Chamber and committees

Good morning. I will begin by stating what I have already said on record: I have never been keen on having a lot of commissioners. I struggle to see how the proposal would actually make any difference to victims. However, I am trying to keep an open mind.

My first question follows on from Russell Findlay’s. The rule of law dictates separation between Parliament and the courts. As you have said, the Lord Advocate has a statutory legal function and is independent. Therefore, it is not possible to create a commission that has powers to challenge those statutory bodies. If it did that, it would be interfering with the rule of law and the independence of the Crown. Is not that the first problem?

Thank you for the quality of your evidence and for how loudly you are voicing what I think is probably the most serious operational issue for Police Scotland. The work that you have done is critical. I suppose that the way forward is not that easy.

Craig Naylor, I was really struck by what you said about individual officers being terrified to make these decisions. At that moment, they are trying to save a life and carry out their duties, but then there is an investigation of whether they did the right thing. That seems grossly unfair to me.

What will prevent that from happening? Does it lie in what you say on page 11 of your thematic review that

“Demand is passed to Police Scotland from partner agencies towards the end of the working day and working week.”?

I think that Sharon Dowey asked you that question. I cannot see any way around this other than other agencies changing the way in which they work. Am I getting it right?

Can I intervene on that point?

Does PIRC take into consideration in its investigation that police officers are not trained as mental health officers? Do you have any examples of that?

Does that not call into question the existence of a commissioner—and, I have to say, the excellent work that Victim Support Scotland has done? That organisation is Government funded and has been a champion for victims. It has appeared before the committee on many occasions. Does what you have said not compromise the funding of a third sector organisation that is already effective?

However, do you not see any compromise having to be made between the roles of a commissioner and of a very effective victims’ organisation?

You have partially covered the question that I was going to ask, but just for the record, you said that there will be a certain element of risk and that the important thing is that we have a system that lets victims tell their stories and that, when they are in court, they can fully voice what happened to them. However, there is a fine line between that and cross-examination. Whatever you think of the system that we have, it is the system that we have and you are not proposing to change its adversarial nature. Have you had any discussions with the profession? Have any concerns been raised with the Government during the passage of the bill about the balance between trauma-informed practice and the process of cross-examination in court?

Thank you.

Surely there is a big difference between a victims and witnesses commissioner and the children’s commissioner, which does not deal with the court system or the Crown Office. Surely the distinction is that you want to create a commission that cannot interfere with statutory functions. I take your point about the children’s commissioner being able to influence policy—on the definition of “child”, for example—but I do not think that there is a straightforward comparison. We hear from victims about their experiences of long delays, of the failure of the Crown Office and the police to communicate properly and of the court system—the physicality of the court and issues with giving evidence. The bill is trying to deal with all that anyway, through trauma-informed practice and evidence on commission.

I struggle to see what the commissioner will do, other than saying, “Report to me on this,” as you mentioned. The commissioner cannot go beyond that in any way.

Yes, I understand that.

Dr Chopra, in answer to another member’s question, you talked about aligning psychiatric emergency plans. Will you elaborate on that? That seems to me to be part of the answer. Do you mean aligning staffing as well, or just the plans?