SCOTTISH Police Association chief Andrew Flanagan’s job is on a shoogly peg after a blistering attack on his leadership from the Scottish Parliament’s Public Audit and Post-legislative Scrutiny Committee.
Jackie Baillie, the chair of the cross-party committee, has written to Justice Secretary Michael Matheson to say she and other MSPs have “serious concerns” over the standards of governance at the SPA, and says Flanagan appears to have “behaved inappropriately”.
The SPA, which oversees Police Scotland and their billion pound budget, has been in the committee’s sights for the last four months after a damning report by Audit Scotland that criticised the body’s “weak financial leadership”. They’ve also been criticised for holding meetings in private, some without minutes.
Flanagan, the beleaguered SPA chair, has been subjected to difficult questioning over his management and the board’s transparency, with the SNP’s Alex Neil once comparing the organisation to the Kremlin.
Moi Ali, a former SPA board member, who publicly questioned the board’s decision to hold meetings in private, had told the committee she felt bullied into resigning by Flanagan – a charge he rejects.
The committee, however, are on Ali’s side, saying Flanagan treated her “in an inappropriate manner”.
“We would be extremely worried if any potential members of the SPA board, or of any public board, were to be dissuaded from applying because they felt they would not be able to offer appropriate criticism and challenge,” Baillie adds.
Baillie said the committee believe “the default position for such an important body is that its committees should meet in public, a position that appears to have widespread support.”
Baillie added: “It is hard to understand why this issue has proved to be so difficult for the SPA to reconcile.
An SPA spokesman said: “As board members outlined this week, the SPA is listening to public and civic concerns and has already signalled it is ready to adapt its approach at the next public board meeting on May 25.
“In addition, HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary is currently looking at governance within the SPA and we are working closely with the inspectorate to facilitate that review.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel