Gweithio i'r gweithio gyda'r Gwerth dda nhw i'r gweithio'r Chymau 23 ymi 2018. Wrth hynny rhai, mae hi opolygyraeth gyda Jerry Go-Ruth a Leanne McArthur oedd maen nhw yma ymdweithio'r gweithio hynny mount ym gweithio yma o'r cychelig yma yn y gwybod. Efallai cyfnodol ogylchau'r agendaeth yma mae'r cyfranteid stationsiaeth, i ddoch chi nhw i Fwrdd, Fulton Macgreber, rai gael i'ch cymdeithasfa. Argymru i chi fod yn ddeglu'r ddau, Ff merci, gwasiwch. Mae'n sianfodd fel coif sadd fel ddau a gwbl gwân iawn, ac yn ddegwyd yn ddegwyddiant i'ch cymdeithasfa mewn ddau rhywbeth yn gyntafol. Rhyw o ddweud ar gael y cymdeithasfa yw'r eich cymdeithasfa ar gyfer y skeleton i gael losol, F gaining and fire reform Scotland act 2012. The committee will take evidence in a round table format. This is a more informal way of taking evidence and exploring the key issues in relation to this legislation, but it is still a formal evidence session. It does help, I think, just rather than having set pieces of evidence, it gives a better flow, and it's a good start to any post-legislative scrutiny. Although it's informal, you still have to go through the chair, so if you want to catch my eye or the clerk's eye to indicate that you want to speak, that's fine. You don't have to press any buttons or any buttons as if by magic they'll come on. I think we'll start by just going round the table introducing ourselves. I'm Margaret Nature and I'm the convener of the Justice Committee. I'm Barra, one of the clerks to the Justice Committee. I'm Stephen Emery, I'm the clerk of the Justice Committee. I'm Uldun MacGregor, MSP for Colt Bridgin Creson. I'm Arsail Tee, superintendent from Police Scotland, but the president of the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents. I'm John Finney, MSP Highlands and Islands. I'm Elena Whitham, interim spokesperson for COSLA's wellbeing board and deputy leader of East Ayrshire Council. I could warn him Mike Hallahan, COSLA community's team. Liam McArthur, MSP for Orkney. Denise Christi, the Scottish Secretary for the Fabricated Union. Liam Kerr, MSP for the North East region. Sandy Brindley, chief executive from Reap Crisis Scotland. Robison, MSP for Dundee City East. Nick Fife, Dundee University and Scottish Institute for Policing Research. Daniel Johnson, MSP for Edinburgh Southern. I'm Eichai, deputy convener of the Justice Committee. I thank all the witnesses for giving us written submissions. That's really so helpful before we come to actually come into formal session that we've had the opportunity to look over the submissions. I refer members to paper one, which is a private paper, and we now move to questions and foot-in, if you'd like to start off. Thank you, convener. As a member, not around 2012 when the act was first passed, there was a lot of talk about the financial reasons, were the main reasons for reform. I don't know who to go to the panel first, so whoever wants to, but was the initial case for reform sound? Right, so I suppose we're looking at the very beginning, and there were certain policy objectives, and one of them was to protect services in light of financial threats. Was that a sound basis in retrospect, in whatever? Would anyone like to come up with that? Hi, thanks, Denise Christy. The FBU, at the start, was supportive of a single Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. Unfortunately, that has amounted to a loss of over 700 front-line fire fighters in the closure of five operational fire control rooms, which impacts the most on women, because most women work in operational fire control rooms. So we believe that it's not impacted and supported the front line, and we believe that's because of the on-going budget cuts that have been put upon the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. We're also seeing regularly every day between 60 and 100 fire appliances unavailable to go out to fire calls because we've not got enough crews to staff them all the time. So we supported the single service and we supported that because we believe that the Scottish Government's intention for protecting the front line, because there wouldn't be any duplications in that direction that we wanted to go about. Unfortunately, that's not been the case. Any other comments on the financial? Yes, Ivor Marshall. I was around at that time, and there was significant work done in terms of the outline business case. I can't comment on the due diligence that was applied around that, but there were obviously built within that expectations that there would be on-going savings as a consequence of the amalgamation of the precursor organisations, the eight forces and the two other agencies. The reality of it has been that the service has been running with a structural deficit in its budget for the past five years, and I think that that's widely known and reported that the service has been trying to narrow that gap. The money that was allocated to the service's transformation budget was actually used to fill that, and in some ways hasn't been used for transformation. I think that the reality of the scale and complexity of the challenge was perhaps underestimated in the timescales around that. Consequently, I think that we're still coming out of a phase of integration and consolidation and not really transformation. The picture moving forward seems to be that we have a more stable budget platform, albeit that we still have some significant challenges around about ICT development and transformation. So I think that in terms of scale and complexity, we perhaps underestimate it and the need to invest and create a bulge of resource that enables transformation before you can actually stabilise and have a national service going forward. I think that perhaps the size and scale of the challenge that hadn't been attempted before, probably with the benefit of hindsight and the learning that comes from this, would be that it needs significant investment to achieve that. Any other comments? Yes, Nick? Yes. The main driver for structural change here was financial. It's quite interesting when you put this in a kind of international context and you look at what's been happening in places like Norway and Sweden and the Netherlands, where they've also embarked on a very similar process of reform of policing, where they've merged what were previously autonomous regional forces or divisions and created a single structure. There, the driver hasn't been money. It's been efficiency and effectiveness. So their view is that because of the changing nature of criminality and particularly around terrorism and organised crime, that actually having a single structure or a more centralised structure offers certain economies of scale and certain operational benefits in terms of being able to mobilise specialist capacity to deal with some of these more complex forms of criminality. So you see a similar pattern of change, but not all driven by money. Right, and in terms of the financial imperatives, have they been realised then? Do you have a view on that? I mean, my senses, and particularly, I suppose, from what the Audit Scotland have done, is that there's still lots of financial challenges around reaping the benefits of reform. I mean, certainly there's been a lot of progress in terms of reducing duplication and I think one of the challenges during the sort of first phases of reform is that Police Scotland were required to maintain the number of officers that they had at the outset and that's one of their biggest costs. So in terms of realising financial benefits and since they were quite constrained in terms of what they could do because they had to maintain the numbers of officers. It's okay. And Eileen? Thank you very much. I think that local government is very aware of the need for transformation and we understand why that needs to happen. And I think that we have seen benefits. So we've seen the benefits, as Nick has just said, about the reducing duplication. We've also been able to pull together specialised services more to a local level, which has been really good. I think that our concern as local government is that where budgets are being cut, we are seeing difficulties at the front line there, but there has been, in the round, a lot of positives as well coming out of the single police force. I think that you raised a little bit there about, either, about maybe the complexity of the change that was required and I know some of the submissions that's been raised. Could you comment on that before we look at the time which Liam is going to look at? Was the complexity of actually merging the forces underestimated? My comment on that would be that it probably was. Did we have the timescales and the experience and the expertise to be able to understand the scale of what it was? Probably not, but with the best traditions of the service, we got on with it and gradually, I suppose, learnt from some mistakes along the way around some of that. I think that the important thing now is, with five years into it, is to recognise that. I think that we've started to develop a 10-year strategy now, which it didn't have at the start, and we as an association support that, that there needs to be a sense of what that looks like and to have a road map going forward. I think that the biggest challenge is around that complexity, as we've been a focus rightly on structures and process and practice to keep the wheels on the wagon, so to speak, and to keep going to calls and dealing with that. Perhaps at the expense of some of the organisational culture changes, division and the values, and harnessing the workforce, the people and understanding that ultimately policing is a human endeavour and it relies upon the women and men who deliver that service to the citizens and has to be delivered through them. So it's about understanding them, supporting them, developing them with those structures and with the leadership that's required within the service. Any other comments on that? I think that you referred to it in your submission, Nick. Yes, I think that the complexity of the changes required was underestimated. Again, Scotland's not peculiar from that point of view. They face very similar challenges in other parts of the world where they've tried to undertake this kind of integration. I think, as I've said, it's one thing to change the structures. It's another thing to change the kind of culture that underpins that. I think, certainly in our evaluation, we saw a number of challenges around the vision for policing and how that has changed over time. So there was a very strong focus on enforcement and on performance management in the early days of reform. One can see a shift now as greater emphasis is now on prevention and protection and localism and engagement. So those changes have taken time to play through. I mean, also people talk about reform as a journey with different phases. And I think the first phase was very much focused on integration and consolidation. And I think we're kind of coming to the end of that phase. The third phase is of transformation. And I think we're only just beginning to kind of see the possibilities of transforming the way that services, both in police and in far and rescuer, delivered. So, yeah, so I think too many people saw reform as an event rather than a process and that actually the process is a very complex one. And the same question to Denise. Yeah, I mean, we've very recently harmonised uniform terms and conditions in the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and that's taken us five years. Five years to harmonise eight different legacy procedures, policies, terms and conditions. So that's really been challenging. It's been challenging especially when you're trying to unify the services of a national service and you're having different resources, different standards, different terms and conditions from each area. It's been a long process and it's been a hard process. I have to say relationships and industrial relations have generally been good with the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and I think that's helped that process along more recently. When you look ahead into transformation, we need to have the foundation settled first before we look at any form of transformation. There's no point in building a house if you've not got the foundations there that's solid in the start. So I think a point to note here is that we don't just harmonise, we need to make sure that the policies are in place, any details are in place and the nuts and bolts are on those policies if we're looking to move forward in another direction. Okay, that's helpful. We've got supplementaries from Rona, John and Liam McArthur. Okay, thank you, convener. Good morning. Just to pick up on Denise Dweyly, what you said at the beginning, it was just to get your views. During a justice committee visit to Montrose earlier this month, the fire officer in charge that we spoke to said that they felt on the operational side they had much more autonomy, less bureaucracy to go through to get things done, and that there was more co-operation. If they needed help from other forces, they could just call on it, whereas before that might have been a stumbling block. I wonder if you could maybe comment on that. They were quite, well, very complementary by the operational side of it. Yeah, there has been collaboration work done with other agencies, and some parts of that have been reasonably successful. There are other areas where you go into different role maps of a firefighter. So, a firefighter's terms and conditions are based on their current role map identified in our terms and conditions, which is the grey book. To open up that role map to take on other responsibilities, we have to go through a negotiation process, and we have to make sure that the resources are there, and the training is there for firefighters to succeed in that as well. Also, the resilience. Firefighters have 300 hours a year to do their core fire service skills. If you look at a fire station that takes on another responsibility, a specialist responsibility, for example water rescue or rope rescue, it is another 80 hours training that they need to do. Now, if we are going to work with other agencies and look at opening up the role of the firefighter, then we need to make sure that we have the proper numbers in there, the proper resources, and the proper infrastructure as well. Thank you. John. It is a question for Nick, and you touched on the international comparators and changes that take place there. One of the main drivers for the Scottish Government saw was the reduction in the block grant in a figure of £3.3 billion, equating to 10 per cent. To what extent did that, and similarly a figure of 12.8 per cent, £50 million for the fire and rescue service, did that shape the legislation and where we are now, would you imagine? I think that because the reform involved all sorts of changes, not just to the structure of policing, but also to the structure of the governance of policing, that that had lots of implications in terms of the relationship between, I suppose, the role of local government in the new police service, and I suppose just the amount of influence that they had at a local level. By taking away some of that financial contribution that local authorities made to policing, I think that brought with it changes in the way they were able to actually influence local decisions and play a role in the appointment of local officers and so on. I think that it is probably intertwined with some of those governance changes as well that has been important. If I may very briefly, because I have something to come in. Back in 2011, the inspector had talked about a weakness in police governance and accountability. This is an advance of reform. So that was an on-going issue. Yes, and I think it's been one of the things that's taken a long time to create a structure of governance where there is a proper balance between the three elements, between the Scottish Government, between the police authority and between the police service. I think what we've seen in the early stages of a performer's degree of asymmetry in those relationships, so effectively the chief constable in the Scottish Government were the more powerful partners, and the police authority was a weaker partner. I think now you're beginning to see a much more assertive police authority. It's developed the capacity to call the police to account. So I think all of that has taken time. I think there are still issues about how you engage local government more in the governance of policing, and I think that's a work in progress. Thank you. That's certainly an area we're going to come on to, because I don't think it was just money. It's the scrutiny role of local government and their ability to effect. I think that we can move on to... Liam, I'll give you a shot, and then I really want to hear to more people around the table, and I'm conscious they're just coming in when you want, Sandy. Yeah, I don't... Likewise, Cymru. I was interested by what Nick Fife was saying in terms of the structure, but I wanted to go back to a point that I were made earlier on in relation to the Transformation Fund. I mean, I recall criticisms of the approach taken in terms of college reorganisation restructuring that the perceived savings and efficiencies were banked and assumed to be able to fund that reform. And I'm just interested, both in Ivor and Nick Fife in particular, as to whether or not that same error was made again, that the efficiencies in the savings were assumed and guaranteed and locked in and used as a justification for not putting in additional funding to the Transformation Fund at that through those early stages of merger. I think that there were my understanding and I think that Nick alluded to this. Within the budget allocation, obviously, the big chunk of that goes on wages personnel. So, and there was the fixture round about the number and the magic number of 17, 234 officers and then the police staff. So, and then the business cases that was structured indicated savings that were to be accrued year on year to achieve that then. The only places that that could be squeezed out of was the police support staff roles and the very small part of the budget which is running cars and fuel and business buildings and so on and so forth. So, the squeeze came on a lot of those issues, unintended consequences of losing police staff and taking officers perhaps to do what they're away from, what their mainstream roles were to do, maybe support roles. So, all of those factors metodigatr against that ability as we're going through that process of amalgamation and integration, we never really were able to get to the transformation projects and the money that was part of that or had been allocated by the Government to help pump prime some of those transformation projects never really happened because... The bedline on police numbers was well known at the time of the reform and of the legislation. So, in a sense, when you talk about unintended consequences it's been surely the consequences of greater efficiencies having to be derived from police staff and other areas must have been known. I'm just wondering whether the level of savings that were being assumed were either exaggerated or wildly optimistic. Yeah, absolutely. Those were known, knowns going into that. I think the issue was that the expectations that I say about the outline business case and whatever due diligence was done around about the time, the expectation that those savings would be realised quickly in terms of amalgamation and stopping duplication and so on and so forth. I think the expectation were that those would come quickly and the reality is for something of the scale and complexity of putting eight police forces in two precursor organisations and then the changes to the governance above that to achieve that within a timescale where the savings started to be rendered down was unrealistic. And that fact, we've had five years of running with a structural deficit because the transformation hasn't generated the income. Then there was a bit of patch-up and make-do in terms of the budget to keep it stable. Hopefully now, as we sit with projects online for 2026, that will start to be some of that albeit I know the services is in the process of looking particularly at this ICT infrastructure and putting towards a business case that says we still need money to make that transformation in that type of scale. So it comes back to that fundamental question of did we know the size and scale and complexity of it? Probably not. I'm just going to add just a footnote to that. I think the costs of transformation were underestimated. And the I mean, just to take one example, I mean the investment in ICT to reap the benefits of having a single organisation as opposed to having eight legacy ICT systems is significant. I know there's a whole history associated with the ISX project but since until you have that element sorted then a lot of the other benefits are much more difficult to achieve. I think the other interesting thing is I've been quite a close observer of the police reform in Norway and it was interesting that their approach initially was to invest hugely in the front line so particularly in technology. So their approach to reform was to give officers new IT equipment so that they could work more efficiently on the street and then they started worrying about the kind of structural changes and back office functions. So it was a very different approach and they started with the front line and then they looked at the sort of wider structures whereas I think the approach here was to start with the structures and then sort of deal with the front line at a later stage. You've supplemented? Yeah, I mean you've sort of opened the Pandora's box of ICT I'm afraid. And I'm just wondering sort of two questions. First of all to what extent is the challenges of integration or life-transition to what extent is that ICT we're talking about or and to what extent are there other things? And then the second question and to you both is what the practical consequences of that have been? I mean we hear stories of police officers having to input kind of into multiple systems for a single incident. I was just wondering if you could just bring that to life in terms of its practical consequences? I'll go first, Nick. I think that ICT is it's not it's all about policing as a human endeavour it's about how women and men in the role of police officer interact with citizens, members of the public at times of crisis and times of need and it's about delivering that type of service. ICT isn't a neighbour towards that and as Nick alludes to if you invest properly and give officers the right equipment be that cars or radios or telephones or tablets however it is it may enable them to work more effectively more efficiently and particularly in the policing in the 21st century where information is critical across numerous systems and the access to that information about what we know about victims and witnesses and so on and so forth and how quickly we can access that how quickly we can share that with partners it is an essential element of it but it isn't a neighbour towards delivering the service the service is still anchored in understanding or what the fundamental basics of what policing is about and it's about enabling and encouraging training the officers to go out and do that job and that can be in the front line out there in the streets but equally there's a lot of talk about what the front line is but it can be in terms of cyber crime and so on and so forth so we need to understand the scale of what complexity is in 21st century policing and ICT is an element of that and an ever-growing element of that, I suppose, in terms of the technological world that we now occupy but it can't be the be-all and end-all if it's good it can make our job easier we can be more effective we can be more efficient if it's bad we will still deliver a service but it won't be as effective and efficient perhaps Yes, everyone can't be with that Fulton Yeah, I mean, thanks community we've moved on a wee bit but I just want to go back to the case for reform and I know that much of the driver was financial as I said but as I said we have moved on a bit but as Nick mentioned there is other reasons and other drivers and I just wonder without going into other areas of questioning later the sort of benefits and negative consequences if the panel think that the reasons were generally sound for reform based on the need of the Scottish people in terms of policing and fire It's nothing to do with timeline that we thought we were asking I was going to say community, I felt that Iver Marshall had covered the time so I was going back to the original question which was about reform Right, well which I would have incorporated in the initial question I think we were looking whether are there any other barriers to reform which hindered progress you know if you wanted to put that in or do you feel we've covered the barriers than happy to move on anything you want to reply to Fulton's question The benefits you've seen but I don't know if that's me being coming up later on We may well go into that so if we move it on a little bit Right, moving on then can we look at Liam Kerr's Yeah, but the governance has been mentioned that's an interesting interesting contribution from Nick so Liam, your question Yeah, thanks convener so Professor Fife you talked about the structure and the governance in particular and there was certainly some evidence that we've seen that suggests that the structure that you alluded to the police, Scotland and the SPA may not be ideal or sufficiently clear so do any of the witnesses have any views on that structure and in particular the role of the SPA as defined and as it has come to be Yeah, I suppose my you know first observation is that again I think there was an underestimation of how long it would take to establish new governance arrangements at the outset of reform and while I think you know that if you like the preparations in terms of the operational side the policing had been happening for some time I think the actual establishment of SPA happened very quickly it's taken time to to I think get the right mix of skills and knowledge within that organisation and my sense now is you know it's in a much better place than it was I think one of the key issues that we've been looking at is that relationship between local authorities and the SPA and particularly the relationship between local streets and the committees and the SPA and I suppose really trying to find effective ways in which that those local concerns can be fed through into a national body because I think you know it's a common theme throughout reform is that balance between centralisation and localisation and I think there was a feeling in the early stages of reform that the focus was much more on the national and on the centralisation of activity both in terms of kind of governance arrangements and in terms of operational and strategic elements and now I think the focus needs to be much more on trying to address that balance and think about how localism is made a stronger had a stronger presence in discussions about policing and you can see that through policing 2026 the strategic document that Police Scotland and SPA produced much greatest focus on localism within that I think now in terms of governance it's a question of how did those local scrutiny committees have a voice at a national level because many of those decisions that have been taken nationally have all sorts of local implications and I think at the moment or certainly in the early stages of reform they didn't really have a particularly strong voice in those and the outcome of those decisions Can you come back on that a bit because you're the council I definitely and either make or I would absolutely echo what you're saying there I think that local government really welcomed the fact that the act provided for the creation of local scrutiny committees I think there has been a disconnect and I think that we're now catching up with that at the moment so Cosa and Police Scotland and the SPA are you know have a joint officer group at the moment that it's working to try and bridge that disconnect because at the moment there are decisions that are made at a national level that have implications at a local level without that input so if local police scrutiny and fire forums are there to make decisions at a local level we think it's imperative that they feed up to Cosa level so we've got a police scrutiny forum at COSLA and then we need to have that then feeding up the way to the national bodies that are going to be making decisions because if not it's going to feel as if the decisions are being made and then handed down to local level to implement so I feel as if we're on that journey at the minute and we're actually going to make a big difference with that joint officer group act to build the bridge between Yes, just to add to what Councillor Whitham said yes, I think overall I've had quite a negative experience local government of their arrangements for policing in Scotland over the last five years obviously more recently it's worked to improve those arrangements under the leadership of the new chair of the SP and with our councillor COSLA Spokesperson Councillor Whitham but we've had a number of experiences over the years everything from more recently TTROs last October to police counter closures CCTV and policing a number of controversial issues that have emerged because national decisions have been taken without sufficient dialogue, communication meaningful engagement with local government local elected members as part of that process so that's something that obviously needs to be addressed and improved upon and we're obviously working with the SP and Police Scotland and Solace local authority chief executives to address but it has been a learning experience I feel if there have been more local accountability and more power if you like a local lever then a case could have been made either to support or try and change some of the decisions that were made locally a better case could have been made Absolutely, I think that if you involve the layer of governance that's most directly closest to the communities at an early level you know at the creation and the ideation stage of policy decision making then we are going to have an influence and we are going to you know we would be able to actually make a a better outcome a better case locally when we are involved in and the decisions that are being taken and that's because one size stuff that they all do Yeah, absolutely Yeah, I wonder I'd like to ask Nick it's I've ever touched us on the fact that there was actually 10 organisations that came together and if we're comparing the present arrangement with the previous arrangements I wonder if the same argument could be made historically about the death of local accountability for instance of the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency or the central services elsewhere because I want to maximise local involvement but is that a reasonable comparator because there was zero input from local authorities to those Yeah, yeah, no I think that's a very reasonable comparison Yeah, I think the governance arrangements for those bodies didn't allow for any kind of local kind of input into the decisions and deliberations of those groups so yeah, I think that is a fair comparison Okay, thank you Yeah, anyone else want to on that just aspect have you finished Liam or was there something else you wanted to Good to go on Just Professor Vife, if I may on the do you take a view then based on what you said earlier on whether the the SPA's recent challenges then have been personality and or culture driven such that the recent changes in personnel will positively impact on the SPA's operations or is there something endemic in the structure that mitigates against the efficient working No, I mean, I think that the structure can be made to work better you know as it is and I think I think the production of the policing 2026 document was a bit of a watershed from this perspective and it was a joint strategy between Police Scotland and SPA and it showed that when they you know by through working together you know they could come to a joint vision of what policing in Scotland would be about and what its priorities would look like and so on so I think you know I think there is evidence of really good effective working between those two two organisations you know beginning to emerge I think you know again it's probably part of the evolution of SPA is making sure that you have the right skills and knowledge in terms of the composition of the board and the wider organisation and so I think as referred to you know ensuring that connection between SPA and local government is a strong one so I feel that a lot of progress is now being made I think in the early days yeah there was a kind of you know disconnect between SPA and local communities and between SPA and Police Scotland you know that Police Scotland were forging ahead with quite rapid change and I think SPA were struggling to kind of keep up with some of the things that were emerging from that So do you take a view then on whether a single oversight body the SPA is the best mechanism is this the best structure to hold Police Scotland to account or is there in your view a better way That's a good question I think it can be made to work effectively I think it's important to see it as part of a wider landscape of governance so you've got it's not just the SPA on it on its own you've also got HMICS you've got Audit Scotland you've got other bodies that are kind of there to call the police to account So at one level I think it can do a very good job and I think one shouldn't look back to the previous arrangements if you like with rose-tinted glasses you know the previous police authorities had their own challenges and weaknesses about them but I think the key thing is now to kind of address that issue about how you get a stronger local voice in the deliberations of SPI I'll answer that and answer the questions maybe backwards I think I've seen improvements in terms of those relationships at that strategic level I think the police authority on his neck alluding to various other elements HMICS and the force executive working in a more collaborative cohesive way in terms of a shared leadership responsibility rather than a sort of fractured one I think if we're being candid to some of the some of the personalities and some of the leadership styles and some of the tensions in the early days and disputes about the interpretation of the legislation about who had responsibility for police staff were unhelpful at that festerd for some time and took considerable time to resolve itself which I think we're still haven't managed to achieve harmonisation for our police support staff in terms of pay and that probably the genesis of that goes away back then but it is in a better trajectory now and I think it's incumbent upon all of us who are involved in that to try and help shape that going forward and I still think there are issues in terms of the centralist versus the local and again it's taking time for that to work through having been a commander in a division with four local authorities I had very good positive relationships with four scrutiny boards all very different all with very different needs and I know that my colleagues who are in similar positions have very positive relationships like that and that has been a continuation of many years of those positive relationships I think the voice of those local scrutiny boards affecting national policies hasn't been heard as strongly as it could and should have been and I think there are other factors in terms of financial controls and a very centralist approach to cuts and budgets that mean that local commanders local area commanders do not have autonomy in terms of or as much flexibility in terms of budgets to enable them to commit to local initiatives in partnership with local authorities which in essence is stymying things like community planning community empowerment I have 29 years in this job and I have yet to see real progress getting made in proper community planning community empowerment and it comes down to the fact that money cannot be shared across budgets at times and I think follow the money trail sometimes and trust the people who are in positions of local management at times to give local services so I think there is an egg to be cracked in terms of that centralist nationalist control in terms of big entities vis-à-vis what is important for local communities Denise, I do not know from the FBU Thanks chair that the governance point in relation to the fire service we have got the fire board and we believe that there is insufficient knowledge of operational matters or operational experience so the fire board scrutinises the fire and rescue service and they will be given papers and policies and procedures from officers within the fire service but throughout that fire board there is no independent scrutiny from a professional viewpoint an operational viewpoint and we suggest that a mechanism should be identified so that the board has ready access to independent objective advice and information in respect of operational matters and that's including known or potential projected impact of proposals on operational matters so if you need to scrutinise an organisation you must have the knowledge and the information and the experience to do that and we believe that that's currently not happening within the current board structures Could you give an example of how that plays out to where the fault line lies? Well for example the to crew on up previously before we're amalgamated into the single Scottish Fire and Rescue Service you had a minimum amount of firefighters on appliance to have a safe crew model to go to a fire or an incident Recently that crew model has went from five firefighters on each fire appliances to five and four Now as operational firefighters and experienced members within the fire brigade union we know the impact a reduction can have when you reduce the amount of firefighters on a fire appliance When those policies and those procedures go to the fire board then we believe that they need to have that independent knowledge and advice to give them all the information so that they can make an informed choice to scrutinise or to agree with the decision of the fire service so that's one specific example That's very helpful Daniel, you're displemented before I move on to Rona to develop this a bit Yeah I'm just interested in this point around the interplay between the centre and local scrutiny panels and in particular following on from Ivor Marshall's point there I mean to really strengthen local scrutiny panels do we need to actually see kind of that flow of money point? You're up to there Daniel you're actually on Rona's question exactly So can we come back to I think you had another point didn't you? Okay I think yeah the direction Daniel was going in From what I'm gathering I mean I'm listening to what you're saying about how it's taken a long time for things to begin to reach the objective Are we going in the right direction we're in the right trajectory as far as local policing and local scrutiny goes I know there's been a long way to go councillor what some you say in your submission the model of local policing has allowed councils to retain a local relationship through local police commanders and so that's a positive and I think we're all agreed that it's also maybe eradicated some duplication of services which is also positive so it's really just to try and and sort of wrap up mainly what what Daniel was saying about the the scrutiny are we going in the right direction do you think we'll get there soon and you know any other benefits that you can think of so far in the first five years and is there anything you want to add to that Daniel? I'm sorry Daniel yes what you're doing when I was just going to ask will the scrutiny panels do they need kind of essential budgetary control and powers of appointment in order to really have the sort of the teeth to be heard was really my question there's quite a lot there who'd like to take that in a minute there's quite a lot there I think that in terms of the scrutiny I think that we will get there I think that we're making great strides if we continue on the path that we're going at the minute I think that you know local government will have the influence that it needs to have at that level I think that we do need to make sure that divisional commanders are adequately resourced and empowered to make decisions them that are going to help their community planning partners and them deliver services on the ground at a local level we've always kind of felt that perhaps the the the scrutiny committee committees should have some involvement in making local decisions when it comes to to budgetary spend appointments etc that you know that is something that we would welcome a discussion on going forward I do think that we've made great strides having the chair of the new chair of the SPA and indeed the fire board coming to our meetings at COSLA has been really well received by the representatives from all 32 local authorities that sit on that committee so I think we're we're on the right path now but I do believe that we need to make sure that we can empower the divisional commanders to be able to to do what we the good work that they're doing there's so much good work that's been doing on community planning partner boards all round about Scotland and it's just how we build on that and I think that that is about devolving more power down the way Mike, did you have anything to add to that? I think it really broadly concur with having that council with him said it's a work in progress in terms of improving governance arranging for the SPA orbs who move along positively so far I think it's been in that place where we're we're comfortable when each other's positions with SPA and Police Scotland yes exactly what council with him said it would be which helpful a local level if local police commanders could be empowered and respective have more autonomy in deploying resources in line with local priorities that are articulated by elected members so obviously closest to their community is when it comes to issues relating to policing obviously have more scope locally as well because a lot of systems essentialising systems and processes from Police Scotland fairly centralised and the need to have them where more adaptable and flexible to meet local circumstances Nick and the diver did you want to come in? Nick Yeah I mean I absolutely agree with what's been said I think the other point I would add is is I think we just need to re-engage with the policing principles that were set out near a sharp police and fire reform act that say some really good things about you know what I think is a very progressive vision of policing which is it's about community well-being it's about working in partnership with localities and communities and so on and I sense I think we just kind of need to re-engage with those principles because I think they are a really really good statement about how policing should be a partnership between different bodies and it should be focused on community well-being Did you have something about reviewing and going back to in your submission to that very point you know that the aim is there but it hasn't been achieved so going back and looking see where do we need to Yeah absolutely I think you know my sense is that we kind of lost sight of those policing principles for the first three or four years of reform and understandably there were other kind of pressures and demands and so on but I think the policing 2026 document is a really good step in that direction but I say there's a really good statement about the purpose of policing in the 21st century embedded within the legislation and I think if we go back and since make that reality then I think that would be a really positive statement and is that almost going back to what you were saying about where they started in other countries it's almost that point they started at Yeah see and actually the other countries look at our legislation and are really impressed at the statement about policing that is set out there because it you know and also unlike in England and Wales where the focus has much been very much on crime reduction and a very you know crime centred view of policing the statement in the Scottish legislation is about wellbeing it's about harm reduction it's about a much more holistic vision of policing which I think is much more in tune with that you feel like the needs of kind of vulnerable populations Okay and Ivor? Yeah Just to be absolutely clear I think that the relationships at local levels with divisional commanders local area commanders with communities with scrutiny boards with partners is has always been strong has continued to be strong I think it's one of the things that has transcended through all of this I think they maybe in the early days some of the partnerships the service was drew from some of those because they were so busy in doing things and some of that's been re-established the commitment, the intention to collaborative working is still exceptionally strong I think my point would be that you can commit a certain amount of people resource to issues but you don't necessarily have a discretionary budget that enables you to run initiatives to match fund certain things because money is so tight and it's been drawn away from maybe that local structure that we perhaps used prior to police calling because of the budget pressures and I suppose it's about empowering and enabling local managers to do some of that I think that would be my position to give you a tangible example of frustrations around some of this use still in certain pockets local authorities did fund community officers for certain divisions and if that funding was withdrawn and then those officers were taken away from divisions and centrally withdrawn that was all part of this big pan-a-play in terms of maintaining officer numbers and who was paying for what and so on and so forth and it was all to be honest a frustration round about taking officers from my point of view at that time in the division taking officers away from doing a very very important community role to make a political point about where the budget and where the money came from and I think that was wrong now that that can I just reiterate that's round the fringes of what is a very strong partnership in terms of local policing and local engagement and working and relationships with local communities I think that's still exceptionally strong I just would like to add that wee bit of polish on top by giving local area commanders and divisional commanders a bit of discretionary budget that they could do that wee bit more Can I just add to that have we I was starting to go back that way because I mean in my local authority we have community policemen that they're still there so I'm not quite sure the point you're making that they weren't there is that In some places there were legacy arrangements where local authorities had funded police officers so they had commit credit budget from whatever council it was into the police budget and that paid for certain officers so 10 officers in a particular local authority area and those were generally community based officers if that money was withdrawn by that council from Police Scotland because they no longer felt they could support that then those 10 officer posts were withdrawn and taken back into the Police Scotland overall 17, 2, 3, 4 and taken away from that local division whether they were needed or not around some of that at times so as I say it's a small thing right about that and it's probably now an issue that is being expunged probably from the funding envelope for Police Scotland because the vast majority of it comes from from central budget but I don't know from a local authority causal point of view they may have a view on that Yes, you do I actually was going to kind of give another live example that's happening at the moment in terms of local resources for for divisional commanders we can have a huge amount of initiatives happen at a local level in conjunction with the police and our community planning partners and my own authority area that the police down there have become trauma informed so they're becoming completely aware of adverse childhood experiences that's embedded right through our community planning partnership strategic aims and our divisional commander would love to do some initiatives but he doesn't actually have the resources to be able to do it or to match fund anything that the local authority is going to do so we can have historic examples of where you have local government fund officers within the police you also have current situations where the police are looking at national priorities you know ACEs are a national priority that we're all looking at we want to you know to figure out how we can deal with that at a local level and to do community justice we need to be able to understand all of that and there we have a police divisional commander that's really want to do it but doesn't actually have any money, any budget to do any work Denise do you have any any comment on that particular aspect the localism the ability to set your local priorities yeah I think it's the same as you know as what I've mentioned in relation to the police senior managers and senior local authority areas I think the frustration there is that they do not have the budgets to look at local needs so for example up in the north area or the Highlands of Scotland it's a completely different demographic than a city centre of Glasgow or Edinburgh so the resources there and the ability to respond to different incidents incidents and different initiatives are going to be different and more complex than I would say the city centre of Edinburgh or Glasgow so more autonomy needs to be needed locally but also in order to have that autonomy we must have the budget responsibility and the freedom to to use that as well yeah we have autonomy to have the flexibility to deal with the issues absolutely I apologise to Shona and Sandy we're coming to you but it follows on Daniel's next question I know you've got a very specific and good example to give Sandy and Shona will be asking about that but just to conclude this part Daniel yeah I mean I think the the questions around the resource available to local divisions I think is really key I mean I think that you know one of the key drivers towards the creation of single police force was about specialist divisions and so on but I just wonder how much that has taken priority and that has been at a cost to local divisions whether you look at the availability locally or just in terms of police numbers I believe in the last five years local divisions have lost 326 officers and regional forces have lost around 79 I was just wondering to what extent that you know that the people around the table would would think about where that balance lies between kind of the national specialist and local divisions and whether or not that needs to be redressed just in terms of police numbers looking at me I'll go first I don't think there's an easy answer to that in as much as I think the services has embarked upon as part of the 2026 10-year strategy demand and productivity analysis I think that work needs to be accelerated and properly understand what the picture of demand across policing in Scotland in the 21st century currently is and what we project it to be over the next few years and as a consequence of that understand what the resources that it's going to take to address that and whether that's the current envelope of 17, 2, 3, 4 officers plus the supports that have plus the budget that it takes to run that or whether it's more or whether it's less can be then assessed and in terms of the roles of whether those are specialist roles for national assets for support, for firearms, search, public order, CBRN, cyber, fraud whatever those specialist resources are on a national level we could understand that and then significantly for me what is required in terms of local policing local divisions as I sit here at the moment I would suggest that there probably is a bit of lack of clarity about what where the resources need to be in a local level and whether or not those demands are being addressed appropriately whether we've got that right and whether the withdrawal of perhaps resources that used to be in local policing to support those specialist roles has been the right thing certainly if the indications are that there has been a sort of removal of some resources into those specialist roles but there may be a good business case for that but sometimes what you're fighting against is the acute challenges perhaps of a sex abuse inquiry that needs to be resourced in the time critical way or firearms resources that need to be uplifted because of the terror threat going up so it's acute and the strategic commanders have to make that decision to put resources to that and that has to come from somewhere and the most obvious place where it ultimately trickles down and comes from is from the front line operational uniform resources because you always tend to take people away from there and the question is is that chronic removal over time which is drip drip drip because you're addressing acute issues what's happening there and I know from my Federation colleagues who are more in tune with the front line officers in the uniform feel that that chronic erosion perhaps is not being seen in that there's a stretch in local policing which is getting to a very very difficult point does that answer your question? I think so I've said I mean this is an area that we've looked at in some detail as part of our evaluation and I mean it was clear in our discussions with local officers that they they can see the benefits of having these specialized resources that they can access particularly to do with you know complex crimes it might be to do with a murder it might be to do with other areas like high-risk missing persons so being able to draw on those resources is definitely seen as a benefit the things that they have been concerned about what one is the redeployment of officers from local policing teams into those specialist services and they're not being replaced so they feel there's a a diminution in the local resource I think there are other concern is about how they access those resources so how do they bid for them and how bureaucratic is that process so you know they're concerned about how quickly can they mobilise those resources if they need them locally I think a third theme is just that interface between specialized centralized resources and the local knowledge of local officers that you know local officers have a huge amount and very rich kind of local knowledge about what's happening in their communities so there needs to be an effective way that that knowledge is shared with more specialist teams that might be coming in from out with that local area and then just a final point that was raised by officers was what does that mean in terms of their careers so what does a career path look like for a specialist officer as opposed to somebody who's on the local policing team and I think there was a sense that those working in specialized functions were being quite well supported in terms of career development and skills and so on those in local policing teams were relatively neglected and so it was kind of creating a slightly you know sort of two-tier system On career point I noticed that was something else you brought up in your submission Iver did you like to Yeah corroborate next point I think there is that concern perhaps that there's a divergence between the sort of specialist national roles vis-a-vis local policing and I think we do want to avoid and it was always an issue during reform concerned that you've begun to that sort of American model where there's sort of national FBI type in the local policing and that never the twain should meet and I definitely want to avoid that and it's nowhere near as bad as that but there are sentiments around about specialists are more visible it's the sort of sexier part of policing perhaps as opposed to local policing from my members superintendents and chief superintendents point of view I think there is a concern that we have seen a sort of natural drawing of those types of senior posts more towards central locations because that's where the demand tends to be that's where some of the most of the specialist roles seem to be so and as we've seen officers retire perhaps from parts of the north far north or from the south who were perhaps in a national role that role being sort of engineered into the central belt so it's reducing the opportunities for people who hold higher rank to remain in more rural parts of Scotland so we definitely are advocating for we need to be flexible and agile in our ability to enable officers to work through all parts of Scotland news technology because I think if you do that if you limit the opportunities to a point because of geography and if that tends to be then officers and staff may choose not to pursue certain promotions and so on and so forth and that means we're losing out potentially on the real talent pool right across Scotland because people will choose perhaps because of family commitments or wherever it happens to be not to move so I think it's something that we need to be very very mindful of and have meaningful conversations with all of our staff to know where they are what their development needs are and what the potential is so that we can maximise the entire workforce not those just who are who happen to be geographically located in the right place okay, can I ask a group? What's your point on that? One comment that's been expressed to me is the flip of that which is that you're also developing an over-specialised senior police officers and we're maybe losing a breadth of experience from senior officers is that something that you'd agree with and reflect? Again there's a balance to be struck because if you invest in certain specialist roles so if that's in terms of counter-terrorism and so on and so forth to build up a level of expertise around some of those areas it's really important that we don't lose that and people may have a career path and I think in terms of a national service now you can see people having a career path in a sort of ascendancy in certain specialisms and I get that to a point I think we need to be very mindful of that there's a real benefit in cross fertilisation and trying to keep that as much as we can and I know through my career and I've seen it with others there's that almost sometimes between doing a central role but always going back to your next posting being in a more localised way and if the service can accommodate that and facilitate that and if it knows its people well enough to do that then you share the knowledge and you share the expertise and you share the experience so that if you are if you've been in a specialist role for a long number of years it's easy to forget about how acute things are perhaps in a local place in context and if you go back out there then you realise actually everything's not in the specialist world everything comes down to happening in a local community affecting local citizens so it's always good to have that touchstone in my opinion I'll bring in Elena and Nick something you said I think it sums up quite nicely the lack of clarity around career development and training opportunities for local officers in the new national organisation is contributing to low morale not having something like that in the north and my sense is that that's something that is now being addressed but certainly in the early stages of reform I think that was an area that wasn't given a high priority and therefore people did feel that they just didn't really as we understand what their career paths would look like in this new organisation because it was a huge change for them I think it does raise a wider question which I think is an important thing for there to be a bigger conversation about which is what is the size and shape of the workforce that Scotland needs because I think again you look at international comparisons Scotland has a lot of police officers compared to countries like Norway or Sweden or Finland which have similar sizes in terms of population and the kind of conversations they're having in those countries is about what are the skills that are needed given the changing nature of the demand on police organisations and particularly if you take one area cyber cyber is a huge and increasingly important area of policing activity the skills that you need for people to tackle those issues are very different from the skills that have traditionally been the focus of police training so you may need more civilian people to come into the force to work in those areas and therefore the balance between uniformed officers and civilian officers so that the civilian staff needs to be repotable Eileen I'm just very briefly because I know that there's other questions to come but it was just to make the point that local government and local councillors really do welcome the shift back to locality policing and we're seeing that and we're going into community council meetings and whilst we know that the kind of specialist areas that we have whether it's counter-terrorism or cyber crime etc is really important and we also know that the knowledge that local police officers have and the areas that they are serving is now only going to be widened because they're actually now allowed that time to become community policing again and for us that makes a big difference at local government level so we really welcome that shift back that we're seeing and Denise yes we've had the same experiences in the far surface it has been difficult to recruit and retain senior managers middle managers in more rural areas previously if you wanted to go for promotion you went for promotion within your own brigade which was a local brigade out of one of the eight now we're finding it more frequent that you know far fighters and middle managers when they're going for promotion it potentially could be a move from Edinburgh to Inverness or Glasgow to Aberdeen and those posts are expanding we're feeling that you know those middle managers and senior managers are taking on much more responsibility in those roles than what the previously had within the former legacy eight brigades this is causing undue stress morale is low we've seen a report last year a free information report that states that there's been a five crease infold in the fire and rescue service of people going off work with work related stress and pressures so it has been very very difficult to recruit and retain those individuals and more recently the Auditor General report has come out and spoken about the succession planning within the senior elements of the Scottish fire and rescue services that can be quite worrying okay supplementary John it's a question for nick I wonder to what extent Nick you believe that this discussion whether they're hard or haven't been reformed would be taking place anyway about the growing specialism and particularly around the use of limage I mean as a green I'm very keen in the use of the word local I think local is terribly important but it's bandied about quite casually so for instance locally in Forfer we visited two highly significant national specialist units now it wouldn't be presented as as such similarly in the highlands and islands where there were challenges around the fire service there are two state of the art training facilities that hadn't been there previously is the language sometimes adding to confusion I wonder yeah yeah no I think that's a good point and and some of that I think goes back to actually to the original legislation which talked about local policing but never defined what local policing is and and I think you know what we've seen over the last five years is it is a you know a very sort of important debate about what you know what is local and and what are the kind of local implications of national decisions so and say I mean it's a debate that's happening all over Europe you know it's not peculiar to Scotland and and I think you know the thing that clearly emerges from those discussions is are these issues about local empowerment are these issues about ensuring that policing is sufficiently flexible to meet local needs and that there are ways in which local communities can articulate what their their needs are but also recognising that a lot of the demands made on policing are national and international in terms of their origins and character and so you need to maintain national and international collaborations in order to kind of tackle you know whether it's organised crime counter-terrorism cyber and so on so yeah I think language is is really important and sometimes I suppose we don't unpack enough what we mean by local both in a kind of operational sense but also in terms of those wider strategic requirements that's that thanks computer I think what's sometimes lost in this debate is what the reforms the merger have meant for people receiving services what the outcomes are for example for the victims of crime and I was very struck by Sandy Brinley's evidence on behalf of rape crisis Scotland where you've stated that the move to a single police force has transformed the way rape and other sexual crimes are investigated in Scotland and it would be useful I think to hear from Sandy about what that's meant for the outcomes for women before and after the merger and if you could give some examples in terms of what that has meant for that and in your view how that has been achieved yes of course I think it's not for us to comment in any detail on the governance and finance aspects of a single force but certainly in terms of the direct feedback from people that we are working with who report on crime across Scotland I would say in general terms it has transformed since the advent of a single force I think there was progress under way through ACPOS prior to the single force but I think having one structure has really assisted in the move to specialism and I think it's the move to specialism and investigate sexual crime that has made such a concrete difference for people that we're working with we have a feedback protocol with Police Scotland where we practically ask callers that come to us through the Police Scotland referral a number of questions about their experience of reporting to the police and then we provide monthly reports to Police Scotland summarising people's feedback and I would say over when will the feedback is positive and that's not to say that there aren't still learnings or people who are unhappy with their experience but these days it is very very much the exception because I would say even 10 years ago we were frequently hearing complaints about the response from the Police to people reporting sexual crime so in our experience it's been very very positive I think the structure enables specialism but also in our experience the structure assists where there are difficulties our experience is Police Scotland are very much open to working in partnership with organisations like rape crisis Scotland they're very keen to be proactive and getting feedback to learn from that and where there are difficulties and we notify Police Scotland of the difficulties I think the structure of Police Scotland really enables any learning from complaints to be integrated within practice much more easily than when it was distinct forces across Scotland where I think there were a number of challenges and responded to improved responses to sexual crime Can I perhaps ask you Sandy I mean was one of the major game changers the fact that the Crown and Procurator fiscal service then prioritised the prosecution of rape and sexual assault cases and set up the dedicated union now that happened I think under Stephen House under the new police force as the the single force commander so trying to tease out and I take your point completely about communication I think that's an important point if that was able that message was able to cascade down within the single force absolutely but just to tease out the extent to which the new policies change within the Crown and Procurator fiscal contribute to do it My experience is that it's Police Scotland that have led the way in transforming the response to sexual crime and it without being over critical I think there are still a number of difficulties in relation to the prosecution of crime that hasn't quite matched and our experience the improvements and the policing side of the approach so I think it has very much the creation of a single force but not to minimise I think there's a number of individuals within Police Scotland who have shown real leadership in driving forward these improvements but I think the new structure has enabled that to make a concrete difference to people across Scotland reporting sexual crime I think what I'm picking up from you, Sandy, is that previously there may have been a geographical variation potentially in the way that the police responded to sexual crimes and what you're saying is that there is now a consistency of a approach so if a woman is reporting a sexual crime whether it's in Orkney, Inverness or Glasgow or Edinburgh it doesn't matter the response is still the same and has that so first of all is that the case and are there any remaining issues to be addressed around making sure that that consistency is applied across all geographical areas are there any remaining issues there and at the heart of that has it been about yes the use of specialist officers but also about the training of police officers more generally across the board including those working in the community and our experience that the biggest issue when people have a native experience reporting a sexual crime to the police is attitudinal and I think that that is about shifting a culture within an organisation with a significant workforce and our experience the single force has assisted with that I think we're still seeing some cases coming through parks that were from the previous forces that I would hope wouldn't happen now under the single force because there is now the structure of the big task force that has oversight in a way that we didn't have in the previous system so I don't want to make it sound like I'm saying it things are perfect I think there are still issues with attitudes there are still issues with training there are still issues with culture but it is significantly better than it was in terms of the experience that we are hearing about from people across Scotland and the role of the national rate task force is critical in monitoring that and making sure that that continuous improvement continues essentially absolutely it's critical any more component yes Elena yeah just briefly I would say from a local government perspective on it as well having that single police force is actually enabled us at a local level to look at tackling violence against women and our partnerships and local councils and also embed that as the strategic priority within our community planning partnerships strategic aims and that is the you know the police force speaking with that one voice and actually taking that right down to local level so we're seeing a really good move that way as well because of that there's a very strong message being able to come out any other questions in that aspect can I ask about communication that appears in some of the the submissions within the police force and within the day-to-day running of police Scotland would you like to comment on that? It comes up in your submission I think and did it come up in your side I'm not sure if it did make the communication yes yeah so I suppose what we looked at were elements of kind of internal communication and external communication I think the internal communication there was a strong sense from particularly kind of local policing teams that that communication was relatively poor they felt that there was a lot of emphasis on kind of what needed to change and how that needed to change but less emphasis on why that change was happening and I think officers felt that they would like to know a lot more about why particular changes were being introduced so yeah there was a strong sense that communication could be done better obviously it's a question of striking the right balance because I think sometimes they felt there was a kind of information overload that they were being kind of overwhelmed with you know new procedures new protocols and so on and also I think there was an issue about the balance between face-to-face communication and the electronic communication so partly because of the restructuring I think local officers sometimes felt more remote from their more senior colleagues and so there was less kind of day-to-day interaction with kind of local commanders in some areas in terms of external communication again I think there was a feeling in the early stages of reform that Police Scotland didn't place enough priority on consultation and engagement that it embarked on a whole series of changes that had implications for other organisations but that's beginning to change that there's now a stronger movement towards consultation right okay any other on communication happy with that I think was there anything in the FBU communication was that Nisha at all, Denise? I'll just pick up on that point that internally because we're amalgamated eight brigades into one the information the vast amount of information that comes quickly over policies procedures new processes it's very very difficult for individuals within the organisation to grasp that take it on board learn from it before something else comes in so it's about the spirit of that information coming through it's quite constant We've got a bit Iver Oh, it's just a pick up on Denise's point I think Nick covered the I think frustrations about communications internal communications it's one of these things you say they're a a feast of a famine I think regardless of which way you do it I think there have been issues for the senior executives about how they get messages out to a big organisation that are both authentic and informative and include people so that they feel and understand the why we're doing things because the messages can be quite complex and the balance between posting messages on an intranet vis-à-vis face-to-face conversations which we know are the most effective so there is something about using the chain of command and briefing appropriately all the way down to the organisation so that people really do feel that they are still part of the police family rather than an employee and being told just what to do and how to do it through standard operating procedures and so on and so forth I think there's also an issue about we've had two wide-scale staff surveys we've had within the superintendent association three surveys there's more survey results coming in I think it's really imperative that the service listens to what comes out of those surveys and is seen to do something quickly if you ask a question of your workforce but don't respond or not seem to respond then that's almost worse than not asking the question in the first place so I think it's really imperative that the listening and the learning organisation element of it gathers pace so that the workforce see that they are being listened to I think that's key to communication I think the communication and the listening to and responding getting back has been a key theme that we've heard from the Scottish Police Federation for people that are out there on a day-to-day basis in the front line so what went ahead Mike Just to add I think from my perspective as a communications which I can touch upon just before is it really the need to maintain police confidence and assurance and local policing throughout local communities and I think it's one of the lessons we've learned what we've experienced over the last five years is not having a no surprise agenda in respect to that local authorities engage genuinely engage at an early stage so there's no potential national policy or priorities that emerge from Police Scotland that cause alarm or you know the controversies I've mentioned earlier to local government so it's really having enhancing upon that and I suppose it's obviously something we're working with partners to address that and it's been encouraging recently to hear the newly appointed chief constable in your livings to say about the need to engage better with local communities and to look at devolving policing as well Yeah thank you for that We've got about five or eight minutes so we're left we've exhausted our questions but I'd like to go around and ask the panellists if there was one thing that you would really like to highlight and flag up to us today moving forward as we look at this post-legislate of scrutiny what would that be and where will I start Let's start with you today Yeah no problem This is a lot more detail within our report but I think it's important for us to flag up the need to have response times and response standards Previously we had times when a fire engine left a fire station to go to an incident and that really helped to keep the infrastructure there it really helped to keep the amount of fire stations the amount of fire fighters personnel there those standards have gone we need to have response standards back within the fire and rescue service in order to make sure that the public are being provided by a world-class fire and rescue service for public safety and for fire and fire safety and we have a lot more detail within that within our submission Okay, thank you for that Sandy I think that the issue that might be helpful to raise that I haven't touched on so far is in relation to forensic responses in terms of set of evences which obviously cuts across the single force and health and the Scottish Government and I would say that's an area where progress has been much much slower than it should be we still have people being examined in police stations people waiting two days after rape to be examined people being examined routinely by male doctors so I think the difficulty that I see is where an issue falls between different agencies that falls between the police that falls between health that also falls between government departments within the Scottish Government there's obviously a response but for the SPA there as well so I think that as there is progress under way just now under the same was task force but I do think it's something to put a marker down that I really think we need to see urgent action because the current approach I think isn't acceptable okay thank you Nick I think probably just to reiterate a point I made earlier I think we just need to go back to those policing principles and make those to be at the heart of policing you know it's got to be about community well-being it's got to be about working in in partnership and part of that is is constantly reviewing that relationship between centralism and localism I mean it's something which I don't think we got right in the early stages of reform I think it's something we're definitely there we're moving in the right direction in terms of greater local empowerment of local commanders having a stronger local voice of local scrutiny committees so I think continuing in that direction makes a lot of sense okay thank you and Iver I would say that we have a workforce of women and men who are vocationally driven dedicated professional committed who turn up to work day in day out and want to do a fantastic job I think the key part for me is that now that we've sort of dealt with a lot of the practices and processes and so on and so forth over the last five years we need to really change the organisational culture which says that we'll listen to our people we will invest in them we will give them training and development and we totally empower and unleash them to give of their best every day to serve the citizens of Scotland I think if we can couple that vision that sentiment that sense of police family along with the technical excellence that we now have in many areas then I think we will have a police service that will be the envy of the world so I think that that for me is the key step forward okay thank you and then it's just to echo some of what Nick said and what previously Mike has just said I think key for us really is the open lines of communication directly with local government and if we can get that right with the police scrutiny forums and cascade that up the way as opposed to cascading down the way I think that we're going to be doing really well all right and Mike yeah just to finally heard it's also about genuine partnership working at a national local level ensuring that national policy priorities don't necessarily override local priorities that's working with SFRS and Police Scotland and also ensuring that maintain police confidence local and assurance with the police and SFRS there's effective performance reporting and also information sharing effectively at a local level as well between community planning partners as well as part of the wider community safety agenda okay can I thank you all very much for attending that's been a very worthwhile opening session to this important post legislative scrutiny so thank you all very much for your submissions and for taking part today we're now going to suspend to allow for a change of witnesses and a five minute comfort break Agenda item 3 is an evidence session on the proposed integration of the British Transport Police in Scotland into Police Scotland and I welcome him Sir Yusof Cabinet Secretary for Justice and his official Donald Bell deputy director police division Scottish Government I refer members to paper 2 which is a private paper Cabinet secretary do you wish to make a short opening statement? If I can thank you very much and good morning convener and committee I'd like to thank committee for inviting me to speak today and again put on record my sincere thanks to the on-going commitment of officers and staff of both police services this is a challenging and complex piece of work and considerable work has been done to assess the risks the opportunities and the challenges that full integration presents the safety and security of the travelling public is absolutely paramount and we cannot and will not allow that to be compromised in any way The Scotland Act 2016 devolved railway policing powers to Scotland our aim has always been to use the devolved powers to ensure that railway policing in Scotland is accountable through the chief constable of Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority to the people of Scotland this government was clear that full integration was our aim for the devolution of railway policing as it would deliver a single command structure for policing in Scotland with the benefits that are provided for by seamless policing operations across the railway and indeed the wider community The purpose of the replaning exercise announced by my predecessor in February was to specify to specifically flush out issues and identify when a fully integrated high quality service could be delivered this has been a very important piece of work indeed some of the evidence that has emerged has certainly deepened my understanding of the issues of clearly which I must now give serious and appropriate consideration to I've always listened to our stakeholders and that is why upon the recent advice from Police Scotland I decided to explore all options available for interim arrangements There is a pressing need to identify interim arrangements that can give effect more quickly to the Smith commission's cross-party recommendation to devolve railway policing to the Scottish Parliament Crucial to this must be the relationship between railway policing and the railway industry as both the funder and recipient of railway policing services the railway industry's interests are of course central A railway operator should be fully involved in setting railway policing priorities and objectives for Scotland and I'm clear that before full integration may be realised there are benefits to considering an interim solution that still meets the recommendations and indeed the spirit of the Smith commission The due diligence report commissioned by Police Scotland identified that the provisional cost of current railway policing in Scotland is £21.9 million for financial year 2018 That includes approximately £9.5 million of indirect cost to BTP centralised functions which Scotland directly contributes to I believe that there's an opportunity to leverage this position for a fairer deal for Scotland in policing our railways and consider a uniquely Scottish funding model This could have a number of benefits providing greater clarity for the rail industry about on-going costs and more transparent service agreement with greater input from Scottish stakeholders and the potential for an enhanced productivity model Over the last few years other options had been given consideration including detail proposals from the BTP and the BTPA Given that we now need to look at interim arrangements it is only right that we revisit these options and indeed any others and give them due consideration We undertake a rigorous scrutiny and we test those with stakeholders and indeed professionals It is imperative that Police Scotland, the SPA, BTP and BTPA are part of that process and I'm delighted that all partners have committed to undertaking this work I'm keen to bring all stakeholders together to fully consider options available for interim arrangements and my officials are organising this as a matter of urgency To conclude, convener, I've fully recognised that this next phase of work still provides a degree of uncertainty for staff and officers However, given the recent advice from Police Scotland and the new need to identify interim solutions for the devolution of railway policing it is crucial that time and consideration is given to these options but it must be noted that, as things stand, there is no change to officers and staff who will remain the responsibility of the BTPA Of course we'll keep committee informed as this work progresses Okay, thank you We now move to questions Thank you, convener Good morning, cabinet secretary The railway policing Scotland Act was passed last June by the Scottish Parliament I wonder if you can tell us what the status of that current bill is and if you're considering new options would new legislation be needed? In terms of the current state of that legislation clearly we're not commencing the act and the language I tried, I used in this whether it was in my parliamentary answers to parliamentary questions or indeed in my statement here is that we'll keep that commencement act date under review and we'll continue to do that clearly as we begin to explore interim solutions it depends on what those interim arrangements might well be clearly if they avoid legislation we would have to come back to the Parliament get agreement with other political parties and hope to move that forward but it may well be that we come to a solution an interim arrangement that doesn't require legislation but in the meantime it is important that whatever interim solution we end up agreeing and partners end up agreeing on it is important that that is given time to see whether or not that fulfills the ambitions that we all have in terms of railway policing vis-à-vis the Smith commission and of course as I say we will keep the act under review Sorry, just in your opening statement can you I think I just didn't hear exactly what you said about the amount of money that British transport police get from Scotland so 21.9 million is the figure in relation to the costs that the railway industry pays for services for railway policing but it should be noted that 9.5 million pounds of that directly contributes from Scotland to centralised services and there's a view there and that this was expressed during the various evidence sessions that this committee took in relation to the integration of BTP that there may be possibility of revisiting that and at least seeing we can potentially get a fairer deal on that Okay, thank you John Finnie Thank you, convener Cabinet Secretary, you described that it's challenging and complex, you highlighted the importance of public safety Both of these things were at the forefront of considerations when this committee put considerable time into looking at this legislation Do you feel let down by Police Scotland? No, Police Scotland gave me the best advice that they could at the time give this committee the best advice that they couldn't clearly once you begin the deep dive into some of this work into the detail of that work and I should say from the offset Police Scotland I've always said and I always did say that they would not commence that work until of course the will of Parliament was determined and that's right not to presume the will of Parliament and of course having done that work and having engaged in the various specialists and the expertise these issues have come to the fore and Police Scotland did the right thing by informing me and my officials of the fact that they were unable to give a date for integration and that I think is the right and prudent thing to do for me and government to have updated Parliament to this committee to that effect and as I say to look at the other options that are available but no, I don't feel let down by Police Scotland You've clearly failed to deliver on this legislation are you confident that the Scottish Government provided this committee with all the information that's led us to this point? Yes, without a shadow of a doubt we were acting of course on the best advice that we were being given that advice has changed but it has changed based on the detailed work that Police Scotland have done it has changed based on that detailed examination you know of a merger of an inter... as you would do with almost any merger or integration and I think that is absolutely right that Police Scotland have come to us with that no, I'm a disappointed that we're at this stage and we're not able to push ahead with full integration because I see the benefits of full integration seamless policing that single command structure and I see those benefits so the question is I'm a disappointed that yes, yes I've said that in my answer to parliamentary questions but I have an absolute duty to ensure that first and foremost the public are keb safe and travelling public are protected but secondly I have an absolute duty I believe to try to give effect to the Smith commission as quickly and as practically as possible yes but that's the singular thing you failed to do and I think we all agreed that public safety was of paramount and also the terms and conditions of the officers and staff affected by this again you failed to deliver the necessary assurances there some considerable time into the process what I want to ask about cabinet secretary is is clearly it's identified that there's a democratic deficit effectively of all we have a police service operating in Scotland that is not accountable to this parliament that's not accountable to this committee and we've seen in recent times for instance significant police operations about disorder at stations the incident fairly recently where there was significant disorder and in the Ayrshire coast it's police Scotland that were involved in these primarily in these operations we can scrutinise police Scotland and we can't scrutinise that force I would agree with the the the the members and it's almost done well I agree with the member actually that the most pressing issue for me is yes the safety in the parliament that is everybody here the the safety of the traveling public but the democratic deficit in relation to accountability to this parliament for me is is the most pressing matter so therefore when stakeholders do meet when they do gather around the table when they do explore all the other options I've got no doubt at all that addressing that accountability deficit that currently exists as the member articulates well I think it will be at the forefront of everybody's mind thank you Daniel excuse me Daniel thank you convener if I may I'd just like to quote from the one of the papers at the from the recent SPA board meeting which states in essence the current BTP in police Scotland systems are incompatible and police Scotland's wider ICT transformation which could increase compatibility is only at the planning stage with the delivery of the improved system being several years away I'm just wondering if this is one of the major points which prevents the implementation of full integration I'm just wondering why it was a surprise that the police Scotland's ICT transformation was a stage that would prevent integration of BTP systems I think anybody that has dealt with the integration of ICT systems and I don't presume to know whether the member has or hasn't knows that these are complex matters they are you know if it could be and it could have been determined beforehand that BTPs systems and police Scotland systems were not compatible or would not be able to be made compatible in term in time for full integration then clearly we would have arrived at that conclusion and police Scotland's advice to me at that point and to this committee in fact it would have been different but clearly it wasn't once the as I said the detailed work could have been done and it is right that police Scotland didn't presume the will of parliament on this then that was the right thing to have done so I can understand members' frustrations and please accept that I'm also frustrated where we are but nonetheless if that is the advice coming from police Scotland the prudent thing for me to do is to accept that advice and see what other interim arrangements can come forward if it's helpful to the member I mean through the committee we can give a little bit more detail about some of those ICT integration issues they are in some respects fairly complex as you can imagine ICT issues tend to be but nonetheless if the committee would find that interesting or insightful then we can provide some of that information I mean it strikes me that this is the sort of detail which is pretty critical in terms of developing a business case for any form of integration in retrospect do you not feel that that business case should have been developed prior to the introduction of this legislation rather than doing it afterwards? So we published a case to the UK Government about integration of BTP and Police Scotland but as I said I think if for example the police had spent the time and the resource and in essence the Government had also presuming the will of Parliament and Parliament had not passed the railway policing act then rightly this committee would be the first to bring Police Scotland and indeed I'm sure the Government to account for spending that resource and spending that time and presuming the will of Parliament even though they hadn't passed the legislation so I think on reflection I do come to this I mean I don't come to this committee ablution in any sense I mean I come of course with a degree of humility and what I would say is that there's clearly a space in between not presuming the will of Parliament and doing that deep dive and detailed analysis to get us to a point which would have served us better I think than where we happen to be so neither ourselves or I imagine I don't speak for Police Scotland but I imagine any other stakeholders you know we would rather not be in this position but we are faced with the advice that we're being given that is changing advice from Police Scotland and I accept the reasons that Police Scotland have given to me on the challenges and therefore it's incumbent that I find those interim arrangements that can give assurance especially around the issues around accountability so just I mean given that statement in the paper from the last SPA board meeting I mean do you agree with the the conclusion from that that extends from that that really full integration won't even be possible for several years and only once the Police Scotland's ICT transformation has been fully implemented having spoken to to Police Scotland the SPA and of course I'll look forward to talking to and speaking to other partners very soon on this that many people look at policing 2026 as being the natural dovetail point of full integration which as I say has been kept under review I would disagree with that assessment it is not where my focus is at the moment my focus isn't on the full integration piece I've been given advice from Police Scotland but it says that full integration they cannot give a definitive date for so therefore my attention at the Government's attention and I've suggested this to stakeholders of course to all our attention should be on finding those interim solutions which deal with the accountability question that John Finnie rightly raises and also ensures that we continue to maintain safety for the travelling public in our railways yeah I should probably roll back we were the committee that looked at this legislation as you know cabinet secretary and unusually we divided on it so it wasn't legislation that we were all absolutely 100% happy it had been got right so I wonder if you could give us some more information about what changed in February 2018 you mentioned some reasons given by Police Scotland ITs being highlighted what else I hope I've never given the impression convener that this was a universally popular course of action we were taking I understand that I was in the committee sessions and in the various debates that were taking place what I would say is previously outlined in the justice to the justice committee the the MTT the mobilisation transition and transformation project was established in October 2017 the purpose of that was to support the delivery of the operational aspects of the integration between Police Scotland British Transport Police sorry and Police Scotland this was led jointly by Police Scotland and and BTPA the joint work that was carried out by both bodies reviewed progress on the operational matters in February 2018 and at that point concluded that a number of significant issues remain to be resolved and therefore that advice was then fed into the joint programme board who had advised that further time was needed to deliver integration most effectively for as I say the safety of railway passengers so really it came from that joint piece of work being done by Police Scotland BTPA under the MTT and that then of course then advised the joint programme board which clearly from operational perspective more time was needed Can I have a little bit further why weren't these developments identified previously in the specialist integration due diligence analysis carried out by Ernst and Young at a cost of £290,000 why weren't they really acted on once they'd been identified I suppose a couple of things the obvious point would be that because this is the Ernst and Young contract you're referring to the £298,000 I would refer the committee to Police Scotland who obviously commissioned the due diligence analysis however my understanding refers actually to my previous answer really that the due diligence work focused primarily on the costs of railway policing so that would be on things like the assets, the liabilities, the fleet, the property and so on and so forth that would be relevant as part of the integration it didn't focus on the operational issues so what I referred to in my previous answer when I hopefully put some emphasis on this was the operational aspects that the MTT was considering so that wouldn't have come out in the due diligence piece of work which was very much focused as I say on the assets and liabilities We're now three years down the line Why has it taken so long? Well again, I go back to my previous answers that I completely agree with Police Scotland when they came in front of this committee and I think it was ACC Higgins who said that they would not presume the will of Parliament so clearly the work of the joint programme board the detailed analysis for which you need specialists and for which specialists have been drafted and it would be presumptuous until that act was passed by Parliament to do that work and to spend that resource and to spend that time but as I said in my answer to Daniel Johnson clearly there are lessons to be learnt here and I think there's a bit of reflection to be done about that space about not presuming the will of Parliament but yet doing the detailed analysis that needs to be done without as I say presuming the will of Parliament so I'm reflecting on that and clearly I would hope all partners would reflect on that too Liam Kerr I'm sticking with the consultants if I may cabinet secretary so in terms of the work that was produced by EUI at a cost of £298,000 was that something so had they missed something such that when it came as a surprise to everyone in or around February or was there a failure to instruct them in terms of the work scope sufficiently? I suppose I would go back to my previous answer around presumption of the will of Parliament so if the question is could they have done that work before I think all of us certainly I should say from a position would have questioned why they were spending a fairly significant resource on a piece of work that hadn't been signed off by the Parliament hadn't been agreed by the majority of Parliament so there's a question there around spending that money I think the other thing to say is that just two contracts for the E&Y piece of work and there can sometimes be a conflation between the two contracts and my answer to the convener some of that work of course was on the assets and liabilities just as you would do in almost any measure if you can imagine any measure you would look at the assets and liabilities that the organisations have so that work was done so again is there a reflective space whereby some of this detail examination could have been done in advance of this stage that is something that I'm reflecting very hard on so I'm absolutely clear for me cabinet secretary so that there are two scopes of work that EY are taking one costs 298,000 in relation to assets and liabilities the other thinks about 400,000 could you just clarify what that refers to and then there's another consultant which comes through Harvey Nash recruitment could you tell us the scope of work that this third consultant or second consultant with a third work scope is undertaking sure so as I say one piece and I suppose these are questions for police Scotland but I'll give you my best understanding of course for the one-inched and young contract is the one that I've referred to and my answer to the convener which is one on due diligence that is the assets and liabilities fleet the property all of that just as you would with any measure the second I would maybe ask Donna Bell to come in with a little bit more detail but the second one looks at essentially programme support looking at targeted operating models and so on and so forth and I'll ask Donna to come in in a second on that in terms of our own the question around the Harvey Harvey Nash consultant again that is very much programme support and very specialist support in that regard and that the costs of that I think we've answered in a in a parliamentary question but so far that that consultant has done 260 days of work which totally approximate total is around £60,000 that's been spent on that consultant but if it's helpful I can bring Donna on the on the second the UI contract that she'll be able to give a little bit more detail on that yep happy to do so as Mr Yousaf says Ernst and Young were involved throughout the re-planning this is a very complex programme and they brought their specific programme management specialist skills to the Police Scotland end of that in terms of the Scottish Government's interim professional advisor which is effectively what that consultant is that person has worked to coordinate the programme as well as working with partners to develop the target operating model and there are a range of work streams that have fallen out of that but effectively it's a coordination role and a role that seeks to secure I suppose the detailed parts of the target operating model and the timeline for the programme so two questions if I'm made will the scope and outputs from these consultants be made publicly available and if so when and secondly in terms of the remuneration of these consultants is the contract is it a fixed fee contract so EY will take 298,000 for this scope of work or is it a rolling contract such that they build time in line such that the longer this carries on the more money the public person will pay to them okay on the second question I might ask Donna if she has slightly more detail I know from our own consultant remember we are talking about essentially three contracts two from Police Scotland excuse me and one from the Scottish Government so some of the detail might have to come from from Police Scotland in terms of the procurement process that is used certainly my understanding on your second question from the Government's consultant from Harvey Nash that it is on a rolling basis but I'll ask again Donna to confirm that in a second in relation to your first question on what can be made publicly available I suppose two things one I would say is that the work that is being carried out whatever option we end up going with in the interim this work that we're doing will carry us in good stead I think whatever option we go with so that there's an element that that work will come in useful in terms of making it publicly available if the member won't mind I'll take that offline and look at that request with an absolute open mind I think we should make that work available where it's possible and as widely as transparent format as possible he may understand there might well be sensitivities around individual's personal information in terms of the consultant being involved or potential commercial sensitivities and other such things but where I can make that information publicly available as widely and as transparently as possible then I have no issues in doing so Just one final thing then so we've talked a lot about the costs of the external consultants but cabinet secretary do you have as it today's day any estimate on the total costs that have been spent today on staff time on consultants on SPA time on Police Scotland other consultancies do we have a global figure yet? Sure I think that would be difficult because you're asking me to somehow conjure up specifics around other stakeholders staff time I wouldn't be able to give you that information you would have to ask those and those individual organisations for the staff time and even from a Government point of view when we give estimate figures of staff time when we have given that to the Justice Committee and a letter to the convener which is publicly available that they are crude estimates we are working and basing that on the fact of the officials involved they are salary levels and an approximation of how much time they are devoting to the project but of course they devote time to many other projects and Government also so we can give you certainly staff figures and crude estimations of staff figures from the Scottish Government we've been able to get them from the DFT as well which again we've passed on to the convener and we're able to give you consultancy costs and you can add all of that together but does that give you a truly global figure where you'd have to speak to clearly other partners and other stakeholders to gather from them the cost and the staff cost involved in this project I wonder, Cabinet Secretary the independent watchdog report on the BTP in Scotland proposed integration stated that the Scottish Government failed to set out a single detailed and authoritative business case are you in a position to do that now? Yeah, but as I said we published a case to the UK Government initially I think it was in 2013 and I've spoken at length I think in committee or indeed in parliamentary debates around why we think full integration has benefits and I've talked and touched upon some of that but clearly as the JPEB partners and others are giving their detailed analysis and consideration clearly there are issues being flushed out and that is only right and that is the purpose of the joint programme board so yes, we have a case and we have given much detail I think over the years on why we think full integration is beneficial but I would say to the convener that that is not where my focus currently is currently the advice from Police Scotland is that they cannot give me and cannot determine a date for full integration then my focus is very much on the interim arrangements but presumably then the business case is something that is constantly under review and will be looked at again because already we've heard the cost from consultants sparring other aspects affecting I think it's a very reasonable question to ask in my direction to my Government officials and this has also been shared with other partners is that the work on full integration should be paused so the work on full integration should be paused while we focus our attention on what are the interim arrangements because again and as my answer to Daniel Johnson that is a long full integration to the long term goal that will be kept under review therefore the immediate focus must be on what those interim arrangements would be now given this was the independent watchdog his report can I ask you about the other two major points that he raised there was a total lack of thought regarding the fact that the proposals would lead to a dual command structure for railway policing across Great Britain well again for me the benefits very much outweigh that the single command structure in Scotland would have been of great benefit and I still believe would be of great benefit and that's the benefit you would have had with full integration so my belief is very much that the benefits that we would have seen in Scotland of full integration would have outweighed any of the negatives so what are the benefits as you see them given that presumably and it would be good if you confirmed this that safety and the safety that has been maintained by BTB is absolutely paramount in whatever arrangement transfer again I think these are well rehearsed from the government's point of view talked about seamless policing we've talked about the single command structure we've talked about the fact that if they were integrated Police Scotland could if I remember the phrase correctly quote unquote routinely deploy Police Scotland officers therefore using that pool of resource of police officers right across our rail network enhancing the safety for the travelling public and indeed when ACC Higgins was here and giving evidence and other Police Scotland officials were officers were giving evidence they often talked about excuse me the enhanced training that every Police Scotland officer would have in relation to to Scotland's railways so I think there's many benefits and there are continued to be many benefits of full integration but I would press the point once again convener that is the long-term goal that has been kept under review and I emphasise that my immediate focus now is very much trying to find the interim solutions and interim arrangements and for that we'll consult with and discuss with stakeholders and indeed wherever there are good ideas I'll be open to listening to those and if I could just press you on the very last point that HMICS made was that the specialist and distinct nature of BTPs work has been underestimated I would completely disagree with that point I've always said whether it's to BTP direct or indeed to this committee that certainly in my time as minister for transport I could see how expert BTP officers were for example whenever there was and unfortunately as there too often was a suicide on the line they were extremely sensitive and professional in terms of clearing that situation in the best way possible and to the minimal disruption of service so they had and have a very high reputation in the rail industry I saw that firsthand from my conversations as minister for transport and from a Government point of view I've never underestimated their expertise and that was never at threat or risk I would argue with full integration but as I continue to say that is not where the immediate focus is the immediate focus is very much on finding those interim arrangements Yeah but if I could just make this last comment then I think the evidence we were receiving is that some of that specialism was leaving BTP because of all the other things that had not had been resolved so while you recognise and I think that's very encouraging the specialism and have given examples of how essential it is then if there's a hemorrhaging of that specialism because of what's happened surely there's a problem here but again that was based I think on staff surveys perhaps that you're quoting but you know we would want those officers to remain we see them absolutely as being vital to the efficient and safe running of the railway industry and as I say I wouldn't take away from that so it never has been an underestimation at all of the very vital service that the British Transport Police provides and the reason for full integration was that we believed that we could have an enhancement of that service not a detriment Okay, Liam Kerr then Liam McArthur Just very briefly if I may you stated a few times full integration remains the long term goal and that's despite the various criticisms from across the spectrum so how do you respond to the suggestion that you're starting from a position of full integration and working backwards to find the benefits and to find out how to get there rather than what would seem to me to be the sensible approach which going back to John Finnie's question earlier is to say well okay we need to deliver public safety above all we need to deliver we need the best product to come out we need the most appropriate thing to the public purse now what is the model that will deliver that so I wouldn't necessarily see the two as being mutually exclusive and the reason I say that the two approaches is mutually exclusive the reason I say that is because we have passed the the way of policing act in this Parliament we have there the legislative framework needed for full integration what interim solutions we come up with of course we'll continue to keep committee appraised of that but it could be that we get to a position where the interim arrangements satisfy us universally and the political parties around this table the stakeholders involved and we believe that after a period of a couple or a few years of those arrangements being in place that we are universally satisfied that the accountability deficit has been demonstrated that we have the best model in place not just to maintain the safety but indeed enhance the safety of the travelling public and if we got to that point frankly we would have to look again at whether the legislation would be commenced or not that would be one position the other position may be that we come to some interim arrangements but as a Parliament as stakeholders we recognise that there could be enhanced benefits from full integration at a timescale determined by the partners Police, Scotland, BTPA so on and so forth and therefore it would be prudent to keep that legislative framework in place and not repeal the act or not for example change that legislative framework so therefore for me the prudent way of approaching this would be to examine and explore what options there are for interim arrangements to give effect and best effect to the letter of the Smith commission but also the spirit of the Smith commission in terms of railway policing give it a period of time and that can be open to discussion and I'd be keen to hear from other political parties on that and therefore keep that under review hence why I keep using the language that is a long-term goal that is being kept and the act and the commencement of the act is something that I keep under review I am not closed minded on that point but I still continue to say that from a Government point of view from a Scottish Government point of view we still see some benefits in full integration hence why it is something that we'll keep under review but again I stress that my immediate focus is on finding those interim arrangements that can hopefully give effect to Smith Okay thank you we've got another supplementary from Liam McArthur, Rona and then we'll be moving on to Shona Thanks very much convener, can I start with an apology cabinet secretary for being late I was down at another committee moving amendments to a bill You've restated the rationale behind the decisions you took in relation to the integration of BTP with Police Scotland You'll recall there were many of us that questioned why other options were not being explored at the outset rather than where we appear to be now Given that there is this pause in the commencement of legislation we've already passed we've seen legislation passed in the last Parliament that's had to be repealed in this Parliament and other examples of where we appear to be legislating at haste and then repenting at leisure Do you think that there are lessons that you will take from this experience and apply in the way that you take forward other aspects of the parts of the legislative programme for which you have responsibility? Certainly, of course it's a foolish it'd be foolish of me not to say that there are not lessons to be learned clearly there are not just for government but I would say of all the partners that have been involved and I think all of us will reflect on that as I said I don't know if the member was here or not but I don't come to this committee bullish and I understand that there's a degree of humility needed in these matters and I come very much in that reflective spirit What I would say however is that we of course took forward full integration with the best advice that we were being given at that time and I don't doubt Police Scotland's good advice at that time they were again basing it on the best advice that they could provide but clearly that advice changed and therefore we are in the position that we are in now so yes reflective undoubtedly but also very much a focus on giving effect to the spirit and the letter of the Smith commission as best I possibly can and hopefully as quickly as we possibly can too I mean appreciate that and again apologies for for not being present for your earlier comments and I take what you said in the spirit with which it's conveyed I think the concern I would have in relation to to this particular example is the advice that you got from Police Scotland seemed to me in the evidence we took from them advice that had been given in response to a very clear steer from ministers and from yourself in particular about where you wanted to go now that's very different from saying look here's an open book this is our direction of travel this is where we want to go what would be your advice on the best way of achieving that it seemed through watching the process through the evidence that we took that the answer had to be this and therefore all the evidence that and the advice that you were taking was with a view to substantiating and justifying that approach rather than saying we're open-minded to how we achieve this our preference is to go down this route but we are genuinely open to arguments about other ways of achieving the broad principles laid out by the Smith Smith commission and accepted by all of us so I don't think anybody was particularly surprised by our position on full integration it's been a long standing position for many many years what we did was based the date on full integration should it be in April next year based on the advice that we were being given at the time and I think that advice as I say was given in absolutely it was given in the best advice possible at that time I never haven't been involved in the legislation from the minister for transport perspective never once you know had any impression from the police that they were being as perhaps Liam McArthur doesn't seem you we think of nothing else being leaned upon at all in terms of the date of full integration it was coming from advice that we would we would receive from Police Scotland through close collaboration and close working but as I say that advice changed and you know based on on further work that Police Scotland had done engaging with experts and of course being part of the joint programme board which is part of the job of course was to flush out some of these issues so I know I would reject any even if it is just an insinuation that there was any leaning on any stakeholders to fit a timetable for government Just on the general principle of integration I wonder if you would agree that there's an element of hypocrisy here given that last year's conservative manifesto proposed to create a national infrastructure police force bringing together a civil defence constabulary the ministry of defence police and the British transport police to improve the protection of critical infrastructure such as nuclear sites railways and strategic road network so there seems to be a will to do it south of the border for that respect but there is opposition up here to the general principle of it As I was doing my best to be as collegiate and collaborative in that spirit as possible and I think you know it's a point of note I think in debate and even at committee that we are not the the only political party to have thought that the merging of police forces was a good idea and as I say it's a matter of note on the record that this was I think in the conservatives 2016 manifesto and in 2017 maybe general election manifesto as well but that is just a matter of note I don't know whether UK Government are in their plans on that and so on and so forth but yes I would concur that clearly we are not the only ones to believe that there was a good idea around merging of forces Thank you Shona I want to pick up on the options and good morning in a minute just on the ICT issue just I guess just an observation that from experience I know how difficult ICT projects can be how complex it can be so I think it would be helpful for the committee to take you up on your offer of some of the detail of those issues how they're going to be resolved might be the timeframe for that and quite importantly I think from experience about the project management of doing so how is that going to be managed because it has to be managed well in order to resolve those issues on the issue of options and just to make sure I'm understanding this correctly what you're saying is that the government is now going to look at the options going forward in order to put interim arrangements in place now depending on the success or otherwise of those interim arrangements that will then colour the view of whether or not those interim arrangements stand at the test of time and become potentially the arrangements going forward but that you'll remain open minded on that depending on how effective they are so on those options presumably some of those options will be the ones previously identified back in January 2015 but you had hinted in your opening statement that some of those may be new options and I guess I want to understand a little bit about how those particularly those new options will be developed how it will be who will be involved in developing those and you know what if any you as the cabinet secretary has as in terms of any preferred option at this stage or are you completely open minded on that obviously you've said they have to deliver the Smith principles and we understand that but whether or not there is a preferred option at this stage and I suppose lastly how you will ensure that Parliament and this committee are kept informed and potentially involved given that the parties represented around this table may have options to bring to the table in that regard on the very latter point when we consulted on this it'd be fair to say that I don't think any other political party came forward with actual detailed proposals on alternative arrangement so yes if other parties want to come forward with models that they are backing firmly then of course my door will be very open very much to that I can also thank Sean Robinson for you know the remarks around the ICT and for facing that because anybody that's been involved in ICT integration knows that they can be challenging and they can be they can be complex but I will certainly endeavour as best I can to get a note to the committee of my or the convener around some of the ICT challenges that exist it should be said that Police Scotland are building up there their case around updating the digital infrastructure that is an on-going process but certainly where I can give information to that I will give you as much information as possible in terms of the other options I suppose a couple of things I would say I think her summing up of my position was absolutely correct in terms of the interim arrangements and giving them time to embed and so on and so forth what I would say is that for me virtually no options should be off the table at this stage however where I have a concern around some options is where there is a confusion potentially of accountability so where there's a shared accountability between UK Government and Scottish Government that would give me cause for concern partly because of the confusion but also I don't think it delivers on the spirit of Smith the spirit of Smith is to devolve to this Parliament therefore be accountable to this Parliament to have another Parliament or indeed another Government involved in that accountability for me would be would be the difficult position to reconcile so while not ruling any options out and I think there's a number of options that have come forward previously from from BTPA BTPA and others and the Federation I think also again we should look at what's been suggested I know for example and I think many people will be aware of of academic work done by Dr Kath Murray and Dr Colin Armstrong I think is again we should be open-minded to to the academics that have come fo