26/09/2012 Newsnight Scotland

staffing at the hotel but the One new states Scotland tonight,

the first she constable of the whole country goes public with his

approach to the new job. -- the first Chief Constable.

His plan will mean wholesale job losses amongst the civilian staff.

Also, as JK Rowling shares her referendum voting intention, do we

care what stars and celebrities think about politics? And should

Asked the idea that his �208,000 pair your salary, the new Chief

Constable of the National Police Service of Scotland replied, I am

worth it. Stephen House's wages may be deck, but so are the challenges

he faces as the new force is expected to save �1.7 billion over

the next 15 years will maintaining record numbers of police officers.

Today at the new interim headquarters at Tulliallan in Fife,

Mr Howard told me how he plans to do this. It is hard to say exactly

how many people, but for clarity let's be sure that police officer

numbers will not be reduced. Police officer numbers will stay high and

I support that. It does put more pressure on to a civilian

colleagues and some -- in support staff roles. There could be many

hundreds, it is difficult for me to say just coming into this job, to

see exactly how large this number will be. We are talking about a lot

of people, probably into the low thousands but I cannot go into

details. 3,000? Too early to say at this stage.

One calculation we were given is that there was around �80 million

set aside for redundancies. Us that the calculation you are working to?

You can do the exact calculations, it might come out at that level but

things can change. We are still six months away from the start of the

new organisation, what we must do is to the work now to figure out

how to close the budget gap. And again, pinions in Derry on just how

much that is. There are many variables. -- again at opinion is

very on how much that is. The bottom line is, by roundabout 20th

April 15, we must be costing nearly �180 million less as a service that

we currently are, so that is a significant challenge. Much of that

will have to come from fewer people joining the Organisation.

Which people are we talking about? Will that have an impact on the

policing people see on their streets? Be able to be to have as

little impact on the policing on the streets as possible. If we are

talking about high numbers of support staff leaving, self-

evidently, those people are doing reported jobs for policing right

now. But the thing that we will have to try and focus on is being -

- is bringing eight police forces together into one police force in

Scotland. There will be duplication of roles and it is those areas that

we will have to target. It is those areas that will have to be back

filled by police officers. I would not sit here NCT that there will be

no back Phelan by police officers, there will have to be some. -- York

back filling. I would have to say that if there is back felling by

police officers, this will not affect the number of officers on

the streets. How can that be achieved? Of more police officers

are dealing with paperwork jobs that support staff to, they cannot

do that and be on the streets as well. It might not only the paper

work jobs, sometimes the paperwork is incredibly important but it

could also be working in their control room at Contact centres at

Kinfauns and despatching other police officers. Very important job

to be done by police officers. I can only speak from Strathclyde

experience, there is other good practice in other forces and we

carried out a number of reviews in the past few years of police

officers working in their headquarters buildings and we are

identified 100 people, police officers, who were working at jobs

at headquarters that we thought we could do without and they were

redeployed to operational roles. There is an opportunity across the

whole of Scotland to carry out a review like that. To make sure

police officers were carrying it essential jobs.

In terms of those numbers, you see that there is a political decision

which is to remain the -- to retain the current number of police

officers. Is that an operational necessity? In my view, the number

of police officers has to be high, and I do not think that the number

that I would want is a lot less than 17,234, when I came to

Strathclyde last year we had 7250 officers, today we have 1,500.

Violent crime has reduced every year in the past five years in

Strathclyde. I believe there is a direct correlation between the

number police officers available for operational deployment and the

levels of crime, so numbers must stay high. I would be pretty stupid

if I sat here and told you that we couldn't manage with one or two

less officers, but the Government has decided that that is the number

they want to keep, but at the rules within which I am working. Give us

an idea. If you try to look for research which says that there is a

direct link between police officers and the reductions in recorded

crime, the research doesn't exist. He cannot prove a direct link. That

is why I ask you, operationally it may not make sense for you to

continue to spend a lot of money on having 17,200 officers, it might

make more sense for you to spend that money elsewhere at Therefore

operationally you could do with fewer officers and more cash to

spend on other services. There is a lot in there, I do not disagree

with much of what to say and we need a mixed economy and policing,

and I would never say that we simply the police officers and

nothing else. We need highly dedicated support staff working

with officers and we have that, it must continue. This cannot be a

police only service and I would never be in favour of that. I do

believe that need the preponderance and high number of police officers.

Research may not be available, but my research and if the titties

years tells me that the more police officers you have, if used

effectively best -- in crime can come down. -- but my research in

the 32 E years tells me. What is the danger and how can you

prevent year as Chief Constable be a political puppet for the whims of

whoever is in office if they find a political concern, what is to stop

the picking up the phone to tell you to sort it out? Let me be clear

on this, if the Government had wanted, and the Government cannot

control this process, but if they want take up its they would not

have full phoned my number, because I have stood up against the

Government on a number of issues and I'm prepared to do the same

again. I think they have chosen me because of my track record of

leadership in Strathclyde, and delighted to have the opportunity.

In terms of accountability, I am not accountable directly to the

Government, and accountable to the police authority and to the board

of the police authority and I think that is a good arrangement. The

Government will give the poor strategic direction and the board

will develop with me a strategic plan. I will deliver that plan.

Many of Scollan's civilian police workers are represented by Unison,

I am joined now by George MacIrvine, the Cherokee is an's police

committee. -- the chairman of Unison's police committee.

This level of loss of civilian workers was inevitable once they

decided to merge eight forces into one, wasn't it? And top of around

3,000 potential job losses, that is what unison were predicting, isn't

it? I think you will find that Unison have said for many months

that there would be up to 3,000, which is nearly half the workforce

in Scotland would face or be threatened with the axe over the

next few years. It is only until now that we are hearing from the

newly appointed Chief Constable that it is reality. The Scottish

Government and the R G S have fudged the issue when we have

challenged them, and it is all we know that we are hearing from

Stephen House that it is a reality. What difference will it make to

lose so many workers? We heard Stephen House say that inevitably

police officers will be perhaps required to back fell where support

workers currently work, but he believes that the police -- the

police work that people want and the frontline can be maintained.

You must realise that we are the public as well, as a taxpayer I

expect police officers to attend when iPhone, however, when we talk

about back filling posts, it has been ongoing since they started

voluntary redundancy and early retirement schemes. He cannot be

good of 1,000 police and civilian staff in Scotland and maintain the

same efficiency and effective police service. Police officers are

now within back from police staff posts, in control room and custody

and such like. The Scottish Government have a

policy which is against any compulsory redundancies, if the

figures which Stephen House is suggesting, many hundreds which

here is certain about that perhaps into the low thousands, d'you think

that is achievable with no compulsory redundancies?

I would certainly, and a regional committee would certainly ask the

question, how can Mr House, the Scottish Police Authority chaired

by Mr Emery and Mr MacAskill himself, they have a conundrum. She

cannot retain 17,234 police officer numbers, he cannot states that he

will maintain no compulsory redundancy policy but expect the is

and people to just walk out of the door. It is madness.

So it would not happen as far as you're concerned? No, not at all.

How will they say the money? think that is a question you must

ask Mr House. The campaign that Unison is running at the moment,

and as we say we are open to any discussions and negotiations around

the table, we need a discussion with the Scottish police

authorities to be set up. We want to speak about a balanced workforce,

the right mix of police staff and officers doing the correct jobs are

being paid appropriately to deliver an effective and efficient policing

for Scottish communities. Very briefly, do you think this will

lease to some form of industrial action if his predictions turn out

to be true? We always hear that, when any trade unionist is on in

the media there asked that question. That is a tool in the armoury. We

heard that news today from Mr House, we have yet to meet formally asked

the committee. Thank you very much We may be two years from the

referendum but almost anyone with a microphone will be asked about it.

Scotland's most popular ever writer said that she would not. She was

asked directly and she did say nobody else should necessarily be

influenced. As you might expect there is some flash photography in

this report. Not least the chap on the far right.

With the economy on the far right Prime Minister is so there Olympic

success as advantages even if it was reflected glory. Andy Murray at

succeeded and was celebrated. He was seen as a Scottish success For

Our First Minister. One of the most extraordinary achievements in

Scottish history. So what about politicians making much of Scottish

success? Sometimes the gifts come from out of the blue. JK Rowling

was asked about independence and did not duck from answering it.

think devolution has been fantastic for Scotland. I really do.

Pragmatically I think we have a great deal of independence right

now. But independence right now is not a great idea. We are in the

middle of a huge terrifying worldwide recession. I just think

that now is a time for stability. Scotland is doing great under

devolution. I think economically, we're pretty stable and our

condition. I would be personally at first to doing anything to

destabilise that in the next few years. Independence is the national

state for a nation's like Scotland. We're used to celebrity endorsement

in party political. Sean Connery for the SNP and more recently for a

Labour David Tennant. We can make Britain the country we all wanted

to be. Before the present leader we got John Cleese for the Liberal

Democrats. The party is going from strength to strength. But it can go

wrong. Remember Kenny Everett for a Margaret Thatcher. Let's bomb

Russia! Let's kick Michael thick's stick away! You do not need to be

immediate professional to work out that newspapers know that celebrity

cells. The question is though, does anyone really know what the effect

is in politics? Some parties such as labour certainly seem to believe

in the power of celebrity more than others. Whether it is Neil Kinnock

and Tracey Ullman or no Gallagher and Tony Blair. That 1 later

backfired. Not quite as spectacular late at its Robbie Coltrane at the

Labour Party conference. Eventually I would like to see independence

but only an independent Labour Scotland. I think this is the way

to go about it. In the States celebrity endorsement such as Oprah

Winfrey and Stevie wonder backing Barack Obama is a where one --

we're warned it pass. But Barack Obama showed that it can sometimes

go wrong. How do you handle it? What you say to people? That list

goes on. Michael Caine and David Cameron, Eddie Izzard and Gordon

Brown. Colin Firth and Nick Clegg. JK Rowling's personal intervention

aside the current campaign over the Independent referendum has seen

actors and the get it -- their it can and better Together campaign

sees others. It was pointed out that a number of the celebrities

that supported the yes campaign such as Sean Connery do not live

here and do not necessarily pay taxes here and then to what extent

why were they being called upon to tell us what to do? To that extent,

the desk Scotland campaign is arguably an example of what the use

of celebrity can potentially backfire. On the other hand, there

at can mac better car mac together at campaign has seen better success.

Thought to be pro union and pro- Labour he is a great celebrity

catch although he did call hoary route -- holy writ a pretend

Parliament. He also said that his desire to be a politician should

ban you for life from being one. Do not expect his celebrity

endorsement any time soon. Dr Chris Harman talks -- teaches at

Strathclyde University. Do you think this endorsement from JK

Rowling makes any difference? has been some research done on this.

Not a lot because it is hard to get your head around. But the research

that has been done has shown that there is a particular demographic

that you can target with the sort of celebrity endorsements. The

people that are at a political or disengaged. Those are the ones that

can be motivated to either become interested in a particular issue or

move their positions around. People who are actually already

politically engaged and watch Newsnight and do those sorts of

things, at those people to not to respond to celebrity endorsements.

Does it matter for those who were not politically engaged? Does it

matter who it is? JK Rowling is an author, or that have more cachet

with them than others? In America as the clip showed Oprah Winfrey

endorsed Barack Obama. The celebrity has to be tied to the

issue that they are discussing. A public affairs. They have to be

known for taking positions on issues that the public can identify

with. Those celebrity in dormant -- endorsements matter. Celebrities

who were not linked to politics or public affairs, it tends to be the

case that their endorsements are lost in the noise and do not matter

that much. If you think of political parties, of all different

views, there are often desperate to get photographed clasping hands of

various celebrities. You are saying that they should discriminate more

or. Certainly. Celebrities have to have the profile. If the person has

not knowledgeable about the issue or topic then they could be talking

about to just about anyone. The studies show that for the

politically engaged getting endorsements of every day and

normal people, those are the ones that actually move it around. You

can get the impression that the Yes and No campaigns on independence by

going with different strategies actually targeting different

audiences. What would be your advice to them? What the people

will not have made up their mind yet and warned until the last

minute. If they are storing celebrity endorsements to should be

that for? Which celebrity? Yes. Or should they bother with

celebrities? The trick is that if they're trying to target the people

that have not been paying attention then the really should have maybe

rule out some high-profile celebrities who are known for being

engaged with politics. If we're looking at just targeting people

who already pay attention, then the celebrity endorsements are not

going to matter that much. In terms of looking ahead, for the next

couple of years, do you think that politicians will learn much from

celebrity endorsement? Does it matter where they left or not? We

saw at the beginning of the Yes launched there was lots of

criticism because many of them did not live here in Scotland. Did

people pay attention to that? But did they just think that they

endorsed it and thought it was amazing? When you start rolling out

a lot of celebrities and build a story around it if it is a positive

story that can help to increase enthusiasm. Studies show that the

more celebrity endorsements you get the more excited the public can

become about the issue. If that is going to have a negative story and

if that is going to be we're all now have fixated on where do they

live and where do they pay taxes than that is not going to be a huge

help. I'll now looking at tomorrow's headlines.

JK Rowling on the front page here. That is about her new book.