���˿���

I totally agree with David Page: we are all very proud of the police service and what it has achieved in the transformation. I do not disagree with any of those comments.

However, perhaps he, too, will recognise that the Scottish Government is in new and very challenging territory with a fixed and therefore reducing budget. I know that he knows that, so it is a case of working together to try to work something out. I just wanted to put on record that I do not think that the police service’s work has not been recognised—I think that it has been.

On mental health, I want to ask about the external contract that you have with Optima Health for officers. What is the value and duration of the contract? Have you ever considered bringing the services in-house? Would that be more efficient?

Lynn Brown, is the service that is provided by that contract evaluated? Quite a lengthy contract is awarded. Do you review with the officers how effective it is?

The committee is concerned because our impression is that the service seems to offer a one-size-fits-all solution that does not recognise the unique pressures of policing and the incidents that occur, which brings me back to the point that maybe an in-house service would provide that better. You said that you will look at the modelling, but our concern is that it is just a general wellbeing service that does not home in on the experiences of officers.

I agree with what has been said, including Collette Stevenson’s request for an update on the short-life working group.

I will follow on from what Jamie Greene said. The letter states that

“The Board has been tasked to provide oversight of the development of an outline business case (OBC) to support a set of clinical IT solutions for prisons”

with a view to supporting

“equity of care in prison healthcare settings.”

The letter states that the outline business case is expected in autumn 2022,

“after which the Programme will present recommended options for progressing to a full business case.”

I would like to know more about that business case. Will it address some of the things that we are talking about, such as digitisation and making the process much clearer? More information on that would be good.

I need a bit of clarification. The Scottish statutory instrument comes into force on 10 October, but I have not seen much publicity about it. I assume that there will be some public awareness raising, but it is quite a tight timescale for that.

That would probably be good, although the instrument might have come into force by the time that we get a response. I flagged up the issue because today is 5 October and it comes into force on 10 October.

I agree with your suggestion, convener, that we write to the CMO, and with Jamie Greene’s point that it is a health board issue. Depending on the response from that correspondence, if we have time on our schedule, would it be possible to have a round-table session with health board representatives, the Scottish Prison Service and others to discuss the matter? Sometimes, more gets done if we have a face-to-face conversation. There is clearly an issue. We hear about it a lot and the Wise Group has concerns about it. I am not sure whether that is a practical suggestion but it might move things on a bit more than just correspondence.

I can speak only for the situation at St Mary’s Kenmure, which is the secure care home in my constituency. In its case, there are always enough beds, and the cross-border placements coming from England are part of the funding solution.

We are definitely moving in the right direction, and I am really pleased to see a focus on the issue at last. However, it is perhaps quite a timid start. The Scottish Government has agreed to pay for the last bed in each of the four secure centres as it becomes available. A bed is always available at St Mary’s.

The short-term objectives of the funding are to reduce the number of cross-border placements, as required by the Promise. Collette Stevenson is right to say that we must think about the young people who are involved. That said, there are not enough secure places in England, which is why they are coming up here. We have been using that as a way to fund our system, but I hope that we are looking at that and saying that we need to have a different framework. I am quite optimistic that this is the start of a journey for making that process better, and I am glad to see that something is being done at last.

I agree with Jamie Greene’s comments—I do not think that we have all the information. Things have clearly reached an impasse, and I do not think that we have all the facts set out clearly before us.

We are not mediators, but it would be good to know more about the background to the dispute. I agree with Jamie Greene; it is a sensible proposition to ask for a fairly easy-to-understand timeline to enable us to know what has been going on. Once we get that, we can consider whether there is any role for the committee in the matter. That is not to say that the situation is not concerning, but work is clearly on-going.