Usually parties get stick for breaking their election promises. Not the SNP, at least not on policing.
The party's headline law and order policy at the last two elections has been to keep police numbers 1000 up on the figure it inherited from the old Labour - Liberal Democrat "executive". And it managed to do so - despite internal qualms about the policy inside Police Scotland - for two full terms.
Now, however, that old promise has not so much been broken as undone. Why? Because the new national force, created by the SNP but only after it was proposed by Labour and the Tories, feels constrained by what seems like an arbitrary number.
Does the service need more cops? Or does it need more forensic accountants? Or civilian cyber experts?
The SNP in its manifesto made no mention of keeping police numbers at the previously sacred but profoundly random figure of 17,234. It said: "The nature of crime is changing and the police need to reflect that.
"We will therefore ensure that the police have more specialists, such as experts in cybercrime or counter-fraud and that the service has the right mix and numbers of staff in the future."
High officers numbers have been something of a mantra for the SNP in recent years. Ministers frequently linked their commitment with record low crime numbers. This rarely reflected the fact that crime was also falling in places where different policies applied, including England, where policing has suffered cuts unimaginable in Scotland.
Police Scotland has been in the wars, political wars. Its very existence has meant policing problems - previously "local" issues - have become national news. The fact Scottish policing has suffered less than England's under austerity has been largely overlooked.
Scottish Labour has been critical of the SNP's 17,324 commitment and says it "supports a balanced police workforce", citing cuts to civilian staff. The Liberals take a similar view. No party, however, has spelled out how they would work out what the balance would be. Different legacy forces, for example, had different mix of civilian and uniformed staff in their control rooms.
The focus of policing politics, however, has become not how may police officers there are or what they do but how they are to be held accountable.
This is a key theme in Labour's manifesto, which talks of "restoring faith in the police". It wants to implement the findings of its own investigation in to improving scrutiny of Police Scotland. This so-called Pearson Review - named after its chairman, former Labour MSP and police chief Graeme Pearson - recommended local policing committees. The SNP also wishes "to strengthen the local community focus of policing". So too do the Scottish Conservatives, who championed the single force. "It has become increasingly clear that the centralisation of our police service has not worked in the manner it was hoped," the party's manifesto says. It wants a thorough review. Watch, then this space.
Scottish Liberal Democrats have always opposed a single force and have stuck to their guns, saying they will "reverse the SNP's centralisation of Scotland".
The party does not say how it will pay for this: a single force has delivered substantial savings and helped avoid English-style cuts. The Liberals, however, do say they would increase police funding by £20m, less than a black hole the force had to plug by slashing overtime and spending last financial year.
The party does detect another kind of deficit: the ability of the Police Investigations and Review Commissioner to grill officers after a serious incident. The Liberals believe PIRC should get immediate access to such officers.
So much for Order. What about Law? Well, the SNP, Labour, Greens, and Liberals all sing similar songs on justice, stressing the importance of community sentences. Labour comes out against jail time of less than six months as counterproductive (the SNP in government is consulting on this) The Greens go further and suggest no jail time of under a year. The SNP talks more about alternatives to custody.
The Tories? Well, they seem to still like jail. The party has proposed get-tough sounding policies meaning people who fail to comply with community payback orders are behind bars within 24-48 hours. "In countries where this policy has been implemented, the evidence of falling reoffending rates has been remarkable," the party said in its manifesto.
But another headline-grabbing pro-jail policy from the Tories is "life means life".
"For some of the worst crime committed," it said, "prisoners should not have the right to apply for parole." In jail, the Tories said, there should be a thorough review of rehabilitation programmes.
The Conservatives have also stuck with its tabloid-friendly policy on drugs, saying drug rehab should be based on abstinence.
Scottish Liberals have lived up to their name on drugs. They call for substance abuse to seen as a health problem, not a justice one. And they call for Scotland to explore a Portuguese stance where those caught in possession of drugs can be referred to a panel to see if they should face the wrath of the law, or the aid of the health service.
Labour too strikes a more liberal tone on drugs, calling for treatment and education alternatives for users while "prosecuting those who push drugs on our streets".
Can Scotland's liberal law and order consensus prevail? Can it succeed? If re-offending and drugs problems fall, the country may be able to do without those 1000 extra police officers.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel