THE former bosses of Scotland’s police oversight body are to be hauled before MSPs to answer questions about "extraordinarily shocking" financial mismanagement.
Scottish Police Authority chiefs have come under fire over “eye-watering” payments and expenses – including a £100,000 pay-off for former head John Foley.
Mr Foley and former SPA chair Andrew Flanagan have now been asked to answer “serious questions” about the decisions, which also saw Deputy Chief Constable Rose Fitzpatrick handed £67,000 in relocation expenses and £53,000 to foot her tax bill.
It comes as former justice minister Alex Neil blasted evidence given by a senior government official to a Holyrood committee as "not credible".
The MSP questioned the director general of the Scottish Government's justice department, Paul Johnston, on rumours that Mr Flanagan had called for Police Scotland’s embattled Chief Constable Phil Gormley to be reinstated.
Mr Gormley was placed on special leave in September amid an investigation into allegations of bullying and gross misconduct, which he denies.
Mr Johnston said: "There have been points at which (in recent weeks) that the view of the former chair was that it may have been suitable for the Chief Constable to return."
But he said he did not know the outcome of a private SPA board meeting which had discussed the issue, with no relevant item appearing on any agenda.
Mr Neil said the evidence was “frankly not credible", adding: "You're telling me that the SPA board, in discussing this item which is of absolutely top importance to the whole police service in Scotland, while we have an individual, the Chief Constable, on £210,000 a year presumably on full salary while he is on special leave – that that was not done at formal board meeting?"
Mr Neil said it seemed like "underhand activity", and said he wanted to call Mr Gormley, Mr Flanagan and new SPA chairwoman Susan Deacon to a future committee meeting.
Jackie Baillie, acting convener of Holyrood's Public Audit and Post Legislative Scrutiny Committee, said the SPA’s "financial mismanagement" was the “most shocking” she had ever seen.
She said: "I've been around politics a long time, but this is probably the most shocking example I've seen of financial mismanagement and poor judgement.
“When you consider the huge deficit the SPA faces, these eye-watering payments are just extraordinarily shocking.
“We must hear directly from those who were responsible for making these decisions. That’s why we’ve called for the former chair and chief executive of the SPA, and current board members, to come in front of the Committee to answer serious questions.”
Financial watchdog Audit Scotland recently highlighted a series of governance failings and poor use of public money at the SPA, which faces a budget shortfall of £47.4 million this year.
Auditor General Caroline Gardner yesterday questioned the decision to make Mr Foley's role redundant, following which he was in line for an early retirement payment of £43,470 and six months payment in lieu of notice.
MSPs were also told Mr Foley was given an additional three months’ salary "unnecessarily" as there was no evidence of a discussion about having him work his notice.
Meanwhile, Ms Gardner said it was “unusual” that the relocation expenses dished out to Deputy Chief Constable Rose Fitzpatrick were not capped, as most public organisations cap them at the tax liability threshold of £8,000.
Ms Fitzpatrick took up the post in 2012 and moved house in 2017, meaning the cash she received apparently breached an 18-month time limit on relocation expenses.
The authority paid £15,000 for the sale of her home in England, and £34,000 towards the purchase of a home in Scotland, £30,000 of which was land and building transaction tax.
The revelations caused committee member Colin Beattie MSP to remark: "That was all paid for? Wow. I wouldn't mind a job in the police service."
Ms Gardner said the excessive payments were "at least questionable" and should have gone before the board, but were instead authorised by Mr Foley.
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