 The next item of business is a statement by Michael Matheson on complaints and conduct review. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of a statement, and so there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call on Michael Matheson for 10 minutes, please, cabinet secretary. Thank you, Presiding Officer. When I addressed the chamber in November on the leadership and performance of policing, I set out my intention to reflect on the operation of police complaints and conduct with key partners. As I said then, I am open to considering whether there is further scope for further improvement. It is of the utmost importance to me and the public and that there is parliamentary confidence in the police, which is high and independently justifiably so, but equally that our systems provide suitable protection for the vast majority of police officers and staff who work hard to keep us safe. Over recent months, I have listened to a range of different perspectives from those directly involved. It is clear to me that the complex issues have emerged in relation to the existing framework, operational responsibilities and procedures that need to be looked at afresh. Five years on from the creation of Police Scotland, the Scottish Police Authority and the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner, the time is right to look at how the structures and processes are working. To do that effectively, we will require an independent and authoritative assessment, and that is why I, together with the Lord Advocate, have commissioned to write honourable Dame Eilish Angelini QC to take this work forward. I am delighted that Dame Eilish has agreed to lead that review. As members will be aware, she is exceptionally well qualified to scrutinise these issues as a former procreator Fiscal, Solicitor General and Lord Advocate. Her outstanding record of public service in Scotland is well known. Having chaired the commission on women offenders, as well as Morton Hall's crematorium investigation for the City of Edinburgh Council and the national cremations investigation for the Scottish Government. More recently, she led the independent review into serious incidents and deaths in police custody in England and Wales for the UK Government. Under Dame Eilish's leadership, the review of complaints handling, investigations and misconduct issues in relation to policing will bring independent scrutiny to the framework and processes for handling complaints against the police and investigating serious incidents and alleged misconduct. As well as assessing the current framework, the review will report on the effectiveness of structures, operational responsibilities and processes. It will also make recommendations for improvements to ensure that the system is fair, transparent, accountable and proportionate in order to strengthen public confidence in policing in Scotland. The review will consist of two phases. The first phase will include consideration of current procedures and guidance to identify areas for immediate improvement. The second phase will include a wider assessment of the frameworks and practice in relation to complaints handling, investigations and misconduct issues. It will cover the work of the Police and Investigation and Review Commissioner, the Scottish Police Authority and Police Scotland. The review will take evidence from a broad range of stakeholders, including the Scottish Police Federation, the Association of Police Scottish Police Superintendents, the Scottish Chief Police Officers, Staff Association, Unison, Unite as well as the PIRC, SPA Police Scotland and the Crown Office. Dame Elish may also wish to speak with those who have had experience of the current system to hear their views and understand where further improvements could be made. Recommendations in the final report should take into account human rights considerations, as well as seeking to identify longer-term improvements. I am aware that the Justice Committee has invited evidence as part of its post-legislative scrutiny of the Police and Fire Reform Scotland Act 2012. I welcome the scrutiny of the landmark legislation that enabled the creation of a single police and fire service. I am also aware that evidence has been submitted on the provisions within the act that underpin our current system of police conduct, complaints and investigations. Those provisions were intended to strengthen the governance, accountability and scrutiny arrangements for policing and created a clear statutory framework for independent review and investigation. It is only right that the committee considers the evidence as part of its broader scrutiny of the act. I look forward to seeing the outcomes of that process. However, as the Cabinet Secretary for Responsibility for the overall framework for dealing with police complaints and conduct issues in Scotland, which includes other primary and secondary legislation, I have a duty to ensure that the whole system is working well. The Lord Advocate has an independent interest as head of the system for the investigation and prosecution of crime in Scotland. The arrangements for complaints handling, investigations and misconduct issues in relation to policing have seen a period of intense parliamentary media and public scrutiny. It is a framework that must ultimately build public confidence in policing, and events of recent months have raised questions about the way the system works and whether it could be improved. It is only right that I listen to those questions and act decisively to address them, which is why the Lord Advocate and I have commissioned this review. The key outcomes of the review will be to ensure that roles and responsibilities at all levels are clear. There are agreed protocols that balance transparency with an appropriate level of confidentiality. In the framework and processes are fair, transparent, accountable and proportionate, upholding fundamental human rights, fairness, transparency, accountability and proportionality. Those are the guiding principles of the review and go to the very heart of what any system that holds public services to account should deliver. The commitment to uphold fundamental human rights is embedded in police training in the overtaken by officers and is central to Police Scotland's professional ethics and values. That is to ensure that policing operations respect the human rights of all people and officers, who in turn should have their rights respected. That must also be central to the process for handling police complaints, conduct issues and investigations. It is vital that the police are held to account when things go wrong. Policing by consent depends upon that accountability. It is essential that lessons are learned and improvements made to prevent mistakes, bad practice and criminality recurring in the future. In order to do that effectively, our systems must treat all parties fairly and justly if they are to earn the trust and respect of those involved and of the wider public. Let me also be clear about what the review will not do. It will not consider the role of the Lord Advocate in investigating criminal complaints against the police. Now I will look at the role of HMICS in scrutinising the state, affecting the efficiency of Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority. It is also important to emphasise that the review will not reexamine specific cases or review specific decisions, although it may provide evidence for an overall assessment of the efficacy of current systems and processes. There are a number of high-profile criminal investigations relating to serious incidents involving the police currently under way. Those investigations are a matter for the Lord Advocate and it would be wrong to suggest that the review should examine those cases or pre-empt the investigation process. I am confident that the review under the authoritative leadership of Dame Elish Angeline will bring fresh scrutiny to the framework and structures that we established five years ago to ensure that they are robust and true to the principles that I have outlined. It is essential that there is a system for complaints handling, investigations and misconduct issues in relation to policing, affair, transparent and accountable, respecting the rights of all those involved. Systems that police officers, staff and the public can have confidence in. Let me finish by putting on record my thanks and appreciation for the work of Police Scotland, the SPA, the PIRC, HMICS and the Crown Office, commending all those who work to keep our communities safe. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to lie around 20 minutes for questions and then we shall move on. It would be helpful if members who wish to ask a question would press the request to speak buttons now. I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of his statement. The past 12 months have been challenging for the leadership of the police and shine a spotlight on the structures that were put in place by the SNP and whether they were and perhaps are not fit for purpose. Cabinet secretary is right to say that public confidence in the police is crucial. Recent events, particularly in and around November 2017, have had a negative impact on public and parliamentary confidence. Its clear lessons must be learned. It is within this context that the Justice Committee has launched a post-legislative scrutiny process of the police and fire reform act to try to get to the bottom of and to what extent the structures were responsible and in any event what can be done better. The crucial question arising is whether the cabinet secretary has confidence that there will be no interference with that inquiry by this one. Can he give a reassurance in that regard? Secondly, events particularly in November brought challenges on all levels of the service and indeed the SNP government. It is vital that all agencies and structures are examined forensically to ensure what went wrong is fully understood. To that end, can the cabinet secretary confirm that Dame Angelini will have full freedom to investigate everything, including the cabinet secretary's actions and those of his officials, and where necessary constructively criticise with a view to ensuring that it can never happen again? Michael Matheson. I am grateful for the member's comments other than that of his latter point, which, as ever, he tends to miss the point when it comes to these types of issues, which is becoming a repeated action of the member in these issues. The investigation that will be conducted by Dame Elish Angelini will be one that will be independent and will be conducted under the terms of reference that have been published this afternoon sitting that out. For anyone who knows someone such as Dame Elish Angelini and the work that she has conducted previously, to suggest that she would be subject to some form of external influence in conducting that work clearly does not recognise her integrity and her commitment to carrying out this particular type of investigation. So I have every confidence that she will conduct it in a fair, appropriate and in an independent fashion and arrangements have been put in place to allow her to do so. On the member's more reasoned point in relation to interference with the parliamentary committee, I have no doubt in the wider investigation which the committee is intending to undertake in relation to the policing fire reformat will be one that will be broad looking at a whole range of aspects of policing and also the fire and rescue service within Scotland. However, there is a need to look very specifically at issues relating to complaint and conduct matters and how these issues are investigated. And the purpose behind this review is to have that much more detailed analysis of that area of responsibility. And that's why the work which will be taken forward as part of this review will help to inform whether there are further measures that can be taken forward in the future. No doubt Dame Elish Angelini in considering the work that the Justice Committee is undertaking will wish to consider the evidence that's being presented to the committee. However, this will be a much more detailed consideration of the very specific aspects relating to complaint and conduct matters. Daniel Johnson Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I thank the minister for advance sight of his statement. Indeed, I am pleased that he has agreed to the calls to commission this review. The accusations and counter accusations swelling around senior officers in recent months has not been healthy for the force, and it's worse, I think, has resembled something of a soap opera, that the complaints handling process has been slow and poorly understood by the public has not helped. Most notably, the discrepancy that when a senior officer resigns, the investigation stops, and any potential lessons for policing lost, I think, is a problem. So can the minister confirm that this is a key reason for this investigation, and the investigation will address it? Likewise, for senior non-senior officers there are reports of a confusing and complex complaints landscape. Understanding the roles of the park, the SPA, professional standards and HVICS is a challenge just as much for officers as for the wider public. So can the minister confirm that this review will seek to simplify that framework for complaints for all officers and ranks? Finally, can I ask the cabinet secretary to confirm the timeline, and when he expects Dame Eilish Angelini to report? Michael Matheson I'm grateful to the points raised by the member, and I will seek to try to address each of them in turn, all of which are important issues that need to be given proper consideration. I made specific reference to the issue of matters relating to on-going investigations into individuals who may subsequently retire from the service or leave the service, and clearly there are questions to be asked about the existing arrangements for dealing with these matters. That will be something that this review can give consideration to. Is there a need for a change in the way in which we deal with these matters, and if so, what measures need to be put in place in order to address that, so that complaints or conduct issues may be able to continue. I can confirm that it will be able to look at that type of very issue. The member also raised the issue around some of the complexities in the matter, and I recognise that there are complexes in the matter. We need to ensure that we have a system in which both those who are having a complaint investigated against them have faith in how the process operates and clear sight of how the process will operate and that it operates in a proportionate fashion given the nature of the complaint that may have been received, and that those who have lodge complaints have confidence in the transparency and accountability that accompanies that process and how that is undertaken. That is why having a look at the whole system will be absolutely critical in ensuring that we can simplify the process where possible, but also clarify roles at specific points within that process to ensure that those who are being investigated or have lodged a complaint have a clearer understanding of the process. Simplifying it would be another aspect that Dame Eilish's review can consider. In relation to the timeline and discussions that we have had with Dame Eilish on this matter, I would expect this work to take around 18 months to potentially two years given the detailed nature of it, but also why it has been broken into two sections to deal with some of the immediate issues around process and guidance which can be identified at an early stage and which action can be taken on and that much more detailed work in looking at the wider framework between the different parts of the complaints system to ensure that they are appropriately addressed including issues relating to both primary and secondary legislation. I have quite a few people wanting to ask questions, so if we are succinct with questions and answers, we should get there. Rona Mackay, followed by Margaret Mitchell. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can the Cabinet Secretary assure me that officers who wish to express their views to the team carrying out their review will be able to do so anonymously? Michael Matheson. It will be for Dame Eilish to determine the process that she takes forward in determining how she conducts this review. No doubt she will want to engage with a whole range of different stakeholders, including individuals who may have experience of the complaints and conduct and investigations process. No doubt she will want to give consideration how to facilitate access to individuals who may wish to engage with her on those matters and to do so in an anonymous fashion. It will be a matter for Dame Eilish and Joleney to determine, but I would imagine that she would wish to provide an opportunity for those parties who may wish to give evidence to her or to discuss their experiences with her to do so anonymously to ensure their protection and to ensure that she gets as full a picture as possible of how the system is operating at the present moment. Margaret Mitchell, followed by Stuart McMillan. Will the cabinet secretary confirm that the review will cover both civil and criminal complaints, and within the current complaints process, has there been any consideration of the Apologies Scotland Act 2016 as an effective and efficient way of resolving complaints and disputes to the satisfaction of both parties? Michael Matheson. We will be able to look at both the civil aspects and also the criminal aspects, however it will not look at the aspects that are led on by the Crown Office and the Lord Advocate and the issues that I made reference to in the course of my statement. In relation to the work that has been taken forward by the convener of the Justice Committee and the committee members, it will allow us to look at how the existing arrangements are working within the present primary legislation that is provided through the 2012 act and to see whether there is a need for that to be amended or changed or whether the legislation that sets out the regulations for dealing with many of these matters needs to be changed. In relation to that, I hope that it will be able to pick up on some of the issues that our committee is giving consideration to but to do so in a much more detailed fashion looking very specifically at some of the regulation aspects that we have in place that deal with police complaints, conduct and investigations matters and to consider whether they need to be addressed or changed in the future. Stuart McMillan, followed by John Finnie. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can the cabinet secretary clarify whether the review will have an impact on any cases that has been investigated as part of a complaint or a misconduct procedure? Michael Matheson. Presiding Officer, no. The issues of complaint and conduct that are being investigated at the present moment will continue to be investigated through the existing arrangements that are in place. It may be that the review will want to consider some of the cases that the process has managed in the past as examples of analysing how the existing system is operating, but it will not review individual cases and it will not start to look at existing cases that are presently being investigated. John Finnie, followed by Liam McArthur. Thank you, and I thank the cabinet secretary for the early sight of the report and welcomed him at Eilish's appointment. Your statement talked about balance between transparency and confidentiality, cabinet secretary. Is there another balance that the report could pick up when what is effectively a service complaint turns into a complaint about an individual officer? We have known that to appear, particularly for senior officers in relation to grievances, employment issues and civil dispute and the resulting publicity. Would you envisage the complaint process picking up on that or the review picking up on that? Michael Matheson. The member raises an important point about transparency and accountability as a matter that has been raised with me on a number of occasions. A key part of that is also about proportionality of the process around how the complaints and conduct and investigations process is presently operating. That is why I am very clear about the principles that are driving this particular review in order to ensure that it is fair, just, accountable, transparent, it is proportionate and that people can have confidence in it. In relation to the very specific type of example that the member made reference to, that is exactly the type of issue that the review can give consideration to. How has it been managed within the existing guidance and regulations is our clarity around responsibilities and if there is a change for the purpose of how any complaint should be handled then who has clear responsibility for progressing that and taking that forward and whether it needs to be escalated as well. That is why this very detailed review will allow us to explore the very issues that the member has raised in a detailed fashion in order to ensure that both officers who may be subject of the process and staff who could be subject to the process but also members of the public can have confidence in how that system is operating. Liam McArthur, followed by George Adam. Thank you very much. I also thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of his statement. Credentials Dame Eilish has to carry out this review although express my regret that it is not the wider independent commission reviews that I have been advocating but given the circumstances that gave rise to this review namely concerns around the cabinet secretary's involvement in the decision by SPA to allow the return of the former chief constable for allowing allegations of gross misconduct can I assure the chamber that Dame Eilish will be invited to look at the role of ministers and their officials in processes such as this in future? Michael Matheson. The first thing to say, Presiding Officer, the member is wrong for the reasons as to why he said this review has been undertaken. There have been some issues around how the complaints and conduct process and investigations have been undertaken for some time now which predate issues relating to November. However, there are issues around how matters around the chief constable, the former chief constable's case was dealt with. So for example investigations should have been dealt with through a grievance process, rather than through a misconductor complaints process, which need to be given consideration to and the review will be able to look at that. However, the underlying issues of concern that have come about as a result and have led to this particular review are not specific to November. They are more deep-rooted and relate to a number of different matters which have been on-going for some time to address an independent review and be able to look at those matters in detail. George Adam, followed by Maurice Corry. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can the cabinet secretary explain to me that this is purely to aid my own understanding of the need for the review? If the police investigations and review commissioner has audited the Scottish police authorities complaints handling procedure and the SPA itself has undertaken its own review, why is this review needed? The first thing that I should say is that I welcome the work that has been undertaken by the police investigation and review commissioner in auditing the complaints handled by the SPA and also the work that has now been taken forward by the SPA as a result of that audit in reviewing their complaints handling process and the decision to re-establish their complaints and conduct committee to consider those issues in individual cases. I think that the work that they are doing will help to improve the system as it operates at the present moment. However, as I have mentioned, there are issues and questions that have been raised in relation to the broader framework and operational responsibilities that go beyond the scope of the audit that was undertaken by the PIRC and also the internal review that was carried out by the SPA and eight questions in my view and that also with the Lord Advocate could only be resolved through an independent examination to look at the whole system and its constituent parts and how they work collectively together. That is why we have commissioned Dame Eilish to undertake this independent review to ensure that we are looking at all aspects of the system rather than particularly limited aspects to do with just the SPA or the work that is carried out by the PIRC but the whole system from Police Scotland the PIRC, the SPA and how that whole process connects with the PIRC followed by Clare Baker. The cabinet secretary has said that a key outcome of the review will be to ensure roles and responsibilities at all levels that are clear. Can he confirm that this will include a recommendation that the cabinet secretary for justice should not interfere in the independence of the Scottish Police Authority? Michael Matheson. Minister and ministers are not involved in conduct matters that are presently dealt with by the SPA. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome the review and the role of Dame Eilish. I would like to highlight that those listed in the statement for consultation are all Police and Crown Office representatives. The cabinet secretary said that Dame Eilish may also wish to speak with those who have had experience of the current system. I'd assumed that meant constituents but he's replied to Rona Mackay suggesting that maybe it means serving officers so some clarity around that would be helpful. The cabinet secretary will know that there are questions over the powers of Perk in this chamber, over the investigation of the Shekou Bayou case. While I appreciate the difficulties of including live cases and to be clear I'm not asking for an examination of that case or any presumption of the investigation but Perk is a relatively new organisation and the experience of the Bayou family is critical to understanding where improvements and changes must be made and I hope that the cabinet secretary and the review are able to recognise that. In relation to the member's point regarding matters relating to Perk and the member has raised a number of occasions the powers that the Perk have at the present moment. We'll be able to look at existing powers as well as I need for those powers to be changed in some shape or fashion in the future and the review will give consideration to that. In relation to engaging with individuals who may have been involved in a complaints process or a conduct there are not police officers of course that will be a matter for Dame Eilish to determine but my view would be that it would be perfectly reasonable for the review team to engage with individuals who may have experienced all the complaints and investigations process who are not officers but may have been non-serving members of the police service or members of the public. However, I'm also conscious that Dame Eilish will be mindful of the on-going investigation work that has been conducted in relation to the very specific case that the member made reference to but there will be nothing to prevent Dame Eilish Angelini from choosing to engage directly with individuals who have made complaints and their experience of the complaints process that are not police officers if she believes that's an appropriate means by which she can actually gather further intelligence and understanding of how the present system is operating. This is not about just trying to get it right for police officers but for those who make complaints in the process and to ensure that it's one that is balanced and it's proportionate and at both those who are making complaints and those who may be getting investigated can have faith in how that system operates and it's one that is fair and it's just to both parties on how it deals with these matters. A quick question and answer from Claire Hawke. Can the cabinet secretary advise will this review be similar to Dame Angelini's review of deaths yesterday in England and Wales? Michael Matheson. Presiding Officer, the report that was carried out by Dame Eilish into death and custody, in police custody in England and Wales is a report that is presently being considered by the Lord Advocate to consider its implications for us here in Scotland. However, the remit of this review is somewhat different from that but no doubt once the Lord Advocate has been given the opportunity to consider the findings of the review that was carried out in England and Wales by Dame Eilish, she'll be able to give consideration as to whether there are any implications for us here in Scotland. It is worth keeping in mind that the previous inspection of custody facilities within Police Scotland undertaken by HMICS back in 2014 demonstrated that the way in which custody services were being delivered by Police Scotland were appropriate to provide room for potential improvement on those matters, but the specific issue relating to that report is a matter for a Lord Advocate and is presently being given very detailed consideration for any changes that we need to take into account here in Scotland. I have been unable to take Graham Day and that concludes questions on Michael Matheson's statement on complaints and conduct review. We will move on to the next item of business. I'll give a few seconds for people to move round.