Chamber and committees

I will separate public inquiries from civil cases for a moment, because the answer on each will be slightly different.

To an extent, you are right—for example, if a report is written many years after a public inquiry has started, it means that ministers are waiting much longer for the recommendations that are meant to come from that thorough review of the facts. However, with inquiries where there is a regular output of recommendations, the situation is very different. An example is the Covid inquiry. We are five years on from the start of Covid; we have had two reports and the Government has already begun to implement the recommendations from the first report, as it has an obligation to do. That is the Government moving at some pace in terms of a direct response to the inquiry’s recommendations.

The situation is very different with an inquiry that runs for several years without any interim reports produced, and where it takes significantly longer for recommendations to be forthcoming.

I can comment on any inquiry—I do not want to undermine the evidence that an inquiry is taking, but I am happy to comment on it.

Don McGillivray wants to come in, if you do not mind.

Indeed—absolutely.

Yes—and I would hope that Labour and the Conservatives would back me in doing it and that we could ensure that there was confidence across the board.

I will ask Marion McCormack to talk about the process for identifying who can chair an inquiry.

The matter is too serious for me to use it to make a comment about lawyers and accountants, but you can make it for me. The issues are very different. I understood your question to be about public inquiries reviewing issues. If it was a simple question of figures, it would be a lot easier; however, such inquiries are often about a thorough review of the facts in extremely difficult circumstances. Nothing comes to a public inquiry unless it is extremely complex or extremely difficult and unless there is, to an extent, a breakdown in relationships and in trust, so the issues are far more challenging. As I said earlier, the demand for a public inquiry arises precisely because of its independence, and therefore the chair is independent.

I hope that the convener does not mind my saying this, but it goes back to his comments about cost. The total cost of the Sheku Bayoh inquiry, as shown on the inquiry website, is £26.2 million—

There is certainly scope to have those conversations.

I am always sensing when Don McGillivray wants to come in, and I think that he might want to come in on that.

I will give an example of what the risk is—I assume that this is in the public domain. One inquiry was given a fairly clear indication of timescales, but it very quickly discovered, as it uncovered the evidence, that the issue was much more widespread than had been assumed. As a result, the scale of the inquiry significantly increased, with people looking to add modules to the work that they were doing because we were identifying that the issues existed on a much greater scale than we had previously assumed to be the case.

Don, do you want to come in on any of that? Maybe I read you wrongly.

That is a very insightful question. The question about the level of satisfaction is, ultimately, for the survivors or the victims themselves to answer. However, I go back to a question that somebody—I cannot recall whether it was Liz Smith or Michael Marra—asked me earlier, about whether the increase in the number of public inquiries has come about because people are unsatisfied with what is happening. Don McGillivray talked about a feeling of injustice, and I think that it is about expectations. With a public inquiry, there is a lot of talk about righting the wrongs of the past. A public inquiry can shine a light on what happened, but it cannot undo the past or restore somebody, and I am very conscious of that with regard to the public inquiries that I sponsor.

There will be a duty to propose recommendations and a duty on the Government to respond to those recommendations. In responding to the Covid inquiry, for example, we want to ensure that we are far better able to respond quickly to, and far better prepared for, the next civil contingency or emergency—which may or may not be a health pandemic—than we were in 2020. However, that does not bring 23,000 people back. I engaged extensively with the Covid bereaved. There is still grief, and, ultimately, the Covid inquiry cannot take away grief. I say that very sensitively, because it is important that it is a survivor, rather than me, who responds to the question.

We have to be clear about what the purpose of a public inquiry is. It is to shine a light, and it cannot undo the past.

It is a fair question. Ultimately, you need to understand the breakdown of costs for an inquiry and where the costs are going. An inquiry is a weighty process that gives victims and survivors, among others, confidence that the facts will be made known and the truth will be uncovered. In the light of that weightiness, therefore, there are advocates and solicitors involved. It is very difficult for me to say otherwise.

Does anybody else want to comment on that?

Having said that there are alternatives, I think that there are certainly inquiries that have benefited from being judge led. I have no current plans to establish another inquiry, so—

That is despite calls already this morning—from Mr Craig Hoy—for another inquiry.

We will take all of that into account. It is worth pointing out that there are five live inquiries and one proposed inquiry. I say that because, when we are discussing issues around inquiries, we start to assume that we are talking about hundreds, whereas there are actually five plus one. Looking at their subject matter, it is clear to me that they all involve extremely challenging, complex and difficult issues.

I think that that is outside my remit. I have to make decisions on the basis of the evidence that is before me and the advice that my officials give me, and on the basis of engagement. To be perfectly frank, that, and nothing beyond that, is what influences my decisions.