Read on Twitter
That was my first physical attendance at a @ScotPolAuth for some time. I’m afraid the quality of what I saw leaves me despairing; so if you can be bothered, a thread
I genuinely believe that some of the members of the SPA are amongst the best it’s ever had. Clearly switched on in their own rights and more than a good addition to any quango.
But, & here’s the rub - I just don’t see that belief translating into product. The SPA has been subjected to fairly brutal criticism of its actions (& lack of) by a number of bodies recently not least @SP_Justice (sub) https://digitalpublications.parliament.scot/Committees/Report/J/2019/3/25/Report-on-post-legislative-scrutiny-of-the-Police-and-Fire-Reform--Scotland--Act-2012---The-Police-Service-of-Scotland#The-role-of-the-Scottish-Police-Authority and @hmics https://www.hmics.scot/sites/default/files/publications/HMICS20190926PUB.pdf
These are issues that OUGHT to be subject to the most forensic of public examination to ensure the body APPOINTED to maintain scrutiny of the police is, well frankly up to the job
You’d think therefore that the issues would have been aired & explored @ a public session of the SPA at 1st opportunity. That opportunity was today. Forgive the upcoming footballing analogy but like Peter van Vossen facing an open Celtic goal, the chance was hoofed over the bar
Incredibly, the chair (who is not shy in using her public platform) glossed over both in her verbal report (it was notable that the recent practice of a written report was abandoned today). Instead the board & anyone tuning in on livestream (which mercifully now seems to work)
were left to go searching for materials after the meeting. We were all told the SPA written responses would be made available online later which meant they weren’t being discussed or aired today - whether they will in future remains to be seen.
As a slight aside I suspect I’m one of the few people interested enough to go looking for the responses and here they are https://www.parliament.scot/S5_JusticeCommittee/Inquiries/20191126SDtoMMPostLegislativeScrutinyUpdate.pdf and http://www.spa.police.uk/assets/507345/529369/chiefexeclettertohmicsnovember if you want the executive summary it’s this 
Anyway, I digress. The board was then updated through a series of comprehensive papers and supporting oral commentary on numerous issues of relevance to both policing and wider environmental issues from brexit, political uncertainty, resources, etc etc.
With very few exceptions (yes they are there) the reports were neither explored or subject to any scrutiny whatsoever. From the elevated public gallery position it looked like some of the scrutiny questions were pre written & lack of supplementaries suggests this is quite likely
Beyond that the board seemed more concerned over presentation format than content. Whilst it’s inevitable we all like information in a certain format, the fact actual content was hardly discussed is a smidgen disappointing. It’s their job to question the content not the font!
The time money and effort that goes into creating these reports ought to be made clear. In any event it’s simply unacceptable that the hard work of a myriad of analysts is simply glossed over without any degree of apparent interest (other than the layout).
It does seem like some want spoon fed so they don’t have to think too hard about what’s before them. Frankly I expect more than that
I make no criticism of our hard pressed press Corp now but it’s telling that even they seem to be so completely hacked off (no pun intended) at the lack of scrutiny being applied by the SPA that they know it’s not worth their while turning up.
So we have a press that’s switching off, an authority that wants pictures and not words, at a time policing has never been under more pressure, and we have a gaping hole where police accountability needs to be - and no one seems to care.
Wake up folks!
But it’s not all bad - at least a working livestream means I don’t need to do that again for some time
