Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
14
Parties on record
2,095,827
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,095,827 contributions in session S6, 11 May 2026 – 10 Jun 2026. Latest 30 days: 2,655. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 09 Jun 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Committee

Criminal Justice Committee 02 October 2024

02 Oct 2024 · S6 · Criminal Justice Committee
Item of business
Police (Ethics, Conduct and Scrutiny) (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2
Like Russell Findlay, I have heard similar concerns. Cabinet secretary, you opened by saying that the committee had asked for these changes, but that is not the case. The committee had asked that the chief constable be given a power to remove someone who was unable to maintain their vetting. However, what we have before us—I think—is a whole series of processes and procedures that you say the police inspectorate has asked for. Our position is similar to what Russell Findlay set out; it is not that we would not support the changes had we had some discussion about them or had the chance to talk to police officers—who are currently vetted, of course—who would be affected by them. The issues that the committee drew out were twofold. First, we were quite clear on the barred list—we think that that is one of the most important things about the bill, so we totally agree on that. Secondly, we agree that the chief constable should have a power to dismiss someone who has not maintained their vetting. In the amendments that we have before us, however, it looks like there is a completely new process in relation to vetting. In my view, it is unprecedented that ministers would, at stage 2, present a whole new process for the profession, on which—unless you are telling us otherwise, cabinet secretary—the SPF has not been consulted. On a point of principle, that is unacceptable to me. Unless you can tell us that you have undertaken such consultation before stage 2, we will vote against the amendments today. I strongly urge the Government to withdraw the amendments and seek to discuss the proposed changes with those affected, and you can then come back to the committee and say that you are satisfied that you have undertaken a consultation process. We can then look at the proposals at stage 3. However, I feel very strongly that what we have before us is not what the committee asked for, and I do not think that it is fair to represent the committee’s position as having asked for a complete review of the vetting of police—and of police staff, it seems. I am interested to hear what the Government’s response to that position is.

In the same item of business

The Convener (Audrey Nicoll) SNP
Good morning, and welcome to the 30th meeting in 2024 of the Criminal Justice Committee. We have no apologies. Our main item of business is consideration of...
The Convener SNP
The first group of amendments is on the code of ethics. Amendment 1, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendments 48, 2, 49, 3, 4 and 50.
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and Home Affairs (Angela Constance) SNP
Good morning. I will first speak to amendments 1 and 2, which will add further sources that the chief constable must refer to when preparing the code. That f...
Katy Clark (West Scotland) (Lab) Lab
I will support the Government’s and Sharon Dowey’s amendments, if they are pressed to a vote. I do not intend to press my amendments 48 and 49 to a vote toda...
Sharon Dowey (South Scotland) (Con) Con
We intend to support the amendments in the group if they are pressed to a vote. Amendment 4 seeks to add to the list of people who should be consulted on th...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow) (Lab) Lab
I seek clarification on the cabinet secretary’s position on Katy Clark’s amendments. The Government’s amendment 1 seeks to adopt, for example, the European c...
Sharon Dowey Con
No—the position is as the cabinet secretary said. It is not about consulting every person who has had a complaint in the police system but about taking a gro...
Pauline McNeill Lab
Right. I know that that will be for discussion between you and the cabinet secretary but, when the revised amendment is being framed, I would like it to be c...
The Convener SNP
I will bring in the cabinet secretary, and Sharon Dowey can come back in if she wants to add anything.
Angela Constance SNP
I reiterate that I am more than happy to work with Katy Clark and Sharon Dowey in advance of stage 3. On the concerns about the phrase “lesser obligation”, ...
The Convener SNP
As no other member wants to come in, do you want to add anything else in winding up?
Angela Constance SNP
No, thank you. I think that I have done my winding up. Amendment 1 agreed to. Amendment 48 not moved. Amendment 2 moved—Angela Constance—and agreed to. ...
The Convener SNP
We move to group 2, on duty on candour. Amendment 5, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendments 6 to 11.
Angela Constance SNP
Amendments 5, 8 and 11 relate to the individual duty of candour inserted into the standards of professional behaviour and the organisational duty added to th...
Sharon Dowey Con
Amendment 6 adds to the provisions that would introduce a duty of candour to the Police Service of Scotland (Senior Officers) (Conduct) Regulations 2013. The...
Katy Clark Lab
I support the Scottish Government’s intention to attempt to strengthen and codify the duty of candour. The duty of candour for public officials is a live iss...
The Convener SNP
There was quite a lot in there. I will bring in Pauline McNeill, before the cabinet secretary responds. 09:30
Pauline McNeill Lab
Thank you. I am in the same position as Katy Clark, in that I think that the amendments in this group are really important, regardless of how they have been...
The Convener SNP
If no other members wish to come in, I will bring in the cabinet secretary to wind up.
Angela Constance SNP
On the types of offences related to misusing public office, there is a live discussion across the UK right now, for various reasons that cut across the Hills...
Pauline McNeill Lab
There were quite a few points that you did not cover there. The one that I am keen to understand relates to the language around “reasonable assertion”.
Angela Constance SNP
There are complicated questions in relation to application and scope, so I will probably require a bit of consultation with legal officials and will come bac...
Pauline McNeill Lab
To be fair, I did not expect you to answer that. It is just that we are going to vote on the matter shortly, so I want to be sure about what “reasonable asse...
Angela Constance SNP
I do not have anything to add to or subtract from what I have said. Amendment 5 agreed to. Amendment 6 not moved. Amendments 7 and 8 moved—Angela Constanc...
The Convener SNP
The next group is on the vetting of constables and police staff. Amendment 43, in the name of the cabinet secretary, is grouped with amendments 44 to 47.
Angela Constance SNP
The amendments in group 3 respond directly to the recommendation that was made by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland to ensure that there...
Russell Findlay (West Scotland) (Con) Con
I am extremely concerned about these amendments. The bill was published on 6 June, and here we are, 12 weeks later, considering a load of amendments from the...
Pauline McNeill Lab
Like Russell Findlay, I have heard similar concerns. Cabinet secretary, you opened by saying that the committee had asked for these changes, but that is not...
Katy Clark Lab
I am very sympathetic to what the Scottish Government is trying to do. It is clear that we need to strengthen the vetting processes that existed historically...
Rona Mackay (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (SNP) SNP
It is clear that vetting procedures need to be strengthened, and that is what the amendments are trying to do. Going back to Russell Findlay’s comments, I a...