THE Scottish Police Authority (SPA) came under more criticism today after inspectors blamed it for failing to deliver improvements to forensic services.
HM Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland (HMICS) found there has been no strategy in place for the delivery of forensic services in Scotland for more than four years.
A report out today say the SPA has not “provided strategic leadership”, and also criticised Police Scotland for failing to bring forward improvements.
It states: “The SPA and Police Scotland have failed to deliver on a number of improvement initiatives due to a lack of resource and cohesive approach to continuous improvement.”
The publication follows cross-party criticism of chairman Andrew Flanagan, who was forced to step down in the wake of a bullying and transparency row.
Last week a separate HMICS report raised concerns about the ability of chief executive John Foley to lead and called key relationships “dysfunctional”.
Today’s paper also identifies “weaknesses” in the strategic engagement with Police Scotland and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service.
Inspectors found forensic services were “consistently working above capacity”, with levels of demand and the geographical spread of staff and functional structures presenting “major challenges”.
Communication between management, staff and unions was also said to be “weak” and the failure to deliver the i6 computer system was found to present “major challenges”.
Gill Imery, assistant inspector of constabulary at HMICS, who led the review, said: “It was concerning that our inspection found there has been a lack of progress across improvement areas which were previously highlighted to both the SPA and Police Scotland.”
SPA board member Nicola Marchant said a new strategy is being developed and Police Scotland Detective Chief Superintendent Sean Scott said the report’s findings will be reviewed and implemented.
Labour’s justice spokesperson Clare Baker said Justice Secretary Michael Matheson has “questions to answer” and the Scottish Government said a review of how the SPA executive can support the board and the chair to take informed, transparent decisions, is already under way.
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 here