Police Scotland mental health absences rise by 52%
They also show the number of officers taking time off grew each year over the period, with 1,024 in 2022 and 1,102 in 2023.
The party said the figures showed officers are at 'breaking point' and called on the Scottish Government to address the 'mounting pressures' facing police.
READ MORE
Scottish Labour justice spokesperson Pauline McNeill said: 'It's clear police in Scotland are at breaking point after years of SNP mismanagement and neglect.
'We owe it to police officers to ensure they have the support they need while they work to keep our communities safe, but it's clear that is not the case under the SNP.
'The SNP has let police officer numbers collapse over the last five years, piling pressure on remaining officers and threatening to undermine public safety.
'The SNP must wake up to this growing mental health crisis and work with Police Scotland to support officers struggling with stress, trauma or poor mental health.
'Dealing with this crisis is vital to keeping police officers in work and on duty at a time when we need visible officers in communities.
'Police officers cannot keep bearing the brunt of SNP failure — more must be done to support police and the vital work they do.'
Pauline McNeill says officers aren't getting the support they need (Image: PA) Earlier this year it was reported that the number of days taken off by police officers and staff suffering from mental ill health rose from 63,797 in 2019/20 to 96,509 in 2023/24 — a 51.3% rise.
Deputy Chief Constable Alan Speirs said: 'The health and welfare of our officers and staff remains one of Police Scotland's highest priorities, with enhanced provisions from both our Employee Assistance and Your Wellbeing Matters programmes.
'This will be further enhanced through the implementation of our new HR structure, with increased resource within our Health and Wellbeing team.
'We also have a range of mechanisms in place to support our employees who are absent from work for any reason.
'We continue to work with our occupational health provider to support police officers and staff in their journey back to health and, subsequently, to work.'
READ MORE
A Scottish Government spokesperson said: 'Police officers and staff do a challenging job and we have welcomed the Chief Constable's commitment to workforce wellbeing.
'Staff and officers can access a range of services to support their physical and mental wellbeing.
'This includes access to a 24/7 employee assistance programme, and direct access to occupational health services.
'We are investing a record £1.64 billion for policing in 2025–26, an increase of £90 million on 2024–25, and Police Scotland took on more recruits in 2024–25 than at any time since 2013, with more intakes planned this year.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
30 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
A Palestinian human rights group will discover on Monday whether it has won a legal challenge against the Government over decisions related to exports of military equipment to Israel amid the conflict in Gaza. Al-Haq is taking legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets. In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme. Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday. At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'. In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel. F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool. An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'. He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
Al-Haq is taking legal action against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT) over its decision to continue licensing exports of components for F-35 fighter jets. In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme. Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday. At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'. In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel. F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool. An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'. He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision. Charities Oxfam and Amnesty International, as well as Human Rights Watch, all intervened in the case.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Judges to rule on Palestinian group's legal action over Israel military exports
In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict. But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, with lawyers for Al-Haq telling the High Court in May that this 'carve-out' was unlawful and 'gives rise to a significant risk of facilitating crime'. The DBT is defending the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law' and that suspending the licences would negatively impact a wider international programme. Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn are due to hand down their ruling at 10.30am on Monday. Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn addressed demonstrators before the hearing began (Ben Whitley/PA) At the hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice, Raza Husain KC, for Al-Haq, said the case came 'against the backdrop of human calamity' in Gaza, describing the conflict as a 'live-streamed genocide'. In written submissions, he said that the Government misunderstood relevant parts of the Geneva Conventions when there was a clear risk that the parts might be used to commit or facilitate violations of international humanitarian law by Israel. F-35s are part of an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool. An earlier hearing in the case was told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. In written submissions for the May hearing, Sir James Eadie KC, for the Government, said that this 'provided justification to take exceptional measures to avoid these impacts and was consistent with the UK's domestic and international legal obligations'. He continued that some of Al-Haq's criticisms 'are not based on a balanced appreciation of the facts' and did not consider 'the true depth and range of the information-gathering and analysis' by the Government when it made the decision. Charities Oxfam and Amnesty International, as well as Human Rights Watch, all intervened in the case.
