. However, we are very much seizing on the need to increase purposeful activity to at least its previous level.

Notwithstanding that—I think that the chief inspector recognises this—some of what has happened around access to telephones and mobile phones has been of huge benefit, although there has quite rightly been a lot of discussion about the tampering of devices. There has been a massive number of calls to the Samaritans from within prisons. The ability of families to talk to prisoners, especially at a time when prisoners cannot have the same amount of purposeful activity, has been really important as well.

We are cognisant that people being denied purposeful activity is a situation that cannot persist. Neil Rennick will have more to say on that.

Once again, the difficulty is that this evidence session is about a process in which we have not fixed the budget.

In general terms, as I have said before, when we allocate the budget, we have to prioritise, and the extent to which we are willing to listen to what the police say their needs are is evidenced by the fact that we have increased their capital budget, as has been mentioned, and met the specific request for £10 million for investment in greening the fleet. Additional moneys have been given for body-worn cameras and various other initiatives.

We are very receptive to what the police say, but the simple fact is that, when the overall grant funding from the Treasury is falling, we have to make difficult decisions. In relation to that, it will be really useful for me to see what the committee believes the priorities should be. If we increase the police budget, will the committee or the member say that we should reduce the fire service budget or the education budget? These are the difficult decisions that we have to make.

I think that the police understand that point. We expect them to put forward the things that they want to see, and, of course, they will want to do that. However, when we finally agree the budget, it will be based on, first, the amount of money that we have to spend and then on the fact that we expect that the police and the SPA will work out their priorities within that budget, because that is their statutory responsibility. As I said however, we are ahead of the budget just now.

I have very little involvement in that. The police have the autonomy that they asked for and that the Parliament granted them. Collectively, as a Parliament, we have agreed that the police should have independence from direct ministerial involvement in such matters. The police should not be subject to ministerial direction in relation to their operational actions. Such decisions are for the chief constable, although, of course, there is oversight through the Scottish Police Authority.

As far as the particular contract to which you referred is concerned, there is quite a role for the Foreign Office, which is involved in the process and under the aegis of which the relevant scheme is delivered.

Obviously, I have discussed the matter with the chief constable. For my part, I am totally behind the view that Police Scotland is a human rights-based organisation. It is probably a human rights-based organisation to a much greater extent—as, I am sure, it would concede—than it has been previously. It is very mindful of that fact.

Whatever people’s view on the activity in question—some people think that it represents an attempt to make sure that proper policing methods are used and that policing is done properly, with accountability, and that that is a good thing to spread around—it is Police Scotland that has taken the decision. The work has not been carried on for two reasons, the first of which is to do with Covid; the second is the suspension of the relevant UK programme. The activity has not been going on for some time. In fact—I stand to be corrected on this—it has not been going on for the entire time that I have been doing this job.

The accountability for the contract to which Katy Clark referred rests with Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority.

Again, I will bring in Don McGillivray on that, but I will first give another example. For some time in advance of COP26, all leave was cancelled for the police in Scotland, which will have consequences as people get their leave entitlement back, and that will continue beyond COP26. From talking to the police and, where necessary, the UK Government, I believe that there is an understanding of the cost. However, it becomes more difficult to attribute costs such as those that you mention. You are right in saying that increased activism is a good thing, and the police will have to respond to it.

Going back to previous questions, I do not want to speak too soon, as we still have three days of COP26 to go, but I think that Police Scotland’s reputation will be enhanced, notwithstanding the issue with kettling, which has been mentioned, and a number of other incidents such as when, early on, a decision was made to have local people, including women, walk through Kelvingrove park in the dark. That was wrong and the police have apologised for it. There are things to learn from the experience, but my feeling is that Police Scotland’s reputation will be incredibly enhanced internationally after the event, if things go as well as we hope they will for the next three days. That will bring opportunities as well, although these things are hard to quantify at this stage.

Of course, it is not just about the police. The Scottish Fire and Rescue Service had quite a bit of work to do in the run-up to COP26, and those costs are being covered as well. There are also costs for the Scottish Ambulance Service. As I said, we are pretty confident about the nature of the arrangements that are in place, and we are hearing from our justice partners that they are confident about that, too.

Don McGillivray might want to say more about legacy costs.

I would respond on that more generally. We might come on to discuss the replacement for Barlinnie, for instance. I hate to use this expression, but how such things can be the most energy efficient is much more baked in from the start now. I am aware, from my previous area of responsibility, that that is being done in relation to housing. I do not know whether district heating is specifically being considered in this context, but reducing the carbon footprint is certainly factored into any new build.

I go back to a point that the convener made. In my area, we have one police station in Clackmannanshire, and it has now moved into the council headquarters. That would not be suitable for a fire station, for obvious reasons, but we would want our public bodies—the police, the fire service and the Scottish Ambulance Service, too—to think more cogently about working together on some things. That can massively reduce costs and increase efficiency. Where there are new facilities, that would allow for initiatives around district heating systems or otherwise reducing the carbon footprint. For the fire service, one such area will be the electrification of the fleet. I imagine that that would be a big area for the service.

I thank Alexander Stewart for securing this members’ business debate to mark the centenary of Poppyscotland’s iconic poppy appeal. It is clear, from the contributions that we have heard, that, across the chamber, we are unanimous in recognising the formidable work of Poppyscotland over the past 100 years and its dedication to and support for our armed forces community.

Alexander Stewart rightly mentioned the symbolism of the poppy, but he also mentioned the practical benefits that accrue from people buying poppies and from the work of Poppyscotland, which is the real point of Poppyscotland.

The remembrance period, which we are currently in, serves a vital purpose in allowing everybody in Scotland a moment to pause, reflect and be thankful to those who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. It is very important that we to continue to remember those who served and lost their lives in all conflicts—as Alexander Stewart said, not to glorify war but to recognise the sacrifice that was made to protect the freedoms and the way of life that we hold so dear.

The poppies that we wear, which were inspired, as we heard from Kenneth Gibson, by Lieutenant-Colonel John McCrae’s poem “In Flanders Fields”, which was written during the first world war, are a tangible symbol of remembrance and of the enduring courage, loyalty and commitment of our regulars and reservists. That shows that, after 100 years, no matter how much time may pass, we will never forget their sacrifices or those made by their families and loved ones.

I was delighted to attend the launch of the 2021 poppy appeal in Parliament at the end of last month—which was also mentioned by Douglas Ross—to hear at first hand how it has evolved over the past 100 years, no more so than in the past 18 months, with increasingly innovative approaches to raising funds and the absolute necessity of that in the face of the pandemic. Increasingly, and exclusively now for many people, payments are being made digitally. Sir Alistair Irwin had some problems with the move to digitising the poppy appeal, but I am sure that that digitalisation will only strengthen it.

The Scottish poppy appeal is Poppyscotland’s largest fundraising event, and all the money that is raised goes to the armed forces community here, in Scotland, to provide support in six key areas: finance, advice, employment, mobility, housing and mental health. The appeal’s success relies on the dedication and hard work of the 10,000 volunteers across Scotland. Without them, it would be impossible to raise the vital funds that are used to deliver support to former service personnel and their families.

For that reason and for many others, I give my personal thanks to the dedicated Poppyscotland staff and volunteers for all that they do—as Sir Alistair did when he spoke at the event that has been mentioned. Stephen Kerr was there, too. The work that has been done by some individuals—I am thinking of one or two of the people who received awards that night—has been absolutely phenomenal. That includes, of course, the devoted team of 34 disabled veterans based at New Haig house, who hand produce more than 2 million poppies and 10,000 wreaths every year.

The poppy appeal and the commemorative events serve a vital purpose for the people of Scotland in allowing time for reflection on the sacrifices that have been made to protect our freedoms. As we all know, Scotland has a large and vibrant armed forces community, and the role of the charity sector is essential in delivering valuable support to veterans right across Scotland. I am sure that I speak for everyone in the chamber today when I extend my heartfelt thanks to everyone who supports the various charities in whatever way they can.

Since I first took responsibility for the veterans portfolio, in previous ministerial roles, and, more recently, since being appointed the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Veterans, I have been fortunate and humbled to hear directly about the experiences of veterans in our community, including the vital assistance that veterans receive from third sector organisations.

For our part, the Scottish Government remains committed to supporting our veterans community. We recognise that veterans and their families are true assets to their communities, their employers and wider society. That includes war widows, who have given so much. I am honoured to be representing the Scottish Government at the War Widows’ Association annual service of remembrance at the cenotaph in London this weekend, although I will not be able to stay for the festival of remembrance, which I think is also celebrating a 100-year anniversary, because I will be returning to Glasgow to attend the remembrance event there on Sunday. We remain committed to those remembrance events.

In the chamber tomorrow, I will provide Parliament with an update on the Scottish Government’s continued support for our veterans and armed forces community, which will include a focus on remembrance commemorations.

I will say a few words about some of the points that have been made in the debate. We heard some very interesting accounts from Alexander Stewart, Kenneth Gibson and Martin Whitfield on the origins of the poppy as a symbol. Kenneth Gibson mentioned the incredible story of the four brothers called Mochrie, who were from Ayrshire. To think that four brothers from the same family were all killed in the war—the sacrifice was truly astonishing.

I was interested to hear Douglas Ross talk about the Lothians veterans centre, mainly because it is a centre that I have visited before. He mentioned Ian Stewart. Ian is a friend of mine, and he has been involved in the veterans centre just along the road from the Parliament. We served together in 45 Commando during the Falklands war. I should mention that he is also a former editor of The Scotsman. He has done some fantastic work with veterans.

I associate myself with the comments that have been made about the contribution that Sir Alistair Irwin has made over many years. I have stood at many remembrance events with him. The work that he has done has been tremendous, and we should remember it. Like Douglas Ross, I am fairly certain that Sir Alistair will still be seen at remembrance events, in Moray and elsewhere, when he has the chance to attend them. Something of a hole will be left in his life, and he admitted as much to me when I spoke with him recently at the remembrance event in Princes Street gardens.

Martin Whitfield made an important point about differences in poppies. Some time ago, I wrote an article about that issue, which could have been construed as being contentious. The point of it was that it really does not matter what colour or design of poppy people wear; they have the same intent. However, I would make the more contentious point that that is also true if somebody does not wear a poppy. I always wear a red poppy because I know that the money is going to a cause that I am very keen to see supported, but others do not want to, and we have to remember that the people we are commemorating fought those wars so that people would have a choice about what they do—which includes not wearing a poppy if they do not want to. I would encourage everyone to wear a poppy, but I respect the rights of those who do not want to wear one, whatever their reason. Martin Whitfield drew out some of the differences that we have, but he said that we all feel the same in our hearts about what we are trying to commemorate.

Stephen Kerr, Alexander Stewart and I have together attended a number of events at Bridge of Allan and elsewhere, and I have visited many of the places that Stephen Kerr talked about, including the Menin Gate at Ypres, Contalmaison, Arras and so on. He also talked about the poignancy of some of the graveyards, which are incredible to witness. It is good to see so many schools taking battlefield tours over the years, because they drive the subject home to young people, who are often particularly interested when they see the graves of people who were 17 or 18 years old when they died.

When I go to those cemeteries, my inclination is to go to their furthest points and find the graves that say “A soldier known only unto God”. It is really poignant that the families of those people do not have a physical place to go to remember them, as Kenneth Gibson said about the Mochrie brothers. The point is that we should continue to remember—we should never forget, not least because we should not allow that kind of event to happen again.

I close today’s debate by offering my congratulations to Poppyscotland as it marks the centenary of the poppy appeal. It deserves every plaudit that it has received tonight in the chamber, and, like other members, I have every reason to be proud of its achievements.

The application period for next year’s Scottish veterans fund is currently open. It closes on Friday 12 November. Interested parties are able to apply for the fund via the Veterans Scotland website. This year, we particularly welcome bids that promote collaboration and partnership among and outwith the veterans charitable sector, as well as projects with a focus on early service leavers.

We continue to have financial support in that from the company previously known as Aberdeen Asset Management. I am not entirely sure how to pronounce its new name, but that is what it was then.