I VIEW the whole media circus of hysterical criticism over Police Scotland from a very different angle from most, due to my day job as a human resources director. The creation of Police Scotland was a huge organisational transformation that would have been a major challenge for any national or even international business/organisation. To have made such major change actually happen has been an incredible achievement of the Scottish Government. That is not to claim that it has been without challenge and problems.
Clearly, with such major change, there needs to be ongoing modification and change to ensure the new structure beds down and works appropriately and effectively. Hence, it is not at all surprising that there are areas of focus for necessary improvement, such as call centre operations and how to improve local accountability.
Again, you need to comprehend the scale of change that has taken place and its complexity. To think that such major organisation change can happen with instant, seamless ongoing operation and success, is a fantasy and a gross misunderstanding and underestimate of how large-scale organisation change happens and impacts.
There is absolutely no correlation between complaints against Mr Gormley and the effectiveness of Police Scotland as a organisation. Such a linkage is a red herring and missing the point and focus, which should be upon accepting the significant achievement of the creation of the single police force and upon ongoing improvements required to further bed in this massive organisational change project.
To do otherwise is to throw the baby out with the bath water and/or to make political mischief and capital at the expense of the SNP and, ultimately, the Scottish public.
George Wilson
Dunbar
THE issue with Police Scotland is not that it is broken. Given the complaints against senior management, it is more about the generic culture at that level. The police are a disciplined body, and inevitably the leadership style tends to be autocratic and dictatorial, as was the case prior to creation of the single force. The biggest difference is the loss of local accountability, through local police boards, which is of negligible relevance in the context of the interpersonal arrangements of senior management.
The arguments that this has all come about because of the single force is a misdirection, and is portrayed as a recent (SNP bad, of course) phenomenon. The concept of a single force has been debated within the service for decades, and was a frequent subject during management seminars in the 90s and possibly before. The single force was set up to correct the perceived structural failings and inter-force rivalry that previously existed, and also to save money by reducing the numbers of chief officers and using common equipment and service support.
If ministers are not allowed to question or consider the actions of those delivering the services they are responsible for, then they would be charged with a dereliction of duty or taking their eye off the ball. Had Mr Matheson not queried anything, somebody would have complained that he did nothing! Damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.
Nick Cole
Meigle, Perthshire
MOST of the figures from The Scottish Government, indeed even the Westminster government’s own figures and those of many reputable financial agencies, support the forecast that Brexit – no matter in which form, be it hard, soft or anything in between – would see slower economic growth of anything between two and 16 per cent dependent on which region is studied. Scotland’s estimate would be 2.5 per cent to nine per cent and the north-east of England would fare the worst at 16 per cent. These figures are from the BBC website. If this irresponsible government continue to pursue this potentially damaging course, I hope the people of this country remember at the ballot box next time.
Graham Smith
Arbroath
GREAT news to hear of the award for Albert Bartlett Potatoes based in Airdrie (Scottish potato firm wins £4m investment, The National, February 7), but why are Sainsburys still sticking a Union flag on them? Can I ask as many people as possible to bombard Sainsburys with complaints?
Edith Davidson
Innerleithen
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel