In a world of infinite viewing and entertainment options it ranks as one of the worst things to watch on a screen. Quite how it managed to secure a second, let alone a 10th series with such embarrassing audience numbers, terrible script, and wooden characters is quite baffling - yet I found myself drawn to it like a sucker for a cult B-movie once more. This time, the trailers had suggested, it could break the mould and be genuinely entertaining.
But no sooner had I sat down to watch last week’s episode than I found myself scanning the extras in the background whenever the cameras panned round. Even though I convinced myself he had to be there, I just couldn’t spot him. Maybe his secondment to the corporate comms team had come to an end but the calming and influential hand of sergeant detective lieutenant Frank Drebin had definitely left its mark.
Without a hint of irony or nod to the firestorm it had hitherto neglected to be bothered about for years, the Scottish Police Authority (SPA) finally conceded: “Raising this issue (of sex and gender) at our September Board meeting will provide an opportunity to seek public assurance and clarification that the approach and recording policy is both reasonable and lawful.” Better late than never I suppose.
Read more by Calum Steele
The madness of Police Scotland bosses knows no bounds
The key to winning the drugs battle is beating addiction
And then it came; in a carefully choreographed delivery of pre-prepared lines the Chief Constable stepped up to reassure us it was all a storm in a teacup and of course male sex offenders would be recorded as men. They always had been and always will be. That was it. Job done. Nothing to see - move along please.
But in what was a highly unusual, and long overdue series of questions and observations from board member Katharina Kasper, the gloss was soon knocked off the spin as inconsistency after inconsistency was pointed out. Ms Kasper’s questioning revealed far more than the words that came out of her mouth, for her delivery and forensic questioning belied an anger and frustration that it appears had been building for some time. The Chief was not going to be drawn on “hypotheticals” but reviews would be undertaken; women’s groups - previously ranked alongside witches and heretics - would be engaged with, and reports would follow. Now can we move along please?
Just 24 hours earlier I had been invited into the debating chamber of the Comhairle Nan Eilean Siar in Stornoway where I heard councillor after councillor talk of the real daily challenges their constituents faced; each one in some way shape or form linked to the decline in the policing presence across the Hebrides. Anti-social behaviour and violence on the rise, police responses on the fall. Constituents phoning councillors as trying to phone the police was a waste of time. As an illustration of the reality of policing decisions, it was a million miles removed from the corporate spin that would be put upon performance reporting just 24 hours later. And the most depressing aspect of it all was not that there wasn’t a senior police officer there to hear their concerns (but there wasn’t), it was the resigned acceptance that this was just how it was and would be.
One of the biggest weaknesses with the SPA is the absence of any democratically elected representation holding the police to account. This is not some fluffy ideal but strikes at the very heart of police legitimacy in the context of a police by consent model. Another is that there is no explicit statutory duty on the SPA to act in the public interest. This fundamentally changes police governance to largely being administrative and managerial rather than inquisitorial and if need be adversarial too. This is great news for the civil service but not so much for the rest of us.
There is little doubt that across the political spectrum there is a consensus police oversight is weak and as such agreement on the need to change should be easy to achieve. The same is true across so many areas of our public services where the quango model effectively prevents oversight bodies from speaking in the public interest. No one really wants public boards constantly bleating about the realities of the challenges they face or what it means for the public. But we do want and need the ability for such bodies to be able to speak freely when the need arises, and if for no other reason to show they aren’t completely detached from reality.
Chief Constable(s) do not like to be quizzed on their performance: they much prefer to report on the things they do well and gloss over the things they don’t. Former police boards were as capable of being manipulated as the SPA is but the one thing they always had was the propensity for a left-field low bowler which would test if the chief had a real understanding of what were real concerns for real people. Those things simply cannot happen now.
The best time to secure a commitment to change is at a time of political upheaval, and by any stretch of interpretation we have that just now. The managerial class has had its day and whilst we shouldn’t discard some of the good they have brought its long past the time to fundamentally reassess how our public services and institutions are scrutinised, and crucially advocated for.
Western Isles councillors are now leading that charge. They agreed to start the slow campaign work to build alliances with counterparts across Scotland to get their voice back in police oversight. But they have to be bolder than just seeking a return to the past, they should look to truly transform the governance framework to make policing about people and not just process once again. We can’t continue to tolerate police leadership and oversight that is structurally and emotionally removed from the realities of their decision making on the lives of millions of Scots. If nothing else last week’s episode showed the need for that.
Calum Steele is a former General Secretary of the Scottish Police Federation, and general secretary of the International Council of Police Representative Associations
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