CLPEX Chat Board

Statement From SPSA website about Chief Executive David Mulhern
05 December 2008


The Scottish Police Services Authority (SPSA) has today announced that it is seeking to hold a disciplinary hearing into the conduct and performance of its Chief Executive David Mulhern.

SPSA will seek to challenge at the first available opportunity an interim interdict raised today by Mr Mulhern that seeks to block the Board holding such a hearing.

Interim SPSA Convener George Kay said:

"The SPSA Board has significant issues of concern over the conduct and performance of the Chief Executive in the course of his duties.

"As a result, we have intimated to David Mulhern that, as an employee of the organisation, we are seeking to cover these issues under the terms of SPSA's disciplinary policy and to hold a disciplinary hearing into those issues.

"The Chief Executive has today chosen to raise a technical legal issue about the Board's right to take this course of action. That is something we will challenge robustly at the first available opportunity in court.

"In the meantime, David has been invited to remain on leave until these issues have been resolved.

"It is our aim as a Board that the disciplinary process is thorough, but timely, to ensure that we act fairly and keep to a minimum any disruption to the management of the organisation.

"Until this process has concluded, the Board would intend to make no further comment on what is a confidential issue. We would expect the same consideration to be shown by all those connected to the organisation.

"I can assure the Scottish Government, our stakeholders, and staff that while we seek an appropriate resolution of this situation, we will remain firmly focussed on delivering our core services to our customers, and to identifying efficiencies and savings to add value to policing wherever we can."

Oh Dear!

This is one extremely positive move, both for the future of the SPSA and also for the forthcoming Inquiry.

As you may be aware the SPSA have recently advertised for a new Convenor, and now it seems they will be looking for a new Chief Executive.

Remember Mulhern was the one said that everything had been “resolved” within the SPSA! Quite the opposite, but you can bet one thing , when the new management comes in things will happen.

High up on their list will be do deal with those within the Glasgow Bureau who still maintain Y7 is an identification.

And this is seriously bad news for messrs Foley, Geddes and Bruce. After all Mulhern protected them. The SPSA know Y7 is a misidentification, and you can bet anything you like they will do everything within their power to resolve matters prior to the Inquiry!

There is no way they can see his departure as anything other than a death knell for their careers.

With regards to them, as you said daktari, Oh Dear!

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/di ... earing.php

Top police manager stalls his conduct hearing
GERRY BRAIDEN December 05 2008

One of Scotland's main police figures is facing disciplinary action over "significant issues of concern" about his conduct and performance.

David Mulhern, chief executive of the controversial Scottish Police Services Authority (SPSA), is now locked in a remarkable legal battle with his own board, having successfully sought an interim interdict yesterday to prevent a disciplinary hearing being held.

However, the agency, which was set up to centralise Scotland's police functions, immediately responded by appealing his move, and its case will be heard at Glasgow Sheriff Court next week.

In a statement issued last night following repeated inquiries by The Herald, interim SPSA convener George Kay said: "The board has significant issues of concern over the conduct and performance of the chief executive in the course of his duties.

"As a result, we have intimated to David Mulhern that, as (he is) an employee of the organisation, we are seeking to cover these issues under the terms of SPSA's disciplinary policy and to hold a disciplinary hearing into those issues.

"The chief executive has today chosen to raise a technical legal issue about the board's right to take this course of action. That is something we will challenge robustly at the first available opportunity in court.

It is understood the disciplinary hearing will focus on his style of management, both internally and in relation to other agencies. It is known that a senior personnel official is currently off work, claiming stress, and has lodged a grievance against the agency.

The Herald understands Mr Mulhern, 51, was concerned that the board did not have the authority to take sanctions against him and that he could be removed from his post only by Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill.

But a Scottish Government spokesman said: "The conduct of any disciplinary proceedings is a matter for the SPSA and is not subject to the approval of the Cabinet Secretary for Justice."

Mr Mulhern, who earns more than £100,000 a year, was appointed chief executive in January 2007, and had worked with the then Scottish Executive for the preceding 18 months on setting up the new authority.

Established under the Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2006, the SPSA was set up to produce efficiency savings by centralising the provision and procurement of training, IT, and forensic services. It has 1700 staff and an annual budget of £84m.

However, Mr Mulhern's tenure has largely been characterised by controversy over the agency's role and remit, as well as a number of high-profile departures.

Graeme Pearson, former head of the SCDEA, quit to take early retirement after complaints by politicians that the agency's autonomy had been compromised, while Ricky Gray, a former deputy chief constable of Strathclyde, left last year and fired a public parting shot about concerns over the organisation's lack of accountability.

Mr Mulhern, a former assistant chief constable of the British Transport Police and deputy chief constable of Central Scotland, was unavailable for comment.

Daktari

Pity they never had the guts to do this to the SCRO Incompetents too.

They could have saved the Scots a load of money.

Any news on Fiona (Incompetent) Mcbride who likes to sign other workers Initials.

Has her enquiry flung oot her case yet ?

Do you think there is any chance she might win it ?

So you have Mulhern hung, drawn and quartered before you even know what the allegations are and before any disciplinary hearing has taken place. Good for you, that will save everybody else the trouble.
I can remember when McKie and Mulhern were friendly. When the McKies tried to get the call for an Inquiry dropped, Mulhern was the first, and only, one to back them.
In the early days, McKie spent much time in the SPSA Office trying to badger Mulhern into sacking even more people. But since Mulhern has an ego equal to McKie (thank God he hasn’t got a daughter who can’t help getting into bother) he was not to be moved from his original deal. So I don’t think it’s likely that Mulhern will be joining the McKie / Asbury/ McKie line up.

Mulhern has only been in this job since 2006, prior to which he was responsible for complaints against the police, IT, human resources, finance and corporate development, according to the conference info at Holyrood.

So, was he very good at his job, or very popular at that time? Now fallen into disfavour it would seem. He also holds some good degrees. Does this make him a bad person – not a question which needs answering to be honest.

Do we know what all of these ‘crimes’ are, or have I missed something?

Daktari,

You really are a joy to behold!

"So you have Mulhern hung, drawn and quartered before you even know what the allegations are and before any disciplinary hearing has taken place."

All you need to know is that David Mulhern will not be returning to his Office. Just trust me on this one. Look back to my previous postings and ask yourself if I knew anything?

I can imagine having 24 hours to reflect on things you are actually hoping he does stay! After all isn’t he the only one from the Organisation who has publicly stated the Experts did nothing wrong? Isn’t he the one who paid out vast amounts in Public Money pensioning off Experts and rewarded them for their mistakes? Isn’t he the one who has protected three discredited Experts within the Organisation who he personally knew had misidentified fingerprint(s) without taking any action against them? (And who still remain within the service, at least meantime).

He is central to the SCRO Experts who had hoped to use him at the Inquiry, with his “done nothing wrong” comments. However without him, suddenly they are extremely vulnerable. This is the truly worst case scenario for them.

Ask yourself why the SPSA is taking this action at the present time? What lies behind the decision?

But of course you believe I am merely speculating. How dare I!

But wait did you not also state:

“In the early days, McKie spent much time in the SPSA Office trying to badger Mulhern into sacking even more people.”

Really, you know this how? Either you were at any meetings with Iain McKie and David Mulhern and are aware of the possible content of that meeting, or perhaps you are merely speculating?

But that would bring us back to the old kettle pot scenario wouldn’t it?

I am presuming David told you this personally? That he was being badgered by Iain McKie? The same way Malcolm Ross has told David Russell that Iain McKie has manipulated the media for his own purposes!

He really is some guy this Iain McKie isn’t he.

One thing does strike me as being very strange on this. You previously made comment how you and the SCRO Experts were desperate to get Iain McKie into a witness box under oath. So where better than at this Inquiry.

Daktari, please enlighten us to whether Iain McKie’s name does appears on the list of witnesses forwarded to the Inquiry on behalf of the SCRO Experts?

If you don’t know please tell us you fully expect it to be on their list given your previous claims.

Or is this another question too difficult or too embarrassing to answer perhaps?

Okay my friend let me help you with the answer to my previous poser concerning Iain McKie and the Public Inquiry. I know it is a real tough question.

Daktari Fri Aug 18, 2006 9:50 am

“It's about getting the McKies into Court and under oath. That's what we (that word again) all want I would have thought. Whether a Criminal or Civil, even an Employment Tribunal will do.”

Pretty clear what you all wanted.

Yet unbelievably Iain McKie has not been cited on the list of witnesses by the SCRO Experts!!

Truly staggering within the space of two years you (we) were so desperate to get Iain into a witness box, and went as far as stating an Employment Tribunal would have done.

Of course the reality is Fiona McBride could easily have called him as witness to her Employment tribunal but failed to do so. And now the SCRO Experts don’t want to call Iain McKie as witness at the Public Inquiry!

Why I wonder????

Any thoughts daktari??

And now the SCRO Experts don’t want to call Iain McKie as witness at the Public Inquiry!

Why I wonder????

Who says they don't want to call him? (Apart from you)
Anyway, in case you hadn't noticed, he's cited already.
I am relishing the prospect of McKie / Asbury / McKie taking the stand.
Are you?

Who says they don't want to call him? (Apart from you)

So can I assume from this that you believe he is on their list of potential witnesses?

Well I’m sorry to disappoint you but he isn’t there! A list of around 60 witnesses yet the name of Iain McKie is definitely missing.

Seems perhaps you and the SCRO Experts are not as united as you think!

Anyway, in case you hadn't noticed, he's cited already.

Put forward perhaps by himself? Given his enormous intimate knowledge of the case I would have expected him to be.

It’s just to repeat your earlier assertion:

“It's about getting the McKies into Court and under oath. That's what we (that word again) all want I would have thought. Whether a Criminal or Civil, even an Employment Tribunal will do.”

It appears what you want and the SCRO Experts want is different!

I noticed from the transcript of the last hearing that Russell was desperate to get his submission out. Any ideas if he has done this?

If he is having a problem given I know he reads these postings, doesn’t he daktari, why not get him to post it on here?

Strange you are so keen to get David Asbury on the stand, isn't it. I notice that in a letter sent by David Russell to the Lord Advocate he actually called David Asbury a "murderer"!

What I believe the vast majority of individuals are looking froward to is the SCRO Experts standing under oath explaining there identifications, point by point.

I am more interested in hearing the evidence of a certain Alan Dunbar for instance. And what about Bruce Grant, who has compared the prints?

And Malcolm Graham, who there is wonderful new evidence available to expose his previous lies.

And what about the Doyen himself? Or Leadbetter?

These are the ones you could sell tickets for.

You are forgetting one major things daktari. This is a "Fingerprint" inquiry. In case you miss it the clue is pretty much in the title. This is not about Iain McKie or Shirley McKie or David Asbury. This is about rooting out and exposing those who have brought shame and disgrace not only on themselves, but also on their peers and their profession.

The SCRO Experts wanted their day in Court, and by God are they going to get it daktari!

By the way still no name of any Expert you believe who may help the Inquiry? What's the problem? Running a wee bit scared, given you continually want to detract from the Fingerprint Issue by trying to focus on more personal matters??

Head of troubled police body may face hearing next week
GERRY BRAIDEN December 10 2008

The senior Scottish police figure facing disciplinary action by his own organisation could discover his fate early next week after a sheriff sanctioned notice of new internal proceedings against him.

In the latest twist in a bitter legal saga, Sheriff Gillian Bryson allowed the controversial Scottish Police Services Authority (SPSA) to again notify its chief executive, David Mulhern, that he could face a hearing which could see him sacked within five days. But she ruled against an attempt by the SPSA to have Mr Mulhern suspended with immediate effect, albeit on full pay, claiming that giving the organisation the authority to do so was at the core of Mr Mulhern's concerns.

The hearing at Glasgow Sheriff Court attempted to overturn the interim interdict served on behalf of Mr Mulhern on the SPSA on Friday preventing it holding a disciplinary hearing against him over "significant issues of concern" regarding his conduct and performance.

The hearing was adjourned until Monday due to the unavailability of Mr Mulhern's principal solicitor but it did emerge, as claimed by The Herald on Saturday, that the SPSA chief's grievance is that the body has no authority to take sanctions against him and that he is an employee of the Scottish Government. As such, only Scottish ministers, he claims, can discipline him.

The 51-year-old former head of the British Transport Police in Scotland and deputy chief constable of Central Scotland Police is currently at home having "been invited to remain on leave".

But Brian Napier, QC, representing the SPSA, argued that Mr Mulhern had resigned from the police service earlier this year and since then was an employee of the SPSA and not on secondment from the Scottish Government.

He also appealed to Sheriff Bryson to allow the attempt to overturn the interim interdict to go ahead as "the defenders are anxious that it goes ahead as it really is necessary in the interests of good administration that it goes ahead".

After Sheriff Bryson said she did not see the urgency in the hearing going ahead, Mr Napier then asked for the terms of the interdict to be modified and asked for Mr Mulhern's suspension, claiming that doing so would prevent him turning up for work.

He also said that there were concerns that Mr Mulhern had been in touch with SPSA members of staff.

Mr Napier said: "At the moment Mr Mulhern has not been suspended, but he is not at work. He has been invited not to attend to allow him to prepare for the hearing.

"I would now seek to have the original interdict modified to the extent that it would allow for the suspension of Mr Mulhern."

But Sheriff Bryson replied: "It's difficult to see how I can allow him to be suspended by the very body that he claims not to be employed by. He is questioning who in fact is his employer and if I allow the defenders to suspend him, that, in effect, is ruling on the matter before it comes to court."

She did however allow the interdict to be changed giving the SPSA board the green light to serve notice of another disciplinary hearing.

Five days' notice of the meeting is required and as the sheriff has approved this it could take place straight away if Monday's appeal is successful.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/di ... t_week.php

From today's Herald
The question of who employs one of Scotland's most senior police figures will not be answered for at least two weeks.
The Scottish Police Services Authority (SPSA) is appealing against an interim interdict served on behalf of its chief executive, David Mulhern, to stop it holding a disciplinary hearing into "significant issues of concern" about his conduct and performance.
Mr Mulhern was granted the interim interdict at Glasgow Sheriff Court earlier this month. The SPSA, which is responsible for support services for all of Scotland's police forces, appealed, but two sheriffs ruled that the interdict should stand.
The authority lodged a further appeal, which was continued by Sheriff Principal James Taylor yesterday.
Lawyer Charles Hennessy, for Mr Mulhern, said that as a holder of public office appointed by Scottish ministers before the authority came formally into being, Mr Mulhern was not employed by the SPSA and could not be disciplined by it.
Ian Truscott, QC, for the SPSA, argued that while Mr Mulhern was originally on secondment to the authority from Central Scotland Police, he became a full-time employee when he resigned from that role in March.
He said: "Whilst we don't dispute the statutory provision concerning appointment of the first chief executive it certainly doesn't give an indication that a couple of years down the line it will be Scottish ministers who terminate that appointment.
"This is a full-time job with a salary and a pension. It is not just a floating appointee of Scottish ministers. That then means that it is for the SPSA to determine how to discipline him. In my submission there is no other body that can address this matter."
Mr Truscott said that a draft contract which had been prepared to "formalise the pursuer's position", but which was not signed by Mr Mulhern, should have been taken into account at the earlier appeal.
But Mr Hennessy denied that his client had ever seen the contract. He said: "Apart from the documents that show that the pursuer was being paid by the defender and had his pension arrangements with the defender, my submission is there is nothing else to indicate that there was an employment relationship.
"The SPSA is a statutory body created entirely by statute and it has no power to do what it is intending to do. My position is that the only people who do have power to terminate the appointment would be Scottish ministers."
Mr Hennessy said Mr Mulhern had remained "willing to discuss matters" with the SPSA since he received a letter, dated November 27, telling him to attend a disciplinary hearing. But he said: "They were not willing to consider any mechanism whereby their concerns can be addressed other than in a disciplinary context."
The hearing will resume on January 9.

WRoughead asked

Do we know what all of these ‘crimes’ are, or have I missed something?

While not wishing to comment on your opinion of Mulhern’s police career I can tell you thirty seven separate charges have been levelled against him.
All to do with ‘performance and capability’
In other words bullying and incompetence.

I wonder if that will include the recent investigation by Lothian and Borders Police or his appalling behaviour at Fiona’s Tribunal where he was warned by the Chair answer the questions put to him?

http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Suspe ... 4862571.jp

Suspended police chief fails to block conduct inquiry

A POLICE chief will face a disciplinary hearing despite a legal attempt to block the move.
The hearing will investigate concerns by the board of the Scottish Police Services Authority (SPSA) over the conduct and performance of its chief executive, David Mulhern.

Mr Mulhern has also been formally suspended from his post as chief executive at the SPSA over a separate allegation.

A court judgment yesterday threw out an attempt by Mr Mulhern to block the SPSA board's right to hold a disciplinary hearing.

The board yesterday wrote to Mr Mulhern requesting he attend a formal disciplinary hearing, expected to be held within the next two weeks.

Jo Brigham, the authority's director of planning and performance, has been asked to fill in for Mr Mulhern.

SPSA vice-convener George Kay said: "I am pleased that the court has today accepted our appeal and thus overturned earlier attempts to block the right and responsibility of the SPSA Board to hold its senior executive officer to account."

The SPSA controls police training, IT, forensics, fingerprints and purchasing of equipment such as cars and uniforms, – previously the responsibility of individual forces. They also oversee the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency.

http://www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/newsfe ... -21049898/

Cop Boss Faces Trial

Jan 18 2009

A POLICE chief is due to appear before a disciplinary hearing tomorrow.

David Mulhern, 52, faces 44 mismanagement and misconduct complaints over his running of the Scottish Police Services Authority.

If upheld, the suspended boss is likely to be fired from his £113,000-a-year post.

The hearing will take place at the SPSA Glasgow HQ after Mulhern failed in his legal bid to block it.

He had argued the SPSA had no right to discipline him as he works for the Scottish Government. But the case was thrown out.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/di ... ession.php

Disciplinary action against police head will go to the Court of SessionGERRY BRAIDEN January 20 2009

PROTRACTED attempts to discipline one of Scotland's most senior police figures will go to the Court of Session.

The Scottish Police Services Authority (SPSA) had yesterday been due to hold a disciplinary hearing into its own chief executive, David Mulhern. However, in the latest twist to the saga, that hearing has been postponed indefinitely after Mr Mulhern launched an 11th-hour appeal against the sheriff's ruling that had cleared the way for the action to take place.

The legal case arose after the board of the SPSA raised "significant issues of concern" about Mr Mulhern's conduct and performance.

The 51-year-old, who earns £106,000 a year, has courted controversy with his views about centralising and "civilianising" active police functions.

The former deputy chief constable of Central Scotland was originally due to appear in front of an SPSA disciplinary hearing in early December, but managed to stop the meeting taking place by lodging an interim interdict at Glasgow Sheriff Court.

The SPSA has now also said that it believes "the best way to proceed for all parties is to settle these legal arguments in the highest appellate court in Scotland".

The body last night said both parties were seeking to persuade the Court of Session to hear the case soon and that this may happen before the end of this month.