Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 03 March 2011
03 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Grampian Police
I congratulate Mike Rumbles on securing the debate. Members’ business debates are traditionally more consensual affairs, but we could always rely on Mike to ensure that what is likely to be our final North East Scotland members’ business debate would be a somewhat more testing event for us.
It is welcome that we have the chance to debate the idea of a single police force and policing in Grampian, as that is an important issue. I would be the first to recognise that Mike Rumbles has always been a doughty campaigner for his constituents and for the north-east, which is what has motivated his lodging the motion for debate tonight. I hope that he recognises that achieving the best for our constituents in the north-east is also what motivates those of us who support change, however much we disagree on the way forward. Our motivation is not the detriment of community policing; it is the protection of it and the desire for a better police service for Grampian and the whole of Scotland.
We cannot hide from the fact that, as things stand, we are looking at substantial cuts in the budgets of all police boards. My fear is that the status quo makes such cuts inevitable for a number of years to come. That would lead to reductions in the number of police officers and key police civilian staff, meaning that more police officers would have to come off the beat. Yes, we can debate what the savings would be—Mike Rumbles is correct in saying that the published figures have been hotly debated—but I, for one, do not accept any assertion that moving to a single police force would mean our losing hundreds of police officers or having to reduce police numbers in Grampian. However, I argue that that fear will be realised if we do not move to a single force. There is no doubt that moving to a single force would realise savings that could be reinvested in the front line to keep police officers on the beat.
Let us not pretend that the current arrangements for funding forces benefit Grampian. In the previous session, under the Labour-Liberal coalition, we secured extra funding for Grampian Police by revising the formula. However, whereas local authorities in other parts of Scotland were able to invest in extra police officers for their forces earlier in this session, local authorities in Grampian simply were not able to do the same for our force. We are disadvantaged by the current situation and, despite the famous concordat agreement, Grampian Police faces losing 50 police officers and 100 police staff. I believe that people in Grampian—like people everywhere in Scotland—are concerned more about having visible policing in their community than about what badge is on the uniform. It is the same in Northfield, Kincorth, Peterhead and Stonehaven as it is anywhere else. To protect the number of police on the beat in those communities, we must make the proposed change.
It is welcome that we have the chance to debate the idea of a single police force and policing in Grampian, as that is an important issue. I would be the first to recognise that Mike Rumbles has always been a doughty campaigner for his constituents and for the north-east, which is what has motivated his lodging the motion for debate tonight. I hope that he recognises that achieving the best for our constituents in the north-east is also what motivates those of us who support change, however much we disagree on the way forward. Our motivation is not the detriment of community policing; it is the protection of it and the desire for a better police service for Grampian and the whole of Scotland.
We cannot hide from the fact that, as things stand, we are looking at substantial cuts in the budgets of all police boards. My fear is that the status quo makes such cuts inevitable for a number of years to come. That would lead to reductions in the number of police officers and key police civilian staff, meaning that more police officers would have to come off the beat. Yes, we can debate what the savings would be—Mike Rumbles is correct in saying that the published figures have been hotly debated—but I, for one, do not accept any assertion that moving to a single police force would mean our losing hundreds of police officers or having to reduce police numbers in Grampian. However, I argue that that fear will be realised if we do not move to a single force. There is no doubt that moving to a single force would realise savings that could be reinvested in the front line to keep police officers on the beat.
Let us not pretend that the current arrangements for funding forces benefit Grampian. In the previous session, under the Labour-Liberal coalition, we secured extra funding for Grampian Police by revising the formula. However, whereas local authorities in other parts of Scotland were able to invest in extra police officers for their forces earlier in this session, local authorities in Grampian simply were not able to do the same for our force. We are disadvantaged by the current situation and, despite the famous concordat agreement, Grampian Police faces losing 50 police officers and 100 police staff. I believe that people in Grampian—like people everywhere in Scotland—are concerned more about having visible policing in their community than about what badge is on the uniform. It is the same in Northfield, Kincorth, Peterhead and Stonehaven as it is anywhere else. To protect the number of police on the beat in those communities, we must make the proposed change.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan)
SNP
The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S3M-7977, in the name of Mike Rumbles, on Grampian Police. The debate will be concluded wi...
Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD)
LD
I am pleased that the Parliament decided that we should debate the motion, which I lodged to highlight what I believe to be a huge mistake that is about to b...
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill)
SNP
Why?
Mike Rumbles
LD
The minister asks why; he wants to place the chief constable somewhere else. That officer would report directly to the Government.
Kenny MacAskill
SNP
Why Glasgow or Edinburgh?
Mike Rumbles
LD
The minister makes a sedentary intervention asking why Glasgow or Edinburgh. I would be delighted to give way to him if he wants to intervene and say that he...
Kenny MacAskill
SNP
Consultation is going on and those matters will be discussed. If the member wishes to suggest where, if we go to a regional model of three or four forces, th...
Mike Rumbles
LD
When I mentioned that the minister wants to locate a national chief constable in Glasgow or Edinburgh, he said, “Oh no,” from a sedentary position. Then, whe...
Dave Thompson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
Although the Liberal Democrats might have a point, they are, as usual, overegging the pudding. Their motion and their contributions tonight are misleading.Th...
Mike Rumbles
LD
Will the member take an intervention?
Dave Thompson
SNP
I will make some progress.
Mike Rumbles
LD
Ask the chief constable.
Dave Thompson
SNP
I know the chief constable’s view.For the sake of clarity, I point out that the three options in the Government’s consultation on the future of the police ar...
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD)
LD
Will the member take an intervention?
Dave Thompson
SNP
No thanks. The Government, quite rightly, has not taken a final position on the issue, although it has stated that there is a growing consensus that the curr...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
It seems to follow from that that the status quo is not an option; it has already been ruled out. Is that not the case?
Dave Thompson
SNP
The options are there in the consultation document. Are we not debating the options? Am I not entitled to have a view on the options, as the Lib Dems are ent...
Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
I congratulate Mike Rumbles on securing the debate. Members’ business debates are traditionally more consensual affairs, but we could always rely on Mike to ...
Dave Thompson
SNP
Does the member have any views on which services might be based in the north of Scotland if we had a single police force?
Richard Baker
Lab
With a single police force, there would be national resources and national parts of that force structure in the north and in Aberdeen. I am sure that Dave Th...
Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con)
Con
I am delighted to participate in the debate, but at the same time I am concerned that it may be slightly premature. My concern relates to the fact that propo...
Mike Rumbles
LD
The member seems to be operating under a misapprehension about what Parliament is for. The purpose of this debate is to ensure that mistakes are not made by ...
Alex Johnstone
Con
I acknowledge the fact that any member is entitled to bring forward their concerns. I believe that the argument that the member is putting forward is one pos...
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD)
LD
As others have said, Grampian Police does an excellent job. It is among the most efficient forces in the country. That success should be built on through clo...
Dave Thompson
SNP
Will the member give way?
Alison McInnes
LD
The truth is that making savings of that sort would mean the loss of around 4,000 officers. Grampian’s share of that would be 10 per cent, or 400 officers—th...
Nigel Don (North East Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I am grateful to Mike Rumbles for bringing this debate to the chamber. The issue is, of course, rather an unusual one for a members’ business debate. Perhaps...
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill)
SNP
I thank Mike Rumbles for securing the debate and I accept the spirit and ethos that have been shown by him and every other member who has contributed. Every ...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
I think that I am right in saying that, when a certain incident occurred not so long ago in the north of England, a substantial amount of assistance was give...
Kenny MacAskill
SNP
Mutual aid is always provided when it is requested. That happened during the dreadful shootings in Cumbria. As I understand it, Strathclyde Police covered th...