For Scotland's top policeman, it is a virtuous circle that offers the tantalising prospect of going after this country's crime bosses with enhanced firepower, in the process reaping the potential rewards of causing irreparable damage to their activities and providing law enforcers with the resources to up the ante further still.

The screw has been tightened on the criminal fraternity since the Proceeds of Crime Act (Poca) enabled the Crown Office to recover and seize money, goods and property earned by illegal means. To date, some £44 million has been confiscated and allocated to good causes such as sports and other community facilities in disadvantaged areas, the motivation being also to keep young people out of trouble.

At present, the cash is disbursed by the Scottish Government, and some has been given to three police forces in matched-funding deals. In an exclusive interview with the Sunday Herald today, however, Stephen House, chief constable of Scotland's biggest force, Strathclyde, argues that a share of the annual proceeds, perhaps 50%, should be given directly to the police to invest in tackling crime. It is clear why House thinks this is a good idea. Investing in specialists in accountancy, IT, forensics and other areas where discrete expertise is essential to expose and eradicate criminal activity is already paying off.

But this comes at a price that will be more challenging to bear given that the budget under a single Scottish police force is anticipated to shrink by £80m by the end of 2015. As the nexus of criminal behaviour becomes more complex and sophisticated, so must the agencies charged with confronting it (an example of the authorities having to be ever-nimble on their feet is the Crown Office lobbying for powers to seize the homes of underworld figures in countries such as Spain). But that cannot be achieved if there is less available to do the job.

Ministers worry that a hypothecated "gangster tax" could skew police force priorities, with disproportionate effort being put into targeting gangsters and suspected criminals simply because the return would be potentially bigger. The less demanding (for the prosecution) test of "balance of probabilities" applies in court cases to confiscate assets from suspected criminal figures. The onus is on these figures to provide tangible evidence that assets were acquired by legitimate means (this also applies to their cash).

The authorities expect a growing number of appeals to be lodged on human rights grounds when civil recovery rulings go against those whose assets are seized or are prevented from carrying out business. It is feasible that the number of such appeals could increase as the police go after more suspected criminals, especially if they have resources beefed up by Poca cash to pursue a greater number of deeper investigations. But the safeguards should be in place to ensure the law is not abused. And monitoring the police rigorously to establish that hypothecated Poca money does not skew priorities or result in misuse should be easier under a single force. In principle, House has a strong case to make.