Chamber and committees

That has brought us swiftly to time. I will ask a final question. You have covered quite a lot, with particular reference to the PIRC and what is not in the bill. Is there anything else, particularly about the police complaints system, that has not been covered and that you would like to touch on before we end our session?

Another point that might be of interest to members is about the process. It is normally the case that, if a misconduct process is to be undertaken, it will commence after the outcome of a court trial.

Thanks. I am sure that we will come back to that.

I open up questions to members.

Thank you very much, indeed. We are grateful to you for taking the time to come in. The committee has picked up a lot of valuable ideas and perspectives from you.

We will have a short suspension to allow our witness to leave.

Thank you. Are you able to expand a bit on that?

I will just interrupt you there. You have set out the issue that we are considering very well, but, in the interest of time, I would like to allow members to ask their questions. If we have time at the end, I might ask you to outline some of the other examples that you have mentioned.

For clarification, when you say “PSD”, do you mean the police’s professional standards department?

That is helpful, thank you.

I welcome to our meeting Ian Clarke. Ian, it is very important that we hear the views of those who have personal experience of the police complaints system, and the committee is interested to hear your perspective of what is being proposed in the bill.

I intend to allow around 45 minutes for this evidence session, and it might be helpful if I open up with a general question about the police complaints system. I am aware that you have a response that you would like to share with us. What do you think should be changed about the police complaints system, based on your experience? Please just take your time in your response.

That is a helpful clarification.

You made final points about a process that is fair, open and based on evidence. You will have heard in our earlier session a contribution from our witness on the independence of the process. That was subject to members’ questions. Will you comment on the importance of an independent process, regardless of the level or seriousness of the misconduct allegation that is being dealt with?

Before the committee goes into private session to review this morning’s evidence, we will consider a negative Scottish statutory instrument. I refer members to paper 4.

Before we begin, I wish to declare that I am a retired police officer—with Grampian Police and Police Scotland—so I have an interest in these pension matters.

Members have no questions on the instrument. Are members content with it?

Members indicated agreement.