11/11/2015 Politics Scotland

Good afternoon and welcome to Politics Scotland.

Another rise in unemployment in Scotland, as the number of jobless

Summing up has begun in the legal bid to oust the Orkney and

And with Westminster in recess, the Prime Minister joins

an international summit on the migration crisis.

The controversy over welfare reforms continues.

The Scottish Secretary, David Mundell, has brushed aside

warnings that any welfare benefits topped up in Scotland might be

And the latest unemployment figures released today show the number

of people out of work in Scotland has gone up, despite falling

We'll also head to the chamber where there's a debate

on the Succession Bill, which looks to reform inheritance law.

Before then, let's talk to my guest for the afternoon, political

Let's talk about this bottle and rows over welfare. There is a

different dynamic here. What is your take on that? I would like to say

the process story of the Scotland Bill has come to an end, the story

of how it is going through the various chambers but we have not got

there. It has to get through the Lords and then the Scottish

Parliament, neither of which is a foregone conclusion, but we are

getting towards the end of this process and then we can stop talking

about the process of the bill and move on to the different stage,

which is how it will come into effect, what the parties will do and

how they would use it. And although there has in theory be in power to

raise income tax here since 1999, it has never been used by any parties,

but this time they will have to make decisions, even if it is to stay the

same. It is a 2-part process, yes we have had that power of tax since

then and next year we get limited income tax powers but there is

general acceptance that the powers that comment next year, not by the

Scotland will process, or a blunt tool, so the real income tax powers

we will get when this bill comes into force a year later, it means

parties will have to go into this election in May with manifestos

sitting at what they will do with these tax powers and the next

powers, so we should get some proper break down on what the parties will

do with the money. Labour are taking a risk saying to better people

Scotland, you will not get the tax breaks George Osborne will give you,

the SNP have to decide whether to say that. One might say Labour have

not much chance of winning the election so could say what they

like, but they are giving the impression they will raise taxes. I

think Conservatives will say they will lower taxes so the question is

what the SNP will do. We will be back with you shortly.

To the chamber at Holyrood now, where MSPs are being asked to

support the principles of the government's Succession Bill.

It aims to update the laws governing wills and inheritance.

The convenor of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, which has

been considering the bill, will give his view, but first let's listen in

to the Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs, Paul Wheelhouse.

It will operate with the law as it stands, and continued to be relevant

should the law be changed. We also undertake to consider at the

relevant time the need to consolidate this bill with any

subsequent belt. The committee recommended that the Parliament

agrees to the principles of the bill and I move that Parliament agrees to

the general principles. Ike now call on Nigel Don to speak on behalf of

the delegate powers and law reform committee. I welcome the opportunity

to speak on behalf of the committee on the succession belt. This is a

Scotland Law Commission Bill, the second such to be considered either

committee following the bill in 2013 which provided that law reform bills

may be referred to this committee. Before talking about the specifics,

I want to reflect on the role of the Scottish Law Commission. It

recommends reforms aimed at up eating and improving Scottish law.

Until recently the take-up of Scottish Law Commission inspired

bills has been low. This process allows those bills to be given

recommendations and for reforms to be implement it. We must do what we

can to make sure Scots law is up to date and accessible. The standard

procedure is committee is reviewing the process and I hope the outcome

is one that builds on the process we have made in improving the

implementation of Scottish Law Commission reports. Turning to the

bill itself, I would like to thank those who gave evidence to the

committee. In addition to submissions received, we heard from

legal and academic representatives. The bill covers complex matters and

the evidence received was greatly appreciated by the committee. The

bill covers a desperate selection of measures relating to succession law.

It originates from eight 2009 report of the Scottish Law Commission which

it self built on the recommendations of laws of 1990 which had not been

implemented, and that makes the point. There has been a long-held

recognition of the need for reform in this area. This reflected the

fact the bill contributes to this process and the committee

acknowledges the need for reforming. This bill is, however, as already

mentioned, only part of the reform of succession law. The 2009 report

contains proposals which would make more wide reaching reforms to the

door of succession. The Government is consulting on those proposals.

The committee misers the matter requires further consideration and

also that those matters may not be appropriate for this bill. It

further appreciates the necessity of a further bill on recession.

Nevertheless having to bills in succession may present challenges

and maybe confusing for users of the legislation, so the committee

discussed whether there should be valued in consolidating legislation

after the second bill and there was support for that. In considering

consolidation, the committee welcomes this commitment as this

will improve accessibility of the law for the public, something

Parliament should always strive to do. This is a complex area of law

but one which impacts on the public. The committee welcomes the

Government's recognition on this and updated guidance on what to do after

death. It would be helped pull to have guidance on what people need to

do before death and encourages the Government to reflect on the

benefits of guidance, as we should all be aware of the desirability of

a properly unction in Bell. The build covers various measures in

relation to succession and I have no intention of covering most of them.

Unemployment in Scotland has gone up again.

Between July and September, the number of jobless rose

In the UK as a whole, the number of people out

Our reporter Jackie O'Brien has been to the Cromarty Firth,

where rig repair and fabrication jobs have been hit by

All will work Robert McNichol is one of thousands laid off over the past

few months. At the age of 25 the father of two from Easter Ross is

having to improve his welding skills to make himself more employable.

When I started off it was quite easy, now it is difficult, I have

had to come in and upscale and get SVQs to help me stay in the

industry. It is able to step up the ladder but hopefully I can get back

into the industry and climb back up the ladder. The jobless total across

the UK fell by more than 100 thousand but it is up in Scotland

for the second period in a row. The number of rigs in the Cromarty Firth

is indicative of the downturn in work and inactivity of sure, and

those dependent on maintenance and servicing contracts warned there is

no quick fix on the horizon. We have been suffering, but we hope there is

light at the end of the tunnel. It will take a long time to reach

cover, maybe not next year or the following year, but I have no doubt

the figures today are reflected in the industry right now. The Scottish

Government points out youth employment is up, an area where it

says Scotland continues to outperform the UK.

I'm joined now from Holyrood by the SNP's Christina McKelvie.

And from the Conservatives, Murdo Fraser.

Margot Fraser, I'm sure you can list figures which show Scotland is not

doing terribly well at compared to the rest of the UK but is there any

reason to worry this is down to more than the obvious fact of what has

happened to the oil and gas industry? For years we have listened

to people from the SNP government went on unemployment figures in

Scotland were at the end the UK, trying to claim credit for that, so

now the figures have gone the other way is for several months we need

you here from the Government what their explanation is. These figures

are not the only economic indicator that have gone poorly relative to

the rest of the UK. We have seen GDP growth trailing the UK, against the

historic trend. Oil and gas is an important sector for Scotland, we

have seen 65,000 job losses and that is important, but low energy costs

are a good thing for the economy, for business and industrial users,

and for the consumer because they put more money in consumers'

pockets, Seward you would expect that decline to be balanced in the

rest of the economy, so the fact that is not being shown would cause

concerns in relation to why Scotland uniquely in the UK is not doing so

well. Kristina McKelvie, there was a period of time when unemployment

figures were better in Scotland than they were a downside, every time

that happened the Government would claim credit for it, so what is your

explanation now? There are challenges in the job market now but

we have an increase of 3000 people in work the highest levels of e-mail

unemployment, 34,000 additional young people, the highest number in

work since 2008, but we're not denying there are challenges. Murdo

cannot write off the fact the oil and gas industry does not have a

proportional impact on job figures in Scotland, it has had, but he

should look closer to home, he is a wind farm denier and some renewable

energy companies have lost jobs in the past few weeks so he cannot take

all these things in silos, you have to take responsibility for all that

but the Chancellor's austerity agenda and not investing in capital

projects has had an impact on job figures. Not in the rest of the UK.

The UK is growing faster than any other OECD country at the moment,

during the whole recession Britain's performance in jobs has

been better than most other European countries, so what do you mean when

you say it is the fault of George Osborne? Murdo cannot walk away from

the fact the impact on Scotland is disproportionate on the oil and gas

industry. The attack on renewable energy is causing job losses. We

will not walk away either from trying to injure we keep people in

work, that is why the Government is investing in capital projects. Drew

Smith, are these comparisons not artificial anyway, comparing

Scotland with the rest of the UK? If you look at Scotland compared to

other areas, it is much of a muchness, unemployment here is a bit

wetter than the North of England but in the south of England, employment

is a bit better there, and the comparisons are not very meaningful,

are they? It is true to say Scotland is a hugely integrated part of the

whole UK economy, so trends we see in the rest of the UK are unlikely

to be reflected in Scotland but Murdo makes a fair point to say

where we have seen upwards trend in Scotland the Government have been

quick to claim credit for that, so they are clear that they can make a

difference they say so when things go well. That is an ad hominem point

by the SNP press office but does not tell us anything meaningful. We need

to see strategic long-term look out where you can make a real

difference, identify sectors, oil and gas is not the only important

one, in the past we have talked up the potential of renewable energies

that that has not translated to the level of jobs. One thing we know is

that construction jobs have been better here than over the UK as a

whole. If there was one area of the economy the Government has influence

on it is construction, and it seems to be big infrastructure projects

that have boosted construction jobs here and are mitigating the effects.

Where there is good news in the construction industry, no one will

deny that, capital investment is hugely important for the economy but

one thing we have seen in the figures is what is happening with

women's employment and there are actions the Government can take

their in terms of support for childcare, training, the impact of

job losses in the public sector, these are important to different

sections of the Labour market. Murdo Fraser, when you look at Scotland

compared to other areas of the UK, it is just about average by every

measure you care to look at. The UK as a whole is doing better, I accept

that if you break down parts of the UK we are doing better than some and

worse than others, but going against the trend of the last six or seven

years, unemployment in Scotland has been low work than the UK but in the

past six months we have seen a reversal, so Scotland is falling

past six months we have seen a behind on unemployment and GDP

growth behind on unemployment and GDP

actions of the Scottish Government are important here. I don't think

talk of a second independence referendum helps confidence and we

have had a lot of that, as we see more tax powers devolved to the

Scottish Parliament, how we use those powers will be very important

in terms of encouraging a business friendly environment. I want to ask

you about tax credits. Ruth Davidson said she was against what George

Osborne was planning to do. Did you agree? Ruth was saying it was not

the principal of changes to tax credits she was concerned about but

that timescale whereby the increases in income we delivered would not be

matched by reductions in tax credit because these came in from April. I

am with Ruth Davidson on that, it is a fair point. Should George Osborne

mitigate the effects of tax credit cuts in full in his Autumn

Statement? We are looking for to seeing what measures can be brought

for just. That is not the same as saying he should mitigate these

measures in full. We have to bear in mind affordability, we are still

dealing with a pickled financial situation and if the Government

feels the UK is not going far enough, in terms of the Scotland

will which has just completed its passage in the House of Commons,

they will get the ability to top up tax credits if they feel the

Government has not gone far enough. Christina McKelvie, did you feel

John Swinney should mitigate the effects? He should do what he can to

make sure people are not hammered I'd be affected on them. That is

different from saying he should mitigate the effects in full. We are

not clear whether mitigating any affect of the tax credit cuts will

be possible. We took evidence in the welfare reform committee yesterday

that suggested any top up we gave could be clawed back. Drew Smith,

you presumably want them mitigate it in full but as you have not

identified any money to be paid for it can you tell us how you will pay

four? We want to see them mitigate it and Alex Neil was clear on behalf

of the Government that that would be possible with changes the Scotland

Bill will bring in, so politicians there will be able to choose to

mitigate those cuts to tax credits and make sure families are not

hammered. Some of that will inform -- will involve choices, for example

around the SNP DCs and. You have not found money to pay for it. We would

not go ahead with that huge tax cut. That doesn't give you any money

either. These things would give money if the tax changes went ahead,

you would see politicians like ourselves a less in tax as a result

of that and we would rather see that money spent on the offending people

in the face of these cuts to tax credits. We will have to leave it

there. Back now to the chamber,

where MSPs are considering the government's new Succession

Bill, which aims to update the laws The Conservatives' John

Scott is responding now. New pieces of legislation at a later

stage, which is welcome. This is a sensible piece of legislation,

although limited in scope inspirations will have a significant

impact on people's affected by this area of law and its focus should not

limit its importance. Scottish Conservatives will therefore support

the bill at stage one. I now turn to the short open debate. I call

Stewart Stevenson, to be followed by Richard Baker. An interesting bill,

which we have been dealing with and I want to address the director of

provisions at sector three and four. In particular taking note of what

the minister said as reported in section 73 of the report, that we

are only looking at what the testator has wanted and has clearly

expressed when it is not reflected in the bill as grounds for

ratification. We will continue to reflect on whether software could be

considered as a third party, contributing to misrepresentation in

the resulting bill of the intentions of the testator. There is a point in

their that we have to consider, which is different from using

electronic means to take a template and fill in the blanks with one's

intentions because there one is keen from the intention of the testator

through the keyboard into the document without any intermediate

computer for a programmer for programme operation, but thinking

about it further, there is a third party when there is a computer

programme involved. There is the programmer who produced it, and like

all programmes it is impossible to guarantee a programme, however

simple it may be, to be free from potential air, and it may well be

that even though the testator keyed, let's say, I wish to leave all my

assets to my spouse, that is all they say, it is still possible for a

computer programme to scramble that and misspell spouse, for the sake of

argument. Now, the House of Commons is

in recess just now, but our Westminster Correspondent David

Porter remains doggedly on duty. Although not indoors, David, they

have thrown you out again. They gave us one week when they made us think

we would have a nice dry time and next week they throw us out to the

elements, the elements are quite kind and let's hope that continues.

David Cameron is at a European summit, a serious issue but is there

a political dimension to this? Yes, from his point of view and the other

59 leaders on the EU and the African states. This is a meeting in Malta

to look at the ongoing migration crisis, something like 800 thousand

people who have moved from Africa I see to the Mediterranean and Europe

since January this year, and it is a good indication of the way this

story is moving and changing, when the meeting was first mooted in

April, the problem was with migrants coming over from countries like

Somalia and Eritrea, but since then the focus has been on the increasing

number of people from Iraq and Syria and that type of area, and what both

the African nations and European Union will be trying to do is find

some way of trying to keep evil in their home countries if they can and

then if they do come to Europe, trying to persuade them to go back

to the areas where they can feel safe. The EU says it is willing to

give something like ?1.3 billion, also expecting members of the EU to

give funds to try to take people back to the areas where they can

feel safe on the African continent, but it is a good example of when

this meeting was set up they were dealing with one problem but that

has now expanded and I think no one would in anyway want to minimise

this year misery that people have suffered because of what is going on

in Syria and Iraq. They are trying to find a way through this problem

but that will not be easy by any stretch of the imagination. David

Cameron has laid out his demands, I am interested in your sense of how

that is going down there. Yesterday he came out with 14 issues, the big

one for him was paying benefits for migrants who come from within the EU

and how he wanted that restricted, although he said there may be room

for compromise. What was noticeable was that when a statement was made

in the House of Commons, by his Europe Minister, David Livingstone,

who is in Edinburgh today, quite how many Conservative back benches were

not impressed with what was put forth. One of them said, is that

it? Another called it a pig in a poke. The your scab 61 Tim to be far

more ambitious in his negotiations with the EU. They want him to

pitchfork are more and David Lidington got quite a rough ride in

the Commons. It even Cameron looks at newspapers this morning he will

not find them supporting him at all in that. What he now has to do is

make sure in these negotiations begin in earnest with other members

of the EU, and the wider European Council next month, that he kept

something he can bring back and sell to the House of Commons, that he can

either say yes, this is a good deal and I would like us to stay in the

EU, for if that doesn't go, if they can say to his backbenchers, it is

Pelosi deal, we ought to recommend coming out of the EU, it is that

they in political terms. David Cameron knows this Parliament and in

his second term as Prime Minister will be Carter right by the deal he

gets on Europe. David, we look forward to speaking to you next

week. We were talking about the problems

with tax decisions but that talk with MSPs might illustrate the

problem, we did not get clear answers about whether the tax cuts

should be mitigated in full. The SNP want to have them mitigate it in

full, Labour can say they want it but they can't because they have no

chance of being elected, to be fair but they can't because they have no

to John Swinney he has every right to say he cannot give an answer

until he knows what the Chancellor will

until he knows what the Chancellor his decision John Swinney sensei he

until he knows what the Chancellor now knows how much money he has and

what to do with it, so he can do that but he is also looking for

excuses to dodge this for another few weeks. Because there was still

the argument, I thought it had been accepted they could do this if they

wanted. It has been accepted they could do this. But Christina

McKelvie seem to say it could be clawed back in some way. The

consensus is the Scottish Government can mitigate the effect that it

would be difficult and all those discussions have to go on

behind-the-scenes but there is acceptance that there will be an

ability for them to mitigate it. Europe, David Cameron has laid out

his demands, a Sunday Times poll came out with what the

recommendations might be. There is confusion about whether there is a

split in attitudes between Scotland and the UK when it comes to the UK,

and according to this poll Scotland were 65% in favour of staying,

whereas Europe were 52% in favour of staying, so there is a big gap they

have Nicola Sturgeon has highlighted on many occasions saying Scotland

was friendly per as Europe was Eurosceptic, which in the view of

Nicola Sturgeon would trigger another referendum. Even if the

polls have not changed, which was the latest criterion. The European

dimension is important if there is a clear split in opinion between

Scotland and England. As we always hey, it is just one poll.

Summing up has begun in the legal bid

to oust the Orkney and Shetland MP Alistair Carmichael.

Four of his constituents claim he broke election law

because he lied about his involvement in a leaked memo

during the general election campaign.

Our Scotland Correspondent, Kevin Keane,

has been following developments and joins me now from the newsroom.

Today, as you said, has been a chance for the lawyers for the two

sides to state their case and talk about the legal aspect of this and

the law, and to some B for them. The big box office days were yesterday

and the day before. Those were the days when Alistair Carmichael

himself gave evidence. That did not happen with cameras present which is

what has happened before and after, but this is not expected to give

evidence on camera. We heard him say he regretted enormously being

involved in the leaking of this memo. He was adamant yesterday that

he still believes that the suggestion in the memo that Nicola

Sturgeon wanted David Cameron to be returned as Prime Minister in the

general election is still what he believes that she thinks. He

believes that the First Minister and Nationalists still, insight, believe

that that is good for the cause of nationalism. It set out by saying

that they can set Scotland apart from Westminster, and that widens

the gap and allows them to kind of flourish. We heard more details over

the course of the last two days in terms of his actions after the

leaking of that memo, the fact that he lied to Channel 4 News and to the

Daily Record about his involvement. He has admitted that he lied. We

also heard that he was less than truthful to the Cabinet Office

inquiry. He was given a questionnaire along with 20 other

people to fill in, he didn't answer all the questions and he was quite

evasive buy it. Lots of the Dell coming out. -- lots of detail.

Briefly, tell what happens next. The judges will sum up and provide a

determination, as to whether or not he breached the terms of their

Representation of the People Act. If he did then he will at that point

loses seat. It is a formality to go through where it has to be passed on

to the House of Commons, but essentially if it is determined that

he broke that Act, the terms of it, then he will lose his seat.

SNP, Labour and Liberal Democrat MSPs condemned the UK Government's

Trade Union Bill in a vote at Holyrood yesterday, saying it

restricts workers' rights to bargain collectively and take strike action.

The Conservatives argue it's necessary to ensure

strikes only take place when there's a substantial

The Scottish Government and Scottish Labour are now seeking

a vote to exclude Scotland from the Bill entirely

and have taken legal advice on the issue.

The Fair Work Secretary, Roseanna Cunningham,

argued the Scottish Parliament needs a veto.

Presiding Officer, I am disappointed if not surprised to note that at no

point ahead of publishing the bill did the UK Government seek our views

on how these measures will apply to Scotland. This legislation, unless

amended, will undoubtedly have an impact on how many of our public

sector bodies operate in areas of devolved responsibility. The UK

Government have made no attempt to understand the Scottish position,

and no attempt to address the concerns we have raised. That stance

was very evident on Tuesday 13th October when I together with Graham

Smith from the S TUC gave evidence to the House of Commons standing

committee on the bill, an interesting experience with a

different speech, it has to be said. Tory members on a committee made it

crystal clear that they have not the slightest interest on the potential

impact of this bill. They intend to legislate regardless of any

consequences. This is just not acceptable. It does not reflect a

mature devolution settlement and it is one of the reasons why I have

asked that Scotland be excluded from the legislation altogether. At the

very least, given the significant impact it will have, I believe the

UK Government had to seek the approval of this Parliament before

enforcing this legislation in Scotland. If the Act goes as it is

just now then it will destabilise the balance of the employer-employee

relationship, making it more difficult for employees to have

their voice heard, it will encourage conflict with unions and make

employees feel further removed from their working environment. Trade

unionism is a part of me and who I am. That is true for pretty well all

of my colleagues on these ventures and some on the other ventures, too.

It is true of the mining communities I serve, and the party I represent,

founded by a trade unionist, Keir Hardie, so that the values and

purposes of trade unionism would find political expression in

Parliament. The inference that the trade union movement is somehow one

of mindless militancy is just absurd. Industrial action already

requires the support of members in the ballots and the attempt on the

bill to impose thresholds on those ballots, which no one elected

politician would countenance when it came to their own election... These

are an anti-democratic outrage. Moving a ban on agency workers

replacing strikers is an attempt to take industrial relations not back

the last century but the one before. Restrictions on facility time

compromising the right of representatives to have time off for

trade union work, that is a naked attempt to undermine the day-to-day

work of union Retford resenting their members. Let me deal briefly

with these elements of the Trade Union Bill to put them on the

record. The Conservative manifesto commitment was that strike should

only be the result of a clear, positive position based on a ballot

in which half of the workforce had voted. The turnout threshold is an

important and fair step to rebalance the interest of employers,

employees, the public and the rights of trade unions. In relation to

essential public services such as health, education, fire and

Transport, industrial action in these services would require the

support of at least 40% of all those entitled to take part in strike

ballots as well as a majority of those actually turning out to vote.

There are numerous examples we have had in the past of strikes in

essential services that have gone ahead on a pro-level of support from

members. Unison ballot members on NHS England including nurses,

paramedics and cooks on September 2014 for strike action. Just sitting

% of those voted and 11% of all union members voted in favour. The

Trade Union Bill is not the operation of effective and

democratic trade unions, but a means to neuter them from properly

representing their members. This bill is purely party political. It

does not help address industrial disputes and simply seeks to

undermine the Labour Party. We believe that responsible trade

unions are vital in standing up for the rights of workers, improving

productivity and protecting against workplace abuse and bullying.

Our Political Editor Brian Taylor is at Holyrood.

I am intrigued by this idea that some of the parties are consulting

their lawyers about this. I'm sure that we're all delighted because we

see lawyers making more money, but what is it that they are proposing

to do? If this was simply a debate, and you heard the Passion of the

specials there, you heard the impassioned arguments on the various

sides, if that was all that was taking place then it would just be a

contribution to the wider discussion about trade union power with the

decision being taken about Westminster, but two things are

being suggested. Roseanna Cunningham, the Minister, requested

and pleaded that Scotland be excluded from the bill altogether,

from the provisions of the bill. That has not been accepted. Her

fallback position is to say that there should be a consent motion, a

Sewell motion on whether the Scotland part of the bill should go

ahead. It is felt that devolved powers are being entrenched upon and

Scotland is entitled to have a say. I am certain the UK Government will

object to that argument and say that this is a reserved matter and they

are entitled to legislate on this for the whole of the UK. In which

case it may end up being a constitutional legal battle and that

ends up going to the Supreme Court, hence the early consultation of

lawyers. The court battle, it would be just the Scottish Government but

Scottish Labour and the Scottish Lib Dems saying that the Scottish

Parliament has a legal right to be consulted on this and has not been,

and therefore, they asked the court to ensure that the British

Government consults about it. If it goes to the Supreme Court to fulfil

the function that used to be done by the committee of the Privy Council

ruling on devolution matters, on the ambit of power, the argument will

not be whether or not the bill is a good thing or not, it will be where

the power lies. Does the power lies solely with Westminster on this, as

the UK Government will undoubtedly argue, or is it shared, as Roseanna

Cunningham argued, saying that it infringed upon the Scottish

Government's relationship with its employees? That is what they will be

asked to rule upon, if it is hybrid across the two parliaments there

could be a case for a consent motion which would undoubtedly be thwarted

given the political mood here at Hollywood but the UK Government will

say that they are vital to govern on this for the whole of the UK. Tax

credits, do we have an political Armistice on this until George

Osborne makes his Autumn Statement? John Swinney wants to match the sum

extent the Labour front tax credits although he argues that it is

impractical and unworkable on its present form. At the same time, that

is a forward offer, he has to consider operating within a fixed

budget and more generally he does not want to abandon any notion of

fiscal prudence, with an eye on Middle Scotland.

Police Scotland have been told to postpone further moves towards

a national call-handling system, because of weaknesses in the way

An Inspector of Constabulary review was ordered

after police took three days to respond to a report of a crash

The main opposition at Holyrood, described the report

The Justice Secretary, Michael Matheson, said he'd arranged

for inspectors to make unannounced visits to call-handling centres,

with immediate effect, in a bid to deliver some

The report contains 30 recommendations. Police Scotland

have a steward me that they will implement them all. The report

confirms that significant progress has already been made. It gives a

clear direction to Police Scotland were further improvements are

needed. It includes in governance and programme management, staff

communication and training, technology and equality assurance.

The report contains a series of criticisms programme management and

governance in place around the restructuring programme. While

performance has now stabilised, it is essential that these issues are

addressed before the remaining phases of the change programme are

progressed. I have discussed this with Andrew Flannigan, Chair of the

SPA and Police Scotland. They have confirmed independent experts will

be brought in to provide strong assurance therefore any decision is

taken regarding the implementation of proposed changes to Aberdeen,

Dundee and Inverness centres. The SPA have continued to monitor, since

April, to monitor performance on a weekly basis. Any debt in

performance such as was experienced in Bilston Glen Elliott this year

will become quickly apparent and will trigger rapid intervention. --

earlier this year. Reports around quality of customer service, call

handling and grading, I want to make sure that standards are maintained

in these areas and improvements being implemented by police Scotland

deliver that required improvements. I therefore asked HMICS to make

unannounced visits to call centres across the country. This will begin

with immediate effect and will be ongoing until the restructuring is

complete. This government will continue to work tirelessly to

strengthen policing in Scotland even further. The language of

management-speak and acronyms, the HMIC report is damning. Two years

since Police Scotland was formed we still see systemic failures in

important aspects of policing. The report boasts savings of 1.8 billion

on policing whilst forcing it to spend an additional 1.4 million on

overtime. This is a massive failure in strategic management. The report

uses the word assurance on 304 occasions but we have had so many

assurances on policing that have come to nothing. The litany of

failures listed are extraordinary. IP systems offering only basic

functionality with questionable stability. A lack of resources for

front-line staff. Weak local management. Inadequate oversight of

call centre rationalisation. A narrower approach to the scrutiny of

major projects by SPA and Police Scotland. No framework to measure

stated benefits. Key staff on that project board lacking experience and

training. A lack of staff. And those who are their reporting low morale.

31% of officers and civilian staff responded to the HMIC survey and

spoke negatively about the 101 service. And we need so many

improvements. Giving we have heard all of these assurances uttered by

the Cabinet Secretary, before, and restated today, what possible

confidence can the general public have that the call handling in

Scotland is fit for purpose to ensure that history is not

repeated? We now need to make sure that in areas where am we have

identified deficiencies in the management of this change, that

these are then taken forward. Bringing into question the quality

of inspection undertaken by the Inspectorate, I don't think does

anybody a service in here. Time for some final thoughts from

Hamish MacDonnell. This police business. A few

unannounced visits to call centres. It will not make the controversy go

away. It was hard to avoid the impression of stable doors being

bolted when the horse has disappeared over the horizon. These

are problems that have been going on for some time. Unannounced visits,

they will not make the controversy over Police Scotland go away. At the

root of the problem for the call handling system is the same as the

root of all this problems with Police Scotland, it comes down to

the creation of Police Scotland and the breaking up of the eight

regional forces that had been there for some time. With call handling,

there were 11 call centres moving to three. It is that change which has

caused problems. Any time that governments and IT systems come into

connection, remember the NHS system in England, it just seems like a

recipe for disaster. You have restructuring, IT systems and

cost-cutting, it was a recipe for disaster from the word go. This

argument over trade unions. It is interesting this idea that there

might be a legal challenge with Labour on the same side as the SNP

and Lib Dems. Politically, it is a smart move. I'm surprised that we

have not had this before. When you start to break up that Westminster

power, there has not been a real controversy over were that power

lies, and now we have got the first one. It is smart, because of this

goes against the Scottish Government and goes all the way to the Supreme

Court and judges rule that and goes all the way to the Supreme

Westminster has the power, the Scottish Government can turn round

and say, they are just riding roughshod over our rights. The

powers of the division did not go far enough, regardless of anything

that is coming in. That may be the long-term aim. Are they asking for

the right to be consulted? I know they would like Scotland to be

excluded completely but are they asking for the right to be able to

do anything differently? They asking for the right to be consulted and to

have a legislative consent motion that would allow them to see, this

does not apply in Scotland. They want Scotland to be taken away from

the powers of the bill, so you have what is effectively a Brit reserved

matter, something the Westminster government thinks should apply to

the whole of the UK, and the Scottish Government wants to get

itself out of it. We'll be back next Wednesday

at 3 o'clock.