Home Affairs Committee: Written evidence

Leadership and standards in the police service

This volume contains the written evidence accepted by the Home Affairs Committee for the Leadership and standards in the police service inquiry. No. Author Page 01 Rachel Kearton 1 02 Paul Veltman 5 03 David Treadwell 6 04 Department of Law, Policing and Investigation and the Centre for Forensic Investigation at Teesside 10 University 05 Police Foundation 16 06 Stonewall 24 07 Public and Commercial Services Union 28 08 Higher Education Forum for Learning and Development in Policing 32 09 Victim Support 38 10 Independent Police Complaints Commission 41 11 Skills for Justice 47 12 Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales 52 13 The Forensic Science Society 56 14 Police Federation 59 15 Dr Rodger Patrick 65 16 Department of Law & Criminal Justice Studies at Canterbury Christ Church University 75 17 Chartered Management Institute 84 18 National Crime Agency 91 18a Supplementary 94 19 Home Office 95 19a Supplementary 101 19b Further supplementary 102 19c Further supplementary 103 19d Further supplementary 228 20 National Policing Improvement Agency 104 21 Association of Chief Police Officers 137 21a Supplementary 150 21b Further supplementary 151 21c Further supplementary 153 22 John Kenny 155 23 James Satherley 156 24 Nigel Lloyd 157 25 Hugh Oliver-Bellasis 159 26 Chris Panther 160 27 Colin Taylor 161 28 Allen Jordan 163 29 Vicky Robinson 165 30 Gary Jackson 166 31 Viv Nicholas 169 32 Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe QPM, Metropolitan Police Commissioner 171 33 Deputy Chief Constable Simon Edens, ACPO lead on anti-social behaviour 172 34 Professor Simon Holdaway 173 35 A. J. Wright 178 36 Tim Passmore, Suffolk Police and Crime Commissioner 183 37 Alan Hardwick, Lincolnshire Police and Crime Commissioner 184 38 Alex Marshall, College of Policing 188 39 Ray Wootten, Chair, Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel 190 40 AC Cressida Dick, Metropolitan Police 198 41 Nick Gargan QPM, Chief Constable, Avon and Somerset Constabulary 202 42 Stephen Kavanagh, Chief Constable, Essex Police 205 43 Mick Creedon, Chief Constable, Derbyshire Constabulary 207 44 British Naturism 210 45 Patricia Gallan QPM, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police 211 46 East Lindsey District Council 213 47 Kevin Maxwell 218 As at 2 July 2013 Written evidence submitted by Rachel Kearton [LSP 01]

1. Executive summary of points:

1.1. There are three contextual requirements to consider when changing the landscape for police leadership and standards. Firstly, the need for greater sophistication in negotiating, communication and political awareness skills of police leaders to operate in a new environment of less autocracy and more joint ownership.

1.2. Secondly, the ability as credible leaders to drive cultural change, to assist the workforce to adapt to a new structure, to direct senior officers to balance operational responsibilities with the requirements of the Police Crime Commissioner to hold the force to account. By negotiating shared responsibilities with PCCs, senior officers can be freed from bureaucratic performance processes to concentrate more expertly on the analysis of the prevention and resolution of crime and antisocial behaviour.

1.3. Finally, by developing a culture of evidence-based policing driven by the College of Policing, police leaders will establish themselves as professionals - technocratic problem-solvers with the scientific arguments to support their approaches - who seize the initiative and hold their own in respect of their critical and indispensable professional expertise.

1.4. Studies of other policing models beyond the UK demonstrate the need for a professional, coordinating body concentrating on the development of these three factors: a single voice for the profession that can advise and inform the public, stakeholders and strategic partners alike; strong accountability processes that provide continuity in the face of political change; and strategic direction in ethical leadership, in addition to support for learning and development, and workforce issues.

1.5. Through a tripartite faculty structure that interchanges research development, professional development, and the setting of policy and ethical standards, the College of Policing must assume an essentiality that has been absent from police training and development for a long time. With appropriate powers and resources it will provide cohesion, independence, opportunity, diversity and a framework that will unify policing nationwide, embrace local difference, initiate a personal responsibility for constant professional development, and deliver a public-focused service across the country.

1

2. Brief personal introduction

2.1. I started my police career in Hampshire in 1989, later moving to West Yorkshire and Northumbria where, as a chief superintendent, I fulfilled roles as head of operations command, head of corporate development and most recently as BCU commander in Sunderland and South Tyneside. Prior to promotion to chief superintendent I was seconded to the Home Office where I worked on the Police Reform programme developing a new strategy for national race and diversity learning and development, and led the development of various leadership programmes including the introduction of work-based assessments for the promotion of sergeants and inspectors.

2.2. I am a qualified strategic firearms commander, advanced public order commander and Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development.

2.3. Having completed the strategic command course earlier in 2012 I am currently taking a career break working for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office as Executive Assistant to the British Ambassador in Turkey.

3. Personal recommendations

3.1. Powers, responsibilities and resources of the College of Policing: it is recommended that the College is provided a legal status to require officers and staff to undertake professional reviews at appropriate stages of their careers. The resources should draw from the exceptional, both within and external to the service: any option to do otherwise will lessen the credibility of the College and lead to the undervaluing of the college by forces from its instigation.

3.2. The college will be well-placed to use such professional evaluations to openly facilitate access to temporary or permanent opportunities across the country and beyond, both within and outside of the service. Currently such opportunities, if advertised, are generally kept within forces, the larger metropolitan forces logically offering many more opportunities than the smaller. Such a system stagnates the free-flow of ideas and experience, placing an unhealthy reliance on networking and limiting opportunities to those who are supported by their senior officers. The converse applies: those who are not favourably supported, for good reason or ill, are currently unable to be proactive and take responsibility for its resolution. Staff in these circumstances are dependent on a generally poor and subjective performance management system, disempowered of choice other than to curry favour with their line managers. They cannot build a CV of their

2 3.3. The balance of responsibilities for: representing police services; setting and upholding standards; testing and rewarding; training; and guarding public interests: it is recommended that the College is not a provider, but the sole determiner of standards. Providers would tender for the delivery of functions, whether as single providers or competitive deliverers of parallel services, and would be re-evaluated at the end of each tender period. Providers may be police organisations or forces, other public services or private companies, for which all pay to be regulated and accredited by the college.

3.4. Creating two separate institutions to provide delivery functions and professional representation: it is recommended that the responsibility for delivery and professional representation should be sourced from the same institution; for the credibility of the deliverer, for greater clarity and reassurance to the public, for a coordinated approach and for seamless ownership between strategic, tactical and operational processes.

3.5. The interaction of the professional body with HMIC; the IPCC; ACPO; and other institutions in providing leadership and setting standards for police forces: it is recommended that the professional body is run by the service, for the service, as the generator of greater personal responsibility within its people to deliver a professional public service. It should be informed by other bodies, but recognised as the independent professional backbone of the service. The decisions made by other bodies would be informed by the rigorous, independent advice of the college, but the college should fiercely protect its position as setter, deliverer, maintainer and reviewer of standards, not determiner or judge.

3.6. The role of the College of Policing in recruitment and training: it is recommended that the College of Policing takes initial responsibility for all police officer recruits for the first stage of their service. Studies show that culture becomes embedded within the first six months. Responsibility for professional service delivery and standards will be enforced from the beginning through the college, supported by the professional development faculty. Officer recruits would be required to arrange their own training schedules by application, achieving evidence-based standards, with the options to seek specialism or a breadth of training geographically or within a specialist field. Forces would be required to make their selection of staff after the initial period, assessing individuals on a portfolio of evidence that may have taken a number of months or years to achieve, depending on the recruit officer’s personal and professional aspirations. Such a system will also be able to take into account applicants with evidence of experience from

3 3.7. A similar system at more senior levels of the organisation will allow officers and staff to gain experience at different stages throughout their careers, to move between metropolitan police force areas for example, thereby improving the cross-fertilisation of experience and knowledge all the way throughout the service.

3.8. Responsibility within the professional body for civilian police employees: it is recommended that the responsibility for civilian police employees lies on a par with officers, within the College of Policing, whilst recognising the differences in service levels between the two sets of working conditions. There is no other way that continuity, cohesion, independence, opportunity, diversity and a framework for professional standards can unify policing nationwide without total inclusion of all involved. This should similarly allow provision for associate members within the wider criminal justice service; volunteers, partners and international colleagues alike. The college should be founded and maintained as a professional resource; prioritising the setting of requirements and standards, the research of future policing techniques and the professional development of individuals.

3.9. Funding the College of Policing: in this respect, it is recommended that significant funding should be made available from a clear recognition of what the college has to offer to others: research capabilities, professional development and recruitment resourcing, and the setting of policy and ethical standards. There should be some reasonable charge to officers and staff to participate in essential training, once again reinforcing the requirement for the personal responsibility in maintaining professional expertise. Associate membership would carry benefits and credibility for criminal justice partners and provide an additional funding source. Greater funding opportunities lie however in the value of expert knowledge; publications, forensic research or assistance, proactive media management, international development and external training events, for example. The regulation of providers will be important as will a role for the college in acting as an agent between forces and those that seek expert knowledge. The role of recruitment agency would extend even further, as forces apply to the college to identify the best fit for their vacancies, or to manage some routine personnel functions for the long- term on their behalf.

Rachel Kearton

October 2012

4 Written evidence submitted by Paul Veltman [LSP 02]

Submission / Summary

1.A basic qualification in UK law should be seen as mandatory professional development for certain senior police roles, especially those working in the areas of quality assurance and professional standards. 2.The UK Policing infrastructure becomes vulnerable to 'reputational risk' when power and capability are not in alignment, and senior police officers act in ignorance of the law. 3.This risk is magnified in a force which has a high ratio of junior to senior staff, as the requirements for sound operational decision making and management guidance to junior staff become proportionately higher. 4.In one case, a serving Constable was well aware that his conduct directly contravened the Police Regulations, while the Professional Standards Department could see no problem with his conduct when a complaint was lodged. It was left to the complainant to explain how the Police Regulations were to be applied in what was seen to be, by most observers, a very simple matter, i.e. knowing the difference between words such as lawful and legal. 5.To borrow from Juvenal, Quis educet custodes?

Information on submitter: 1. This submission is made in a private capacity. 2. The Professional Standards Department of the force concerned have read this submission to the Home Affairs Committee in advance, and have chosen not to comment.

Recommendations: 1.That the proposed College of Policing make basic legal education a mandatory element of a senior police officer's professional development. 2.That the standard of legal education be higher still for staff working in critical guardianship roles which define the parameters of corporate integrity and responsibility, such as force Professional Standards Departments.

Paul Veltman

October 2012

5 Written evidence submitted by David Treadwell [LSP 03]

If this should be considered as 'written evidence' is a moot point, but we have been engaged locally with matters relating to the constabulary, following the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.

I, David Treadwell, am currently involved locally, as a member of a' Acocks Green Neighbourhood Forum' and we are represented on the West Midlands Police, Birmingham East Local Policing Unit, Operational Advisory Group (OAG), in a community consultation role, together with other community members.

There is no particular need or reason to give oral evidence, but if it should be considered appropriate these comments can be used, as and when necessary and in a responsible manner.

There could be much to commend these proposals, if used to improve the position and standing of the British Police service, and is inclusive to include the aspirations and opportunities for the Rank & File. Or is this to be taken, as in line with the military staff colleges, for the officer structure only?

There are many other professional/regulatory bodies, such as the the Independent Police Complaints Commission, H M Inspector of Constabulary, and Association of Chief Police Officers. What would be the College of Policing relationships and engagement with these bodies, and indeed the colleges influence with local universities that offer opportunities for a policing degree.

Policing from its foundation is very much a locally engaged service within the community that it serves and must ultimately be directly accountable to the citizen. That includes its officers and leaders. The police officer is the 'bedrock' of enforcement of English Law and 'keeping the peace' who is sworn into the 'Office of Constable', and is a servant of the Crown. They in turn have the full unlimited trust of the British People, devoted to the public interest and impartial in the enforcement of law and order, a complete opposite to some of our other institutions. This is some responsibility, and in the main we consider this has been carried out.

Could there be any conflicts of interests, arising from these consultations and recommendations, and what safeguards are there to ensure that persons involved in these consultations or recommendations do not derive any commercial benefits should any of their recommendations be adopted.

It is further understood that the Association of Chief Police Officer (ACPO) have been taking an increasing role in advising the government on certain strategies, does this include the proposals under consideration. If this should be the case, are the functions of ACPO, determined by parliament.

The public, through its representation in parliament, are the owners and custodians of our policing assets, and are often poorly consulted and engaged in these matters. We should continually ask what we are hoping to achieve by changes and have these been thoroughly evaluated.

6 We the public, in the main are most tolerant towards our Offices of State, as in our obedience and reluctance to question authority, with our 'back room' mentality and insularity and always accepting the programme. These consultations are an healthy opportunity for some form of engagement to counter these perceptions.

Comments on certain particular terms of reference.

1/ What powers, responsibilities and resources should be given to the college of policing? To promote and inculcate the principle of British Policing and the 'Office of Constable'.

2/ What lessons can be learnt from other professional bodies within the UK and from bodies in other countries? The aim of a professional body is to maintain standards and always to be open to and seek improvement.

3/ Is it possible for one institution to balance responsibilities for: representing police services; setting and upholding standards, testing & rewards? Yes with an emphasis on the public ethos. Unlike certain others who may be considered to be aimed at self ‐ promotion and self – interests.

4/ Would it be preferable to create two separate institutions to provide delivery functions and professional representation? These could be considered comparable within one organisation.

5/ How will the professional body interact with HMIC; IPCC; and ACPO; and other institutions providing leadership and setting standards for the police forces? There should be a clarity of understanding and responsibilities, with a code of conduct and accountability to those they represent and serve.

6/ What role should the college have in recruitment and training? Recruitment should be undertaken locally and enrolled at the college for advanced training purposes.

7/ What role should the College have in recruiting non‐police officer to senior roles within the police service. As the due process stands as statute, A Chief Constable must have previously served in the Office of Constable. Surely, the function of a Staff College is to deliver people of the highest standards. Do we still have cases of the military recruiting civilians into high operational roles? Perhaps they are recruited direct to a staff college???? We could do well to reflect on this one.

8/ Are police recruitment processes fair and open and how could they be improved? Yes! compared to any other profession, but should always be on the basis of merit.

9/ Is the Metropolitan Police over ‐ represented in senior positions?

7 The perception is possibly yes, due to its high and historical position within the capital.

10/ Are there any specific challenges facing the leaders of the Metropolitan Police Force, which the College of Policing could address? Areas of accountability and transparency, as in all areas of political and public service.

11/ Should the professional body be responsible for civilian employees? There could be some opportunities for civilian employees through association, or in the case of PCSOs, if this post is to be maintained. Locally, we have very positive experiences from the function and service of PCSOs. Although a police officer is one who has holds the Queens Warrant and taken the loyal oath.

12/ How should the college of policing be funded? By the State, or foreign governments, or it would become a guild, subscribed by its members.

Trust these contributions are of assistance to your enquiries and the method of delivery is acceptable. If this should not be the case please do advise.

Further written evidence submitted by David Treadwell

Apologies for the need to make this follow‐up contact but, having been made aware of additional information, I may have completely misinterpreted the Term 'College of Policing', as used in this notice.

Also, this appears to be a 'fait accompli' as the Home Secretary, is reported to have said, "that there will be a College of Policing, established at the end of 2012". It is also stated that, The Terms of the College of Policing will not:

1/issue any licence to practice policing. 2/duplicate the roles of other bodies, the like of HMIC or IPCC. 3/be a re‐branded National Policing Improvement Agency 4/Investigate complaints or allegations of misconduct against police officers and staff. This will remain within the remit of the relevant police forces. 5/create a raft of bureaucratic guidance for the police service.

It will however, play a vital role in training and development of police officers and police staff in the future ensuring that continue to retain the skills they need in order to fight crime and protect the public. Quote!

Therefore, how will the College of Policing, sit along side existing establishments, such as 'Bramshill NPIA', or indeed the Metropolitan Police College Hendon. Is it the intention to replace these existing colleges, or is it to become a Charted Institute or Guild?

Will it become necessary to hold a professional qualification to practice in the profession?

8 If it to become a professional body, and as there are no plans to require officers or staff to pay to be members of the College of Policing, and the intention is to become statutory, it will presumably become a State/Public body, responsible to parliament?

As a lay member of the community, having been invited to become engaged or consulted on policing matters, I don't quite now understand where you expect or see this body to sit, within the wider scheme of things.

The aims are laudable, but like many initiatives emanating from parliament the realities can be lost in the fog of interpretation of intentions. What we do need is a clear appreciation of the infrastructure and routes of accountability and that functions are suitably aggregated, to reduce duplication of service.

Again apologies for the possible misinterpretation of aims, but would still trust that these comments are useful to your outcomes.

David Treadwell, Chair, Acocks Green Neighbourhood Forum

October 2012

4 9 Written evidence submitted by the Department of Law, Policing and Investigation and the Centre for Forensic Investigation, Teesside University [LSP 04]

Executive summary

As an education and training team working within higher education and delivering programmes in partnership with a number of police forces. Our view is that the instigation of the College of Policing is a positive step forward for the police service as a whole.

The college should be ambitious in its outlook, regulate professional practice, and possess the ability to sanction poor and/or inappropriate practice. It should maintain and develop education and training products for the service in partnership with higher education and further education, with these products reflecting the professional nature of the service at the minimum level of four on the QCF/FHEQ educational frameworks.

Response to terms of reference

1. What powers, responsibilities and resources should be given to the College of Policing?

1.1 The college should set standards for recruitment, training, promotion, professional practice and identify/sponsor evidence based research in partnership with other organisations.

1.2 The development and/or accreditation of appropriate continuous professional development (CPD) should be a college responsibility, as is the need for the CPD to be kept track of in order for individual practitioners to maintain any future registration as a suitable practitioner.

1.3 The college needs to deal with complaints of professional practice and be in a position to sanction poor and/inappropriate practice.

2. What lessons can be learnt from other professional bodies within the UK and from police professional bodies in other countries?

2.1 The college should follow other national professional bodies, such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), who set the standards for education and training within their profession, ensuring that the skills and knowledge of members are kept up to date (NMC. 2011). Other professional bodies, such as the Forensic Science Society, also support the development of professional practice, therefore future affiliation to such organisations should be considered.

2.2 The development of knowledge and skills to support professional practice should be at an appropriate educational level. We would suggest that the minimum level of qualification should be established at level four on the QCF/FHEQ educational frameworks. This supports the ideals of Neyroud (2011). It should also be considered, that if the college is setting the standards for professional practice, then should the college provide liability insurance for members?

10 2.3 The independence for research exercised by The Royal United Services Institute allows them free thought and careful reflection, such independence has provided unique insights in to defence and security. As such, the new college of policing should be in a position to set the strategy and initiate research themes to inform evidence based practice, but not conduct the research itself, instead partner with independent agencies to do so.

2.4 The correct nationally agreed funding model for the college is essential, to avoid repeating the challenges faced by individual practitioners wishing to be registered with the now defunct Council for the Registration of Forensic Practitioners (CRFP), a number of whom paid for their individual registration, some were supported financially by their police force for registration, others did not register at all. Any funding model which is not supported financially by its member’s deviates from current practice across the UK for the funding of professional bodies.

3. Is it possible for one institution to balance responsibilities for: representing police services; setting and upholding standards; testing and rewarding; training; and guarding public interests?

3.1 Yes, it is possible for one body to do this. However, there should be an organising committee (or similar) with not only members from all of the stakeholders involved, but also lay members.

4. Would it be preferable to create two separate institutions to provide delivery functions and professional representation?

4.1 No, there should be a joined up approach to both functions.

5. How will the professional body interact with HMIC; the IPCC; ACPO; and other institutions in providing leadership and setting standards for police forces?

5.1 The college needs to work closely with these bodies, but the detail needs to be set by the college in consultation with such agencies.

5.2 Interaction should take place between all professional bodies involved in the setting of standards for law enforcement including those for specific professions such as the Forensic Science Society and the Fingerprint Society.

6. What role should the College of Policing have in recruitment and training?

6.1 The creation of a new professional body must be a positive move forward in terms of providing vision and guidance to the service, although the approach to the education and training of future police officers currently seems both disjointed and confusing.

6.2 The college needs to mandate education and training which recognises the professional standing of police officers, who in order to perform their core role, require undergraduate skills such as problem solving, decision making and independent working, which is also linked with the aspirations for the professional standing of police officers identified by Winsor (2012) and would move away from

11 the “what is currently a craft- based operation, where experience and/or habit is the driving force for action – not evidence-based knowledge and practice” (HMIC. 2012 p18).

6.3 The college then needs to identify the opportunities for individuals to progress as lifelong learners as their career progresses. The facts reported by Winsor (2012) that just under 80% of chief police officers hold a level four qualification or above (such as a degree), in itself implies that in order to achieve the most senior ranks within the police service, the likelihood is that at some point an individual will most likely have to study for a such a higher education qualification.

6.4 Neyroud (2011) makes an interesting observation on the education and training of police officers which is “largely delivered in house with relatively little delivered by external providers, from Higher Education (HE), Further Education (FE) or the private sector” (Ibid. p.78). A number of higher education qualifications have been successfully delivered in the UK and other countries in partnerships between police forces and providers. For example, Chan and Dixon (2007) detail a successful partnership between the New South Wales Police Academy and Charles Sturt University in Australia delivering a Diploma of Policing Practice. Successful partnerships to deliver educational programmes have also been achieved in the UK, such as a short programme delivered in a partnership between Cleveland Police and Teesside University (Pepper and McGrath. 2010). The college should be in a position to accredit and promote such professional education and training.

6.5 The college should identify and maintain an approved register of CPD and providers. It is imperative that the college maintains the education and training frameworks developed by the service, such as the Initial Police Learning and Development Programme (IPLDP) and other frameworks.

7. What role could the College have in recruiting non-police officers to senior roles within the police service?

7.1 The role of the college should be to identify the minimum requirements for recruitment and then the education and training requirements for their development based on meeting the needs of the National Occupational Standards (NOS).

8. Are police recruitment processes fair and open and how could they be improved?

8.1 The standardised national recruitment process (SEARCH) is open and transparent though some forces also undertake formal second recruit interviews. There are similar fair processes for the recruitment of Police Community Support Officers (PCSO’s) and Special Constables (SC).

8.2 The roles of the SC and PCSO are considered by many volunteers and employees as a means through which they may eventually gain employment as a regular police officer. However, there is no account taken of the successful completion of an assessment centre to be PCSO or SC if one then applies to be a regular police officer. For example, the pool of over 19,000 volunteer part-time SC’s (Dhani. 2012) is an ideal potential recruiting ground for regular officers, but no credit is currently provided within the recruitment process for their already successful application and assessment.

12

8.3 There is also huge uncertainty amongst educational providers in terms of the acceptance by the police service, or otherwise, of so termed ‘pre-join’ qualifications. Students studying in HE and FE need to understand what the relative benefits are of undertaking a self-funded pre join programme and what, if any, guarantees it can bring for future employment.

9. Is the Metropolitan Police Force over-represented in senior positions?

9.1 This question would require greater clarity in order to formulate a response.

10. Are there specific challenges facing the leaders of the Metropolitan Police Force, which the College of Policing should address?

10.1 There is no doubt that the MPS has a greater level of involvement with counter- terrorism and national security. However, they are also the largest force in the country with greater resources available, not to mention the facilities of both mutual aid and information sharing.

10.2 The more important issue, is the ability of the new college to continue the good work of the National Police Improvement Agency (NPIA) in sharing good practice throughout the workforce.

11. Should the professional body be responsible for civilian police employees?

11.1 Most definitely. The police service of the future must demonstrate a common set of professional standards whether the individual is customer facing or in the back room. The police service should be one family. This could be achieved by establishing categories of membership such as ‘sworn roles’ and ‘unsworn roles’.

12. How should the College of Policing be funded?

12.1 The college should be funded centrally through public funding, top slicing from all the police forces (including the non-Home Office forces, all of whom should support the college), although such funding, indirectly from the tax payer, will need to be justified. Funding should be supported by subscription from members as occurs with other professional bodies who provide professional development and networking, such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police in the USA (IACP. 2012).

References.

Chan. J. & Dixon. D. (2007). The politics of police reform: Ten years after the Royal Commission into the New South Wales Police Service. In. Criminology and Criminal Justice. 7 (4), pp 443-468

Dhani. A. (2012). Police Service Strength in England and Wales. 30 September 2011. London: Home Office 03/12

13 HMIC. (2012). Taking Time for Crime: A study of how police offices prevent crime in the field. London: Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary

IACP. (2012). International Association of Chiefs of Police. Membership. [online]. Available from: http://www.theiacp.org/Membership/tabid/62/Default.aspxIACP [Accessed 25th September 2012]

Neyroud. P. (2011). Review of Police Leadership and Training: Volume One. London: Home Office

NMC. (2011). Nursing and Midwifery Council: Our role. [online]. Available from: http://www.nmc-uk.org/About-us/Our-role/ [Accessed 26th September 2012]

Pepper. I. & McGrath. R. (2010). Pre-employment course: a partnership for success? In. Education and Training. 52 (3), pp 245 - 254

Winsor. T. (2012). Independent Review of Police Officer and Staff Remuneration and Conditions: Final Report – Volume 1. London: HMSO

Biographical summary of team members reporting to the committee

Ian K. Pepper is the Principal Lecturer in Policing at Teesside University.

Ian is an advocate of lifelong learning within criminal justice and law enforcement. He is a graduate of Sunderland University and Durham University. Ian manages a range of specialist learning and development programmes in partnership with law enforcement agencies. He is a former Senior Lecturer in crime scene and forensic science, police trainer, crime scene investigator (CSI) and fingerprint officer.

Ian has designed and delivered education and training to crime scene investigators and police officers across the UK and the world. He has a number of publications and is a member of the International Association for Identification, the Fingerprint Society and the Higher Education Academy. His research interests include police education and training.

Brian Rankin is the Head of Centre for Forensic Investigation at Teesside University.

After completing an MSc in Forensic Science Brian started his career as an operational forensic chemist with the Home Office Forensic Science Service. He has also been a fire investigator and an authorised analyst for the purposes of the Road Traffic Act. He has also had a variety of roles within the management of teams of forensic scientists and has been involved in high profile projects and programmes of work within the Forensic Science Society, the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers.

Brian has been involved in the training of police officers of all ranks, scenes of crime officers and members of the legal profession. He is an advocate of an integrated system to support the investigation of crime to court.

He is a past President of the Forensic Science Society and a member of the recently formed Home Office Forensic Science Advisory Council.

14 Christopher Blake is a Principal Lecturer at Teesside University responsible for the management and delivery of a collaborative policing programme for student police officers with West Mercia Police. Christopher worked for West Midlands Police for thirty years in uniformed operations specialising in roads policing and staff training and development. While seconded to the Central Police Training and Development Authority he worked both as a team leader and as a training manager. Christopher has also delivered investigative training to detectives in Rwanda.

Ruth McGrath is a Senior Lecturer in Law and Policing at Teesside University, teaching on a range of vocationally focused policing programmes with partner organisations. She is a former police sergeant with Cleveland Police and has experience across a broad range of policing specialisms, including roads policing, criminal investigation and police custody. As a former police trainer she had responsibility for training and development of staff at all levels of the organisation, and continues to be involved in the recruitment and assessment process for potential police and community support officers.

Helen Pepper is a Senior Lecturer in Police Studies at Teesside University leading the delivery of a ‘Skillsmark’ endorsed Foundation Degree in Police Studies in partnership with Cleveland Police. Helen started her career with the Forensic Science Service as an assistant scientific officer. She later moved on to become a crime scene investigator (CSI) with West Yorkshire Police. She has been a senior scientific support officer with Durham Constabulary and the force forensic trainer. Helen has also been the acting Head of the Durham Constabulary Crime Scene Investigation Department.

Peter Williams is a Senior Lecturer with Teesside University teaching programmes in partnership with West Mercia Police and the military police, as well as delivering online programmes in counter-terrorism. Peter served thirty years with Merseyside Police and retired as a police Inspector, having also served as a custody officer and trainer in the force custody department along with performing a consultative role for custody matters with the police in Hungary. Prior to his operational police career Peter worked as a member of police staff with the then Liverpool and Bootle Constabulary and served in the Royal Air Force Police.

Department of Law, Policing and Investigation and the Centre for Forensic Investigation at Teesside University October 2012

6 15 Written evidence submitted by the Police Foundation [LSP 05]

About the Police Foundation

The Police Foundation is the only independent charity focussed entirely on developing people's knowledge and understanding of policing and challenging the police service and the government to improve policing for the benefit of the public. Founded in 1979 by the late Lord Harris of Greenwich, the Police Foundation has been highly successful in influencing policing policy and practice, through research, policy analysis, training and consultancy.

The Police Foundation welcomes this inquiry which raises important questions over the role of the College of Policing.

We support the idea of a College of Policing which promotes evidence-based policing, sets standards of professional behaviour (alongside other bodies where appropriate), and promotes good practice. However, we have concerns that a number of issues concerning the College are yet to be clarified. It is still unclear as to how training is intended to be provided or overseen and to what extent it may be devolved to police forces. We are also unsure as to how the College will fit into the broader landscape of policing and the extent to which it will connect to the work of the Home Office and of Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC). We set out our response to the terms of reference below.

What powers, responsibilities and resources should be given to the College of Policing?

1. We are encouraged to learn that the Home Office intends the College to ‘identify evidence of what works in policing and share best practice’ and ‘provide access to a body of knowledge that is informed by evidence-based research and work with universities to share and develop the underlying evidence base for policing practice.’ We fully support an evidence-based approach to policing and the College can assist in this by ensuring that officers learn how to interpret and use academic evidence to inform effective practice. To this end, as well as working with universities, we suggest the College might work with other relevant organisations such as research centres or independent think tanks.

2. We would support the creation of a high quality knowledge bank, based on research commissioned from a range of independent sources. We alert attention to bodies such as the King’s Fund, which is independent but works with a range of different organisations to support the development of policy and practice in the health sector. Policing would greatly benefit from a similarly independent approach to applied research and evidence gathering that feeds into policing policy and practice, building on the work of the NPIA. The College might also wish to explore the issue of access to POLKA. The shared knowledge bank of POLKA is a valuable resource in policing. Some of the data held is confidential but there is an argument for making its less sensitive knowledge more accessible via a wider log in system to policing partners, stakeholders or interested parties nationally and internationally. This would enable a

16 broader audience to follow and contribute to the discussion around policing, adding a range of innovative ideas from wider sources both within and outside the police service.

3. The Police Foundation welcomes the intention for the College to set standards of professional behaviour. In its capacity as a centre for training and professional development the College should rightly be responsible for setting standards of good practice, professional behaviour and conduct. In England and Wales, there is no single document that sets out the ethics of policing. The principles are spread across a confusing number of sources: Peel’s Nine Principles, the Code of Professional Standards, the Police Code of Conduct, ACPO’s Statement of Common Purpose and Values, the Policing Pledge and the Quality of Service Commitment. There is a need here for rationalisation and synthesis and the College will be in a position to provide valuable assistance in this regard. The European Code of Police Ethics, produced by the Council of Europe might provide a helpful starting point for this.1

4. We want to be clear, however, that in our view the new Professional Body should not be given the remit to set national policing strategy or policy. These must be set by either Parliament or by Government, through the Home Office. We make this point because the word ‘standards’ is not adequately defined in the Neyroud Review. Care needs to be taken to ensure that the setting of standards does not go too far and become, in effect, policy-making. Concerns have been raised over ACPO’s undue influence on policy2 and the new College should take care that it does not follow a similar route.

5. The Police Foundation would be similarly concerned if the College were given a role in setting guidance. Guidance is intended to assist the police in interpreting legislation. It is currently produced in part by ACPO, and the Neyroud review identifies 400 pieces of doctrine that, it states, are ‘of varying quality.’ Although the ACPO Guidance is not binding, it is often assumed it has legal force and police officers are sometimes surprised to learn it is not statutory. The courts also on occasion assume ACPO Guidance sets out recognised policing policy on matters such as DNA retention.3 We recognise the need to provide guidance to assist the police in applying legislation effectively and we appreciate the specialist knowledge that the police hold in terms of operational matters. In this respect we believe the College should be responsible for professional practice guidance; that which concerns the leadership and management of a force, providing expertise and insight for chief constables to draw on in help running a police force. However in our view the Home Office should retain ownership and responsibility for guidance intended to

1The European Code of Police Ethics Council of Europe 2001 http://polis.osce.org/library/f/2687/500/CoE-FRA-RPT-2687-EN- European%20Code%20of%20Police%20Ethics.pdf 2 Including at our Oxford Policing Policy Forum Police Foundation (2009) Politics and the Police available at http://www.police- foundation.org.uk/files/POLICE0001/OxfordForum/OPPF%20REPORT%206th.pdf and also The Guardian, 16 February 2009, Police Chiefs Body faces call for review. 3 Regina (GC) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2010] WLR (D) 193

17 assist the police in interpreting legislation, as this type of guidance can become in effect secondary legislation or policy and as such it must accurately reflect its statutory origins. This is not one of the responsibilities of the Home Secretary which we feel can or should be devolved.

6. We appreciate that it is a difficult distinction to draw but we would hope by alerting attention to the issue, the College might consider the fine line between guidance or standards which are operational, professional and practical (which should be within its remit) and guidance or standards which amount to policy-making (which should be the responsibility of the Home Office, or locally, the new Police and Crime Commissioners).

Is it possible for one institution to balance responsibilities for: representing police services; setting and upholding standards; testing and rewarding; training; and guarding public interests?

7. Although the phrase ‘represent the police service’ has been used in the Neyroud review, and in Home Office4 and ministerial statements,5 we are nonetheless unclear about what this phrase means in the context of the College. Our understanding is that the role of the College is to provide training and professional development, improve the evidence base for policing and to set standards for policing. To whom is the service to be represented? Which ranks will be represented? In what context? What representational role is the College intended to have? We would like to understand this aspect of the College’s intended role further.

8. With regard to the other responsibilities set out above, in our view the College should set standards for professional behaviour (working with HMIC where appropriate to achieve this) and is well placed to test and reward academic and practical qualifications (but not to test or reward beyond these areas). As for ‘guarding public interests,’ the Home Office website sets out this responsibility as: “Protect the public interest: by promoting the values of effective policing; learning from and supporting improvement in policing; and maintaining ethics and values.” We support the College’s role in promoting the values of effective policing and in providing training and development to improve policing and its evidence-base. If by ‘maintaining ethics and values’ the Home Office means the College should set standards and train and test officers at all levels to ensure they meet those standards, then we agree there is a role for the College in this regard. If, however, the Home Office envisages a broader role for the College in terms of either maintaining or upholding standards beyond training and testing officers then in our view this strays too far into the role of the HMIC.

4http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/police/college-of-policing-introduction?view=Binary ‘it is essential that the body represents the desires and aspirations of the police service’ 5 15 December 2011 ‘The police professional body will develop policing as a single profession; it will represent the entire service’ http://www.npia.police.uk/en/docs/HO_- _Future_of_the_NPIA_Commons_-_2011_12_15_1.pdf

18 9. We do have concerns over the range of responsibilities intended for the College, particularly due to the lack of clarity in this area. It appears the College may be intended to operate in some ways as a training delivery body, in some ways as a membership organisation (representing the views of its members) and possibly in some ways as a disciplinary body (upholding standards and maintaining ethics and values). We do not believe it is appropriate for the College to provide both delivery functions and professional representation. In addition to the question of whether a disciplinary role is appropriate, the wide remit proposed may leave the College open to criticism that its role is unclear and will confuse the public. Similar criticism has been directed at ACPO, which has been described by the Association of Police Authorities (APA) as a functional hybrid due to its range of responsibilities.6 It is important that the reasons for replacing much of ACPO with a more transparent and accountable body are not simply replicated in the new College. To this end, we think it would be useful to publish a clear statement of the role and functions as well as governance arrangements for the new slimmed-down version of ACPO at the same time as publishing the details of the role and function of the College of Policing.

Would it be preferable to create two separate institutions to provide delivery functions and professional representation?

10. In our view the College should be responsible for delivery functions – providing training and development, setting standards of professional behaviour and improving the evidence base. We believe there is already an adequate structure for professional representation in place, under the Police Federation, the Police Superintendent’s Association and the remaining functions of ACPO. If this route is not followed, then we believe the title of ‘College’ should be reviewed. ‘College’ implies learning and training, rather than ‘professional representation’ and the term may lead to confusion in the public’s mind.

How will the professional body interact with HMIC; the IPCC; ACPO; and other institutions in providing leadership and setting standards for police forces?

11. We see the College as having an important role in setting standards of professional behaviour (with assistance from the Home Office) and training officers to reach and surpass those standards. It is the role of the HMIC to monitor whether these standards have been met and of the Independent Police Complains Commission (IPCC) to oversee an effective, independent complaints system which holds officers accountable to those standards.

12. In order for this linked system to operate effectively, there needs to be a process of information sharing and continuous learning via regular meetings, bulletins such as the IPCC ‘Learning the Lessons,’ and networking between the three organisations. Through this regular contact, information and knowledge on common problems and

6 Association of Police Authorities (2010) Response to Policing the 21st Century

19 best practice can be shared and fed into College training and professional development.

What role should the College of Policing have in recruitment and training?

13. We agree with the Neyroud Review that there needs to be a stronger emphasis on the relationship between education, evidence and practice in policing. We also support the continuing professional development of police officers and the shift from an in-house approach to a greater use of external providers such as institutes of higher education. Training will benefit from being overseen and managed by one national body responsible for ensuring it is of a sufficiently high standard and covers both academic and vocational development.

14. In respect of training, the role of the College should be to develop a curriculum that addresses the multi-faceted skill set required of the constable role; including not only theory but work place skills such as problem-solving, communication, situation management, inter-personal skills and teamwork. Currently police training has a tendency to focus on learning the law rather than learning how best to handle a variety of situations on the ground. Although an understanding of the law is important, the training should not neglect the ‘how’ of policing – in this respect, the best training is usually practical, on-the-job experience and the College will need to identify a way to combine both academic and practical teaching in this regard.

15. There are two areas in particular which we believe are insufficiently valued under the current police training system. The first of these is business and management skills. The risk-averse culture of policing can be a barrier to innovation and development,7 and it is important, particularly in the current context of reducing resources, for the service to find new ways to operate efficiently and effectively, while maintaining a high level of public confidence. To this end we are pleased to note the Home Office’s statement that the College ‘will work with other organisations, including with the private sector to ensure that, where appropriate, the police service is able to access the very best training from outside the police service.’ We believe the use of outside training providers could provide valuable business skills and introduce more forward- thinking, innovative approaches to policing.

16. Secondly, as identified in the Neyroud Review, training on human rights and ethics has hitherto been undervalued. Human rights values based on fairness, procedural fairness, respect and equality are important to policing, not only because they have been shown to increase confidence and legitimacy, but also because one of the principal roles of the police is to protect and promote people’s rights and freedoms. Policing frequently involves balancing different rights and, in practice, the police exercise considerable powers that can affect the liberty of citizens. As noted by the

7 Berry, J (2010) Reducing Bureaucracy in Policing, Home Office

20 Patten report, ‘There should be no conflict between human rights and policing. Policing means protecting human rights.’8

17. An inquiry by the Equality and Human Rights Commission9 found human rights are seen by frontline officers as a less important part of the training process, as ‘political correctness’ rather than a useful tool of policing. The Inquiry identified a feeling amongst police that human rights are ‘criminal’s rights.’ The Joint Committee on Human Rights similarly identified a lack of understanding of human rights at all levels and recommended independent research into the extent of police knowledge and awareness of human rights.10

18. We would therefore welcome an increased focus on training in ethics and human rights that includes a clear understanding of why human rights should be at the core of policing. This could begin at recruitment level with the assessment of candidates with high empathy and negotiation skills who identify with the peacekeeping aims of policing,11 and continue through a training programme based on ensuring an understanding of human rights values and rewarding officers who demonstrate those values. Rather than being a separate training module, human rights training should feature in every part of frontline police training, using case studies to illustrate how a human rights approach could diffuse a difficult encounter or assist policing in other concrete situations.

What role could the College have in recruiting non-police officers to senior roles within the police service?

19. There are, in our view, some clear advantages to a direct entry system. Policing has become increasingly specialist and there is a need for technical abilities in areas such as complex fraud or cyber-crime. The Metropolitan Police Service’s Race and Faith Inquiry12 concluded that the single entry system could consequently leave policing at the margins of more sophisticated crime investigation due to its inability to support a pool of specialists with technical expertise. To tackle the budgetary cuts senior police officers are also increasingly required to make business decisions in areas such as financial management and human resources, and managerial experience gained outside the police service could be useful in this context. Although many police staff may have these specialist skills (particularly in terms of financial expertise), there is arguably a need for more warranted officers to also have them. Candidates with such specialist skills would, in all likelihood, be joining the police as

8 4.1 Patten C (1999) A New Beginning: Policing in Northern Ireland The Report of the Independent Commission in Northern Ireland HMSO 9 Equality and Human Rights Commission (June 2009) Human Rights Inquiry. 10House of Commons (2009) House of Lords Paper 47-11 ‘Demonstrating Respect for Rights? A Human Rights Approach to Policing’ Joint Committee on Human Rights Seventh Report of session 2008-2009. 11 Greene, J. (2010) Policing Through Human Rights, Ideas in American Policing (13) December 2010. 12 Metropolitan Police Authority (May 2011) Race and Faith Inquiry - exploring options for multi-point entry in the Police Service.

21 a second career and thus might be reluctant to start again at the most junior level and undergo the two years of training required under the single entry system.

20. Direct entry could also potentially help to address diversity issues within the police. The Police Foundation has serious concerns about the low levels of women and ethnic minority police officers at middle and senior management level. The Metropolitan Police Service’s Race and Faith Inquiry concluded that multi-point entry could assist in increasing the proportion of female and ethnic minority officers in senior positions. The Inquiry also found that direct entry could help to improve police culture. The single point entry system encourages an inward-facing occupational culture13 with a natural suspicion of outsiders,14 making it difficult to embrace new ways of working and promote collaboration. By contrast, direct entry could help to improve police culture by introducing new ideas and new ways of thinking at senior levels.

21. As well as potential benefits, however, the direct entry system also carries significant risks. The police service is equipped with unique powers that affect people’s rights and liberty, and care should be taken to ensure that these powers are used only by officers that have the necessary training and expertise. Policing is complex and involves considering subtle factors such as the impact of a particular action on community relations. Decisions made in a split second can have far reaching consequences. Two years of ground level, street-based experience can help an officer in developing the ‘craft’ of policing, assisting him or her to develop the use of professional judgment, in preparation for the split-second, practical decisions that will be required.

22. The accumulated knowledge of the police service and its structure based on working through the ranks would be difficult for the College to replicate though training. Furthermore, management positions within the police present some unique challenges that are not easily comparable to the challenges found in other professions. In this respect, the Metropolitan Police Service’s Race and Faith Inquiry found that managerial experience in a role outside of the service is no guarantee of managerial success inside the service and that operational decision-making can only be learnt in role.

23. We are also concerned about the credibility of senior officers recruited through direct entry. There is overwhelming support for single entry inside the police service15 and constables have more confidence in leaders who have had frontline experience.16

13 Barton, H. (2003) ‘Understanding occupational (sub), culture – a precursor for reform: the case of the police service in England and Wales’, International Journal of Public Sector Management, Vol. 16 No.5, pp.346-58. 14 See, for example: Berry, J. (2010) Reducing Bureaucracy in Policing, London: Home Office and MacGregor, M. (2005) Manifesto for the Met Policing London in the 21st Century, London: Policy Exchange. 15 Review of Police Leadership and Training 16 Rowe, M. (2006) ‘Following the leader: frontline narratives on police leadership’, Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, Volume29, Number 4.

22 The focus on direct entry as a way to address diversity issues arguably compounds this problem, and the Metropolitan Police Service’s Race and Faith Inquiry raised concerns that officers recruited through direct entry might be perceived as having been given opportunities based on their race or gender rather than their competence.

24. Clearly, there are challenges facing the recruitment of non-police officers. But there is a valuable role the College could play in this area. The College could, for example, work with forces to identify skills that are lacking, and set standards for the recruitment and assessment of direct entry candidates. In terms of training, the College could design a range of courses to ensure that non-police officers gain relevant on-the-ground training, skills and experience. In cases where practical training is provided by forces in-house, there is a role for the College in supervising and assessing the processes and outcomes. Further, examples of direct entry schemes have already been proposed in the second Winsor Review and it should be within the remit of the College to assess the feasibility of these as well as future schemes.

Should the professional body be responsible for civilian police employees?

25. In our view the College should be responsible for civilian police employees. Officers and staff work together in many branches of policing. Training both within the same organisation will enable the ethos of the service to be promoted and relationships to be established, setting up strong lines of communication and teamwork for the future.

26. As we have stated, in our view the role of the College is that of delivering training, providing a knowledge base of evidence on good practice, and setting and promoting standards. The College should not operate as a disciplinary body, nor as a representative body. Without this representational element, we do not think it is appropriate to ask police officers to fund the College. In this respect we are pleased to note that this is not being planned at present, with the College to be funded until 2015 through the transfer of the NPIA budget.

27. After 2015 in our view the College ought to be funded primarily by central Government, but it may be possible to develop a business model for funding from an additional range of sources. Training through the NPIA was funded in part by Police Authorities and in part by police forces directly. Similarly there may be scope within PCC or force budgets to supplement Government funding by way of a subscription fee or payment for individual courses. In addition, were the College to decide to offer a range of courses to business organisations, such as private security, this might provide a revenue stream.

The Police Foundation

October 2012

23

Written evidence submitted by Stonewall [LSP 06]

Introduction

1. Stonewall welcomes the opportunity to respond to the Committee’s inquiry into leadership and standards in the police service. Stonewall is the leading organisation campaigning and lobbying for lesbian, gay and bisexual equality in Britain. This submission draws on YouGov polling commissioned by Stonewall, as well as our work with over 30 police forces in England and Wales.

Summary

2. Stonewall welcomes the establishment of a professional body to increase professionalism in policing. We believe a body driven by serving police officers will lend credibility to initiatives to tackle homophobic hate crime and same-sex domestic violence and improve engagement with lesbian, gay and bisexual people in local communities. We anticipate that this will help to increase wider support from within the police for such initiatives.

3. Stonewall’s research clearly demonstrates that, although lesbian and gay people experience high levels of homophobic hate crime and domestic violence, very few of these incidents are reported to the police. Lesbian and gay people expect to be treated worse than heterosexual people if reporting a crime, or if suspected of having committed a crime, which has a material impact on their interactions with the police.

4. As the police service adapts to the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners and the changing landscape of policing, a consistent approach to supporting local lesbian, gay and bisexual people will be increasingly important, in order to increase confidence in the police. We believe the College of Policing will have an important role to play in:

• setting definitive standards of how lesbian, gay and bisexual people can expect to be treated by all police officers and police staff;

• ensuring that all police officers and police staff receive adequate training on why sexual orientation issues are relevant to the work of the police and supporting them to fulfil their statutory obligations under the Equality Act 2010;

• raising the visibility of lesbian, gay and bisexual issues in policing, for example by promoting work to tackle homophobic hate crime and same- sex domestic violence and encouraging the sharing of good practice between forces;

• retaining talented lesbian, gay and bisexual police officers and police staff by offering targeted development opportunities.

Stonewall’s research

24 5. Stonewall’s report Homophobic hate crime, based on YouGov polling of over 1,700 lesbian, gay and bisexual people, found that every year one in eight lesbian and gay people experience a homophobic hate crime or incident but less than one in four of those report it to the police. Over a third do not report these incidents to the police because they do not believe they could or would do anything about it. Seven in ten do not report hate crimes or incidents to anyone.

6. Further YouGov polling of over 1,600 lesbian, gay and bisexual people commissioned by Stonewall, Serves You Right, found that more than one in five lesbian and gay people would expect to be treated worse than a heterosexual person when reporting a crime if the police officer knew they were lesbian or gay. Lesbian and gay people think they will be treated even worse by the police if they report a homophobic hate crime.

7. Serves You Right also found that over a third of lesbian and gay people think the police would treat them worse than a heterosexual person because of their sexual orientation if they committed a crime or were suspected of committing a crime. This is exacerbated for lesbian, gay and bisexual people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds. Our report One minority at a time reveals that black gay men feel they have a distinct experience of being stopped and searched because of their sexual orientation. This indicates that the police have a limited understanding of issues relating to ethnicity and sexual orientation, which has an impact on black gay men’s trust and confidence in police services.

8. Our research also demonstrates that, although domestic violence is a significant issue for lesbian, gay and bisexual people, with half of gay and bisexual men having experienced it, very few report it to the police and many of those who do are unhappy with the police’s response. Four in five lesbian, gay and bisexual people who have experienced domestic abuse have never reported incidents to the police. Of those who did report, more than half of gay and bisexual men were unhappy with how the police dealt with the situation. Only half of lesbian and bisexual women who reported abuse were happy with how the police dealt with the situation.

The role of the College of Policing

9. Stonewall welcomes the introduction of a police-led professional body to promote excellence in policing. By putting police officers and police staff at the heart of its work, we believe the College of Policing will lend credibility to on-going work to improve outcomes for lesbian, gay and bisexual victims of crime. We believe police officers will be more likely to support initiatives that draw on the expertise of other police officers working with diverse communities across the country.

Setting definitive standards

10. One of the key roles of the College of Policing will be to set definitive standards of police behaviour. We expect this to include explicit standards about how lesbian, gay and bisexual people can expect to be treated by police officers and police staff. This will help police forces meet their statutory duties under the Equality Act 2010.

25 11. In order for the College of Policing to be fully effective in supporting police forces to comply with the public sector equality duty, it will be important that the body is itself subject to the duty. For this reason Stonewall strongly recommends that the College of Policing is established as a statutory body as soon as possible, in such a way that its public functions are subject the Equality Act 2010. This will mirror other professional bodies such as the General Medical Council and the Law Society.

12. The importance of having a professional body that sets explicit standards of behaviour towards lesbian, gay and bisexual people is demonstrated in other sectors. The General Medical Council, for example, sets standards for doctors on how to treat lesbian, gay and bisexual patients and how to make sure they do not discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation. In the housing sector, the Chartered Institute for Housing has published a practice brief for housing providers, featuring best practice case studies on how to deliver services appropriately to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender clients.

Training

13. Stonewall expects the College of Policing to play a key role in ensuring that all police officers and police staff receive comprehensive training that fully addresses sexual orientation issues. This will ensure that all taxpayers receive the high level of service they rightly expect from the police. Through our work with over 600 employers in a variety of sectors, we know that training targeted at every level of an organisation is a valuable tool in raising awareness of lesbian, gay and bisexual issues.

14. Police training should outline expected behaviours at work in order to create a respectful and supportive working environment for all staff. This will ensure that all police officers and police staff can perform to the best of their ability. Training should cover the police’s legal duty not to discriminate against lesbian, gay and bisexual people, as well as its duty to proactively promote equality for lesbian, gay and bisexual people under the public sector equality duty. Training should also address the relevance of sexual orientation issues to police work, looking in particular at homophobic hate crime and same-sex domestic violence and the reasons why gay people may be anxious about approaching the police.

Raising visibility

15. Through Stonewall’s work with over 30 police forces across England and Wales, we know that many forces want to drive down rates of homophobic hate crime, encourage reporting and improve confidence in the police amongst lesbian, gay and bisexual people in their local communities. While some already demonstrate good practice in this area, many want to better understand the needs of their local gay community and engage effectively with them but simply don’t know how to do so. Through Stonewall’s Diversity Champions programme, many police forces have come to recognise the value of sharing examples of good practice with other forces.

16. We believe the College of Policing will be well placed to extend this sharing of good practice and raise the visibility of work already being undertaken by police

26 forces to engage with local lesbian, gay and bisexual people and reduce homophobic hate crime. For this reason we welcome the Home Secretary’s clarification in her Written Ministerial Statement that the College of Policing will ‘identify evidence of what works in policing and share best practice.’

17. The College of Policing will also have a role to play in raising visibility around lesbian, gay and bisexual issues in other ways, for instance by showing support for gay staff within the police service. Other professional bodies have again demonstrated best practice in this area. The British Medical Association, for example, created a web-based resource celebrating the contributions of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender doctors to the NHS over the past 60 years, and launched the resource to coincide with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans History Month.

18. The College of Policing should also look to work in collaboration with the Gay Police Association, and the lesbian, gay and bisexual staff networks of individual police forces where they exist, to support and raise the profile of gay police officers and police staff. In doing so it can learn from the experiences of other professional bodies that collaborate with staff associations, such as the Royal College of GPs which has strong links with the Gay and Lesbian Association of Doctors and Dentists.

Offering targeted development opportunities

19. Through our work with police forces across the country, we know that lesbian, gay and bisexual police officers and police staff can face barriers to career progression. Many of the police forces we work with offer targeted development opportunities to underrepresented groups within the police service, including lesbian, gay and bisexual police officers and police staff, in order to improve the diversity of senior staff. Four in five police forces who submitted to the Workplace Equality Index 2012, Stonewall’s annual benchmarking exercise of gay-friendly employers, offered targeted development opportunities to lesbian, gay and bisexual staff. Overall, the police was the second highest performing sector in the 2012 index.

20. The College of Policing must ensure that a national development programme continues to be offered to underrepresented groups within the police service, equivalent to the National Policing Improvement Agency’s Positive Action Leadership Programme. This will help to retain talented gay staff, who may look for work elsewhere if they feel they are not sufficiently supported. It will also help to ensure that the senior ranks of the police service reflect the diverse communities they serve.

The publications cited in this response are available to download free from www.stonewall.org.uk/publications.

Stonewall October 2012

4

27

Written evidence submitted by the Public and Commercial Services Union [LSP 07]

1. PCS, the Public and Commercial Services union, represents over 270,000 members throughout the civil service and government agencies, making us the UK’s largest civil service trade union. We also organise widely in the private sector, usually in areas that have been privatised.

2. Our members include those currently working at the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) which is set to be abolished on 30 November. About 400 staff expect to be transferred into the new College of Policing.

3. Our submission to this timely inquiry has been put together with the assistance of PCS reps in the NPIA who have the knowledge and experience of what is required to ensure standards of policing are improved.

4. Our members who are set to transfer out of NPIA are understandably at this late stage concerned about their futures as there is still a lack of clarity over their future employment status and roles. We are still seeking assurances that these staff will retain their civil service status and access to the civil service pension scheme.

5. We have set out our answers to the questions posed in the committee’s terms of reference for the inquiry individually below.

What powers, responsibilities and resource should be given to the College of Policing?

6. We recommend that the college retains the powers of the parts of the NPIA that transfer into it and that its quality assurance powers be enhanced. We note that when the Home Secretary addressed the Superintendents’ Association Conference on 11 September 2012 she made reference to the College of Policing setting first class standards for training, development, skills and qualifications. However, these can only be achieved if the new body is given adequate resources and powers to deliver them.

What lessons can be learnt from other professional bodies within the UK and from police professional bodies in other countries?

7. We do not believe that any of the predecessor organisations to the NPIA were truly professional policing bodies. They provided a range of services to the police, and other bodies concerned with policing, but did not generally set standards of policing and did not have authority to enforce them.

7.1 For the College of Policing to have this role, it would need to have a guaranteed independence of judgement from the Home Office, the police service and other policing bodies. It would consult, and work closely with, these but the judgement would have to be that of the College of Policing.

28

7.2 We do not think that it would be practicable for the College of Policing to retain an independent status if it were to charge the police service for the services it provided, if it had to compete with other providers, and it would be invidious if it did charge but was a sole provider.

Is it possible for one institution to balance responsibilities for representing police services; setting and upholding standards; testing and rewarding; training; and guarding public interests?

8. We do not believe that this is possible. The responsibility for representing police services is not compatible with setting and upholding stands; testing and rewarding; training and guarding public interests. We think the responsibility for representing police services should lie with the Association of Chief Police Officers.

Would it be preferable to create two separate institutions to provide delivery functions and professional representation?

9. There is a difference between representing police services, as a group of organisations, and representing the police as a profession but it is a narrow one. It would be difficult to draw a distinction in our view.

9.1 PCS believes that it would be better for the College to focus on setting and upholding standards and providing professional representation in that sense alone. We believe that this can be combined with delivery functions, and therefore those functions not handled by police services should go to a separate institution.

How will the professional body interact with HMIC; the IPCC; ACPO; and other institutions in providing leadership and setting standards for police forces?

10. We believe that these bodies have different roles. The College of Policing should be responsible for setting the standards of policing and upholding them and would consult and work with the other bodies on this.

10.1 It would not be a regulator, as the HMIC is to be; it would have no complaints handling role as the IPCC has; it would not represent police services or have the coordinating role as ACPO does and neither would it have the law enforcement and intelligence functions that SOCA has and that the National Crime Agency will possess.

10.2 We would expect it to provide some training and other services to these bodies. It could for example provide legal, diversity and human rights validation of policies and training material for the other three bodies. It could also provide leadership, senior command and some specialist training for their staff.

What role should the College of Policing have in recruitment and training?

29

11. We believe that the college should retain the role that NPIA currently has. This includes the design and operation of Police SEARCH recruitment assessment centres and assistance and quality assurance of such centres operated by the police services. NPIA also provides executive services to the tripartite body (Home Office, ACPO, Association of Police Authorities) overseeing the Initial Police Learning and Development Programme that includes design of the learning outcomes, the provision of learning materials and quality assurance for the Initial Police Learning and Development Programme (IPLDP).

What role could the College have in recruiting non-police officers to senior roles within the police service?

12. We recommend that this should be an extension of the current selection arrangements for ACPO posts and that it include defining the learning requirements for these entrants, to enable them to perform in roles as effectively as police officers do

12.1 We understand that courses for senior police managers have been attended by civilian police managers and we think this indicates that there is no inherent problem in running joint selection exercises for police officers and others.

Are police recruitment processes fair and open and how could they be improved?

13. The recruitment process for police constables, as designed and delivered by or under the quality assurance of the examinations and assessments process is rigorously checked at each stage to eliminate discrimination and to be otherwise fair.

13.1 PCS does not know whether, and to what extent, there are additional, force specific, selection processes, and whether they are fair and open. We have no reason to believe that if they exist, they are not fair and open.

13.2 We are concerned that the recruitment of police from BME backgrounds still falls disappointingly well short of reflecting the 7 per cent target figure set by the Home Office in 1999 to reflect the proportion of ethnic minorities in the population as a whole. According to Home Office figures there were 6,679 FTE minority ethnic officers in the 43 English and Welsh police forces as at 31 March 2012, 5 per cent of the total strength, compared with 4.8 per cent a year earlier.

Are there specific challenges facing the leaders of the Metropolitan Police Force, which the College of Policing should address?

14. The Met is the largest force in the UK and we think this may well impose specific challenges. There are also Met functions arising from policing the capital of, and the largest city in the UK, which may well have similar consequences. We think the setting and upholding of standards by the College of Policing should take account of these.

30 4

Should the professional body be responsible for civilian police employees?

15. Yes, we believe that they should be. The police service has an increasing proportion of civilian employees and the range of functions they carry out is also on the increase. Therefore it is vital that the new body has responsibility for these employees.

How should the College of Policing be funded?

16. We believe that the activities of the College of Policing should be primarily financed by the Home Office, following the same funding model that the NPIA has had.

Public and Commercial Services Union

September 2012

31 Written evidence submitted by the Higher Education Forum for Learning and Development in Policing [LSP 08]

Submitted by Dr Dominic Wood on behalf of the Higher Education Forum for Learning and Development in Policing (see 2.2 below)

1.0 Executive Summary

1.1 The following submission provides a higher education perspective on the College of Policing. It represents the shared views of academic members of the Higher Education Forum for Learning and Development in Policing (HE Forum) from the Higher Education Institutions (HEI) listed in section 2.4 below. The main points addressed in the submission relate to standards in policing and those terms of reference that address the composition, role, functioning and governance of the College of Policing. The submission is highly supportive of the introduction of the College of Policing, assuming it is able to provide a professional voice for policing. It is important that the College of Policing is not allowed to become the National Police Improvement Agency (NPIA) by another name.

1.2 The submission is based upon the experiences of delivering an array of policing programmes in HEIs across the UK. A frustration for HEIs has been the difficulty of engaging nationally with policing. Partnerships between HEIs and police services have therefore tended to have only local impact. The programmes themselves are therefore susceptible to changes in the leadership of the local force and students on these programmes will often not have their learning recognised by other police services. Most importantly, those with responsibility for standards within police learning and education within, for example, the NPIA or Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) are too often unaware of what is being offered within these various programmes. A frustration for members of the HE Forum has been the constant need to challenge prejudices about the role HE performs in modernising and professionalising policing, for example in relation to matters of currency and diversity.

1.3 The submission concludes with recommendations, most importantly, that the learning required for all professional policing roles easily equates to a minimum standard of HE level 4. This conclusion is drawn from the experiences that have been gained over the previous 10 years and longer from engaging with police officers from various police services on academic programmes at HEIs across the UK. Police officers on these programmes have routinely demonstrated knowledge, skills and personal attributes normally associated with HE Level 4 learning in meeting the initial police learning requirements on such programmes. It is only fair that all police officers who can demonstrate that they have the appropriate knowledge, skills and personal attributes to be employed as police officers should have these qualities recognised formally and be rewarded accordingly. It is important, we believe, that the qualities required within policing are publically recognised and valued appropriately.

2.0 A brief introduction about the authors of this submission

32 2.1 Dr Dominic Wood is the Chair of the Higher Education Forum for Learning and Development in Policing and the Head of Law and Criminal Justice Studies at Canterbury Christ Church University.

2.2 The Higher Education Forum for Learning and Development in Policing came into existence over a six month period from September 2008 and March 2009. The primary reason for its coming into being was to fill the gap within police training and education left by the absence of a professional voice for policing. It has sought to provide an academic perspective on the developments within police training, focusing on good practice and working towards establishing common benchmarks across the various academic policing programmes. The HE Forum, in consultation with the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA), is working towards establishing academic benchmarks for policing that are linked to, and underpin, professional practice. The Forum is working with contacts within the police services towards this end, in addition to representatives from NPIA and Skills for Justice (SfJ).

2.3 The Forum has always maintained excellent links with professional police at all ranks and sees the interplay between HEIs and police services as an essential component in the development of policing as an academic subject and endeavours to professionalise and modernise policing.

2.4 The HE Forum comprises academic representatives from over 20 UK HEIs, in addition to colleagues from international institutions involved in delivering police education, e.g. Charles Sturt University in Australia. Academics from the following HEIs have contributed towards, and signed up to, the views expressed within this submission:

Canterbury Christ Church University De Montfort University Liverpool John Moores University Oxford Brookes University Staffordshire University University of Central Lancashire University of Chester University of Cumbria University of Glamorgan University of Gloucestershire University of Northampton University of Teesside University of West London University of Wolverhampton

2.5 In addition to contributing to this submission, some of the HEIs listed above have also made submissions to the Home Affairs Select Committee with details of how their own institutions have contributed to the professionalisation of policing.

3.0 Factual information we would like the committee to be aware of

33 3.1 There are currently numerous academic policing programmes run within UK HEIs. Some of these are offered as pre‐service programmes to individuals wishing to join a police service; some are offered to new recruits into the police as part of the initial police learning and development programme (IPLDP); some are offered to serving police officers and police employees as in‐service programmes, including programmes for senior officers. A number of police services are involved with these programmes to varying degrees, from full partnership engagement on programmes to general support and guidance in the running of programmes. Some of the programmes are primarily concerned with general matters of policing; others are related to specific areas of police work.

3.2 In providing these various programmes HEIs can offer the police service an excellent resource in the professionalisation and modernisation of policing. There is a buoyant market, in particular, for pre‐service policing programmes within HEIs that require staffing. Over the past few years there has been a growth in the number of people employed by HEIs with the specific responsibility of designing, developing and delivering policing programmes from HE levels 4 to 8.

3.3 There is an incentive for HEIs to develop programmes that meet the needs and demands of police services, which in turn leads to innovative, creative and thoughtful approaches to curriculum design. These programmes form a contribution to the development of policing at no cost to the police. Also, there is much more scope for HEIs to be aspirational than there is for those currently responsible for developing the curriculum for police training.

3.4 A problem with the existing role played by the NPIA within police training, and one that the College of Policing will do well to avoid, is the extent to which constraints are imposed through the requirement to operate at the level of the lowest common denominator. It lacks the authority to set standards beyond a level that is acceptable by all 43 Home Office police services. Those chief officers that oppose HE level standards for policing thus have an overwhelming influence upon the decisions taken by the NPIA.

3.5 This has been evidenced within our interactions with the NPIA and SfJ. We have always found both organisations supportive of HE involvement in police training but this involvement is seen as ‘additionality’, above and beyond what is actually required. The problem with this approach is that it underestimates, in our view, what police officers need to know to remain safe and operationally effective in a dramatically shifting topography of risk in meeting the needs of the diverse populations served.

3.6 This approach was articulated by the then ACPO lead on Learning and Development, Wendy Walker, at a conference organised by the HE Forum in 2010, when she said that if a 38 year old plumber wished to join the police, the police should do all it can to make sure the plumber’s wish was realised. The point was made against the idea of having what she perceived as onerous qualification requirements for joining the police. But if we reverse this scenario, and ask what happens when a 38 year old police officer wishes to become a plumber, we find that they are required to study and pass examinations before they can qualify as a plumber. It is important that those wishing to join the police, whether they are 18 year old school leavers or 38 year old plumbers, are able to demonstrate that they have the attributes required to be a police officer. We need to challenge the view that the only qualification required to be a police officer, is the desire to be a police officer.

34 3.7 The role of a police officer is so important within liberal democratic societies, and there are such dire consequences when policing is performed badly, that we must establish appropriate standards of professionalism for those wishing to become police officers. We believe that the learning required for all professional policing roles is easily equivalent to HE level 4 and above. Existing police officers who can demonstrate that they have the appropriate skills and knowledge meet this level of academic recognition.

3.8 An important role for the College of Policing will be in articulating the professional requirements for all policing roles. However, it is important that the College does not then also have responsibility for designing, developing or delivery training programmes that meet these professional requirements. This should be left to educational institutions and/or other providers who have the expertise and resources to do this, working in collaboration with professional police. The College of Policing should have a role in ensuring that programmes meet the standards it sets on a regular, on‐ going basis. There should be a requirement, for example, for providers of the programmes to demonstrate that they have the appropriate expertise and that they are keeping abreast of legislative changes, research into evidence based practice and normative debates about the role and purpose of policing within society.

3.9 The issue of currency is sometimes raised as a concern, particularly in relation to students on pre‐service programmes. However, our experience has been that the issue of currency is not currently addressed adequately and there would be much more scope for students on pre‐service programmes to be made aware of the need for professional police officers to regularly and routinely update and refresh their knowledge and understanding of legislation and policy initiatives.

3.10 Diversity is also raised as a concern from establishing HE levels of academic attainment for entry into policing. It is suggested that such qualifications would present artificial barriers and reduce the extent to which the police are representative of the population.

3.11 It should be noted against this argument that HEIs have generally been much better than police services at increasing the diversity of their respective recruits. The diversity argument tends to both ignore the failings of the police in diversifying its work force and also caricature HEIs as ivory towers. For example, Foundation Degrees in particular have had a positive impact on widening participation in higher education.

3.12 We have one example of a pre‐service policing programme that has attracted an ethnically diverse group of students. However, at the end of the first year of the programme, when students are required to become special constables to continue on the programme, the diversity of the student cohort is significantly reduced because the recruitment processes into the special constabulary appear to be biased against those from ethnic minorities. In other words, it is the police that restrict the diversification, not academic requirements.

3.13 Likewise, a number of initial police training programmes linked to HEIs have demonstrated that typical recruits joining the police have been capable of meeting the learning requirements set at HE level 4 and above. In some instances, particularly in the early days of such programmes in 2004‐ 2005, individuals had applied to join the police not knowing that they would be required to enrol at an HEI and complete an academic Certificate at HE level 4 or above. Nonetheless, they have easily

35 met the academic requirements; the small minority that have struggled with the assignments set by HEIs have also tended to underperform in the operational environment on area.

3.14 A final point to note on the issue of diversity is that the police have been particularly poor in finding ways of employing people with registered disabilities. The perceived attributes of being a good police officer are still far too rigidly set in terms of physical attributes. This might be an important aspect of many policing roles but it is not a necessity within all.

3.15 Much of what has been addressed in this submission so far pertains particularly to entry into policing. However, it is also important that the College of Policing considers ways of engaging with those already in service. Too often, the vast majority of police officers are ignored in discussions about policing and it is important that existing expertise and good practice within policing is captured, recognised and rewarded.

4.0 Recommendations that we would like the committee to consider

4.1 The College of Policing should have academic representation as part of its committee structures. This representation should cover both research, and learning & teaching aspects of the College’s work. The HE Forum would welcome the opportunity to support and work in partnership with the College, in coordinating and managing the development of an evidence base or archive. This would enable the dissemination of demonstrable best practice in Learning and Development at all levels in addition to commissioning research to ensure that a knowledge base for innovation and excellence becomes the cornerstone of professionalism in policing.

4.2 The College of Policing should be aspirational and drive the standards that raise the professionalism of the police rather than simply meeting the lowest common denominator in terms of what is acceptable within the profession. We strongly encourage the College to establish HE level 4 as a minimum standard for all policing roles.

4.3 Beyond this, the College of Policing should work towards articulating the professional requirements for all policing roles in order to foster the creation of appropriate programmes of study that meet these different requirements. This should lead to modules and programmes of study being developed and offered to serving police officers wishing, for example, to be promoted to sergeant, inspector etc., but also to those wishing to specialise in particular policing roles. This process should lead to greater emphasis on the epistemic authority of police officers performing roles for which they are suitably qualified.

4.4 The College of Policing needs to find ways of encouraging innovation in the design, development and delivery of appropriate policing programmes. This will foster open and transparent mechanisms that allow for different providers to have their programmes scrutinised and will require the College of Policing to engage with professional bodies in complementary areas, such as the forensic sciences. There should also be a recognition of the need to establish policing standards that apply to organisations other than the Home Office police services.

4.5 Finally, the College of Policing should pay particular attention to ensuring that all current serving police officers are given the opportunity and support to have their existing skills and knowledge recognised and rewarded appropriately; likewise, they must be supported in developing their

36 professionalism further through the offering of College of Policing accredited in‐service programmes delivered by HEI.

Higher Education Forum for Learning and Development in Policing

October 2012

6

37 Written evidence submitted by Victim Support [LSP 09]

The following paper is Victim Support’s response to the Home Affairs Committee request for input as part of the inquiry on the soon to be established College of Policing.

Executive summary

While Victim Support does not feel it is appropriate or indeed best placed to answer all of the questions listed within the terms of reference, we believe it is important to respond where relevant as the national organisation speaking up for victims and witnesses in England and Wales.

Victim Support welcomes the creation of a professional policing body at a national level but in order to deliver its goals, it will need to obtain input from key agencies that regularly work alongside police forces as part of the wider Criminal Justice System. The Home Office have outlined that the College of Policing will achieve its objectives by strengthening the links between the police service and other organisations. Victim Support would welcome the opportunity to regularly provide input to the College of Policing in order to represent the views of victims of witnesses. This will help to ensure that all police forces in England and Wales deliver the standards of services that victims of witnesses expect from their local police service.

Terms of reference

1. How will the professional body interact with HMIC; the IPCC; ACPO; and other institutions in providing leadership and setting standards for police forces?

1.1. It is important that as part of setting standards for police forces, organisations representing the needs of their key stakeholders (victims and witnesses being one of these), can contribute to outlining the importance of delivering consistent and high standards of service that they require.

1.2. To achieve this, Victim Support would welcome the opportunity to have a senior representative to sit on the College of Policing Board as one of the non-police representatives. This will help to ensure the College of Policing serves the public interest, and specifically to speak up on behalf of victims and witnesses.

38

1.3. Professional standards should include police force and police officer compliance with the Victims’ Code of Practice (to be reviewed in early 2013). All police forces are currently required to (but are not made accountable for) provide victims with a minimum level of service, such as being provided with a case update every 28 days, the right to hear when a suspect is arrested, charged, bailed or sentenced. By making police forces more accountable to delivering a consistent service to victims through the Victims’ Code, we can be confident that victims are being provided the standards of service they should expect to receive.

1.4. In addition to the Victims’ Code, the soon to be appointed Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) will have a statutory duty to obtain the views of victims under the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act. This offers up another opportunity to ensure that police services provide a high standard of service to victims and witnesses. Victim Support looks forward to working alongside PCCs to ensure this duty becomes a reality.

2. What role should the College of Policing have in recruitment and training?

2.1. As part of their training, police officers (and where relevant, police staff) of all ranks should be fully briefed on the importance of keeping victims regularly informed about their case. Victims that are satisfied with the service they receive are more likely to report crime in the future, have more confidence in the CJS, thus encouraging more to attend court to give evidence and see more offenders brought to justice.

2.2. Victim Support would be open to assisting the College of Policing in officer training requirements specifically in relation to the professional standards that officers (and indeed staff) should be meeting when providing victims with information and other services. In addition, Victim Support staff could provide officers and staff with training to underline the importance and benefits of offering Victim Personal Statements to all victims of crime. Currently, not all victims are provided with the opportunity to provide a Victim Personal Statement to outline how a crime has personally affected them.

3. Should the professional body be responsible for civilian police employees?

39

3.1. Yes, the professional body should also be responsible for civilian police employees.

3.2. If victims are to receive a consistent standard of service, this needs to be embraced by all officers and police staff, i.e. the entire police force. Initiatives such as the ‘total victim care day’ which was introduced by the Metropolitan Police earlier this year was an example of how important it is that civilian police employees are also fully up to speed in regards to the importance of delivering a high standard of service to victims. It is not only police officers, but on many occasions it is civilian police employees that are tasked with providing victims with the essential information they require.

Victim Support October 2012

40 Written evidence submitted by the Independent Police Complaints Commission [LSP 10]

Summary

Since it became operational in 2004, the IPCC’s investigations, casework and research activity has provided an important source of information to help drive improvement in policing across England and Wales. The IPCC can point to a number of specific examples where, as a result of its work, systemic changes have been made either for one specific police force or for the service as a whole.

Where a need for a change in policy is identified, the IPCC makes recommendations to ACPO, NPIA or other relevant bodies and IPCC Commissioners also engage frequently with relevant organisational leads to ensure that learning from the Commission’s work is taken forward. The Commission will continue to have an important role to play in this area both in identifying and recommending improvements to the police service and dealing with areas affecting public confidence in policing such as tackling corruption.

In order to maximise public confidence in the IPCC and to ensure that the Commission’s recommendations are taken seriously, the IPCC is seeking a statutory framework in which its institutional recommendations require a formal published response by the responsible authority within a specific period of time. This will also provide a route for both the new College of Policing and the soon to be elected Police and Crime Commissioners to follow up on areas requiring improvement.

Given that the College of Policing is mandated with setting and upholding standards in policing, it will be important for it to build effective relationships with the IPCC, along with other members of the policing landscape, to ensure it is able to make maximum use of the intelligence and evidence that they produce. The IPCC looks forward to working with the College in the future.

The IPCC’s role in improving standards in the police service

1. As well as having investigative powers and an appellate function, the IPCC also has a responsibility for oversight of the police complaints system as a whole. The IPCC carries out this role alongside key stakeholders and in relation to its priority areas1 to ensure that improvements are delivered across the system. In relation to the complaints system as such, the IPCC issues statutory guidance to police forces on how they should handle complaints and referrals under the Police Reform Act. A revised version of this guidance, taking account of continued learning as well as new legislation, is currently out for consultation and will be issued in November 2012. It stresses that complaints should be approached as

1 The IPCC’s current priority areas are deaths and serious injury: in police custody, as a result of police use of firearms and less lethal weapons, as a result of gender abuse and domestic violence where it is alleged that the police have failed to protect the victim, and following road traffic incidents where it is alleged the police have caused or failed to prevent. The other priority areas are serious police corruption, police use of stop and search powers and other issues affecting young person’s confidence in the police and policing of protests and public order incidents.

41 an important source of feedback from those in contact with the police, which can be used to influence and monitor standards of policing.

2. Through the course of its work, the IPCC has been able to identify opportunities to improve policy and practice within individual police forces or across the service as a whole. These opportunities have arisen from individual investigations where specific learning recommendations were made, through the assessment of appeals or as the result of a more in-depth research study in which specific areas of police practice, known to have impacted on public confidence, have been considered. In addition, the IPCC is responsible for the publication of quarterly and annual performance data/statistics on complaints recorded against the police, how they have been handled and subsequent appeals to the IPCC. The annual reports detail national and force level data and identify trends providing police forces with key information which they are encouraged to use as part of their continual assessment of their own policy and practice.

3. As well as making recommendations directed at specific forces or the police service as a whole, the IPCC also shares and disseminates learning through its Learning the Lessons Bulletins. These are produced by a multi-agency group, led by the IPCC, and contain a series of easy to read case studies to encourage policy makers, managers, officers and staff to consider a series of questions and think about how they could prevent a recurrence of similar incidents.

4. Some specific examples of where the IPCC has identified and made improvements to policing are provided below:

Code of practice on the management of police pursuits

5. In 2007, the IPCC conducted a detailed research analysis into police road traffic incidents involving serious and fatal injuries. This piece of work identified shortcomings in police practice around police pursuits and the Commission worked closely with ACPO and road safety groups to improve national policy in this area. One of the specific recommendations in the report was that ACPO guidance on the management of police pursuits should be made subject of a statutory code. Although the process of codification commenced, it stalled in 2010 with the formation of a new government. The IPCC continued to pursue the matter with relevant national stakeholders and the Minister for Policing. The Minister recognised the value of this work and in May 2011, the Code of Practice on the Management of Police Pursuits was presented to Parliament requiring pursuits to be conducted to exacting standards set by ACPO, ensuring maximum safety for members of the public and police officers.

Deaths in police custody

6. Figures from the IPCC’s predecessor body, the Police Complaints Authority, indicate that in the year’s prior to the establishment of the IPCC, deaths in police custody remained constant at 30-34 each year. There has been a downward trend in the number of deaths annually since then with 15 being recorded in 2011/12. The IPCC has conducted rigorous and transparent investigations following many of these deaths, which have resulted both in individuals being

42 held to account where necessary and in the IPCC making recommendations in relation to training, equipment and facilities.

7. Recently, the IPCC has helped shape new national guidance on the safer detention and handling of detainees. The Commission worked with ACPO and the NPIA on the second edition of the ACPO Guidance on the Safer Detention and Handling of Persons in Police Custody, which was released in March 2012. The guidance focuses on practical issues within custody and aims to provide a definitive guide to police forces on strategic and operational policies to raise standards of care within custody. The IPCC made a number of recommendations on best practice as a result of learning arising from its work which have been reflected in the new guidance. One key change relates to the handling of detainees who are intoxicated. A new definition of “drunk and incapable” has been included, meaning someone who is unable to walk or stand unaided, or is unaware of their actions or unable to fully understand what is said to them. If a person is found to be drunk and incapable then they should be treated as being in need of medical assistance at hospital and an ambulance should be called. The revised document also gives further guidance on a range of other areas including risk assessments, handover procedures and dealing with detainees with diabetes.

Mental health and police custody

8. In 2008 the IPCC published a research report which examined the extent and use of police stations as “places of safety” under section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983. This followed concerns raised by the Commission about the number of people with mental health problems who died in police custody. The study sought to identify good practice and made a series of recommendations for the police, health, social care and other relevant bodies, to seek to minimise the use of police custody as a place of safety.

9. This was the first time national statistics on this subject had been produced and they were used to inform national policy including the report by Lord Bradley into mental health and offending. They formed part of the resulting recommendations to reduce the practice of using custody suites as places of safety. In addition the report was used to encourage local healthcare providers to create alternative places of safety for people with a mental illness coming into contact with police custody. The Home Secretary recently confirmed that she had secured the Health Secretary's commitment to divert more mentally ill offenders away from the criminal justice system, including introducing mental health liaison and diversion services at every police station that needs them. These measures as well as an NHS commissioned pilot to deliver a police custody health service are in tune with the recommendations made by the IPCC in 2008.

Gender violence

10. The IPCC has conducted a number of investigations following fatal incidents of domestic violence where it is alleged that the police have failed to protect the

43 victim. A number of recommendations and areas of learning have been identified and disseminated throughout the police service. These included a recommendation to all forces that they conduct domestic homicide reviews following a domestic murder, a recommendation to the Home Office that it consider changes to legislation to ensure that offenders who return to the UK having served a life sentence in another country are subject to a life licence here and a recommendation to ACPO that it make amendments to the national call handling standards.

11. Similarly, the IPCC has recently produced a report, jointly with ACPO, on the abuse of police powers for purposes of sexual exploitation. This arose from a number of cases dealt with both by the IPCC and individual police forces. The report contains recommendations designed to prevent, detect and monitor such behaviour and to learn lessons from individual cases of abuse.

Police corruption

12. In July 2011 and in the wake of concerns around phone hacking, the Home Secretary requested a report on the IPCC’s experience of corruption in the police service in England and Wales. The IPCC submitted its initial report at the end of August 2011 with a final, more detailed report submitted in April 2012.

13. The report illustrated the kind of behaviour that undermines public confidence in the police such as abuse of authority, perverting the course of justice, and accepting generous hospitality. A number of recommendations for change were identified, which included the need for Chief Constables to ensure more consistency in their recording and referral of corruption cases to the IPCC, the need for clearer public information about what constitutes police corruption and the need for a more effective national system for handling allegations of corruption against very senior officers. The IPCC is working with ACPO and others to ensure these actions are taken forward.

A statutory framework for IPCC recommendations

14. The examples above show that throughout its work, the IPCC regularly identifies institutional failings in police forces about which recommendations for change are made. There is currently no regulatory framework or mechanism to ensure such recommendations are properly followed up or enforced and this has understandably caused concern from a number of bodies.

15. A statutory framework in which IPCC institutional recommendations require a formal published response by the responsible authority within a specific period of time would help reinforce public confidence in the work of the IPCC and the police more generally. It would also provide a route for both the College of Policing and the new Police and Crime Commissioners to follow up on areas requiring improvement.

Working with the new College of Policing

44 16. As evidenced above, the IPCC currently works closely with ACPO, NPIA and other policing bodies to ensure that changes are made to policing policy and practice as a result of IPCC learning and recommendations. The Commission will continue to have an important role to play in this area both in identifying and recommending improvements to the police service and dealing with areas affecting public confidence such as tackling police corruption, particularly where this results in investigations into very senior police officers.

17. Currently the NPIA plays an important role in disseminating learning both as part of the Learning the Lessons multi-agency group (see paragraph 3) and through its projects such as the Police Online Knowledge Area (POLKA), a vital tool to help improve collaboration and information sharing across the police service.

18. Given that the new College of Policing is mandated with setting and upholding standards in policing, it will be important for it to build effective relationships with the IPCC, alongside other relevant organisations, to ensure it is able to make maximum use of the intelligence and evidence that the Commission produces. The IPCC looks forward to working with the College and hopes that it will be able to build upon the success of past initiatives by ensuring that new and improved ways of learning are identified and taken forward for the benefit of the police service and public as a whole.

Further information on the IPCC

19. The IPCC was established by the Police Reform Act 2002 (PRA) and became operational in April 2004. Its primary statutory function is to secure and maintain public confidence in the police complaints system in England and Wales. It acts as an appeal body for some locally handled complaints and issues statutory guidance on complaints handling to police forces. It undertakes independent investigations into the most serious injuries and other human rights breaches; and has the power to manage or supervise police investigations. Its statutory role also involves an obligation to measure, monitor and where necessary, seek to improve the current system. The IPCC is independent and makes its decisions independently of the police, Government and interest groups.

20. The IPCC was created following both public and political concerns about the lack of an independent system to deal with complaints and conduct matters within the police service. Since 2004, the organisation’s remit has been extended to include serious complaints and conduct matters relating to staff at the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and the UK Border Agency (UKBA).

21. The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 has extended the IPCC’s remit further. Since January 2012, the IPCC has been responsible for deciding whether any criminal allegations relating to the occupant of the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPC) or his Deputy should be investigated. The IPCC will have a similar remit over Police and Crime Commissioners and their deputies following their election in November.

45 22. The IPCC is run by a Chair, Deputy Chair and ten Commissioners. Together they make up the Commission. Commissioners (other than the two non-executive Commissioners and the Chair) have an operational role and also have responsibility for oversight of the organisation as a whole. Commissioners are appointed by the Home Secretary and by law they must never have served as a police officer. The Commission is supported by a Chief Executive, a small management team and a staff of about 370. In 2011/12, the IPCC received an annual budget of £34.3m.

Independent Police Complaints Commission October 2012

6

46 Written evidence submitted by Skills for Justice [LSP 11]

Skills for Justice is the licensed Sector Skills Council for a growing footprint including Justice, Safer Communities and Legal Services. We work with key stakeholders to identify the skills priorities and needs of the Sector and support the development of workforce skills and operational competence. We have a long‐standing relationship with the UK Police Service and have worked with them to improve workforce management and performance. We believe that this means we are well‐placed to assist the Home Affairs Committee in this Inquiry. In terms of our response, we do not intend to answer each question in turn. We will attempt to address the core issues raised in the terms of reference and provide additional comment where appropriate to our remit.

It is evident that the Police Service is facing a tough challenge; managing unprecedented reductions in funding whilst delivering a high quality, effective service that commands the confidence and respect of the public. This can only be achieved if the workforce is sufficiently skilled and professional and therefore we support the overarching ambition of the new College of Policing. Consequently, we welcome this inquiry and fully endorse the emphasis placed on leadership and standards. Nevertheless, in order to achieve these ambitions within the financial restraints being experienced by forces in England and Wales, we urge government to exercise caution against any measures that will see the Service incurring unnecessary, additional costs through the establishment and maintenance of The College.

Whatever powers, responsibilities and resources are given to the College of Policing, we would advocate building on the work that has taken place to develop existing models, frameworks, process and tools and to make best use of them in achieving the reforms required through best value solutions. For example, systems of accreditation already exist, as do national standards. There is a very comprehensive suite of National Occupational Standards (NOS) that describe the skills, knowledge and competence required of every Police Officer in any rank or role within the Police Service of England and Wales. These standards are already widely used in recruitment, selection, promotion and learning and development across the Police Service and are highly valued. Skills for Justice would advocate that these existing systems are utilised by The College to achieve its challenging agenda rather than new systems be created as this would enable The College to achieve its ambitions more quickly and at a significantly reduced cost thus increasing the impact The College can have on the Service.

There already exists a systemised system of professional standards in place within the Police Service in the form of the Policing Professional Framework (PPF) (see Annex 1) which includes the Behaviours and National Occupational Standards (NOS) that Police Officers should display in carrying out their functions. Skills for Justice is responsible for working with police and law enforcement agencies to develop and maintain the National Occupational Standards (NOS). As highlighted earlier in this submission NOS and the PPF are used extensively across Police HR systems, examples include the Search recruitment process for new Police Officers; the Policing Diploma that all officers need to complete upon joining the Service; the national promotion processes for Sergeant and Inspector and the Police National Assessment Centre for the most Senior Officers.

Skills for Justice have been integral in designing and developing the PPF which is used by the majority of police services in England and Wales and underpins key national training recruitment and professional accreditation processes. Through our work in collaboration with the forces we have created a cost effective system that assists in recruiting, retaining and developing all staff and is contained within one simple structure. It provides a comprehensive framework of attitudes, behaviours, knowledge, understanding and skill that can be applied to all police roles providing clarity of the professional and occupational competence required for the delivery of an effective

47 police service.

1 The PPF was launched in December 2010 and has already reduced bureaucracy associated with HR processes by 70% resulting in savings of up to £150k per force2, and is developed and maintained by Skills for Justice. The PPF and NOS are the fundamental basis of the Professionalising Investigation Programme (PIP) a programme which is cited as an example of what can be achieved through the effective implementation of NOS in both the Neyroud and Winsor reviews. The return on investment across the Service through solutions such as the PPF is significant given the modest investment they require against the wide reaching application and national benefit accrued.

In addition the framework provides the basis for the development of overarching professional arrangements for Policing including a set of common and consistent qualifications, accreditation and recognition. We fully support the need for accreditation in the service and the appropriate use of licence to practise schemes. However, we believe that the Service already has the resources and tools to address these issues without the need to resort to investment in replacement models or radically different approaches. The PPF and NOS already provides a framework that the Service uses, and can increase use of, to accredit learning and performance across all roles and ranks. The qualifications developed from the PPF would effectively utilise the Qualification and Credit Framework (QCF) accrediting the skills and knowledge an officer or member of staff requires to be competent in the workplace.

The additional benefit of the QCF is that it could provide the Service with a licence to practise scheme at no additional cost to achieving the qualification. We have previously scoped and made recommendations regarding the setting up of such a scheme, effectively building on the elements already in place. This would facilitate Winsor recommendations on ‘expertise’ payments, an option we have been asked to scope and explore with the Service. Furthermore, the existence and increasing use of the PPF by the Service, with the wide recognition and use of the existing NOS, provides the essential core standards which could be used to enable the progressing of many of the Winsor recommendations more immediately than waiting for the development of alternate standards or frameworks by the new College of Policing. Therefore we would suggest that the College plan and continue on this path and would welcome the opportunity to work with the College to further develop and build on this approach.

Because the PPF is mapped to NOS the system can be easily integrated and is familiar, supporting efficient uptake. The early success of the PPF demonstrates the importance of building upon current good practice and where possible adapting and improving existing models that are fit for purpose. The College provides an opportunity to build on, and further develop the things that are working well; it will take far longer to embed something completely alien to the current day to day practice of the Police Service. If this opportunity is missed in favour of starting from scratch, it will be costly and time‐consuming. We are now working with the Scottish Police Service and precursor agencies for the National Crime Agency (NCA) to create their own aligned competence frameworks, using the same common standards contained in the PPF. This will significantly facilitate greater interoperability and consistent standards of professional competence across much of UK Policing and Law enforcement. This work builds upon the PPF blueprint and provides a key element for Scotland and the NCA to deliver their own reform and workforce development programmes over the next 5‐10 years. A move away from the PPF in England and Wales would represent a potentially lost opportunity to achieve a significant alignment and adoption of common and consistent standards of operational and professional competence across UK Policing and wider Law Enforcement.

1 Home Secretary’s speech on police reform 09 May 2011 2 ACPO Cabinet Paper 30 September 2010 ICF Review Proposals

48 Standards

The Terms of reference indicates that the new College of Policing could be responsible for setting and upholding standards and we would greatly appreciate clarification on this. We believe that the service should set and maintain standards for itself, supported by us as the government’s licensed standards setting body for the sector. We are already custodians of the comprehensive suite of National Occupational Standards that cover Policing and related roles, ensuring they are up to date and of continuing relevance. Creating a whole new set of professional standards, and designing a whole new suite of related qualifications, would effectively be undoing the work and investment of the last decade in the NOS and related qualifications. Common standards of knowledge and skills are important for increasing professionalism and operable effectiveness. This is particularly important in a climate of increased competition. NOS are accessible to everyone and this means that a number of competing organisations across the public, private and voluntary sector are able to operate independently whilst being guided by common, appropriate standards ensuring high‐quality service provision.

There is potentially an opportunity for The College to develop full and overarching ‘professional standards’ for the Service based upon a combination of the Approved Professional Practice (APP); guidance and recognised best practice in the undertaking of operational activity, and the developing national curriculum for Policing, which is based on NOS and APP.

Qualifications

We note that the terms of reference do not include any reference to qualifications. Skills for Justice have facilitated and provided the technical and specialist support in the development and establishment of the current approach to initial recruit training and its supporting qualification. We have also been involved in the pre‐entry/pre‐join arrangements, including the facilitation of the relationship and engagement with Further and Higher education, and the development of potential supporting qualifications. NOS is currently used to assist with developing qualifications that accredit police training and skills development, which leads to greater professionalisation of the police force. In addition, the PPF defines the skills, knowledge and understanding required of each role and this can form the basis of accreditation. Any future system for development should follow this successful model.

The terms of reference asks ‘what lessons can be learnt from other professional bodies within the UK and from police professional bodies in other countries?’ We welcome an approach that identifies and emulates good practice and we would hope that this includes learning from the current uniformed Services in England and Wales as well as exploring a wider field of professional bodies. We do recognise that there are areas for improvement, particularly in terms of effective rates of response to a rapidly changing environment that is constantly presenting the Service with new challenges. We would suggest that the current programme of reform learns from instances of good practice whilst assessing why some of the less successful initiatives have not been as effective as intended.

Recruitment

Recruitment in the police force is worthy of review. The PPF has gone a long way to improving and streamlining the recruitment process but there are a number of external factors that cause problems for the police. We believe that our police forces should be representative of the diverse communities that they serve. The current recruitment freeze is stifling opportunities to realise this vision. Recruitment through the college may well help to further streamline the process, however, it is clear and sustainable career pathways with consistent and long‐term routes that will enable the

49 police to improve the make‐up of the force.

We would support moves to further enhance the professional profile of the police service, not least because this may open up new markets of recruitment and alter the makeup of senior leadership within the service over time. We would also recommend a review of the current entry routes into the police service, with clear succession planning to ensure that there are sufficient leaders of the future in place in the workforce today.

There are already the systems and tools in place to ensure that all officers and staff have an appropriate skills ladder up which to climb. The PPF clearly articulates all of the skills required for each rank and role and also the associated accredited qualifications. All members of a police force are able to view the PPF and identify how they may be able to progress their career. Skills for Justice would suggest that further work needs to be undertaken to make sure that officers and staff have access to appropriate learning and development to develop these skills. We foresee a role for both Skills for Justice and the new College of Policing to work together to assist the police service in this regard.

Training

We would also like to comment on the current leadership development models within the police service. The current promotions system is based on the OSPRE model whereby promotion is possible once technical competence has been achieved, rather than assessing aptitude for leadership and individual’s ability to manage the challenges facing the service. However potential for Leadership is now assessed using the behavioural standards and the Policing Personal Qualities which are a fundamental element of the PPF. We believe that setting up the new college provides a real opportunity to radically rethink how leadership is tackled in the police service with reference to this recent progress.

The PPF has identified the competencies required of managers at all levels and would provide the basis of a curriculum for any prospective or new manager. However, to be effective a new manager needs an opportunity to apply and demonstrate their skills in the workplace with appropriate support and we would therefore recommend a competence based approach to learning that combines the theoretical with the practical with the support of a tutor closely linked to the workplace.

Quality

Quality is a concern for us. We believe that all police leadership and training should be subject to a sector recognised and endorsed quality assurance model, and that all learning and development needs should be linked to the PPF as part of business ambition.

Through the National Occupational Standards, qualifications frameworks and systems such as the PPF we believe that the tools and frameworks are effectively in place, that could continue the move to a modern, flexible, professional Service based on competence and the measurement of performance over time. The appropriate national context and frameworks allow for consistency in delivery and local diversification. Appropriate quality assurance can be built from the cost effective models that are already in place and we would welcome the opportunity to support the college in achieving the outcomes required.

How should The College be funded?

Reduced funding means that there is an increased need for services to collaborate ‐ with each other,

50 government departments and local agencies. Any contributions from individual forces to the new college should take into account the current spend on the responsibilities that will be transferred and aim to reduce these costs through the pooling of resources and subsequent economies of scale. However, there are also opportunities to reduce costs through long‐term workforce development planning which can realise significant savings and assists in building on the existing strengths of the service.

Once the responses to this consultation have been collated and considered we would strongly recommend that one priority should be to clearly articulate the benefits of the college to individual police forces. Whilst we support the ambition to further professionalise and develop the Service, large‐scale change is always fraught with concerns and appeasing these, through open and honest communication and realistic aims and objectives can be very useful in securing buy‐in. This is particularly true when forces are highly likely to be contributing to the funding of the college. Skills for Justice would welcome further discussions with the Committee about the Policing College. The establishment of the college is a major undertaking and we would like to provide as much support as possible. We have explained here a number of areas that we feel we can assist with and we are keen to work with the college in the future to ensure it successfully achieves its aims. We are pleased to be given this opportunity to feed into the consultation and we look forward to further dialogue as plans develop.

Skills for Justice October 2012

5 51

Written evidence submitted by the Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales [LSP 12]

1. Executive Summary

1.1. The Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales (PSAEW) welcomes the Home Affairs Select Committee’s inquiry into Leadership and Standards in the Police Service at a time when the Service is undergoing an unprecedented period and pace of reform.

1.2. Policing in the United Kingdom already has an enviably high worldwide reputation. Our policing is regarded as ethical, professional and overwhelmingly free of corruption. The principles of protecting the public, tackling crime and serving local communities must remain paramount, and whatever the consequences of the current reform programme, we all have a responsibility to ensure that our Police Service remains, as the Prime Minister has said ‘…the finest force in the world.’

1.3. We do recognise, however, that improvements can be made and believe that effective leadership of the police service at all levels will be critical to maintaining, and hopefully continuing to improve the standard of policing in this country. This will become more important over coming years as the service faces fewer resources reduce and potentially increasing demand.

1.4. The Association strongly supports the development of a College of Policing that will encompass the whole of the service and ensure that all future developments in relation to leadership and standards in the service are undertaken in the public interest.

1.5. There are some key issues that the College will need to consider and agree before significant progress can be made. This will include a clear understanding of the type of leadership that the police service will require in the new policing landscape, and the environment that will enable such leadership to flourish in order that everyone involved in policing has the opportunity to maximise their potential in order to provide the best possible service to the public.

1.6. This written submission focuses on the areas which the PSAEW feels are most pertinent to our role and which can be expanded upon during oral evidence if required.

2. What powers, responsibilities and resources should be given to the College of Policing?

2.1. In the PSAEW response to the consultation on the Review of Police Leadership and Training in June 2011, we agreed with the principle of a new body for policing responsible for setting standards and overseeing the development and commissioning of training, with the purpose of seeking to further professionalise the Police Service.

2.2. Consequently the Association supports the introduction of a College of Policing and agrees with the proposed objectives of the College. We are currently in consultation with the Home Office regarding the potential powers that the College should have and believe that the powers given to the College should directly support the delivery of its objectives.

2.3. The Association sees the setting of national standards for policing as a key responsibility of the College. These standards should include entry standards for recruitment into the service, standards for promotion (at all ranks) and standards for training and development.

2.4. The College’s responsibilities should also include developing national policing policy, such as that currently undertaken by the ACPO business areas and NPIA, including the development of operational standards leading to Authorised Professional Practice. This work should be led by the most appropriate individuals, irrespective of rank, with greater involvement of both the federated and superintending ranks and police staff.

1 52

2.5. As part of the development of policy and standards the College should also play a key role in identifying what works on policing and sharing good practice. Associated with this is the need to develop strong links between the College and higher and further educational institutions that may be in a position to support the development of a more evidence-based approach in policing.

2.6. Consideration should also be given as to whether the College should oversee a national talent management process for the service.

2.7. The Association strongly believes that there is role for the College in relation to equality and diversity issues – not only in developing policy or standards, but also an oversight role to ensure that the service continues to work towards becoming more representative of the communities we serve, and that our operational practices are effectively monitored to ensure that they instill confidence in those communities.

2.8. Finally the College should have a responsibility to develop, and where appropriate to deliver or otherwise commission leadership and development training for the Service.

2.9. The Association agrees that the College of Policing should not have the power to ‘licence’ officers to use their general warranted powers or to exercise control over conduct matters relating to police officers. In view of this it is our view that the College of Policing is different to most other professional bodies which do have these powers, and so should not be described as a ‘professional body’ in its truest sense. We have received assurances that the College is not intended to replace staff associations and so the role of the PSAEW should not be altered as a consequence of the introduction of the College. We do, however, wish to play a key role in the development and governance of the College.

3. What role should the College of Policing have in recruitment and training?

3.1. The College of Policing, through the Board of Governers, should be the body that identifies and sets appropriate standards in relation to recruitment into the Police Service. The Association believes that it is time to review the current processes to ensure that the service is attracting the best possible recruits to carry out policing for the next 30-40 years. If there is a desire to have a mandatory pre-entry qualification prior to recruitment, then there must be sufficient safeguards in place to ensure that this doesn’t exclude individuals who, for a variety of reasons, find difficulty in obtaining this qualification. This would include a variety of ways of accessing the qualification and financial support, for example by the provision of bursaries.

3.2. We also feel strongly that the College of Policing should have a role in setting national standards in relation to promotion examinations and qualifications. Whilst acknowledging the need for some flexibility for local Chief Constables in final promotion selection, the Association would like to see standard national qualifications to achieve all ranks in the service, not just Sergeant, Inspector and Assistant Chief Constable. Such qualifications should be linked to an appropriate training and development framework, and officers of every rank should understand that they have a personal responsibility to engage in personal development throughout their career, with appropriate support from the service. Furthermore we need to be clear that ‘training and development’ is far broader than classroom based study and can consist of a variety of learning and development methods.

3.3. There are certain aspects of police training that the Association believes should continue to be delivered from within the service, particularly where there is a need for a national approach (for interoperability purposes), for cost effectiveness and in the case of some specialist operational training.

3.4. We recognise, however, that there are numerous public and private sector institutions that already offer training to police officers, and these are likely to increase in the future. In view of this, one of the important roles for the College of Policing will be to oversee this market and to

2 53 provide accreditation and quality assurance to ensure that the appropriate standards of training are being met, and continue to be met.

4. What role should the College of Policing have in recruiting non-police officers into senior roles within the police service?

4.1. The PSAEW does not support the principle of direct entry to the rank of Superintendent, however we acknowledge that this was one of the recommendations in the final report of Tom Winsor and we will be contributing to the forthcoming Home Office consultation on this issue.

4.2. If the outcome of the consultation is that non-police officers will be recruited as Superintendents, then the College should play a major role and should be responsible for setting the recruitment criteria and developing an appropriate training package in consultation with PSAEW and other key stakeholders. We would expect any such recruitment and training process to be fully costed and impact assessed prior to implementation.

5. Are police recruitment processes fair and open and how could they be improved?

5.1 The Association is not aware of any particular concerns about the fairness or openness of the SEARCH assessment process for recruits, however we have some concerns about the mixed picture that is developing in relation to entry routes into the service.

5.2 Due to the fact that there are very few forces recruiting at the present time, and those that are tend to be recruiting small numbers, there appears to be a development of restricted approaches to recruitment. Some forces, for example are restricting recruitment to those who are already employed by the force either as police staff, PCSOs or are Special Constables. Whilst we acknowledge that this enables forces to manage their recruitment processes better, it does potentially exclude good candidates who for a variety of reasons may not already work for the force or have the ability at that time to become a Special Constable.

5.3.The view of the Association is that restrictive routes such as these are acceptable as long as they are offered alongside other routes which enable people in different circumstances to apply to join the service. There is a similar argument with the pre-entry qualification as discussed above.

6. How should the College of Policing be funded?

6.1. The funding arrangements for the College of Policing are currently uncertain and lacking in clarity. The College Board will need to develop an appropriate commercial strategy which will identify potential future sources of income which could include charging forces and others for the provision of goods and services and a quality assurance regime as part of the accreditation process for universities and colleges.

6.2. The College will also contribute to national security by undertaking responsibilities previously undertaken by the National Policing Improvement Agency and therefore we believe that a level of grant in aid funding should be available for this purpose.

6.3. At the present time the PSAEW does not support the requirement for officers and staff to pay membership fees for the College of Policing due to the fact that, as discussed above, it is our view that the College is not a professional body in its truest sense and thus there is no clarity about what member benefits might be. There is a risk that if this option were to be undertaken, then there would be a perception that the income from membership fees for the College were being used to close the significant funding gap that is facing the NPIA and ACPO and this is clearly not acceptable to the police workforce.

7. Conclusion

7.1. It is the view of the PSAEW that the leadership and standards of the police service will benefit from the introduction of a College of Policing. The College presents the opportunity to enhance

3 54 the professionalism of the service and to radically change the service's approach to key issues such as recruitment and selection.

7.2. We have by common consent a police service admired and respected internationally and some of the most accessible and internationally renowned universities. The creation of a College of Policing provides us with a one-off opportunity to combine these two world class institutions together. It will also progress the development and implementation of policing policy and tactics to a situation where it is based on evidence of what works rather than opinion and ideology.

7.3. These opportunities will need to be supported by a level of cultural change within the service and it is the current and future leaders of the service who will be able to translate these opportunities into reality.

The Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales October 2012

4 55 Written evidence submitted by the Forensic Science Society Submission [LSP 13]

Executive Summary

The Forensic Science Society as a professional body representing forensic scientists and associated specialties within the Justice system. It takes the view that utmost clarity is required when proposing a professional body for policing. The fundamentals of what it is to be a professional body provide a template and the landscape as a whole must be clearly scoped to avoid tensions and confusion.

1. Introduction

The Forensic Science Society (FSSoc) was founded in 1959 as a Learned Society to provide a forum for communication and collaboration in the developing field of forensic science both at home and overseas. Its membership encompasses the USA, Canada, the Caribbean, Far East, Middle East, Africa, and many countries across Europe as well as the UK and the Republic of Ireland. It is multi-disciplinary covering police, firearms officers, scenes of crime officers, fire investigators, document examiners, forensic scientists, digital forensic examiners and many specialties within forensic science.

In 2004 The Forensic Science Society became a professional body and now has several distinct categories of membership including Student, Associate, Affiliate, Member, Fellow and Accredited Forensic Practitioner.

The aim of the Society is to promote quality standards, support members’ continuing professional development and further research and development within forensic science. There is a Code of Conduct to which members must adhere and disciplinary procedures to underpin it. Our overall objective is to support the Justice system and our members and to benefit the Public interest. We do not receive government grants but rely upon member subscriptions and sponsors to supplement income from our educational activities.

2. Terms of Reference—Bullet point 2: What lessons can be learnt from other professional bodies within the UK and from police professional bodies in other countries?

Within the UK there are a variety of professional bodies, some regulatory and others not. There is a need for absolute clarity on the framework within which the proposed new College of Policing is to sit. For example, is the new body to examine trainees and decide upon their eligibility to become members? Or is it to admit those qualified through other means to enrol as members? Alternatively, are all police officers to become part of the new body by virtue of the fact that they are police officers?

Most professional bodies have a membership structure (and associated criteria) to allow for use of the terms Associate, Affiliate, Member and Fellow to describe levels of distinction. Will this be true for the new College?

56 In raising these questions we posit that the information hitherto gleaned in connection with the new College of Policing suggests some blurring of boundaries between usual expectations of what a professional body is and that proposed.

A professional body, by definition, represents a particular profession. Is there a need to unravel the issues/threads involved in professionalising the police in order to proceed with clarity of purpose?

3. Terms of Reference—Bullet point 3: Is it possible for one institution to balance responsibilities for: representing police services; setting and upholding standards; testing and rewarding; training; and guarding public interests?

Most professional bodies have to deal with the inherent tension of supporting their members while at the same time, safeguarding the public interest. This is a difficult task at the best of times, however, in the current climate when public confidence in policing is not what one would wish it to be, it might be worthwhile considering various options. For example, the Royal College of Surgeons carries forward certain functions while the General Medical Council deals with other issues. Independence is key in critical domains.

4. Terms of Reference—Bullet point 4: Would it be preferable to create two separate institutions to provide delivery functions and professional representation?

Members of a professional body are involved in delivery functions. However, the professional body is not usually directly responsible for these delivery functions which are carried out by members for their employers. Some of our members work for private forensic providers and deliver forensic services to the customers of those private facilities. The professional body is not directly responsible for these services.

We would suggest that following the usual model of a professional body as promoting quality standards and representing the profession would invoke clarity.

5. Terms of Reference—Bullet point 5: How will the professional body interact with HMIC; the IPCC; ACPO; and other institutions in providing leadership and setting standards for police forces?

The modus operandi is normally that professional bodies engage with governments and institutions to offer advice and support. However, a professional body reserves the right to voice opposition to policies which it believes might be detrimental to the profession. In light of these points we could foresee various tensions arising unless clarity of direction involving all interested parties is vigorously pursued. Scoping of the whole landscape is crucial.

6. Terms of Reference—Bullet point 6: What role should the College of Policing have in recruitment and training?

57 This completely depends on the issue of whether the new College is a professional body or not. Strategic oversight of policing numbers and rank for any country, in our view, would not normally be the remit of a professional body. However, a professional body may encourage its members to aim for higher levels of distinction and will encourage new members to join. It will be a voice for the profession to encourage uptake to that profession and in that sense could impact recruitment and subsequently training. Professional bodies often have a qualifications framework and strategic partnerships to support this framework through training.

7. Terms of Reference—Bullet point 7: What role could the College have in recruiting non-police officers to senior roles within the police service?

A professional body with various categories of membership including that of Affiliate could conceivably provide a pool of potential recruits as well as providing highly experienced personnel to sit on recruitment/selection panels. However, does this question stem from a blurring of the boundaries between what a professional body could do and what another body should do?

8. Terms of Reference—Bullet point 11: Should the professional body be responsible for civilian police employees?

We take issue with the term ‘responsible for’. A professional body for policing could represent civilian police employees through its membership structure. Such employees could be considered to form part of or at least to assist the profession and would therefore be entitled to have membership of the professional body.

9. Terms of Reference—Bullet point 12: How should the professional body be funded?

The usual model of funding for professional bodies is through membership subscriptions, legacies, trusts, individual donations and sponsorships. Our view of professional bodies is that these are often (usually) charitable and not government funded.

The Forensic Science Society October 2012

58 Written evidence submitted by the Police Federation of England and Wales [LSP 14] Introduction

Since 1990 the Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW) has been calling for a wholesale and fundamental review of policing as a consequence of the piecemeal and disparate approaches to reform that have characterised the recent past, invariably creating more problems than they solved. The fact that Lord Hutton's review of public sector pensions, Tom Winsor's reviews of police pay and conditions and Peter Neyroud's review of leadership and training in the police service all reported within a relatively short period of time is indicative of this piecemeal, disjointed and reactionary approach. The comprehensive spending review and cuts in the region of 20% to policing have further exacerbated the situation.

In December 2011, the Home Secretary announced plans to establish a police professional body to further professionalise policing, which will be known as the College of Policing (CoP), has added to the uncertainty in the minds of police officers. It should not be overlooked that the support of the 135,000 police officers of federated ranks would be vital for the success of the Home Secretary's proposals. Officers therefore need to be convinced that there is a benefit for them and not only for the Government and ACPO in the level of service they provide to the public.

Against this backdrop of uncertainty and change we have chosen not to answer the specific consultation questions suggested by the Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC), but rather to provide the views of PFEW on the key factors likely to affect training and leadership in the police service in the near future.

The PFEW support the promotion, development, possession and use of professional practice for all officers within the police service while ensuring standards of recruitment, training and promotion are quality assured, mandated to forces and monitored for compliance.

Is a College of Policing needed to achieve this?

The police service does have a number of elements of a profession already in place or under development. As a general rule it is not necessary for a profession to have a professional association or registration body if sufficient identity and coherence is provided through employment, or formal organisation has few benefits.

Police officers are already highly accountable to the public they serve. As holders of the Office of Constable they must exercise discretion, judgement and responsibility to the public. With the Office of Constable comes personal accountability and responsibility for the protection of life and property, the prevention and detection of crime, the maintenance of law and order and the detection and prosecution of offenders. This office allows for the protection that other professions sought to achieve through their professional bodies.

It is not clear to us how membership of a professional body such as a CoP would further enhance public confidence in police officers. If introduced, a CoP for the police service would be untried and untested and the consequences of it failing are unknown.

The PFEW's view remains that it does not support the need for a CoP. We do, however, support the aim of increasing professionalism in the police service through nationally accredited standards and continue to engage in discussions at this time.

The urgency to introduce a professional body brought about by the Government's desire to terminate the National Police Improvement Agency (NPIA) has been disquieting and, we believe, inappropriate. However, we are cognisant that vital elements of the NPIA's work relating to learning, training and development of police officers must be transitioned to its successor organisation with as little disruption as possible to our members.

59 Whilst PFEW continues to attend the various meetings associated with the development of a CoP there remain numerous aspects of the interim body proposed by the Government which cause us significant concern.

How could professionalism be improved?

Police officers are required to undergo a significant amount of training to both qualify as an officer, and then to progress in a chosen specialism or to gain promotion. The largest failings in the existing provisions for training and leadership in the police service are the inconsistencies that exist between forces and the lack of strong governance.

Some excellent training programmes already exist. A number are already linked to a form of accreditation, where appropriate from external providers. Developing more training programmes, which follow these principles, would gradually increase the professional status of police officers.

A CoP is not necessary to implement this. Nevertheless, the disbanding of the NPIA provides a real opportunity to re-define the role of the central provider for police training, development and promotion whilst de-cluttering the bureaucratic landscape.

We suggested that the training, learning, development and promotion arms of the NPIA should be incorporated into a new National Standards Agency, which could continue much of the good work undertaken thus far by the NPIA in programme design. It could have been charged with devising a "cradle to grave" system of training, providing recruits with clear career pathways.

It could have possessed the power, authority and resources to impose quality assured, mandatory, national standards upon forces and to monitor their compliance with those standards, either via its own compliance arm or potentially via more robust Her Majesty's Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC) inspection.

There would need to have been oversight of the functions of the proposed agency. One potential solution for this would be for the Police Advisory Board for England and Wales (PABEW) to have taken on the oversight role. The PABEW already provides oversight on recruitment standards for the police service and makes recommendations to the Home Secretary as appropriate. This mandate could have extended to standards of training, leadership and promotion.

We believe national standards should continue to be developed in conjunction with Skills for Justice.

We have no objection to the accreditation of training programmes which we believe could help to ensure that training is delivered to a consistent and high standard across all forces.

Governance

The final draft of the CoP Skeleton Blueprint document {3.8 - 6/7/12} states that one representative on the Board of the CoP will be a constable, sergeant or inspector.

We believe it is unacceptable that federated ranks, which characterise the vast majority of police officers, will be represented by one seat on the CoP Board. Our members will expect to have a greater influence on the leadership of the organisation if they are persuaded it represents any benefit to them.

We believe a rigidly top-down structure is not a sustainable means of engaging everyone in the police service in what should be creative and worthwhile relationships. The Board, as it stands, is too hierarchical to be successful. Equal representation of the three main representative bodies in the service should be the aim. For the PFEW to have just one seat on the Board is incompatible with the tripartite nature of the Federation. We expected to have had four seats on the Board - the PFEW Chairman and one representative from each of the separate rank committees.

It is important to stress the difference between ranks and their differing training requirements. For instance, 80% of constables will probably remain constables and without direct representation on the

60 Board there is a concern that their voice will not be heard, and the CoP will concentrate on leadership and promotion to the exclusion of their training needs as the biggest constituent part of policing.

Funding

The Home Office has stated that:

"Services transferring from the NPIA will move with their existing budgets until the end of the current spending review period in 2015. This will give the Police Professional Body the opportunity to decide the requirements of professional training in the future while providing some training continuity after the NPIA closes in December 2012."

We welcome that the Home Office has recognised that central funding cannot be removed with immediate effect. However, there is clearly a fundamental question to be answered in how the body will be funded after 2015. The Home Office has repeatedly stated that the decision on how to fund the body will be the responsibility of the Board of the CoP. We feel strongly that the Home office should not be able to abrogate or absolve itself of such critical areas of decision making without recognising the importance of this to the future success and delivery of the new College.

A critical concern of the PFEW and its members is that, in practice, once the central funding is discontinued in 2015, the CoP is likely to have little option but to begin charging members for services. The possibility that the CoP might at some time charge police officers fees for access to the College and occupational training is for the PFEW completely unacceptable and a red-line issue from the outset. We believe it is disingenuous of any government to delegate the cost of developing professional police officers and that it is unethical to expect individuals to pay for any training necessary to make them into fully rounded officers.

We believe members of the police service need to be convinced that the CoP will provide services to them which are meaningful and beneficial without increasing bureaucracy, cost and burden. We are unconvinced from what we know how this will work.

The core mission of the CoP will be to "safeguard the public and support the fight against crime by ensuring professionalism in policing." We are concerned that the emphasis placed by the Government on the need for the CoP to implement a national and international commercial strategy could be contradictory to its core objective of providing the best possible outcome for the public. Public service should not be a commercial enterprise. Asking the CoP to raise its own funding could create a conflict of interest with its main objective of service delivery.

We support the improvement of efficiency in training provision such as the use of more cost effective locations.

National Standards

The CoP Skeleton Blueprint sates that the professional body "will have a powerful mandate to enable the service to implement the standards it sets for training, development, skills and qualifications."

We continue to have concerns that national standards will not be mandatory and that there will be no sanction on forces that do not adhere to them.

In our experience there is no evidence from the past behaviour of chief officers that they will want to have the same accredited standards as neighbouring forces. Indeed, this increases officer's portability and is often contrary to the interests of an individual force. Hence, we have seen an increase in in- house training provided by forces but not nationally accredited, and therefore not recognised by forces elsewhere.

Pre-qualification requirements for recruitment

61 Any requirement for a candidate to "pre-qualify" could lead to a decrease in the diversity of police officers. The service already has a tried and tested national assessment process pre-entry in the form of the SEARCH assessment centre. We believe the SEARCH process is sacrosanct and it should also be undertaken by special constables before they take on policing responsibilities.

We resist any suggestion that forces should be able to decide upon their own pre-entry qualifications. Any move towards national standards of pre-qualification outside of SEARCH must be the subject of a thorough equality impact assessment.

Training Provision

We believe training necessary to carry out the role and duties of a police officer should always be funded by the officer's force and not the individual, and there should be a commitment from forces that time will be given to officers to attend role specific training during duty time.

Whilst the use of further and higher education establishments may be an attractive financial proposition for the Government, there is no firm evidence to indicate this is the best approach for officers or the public. We believe that training, coaching and mentoring must be delivered by appropriately qualified individuals, who have had the exposure to real operational police work which gives them the practical as well as cognitive ability to share learning needs in a fast moving world.

Consequently, any move towards the outsourcing of training needs should be approached with extreme caution.

Privatisation of police training

The Home Office has stated:

"The body will underpin all future police training and delivery. While it will continue to deliver some training, in those areas where it is best in the interests of the police service to do so, it will also play an active role in assessing the very best training other sectors can offer."

This would seem to confirm that increased outsourcing of training is envisaged. It is hard to see how the involvement of an external organisation that will be looking to profit from its involvement with the police service could ultimately benefit the public.

It is envisaged that the CoP's ethos will be to ensure the best possible choice of training provision. Again it is hard to see how this is likely in an environment of reduced or non-existent central funding and the need for significant further cost-saving.

The present structure of recognised national standards for vocational police training, accredited at the appropriate level of the national curriculum framework, is a sound and properly constructed qualification framework which is fully aligned with the high skills officers require.

This has been recognised for some time as the acceptable standard and is delivered at the local level through a system of assessment and skills auditing. There is natural order to the system.

We are unclear and unsighted how higher education bodies or private companies will deliver anything better. Whilst it may generate revenue for such institutions, what perceivable benefit will it offer to the operational officer, the force or the public? The regulation of control and the quality of input must be a key cornerstone to training standards and we fear a real diminution of those standards as the delivery options become more varied and widespread within the private and commercial sectors and further education and higher education sectors.

We continue to believe that core training, coaching and mentoring is best delivered by experienced practitioners from the police service.

Leadership development

62

We support the development of leadership programmes which encompass all police officers from constable through to chief constable.

We would recommend that the development of leadership programmes for the police service in the future should be both robust and evidence based.

We support the continued existence of a National College of Police Leadership (NCPL) and the development of leadership programmes based on strategies that are relevant to the police service.

We acknowledge that a significant amount of work has already been done to improve the existing provision of leadership programmes.

We strongly support the continuation of the Core Leadership Programme (CLP) and Senior Leadership Programme (SLP) and recommend a link to recognised accreditation is available to all officers.

We support a fast-track scheme that would include those with the potential for high rank from the public and private sectors, or armed forces, who have had real exposure and proven experience in organisational management and strategic leadership to complement the revised High Potential Development Scheme (HPDS). This should not override the requirement for officers to have served in all prior ranks at the point of promotion.

Leadership development programmes should link in to promotion processes to ensure consistency and avoid duplication.

The geographical location of the NCPL is less important than the quality of the product it offers. Training needs to be accessible to all officers with leadership potential.

We support the provision of training via multiple training centres provided they are able to deliver training to the same quality around the country.

We consider it necessary that all training centres are dedicated solely to police training rather than being subsumed into a university campus.

It is crucial that the frontline ranks of constable, sergeant and inspector are properly recognised and resourced to meet the demands of operational policing.

Promotion

We believe that every officer promoted must have served at every rank below that to which they are promoted.

We acknowledge that the existing process for promotion is less than perfect and accept that the service needs to invest in open promotion procedures that enable those with the relevant skills and abilities to become the future leaders of the service and which supports officers from all minority groups to reach senior ranks.

The promotion system should be underpinned by the following principles: It must be standardised nationally and compulsory for forces; effective governance and compliance procedures must be put in place to ensure forces comply; the system of PDR and assessment must be robust, national and non- bureaucratic; the promotion process adopted must be fair and seen to be fair by those seeking promotion; it should meet expectations and demands commensurate with modern policing requirements.

There should be some way of managing the numbers of officers achieving promotion and consequently managing the expectations of officers during the promotion process. Therefore, a national, transparent and fair assessment filter needs to be introduced, which will identify candidates based on the objective criterion that they are likely to develop into good leaders.

63 We believe the promotion system needs to measure a candidate's legal knowledge and recognise abilities to manage at different levels.

We therefore support the development of a new national assessment, which tests legal knowledge and leadership qualities in the context of an operational policing environment. The promotion process also needs to be subject to scrutiny. We believe it rests most appropriately with the PABEW.

The role of the Chief Constable's Council

In response to Peter Neyroud's original proposal for a professional body the Association of Chief Police Officer's (ACPO) recognised that:

"As leaders of the service we recognise such a body must be open to all who deliver policing and its inspiration shared across all ranks and grades."

We believe the latest proposal to allocate ACPO ranks three seats on the Board of the CoP, in addition to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) who "will have been a senior police officer", would give ACPO too much influence in the new body and make it unrepresentative of the police service as whole.

It is exacerbated by the increased influence of the Chief Constable's Council in endorsing proposals before they are put to the Board for approval.

Police Conduct

The conduct of police officers is regulated by the Police Conduct Regulations 2008 (as amended) and the Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2004 (as amended). These regulations confer the power to impose a number of outcomes on officers, including dismissal. Therefore no body responsible for the setting of standards of recruitment, training and promotion should have the disciplinary power to remove officers from a central register or prevent them from practicing. The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and police forces should continue to have responsibility for investigating and dealing with the conduct of police officers or complaints against them.

College of Policing and existing consulting and negotiating machinery

The CoP Skeleton Blueprint document states that a new model of reward is required which incentivises officers and staff based on their expertise. Discussions on this matter are currently ongoing through the Police Negotiating Board (PNB), and due to a failure to agree by both sides, are the subject of a pending Police Arbitration Tribunal (PAT) hearing. It is unhelpful and inappropriate for such statements to be included in the document before they have been fully discussed by the relevant stakeholders via the PNB.

We would make a similar comment about the references to direct entry on page 9 of the document. It is certainly not a consensus view of the constituent members of the Developing Professionalism Working Group (DPWG) that Winsor's recommendation on entry could allow the service to draw upon the best pool of talent available. Indeed, the PFEW and the Police Superintendent's Association of England and Wales (PSAEW) have explicitly raised their objections to Winsor's proposals on direct entry via the PABEW.

Police Federation of England and Wales October 2012

6

64 Written evidence submitted by Dr. Rodger Patrick [LSP 15]

Executive Summary:

The hesitant response to the disorders in the summer of 2011 and apparant uncertainty over political and operational boundaries coupled with the suspicion that there was a lack of transparency over the failure to deploy available resources justifies a review of police leadership. However these are not the only symptoms of the malaise engulfing the senior echelons of the service and a number of high profile criminal/discipline cases and associated resignations suggest the moral compass is wavering. However a new College of Policing is unlikely to address the underlying problems. Similar circumstances led Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary to review Police Integrity in 1998/9 (HMIC 1999) and the current demise exposes a failure to address the weaknesses identified then. This submission will return to this thematic inspection to try to learn from past mistakes concluding that more effective regulation, by bodies committed to democratic principles of openness and accountability, hold the key to better standards of leadership.

1. Introduction

1.1. The Police and Magistrates Court Act 1994 and Police Reform Act 2002 radically altered police governance making Chief Constables directly accountable to the Home Secretary through a framework of centrally determined performance indicators. This in theory should have led to an increase in the efficiency of the service as effective leaders would be evident from their performance and good practice would spread as they were promoted to the highest positions. At this time the remit of the principle regulator Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC) was subtly shifted from maintaining efficiency and probity to ensuring value for money. The incompatibility of these distinct roles was clear from the collapse of Enron where the auditors Andersen also acted as consultants on performance. HMIC appeared to have grasped the significance of this and the following comment is included in their report on Integrity:

Her Majesty’s Inspector is confident HMIC will increasingly monitor integrity, the systems and the investigative and corrective measures for maintaining it, and Inspectors will become aware at an early stage of any failings. In the same way forces are urged to keep in view the human side of policing, HMIC, in its new role as ‘best value’ inspectors, will not lose sight of this important responsibility” (HMIC 1999:69).

1.2. It would appear they have failed to meet their own expectations but their actions in dealing with the malpractice they uncovered during this thematic inspection would suggest they are the authors of their own misfortune: more on this later.

2. Theoretical Considerations:

2.1. From a theoretical perspective it is crucial for regulators to prevent cheating or ‘gaming’ when performance regimes are introduced. It is difficult for lay members to judge whether or not probity or quality controls are being maintained when they are presented with data on organisational performance. The Market, which performance management systems in the public sector seek to

65 replicate, does self regulate on price and quality and even in the case of the banking sector, where regulation was woefully lacking, would have exposed and disposed of institutions and their managers if national and political interest had not intervened. However there is no evidence of such ruthless action to maintain standards by the various Police regulators and the evidence suggests they are guilty of applying what Bevan and Hood (2006) refer to as a ‘Nelson’s eye game’ in their approach to such perverse behaviours. They also went on to categorise the types of leaders who will thrive in such an environment:

‘ Rational maniacs ’ who do not share the goals of central controllers and aim to manipulate data to conceal their operations.

‘ Reactive gamers ’ who broadly share the goals of central controllers but aim to game the target system if they have reasons and opportunities to do so.

(Bevan and Hood 2006:523)

2.2. In the absence of effective regulation this type of individual is likely to reach the highest echelons of the police service, including the Inspectorate and beyond, where they will be in a position to distort the past and continue to exert an unwarranted level of influence on the service. The parallels with the banking sector are self evident.

3. A Flawed Approach to Regulation:

3.1. Whilst HMIC were conscious of the dangers posed by Performance Management and highlighted a number of ‘gaming’ type practices in their report on Integrity (HMIC 1999) they minimised the scale of the problem. An examination of the West Midlands Police, one of the police forces taking part in the thematic inspection, demonstrates this feature. This force had been transformed from the worst to the best performing Metropolitan Police Force in the country after the arrival of a new Chief Constable, Edward Crew, in 1996. The Chief Constable introduced a ‘Compstat’ style of management control similar to that utilised by the New York Police Department (NYPD). The various area commanders met on a monthly basis to be held to account for their performance. The best performers were awarded with a bell of the sort used to usher school children and the worst exposed before their peers. The atmosphere and sense of control concentrated in the hands of the Chief Constable is captured in a cartoon from the period (Fig.1)

66

FIG. 1

3.2. This control system is now being brought into disrepute by the findings of Eterno and Siverman (2012) who have presented convincing evidence that the reported performance of NYPD is being distorted by unethical practices, principally statistical manipulation and under‐recording. The same was true of the West Midlands Police. Examination of internal documents, including the unpublished report by HMIC, confirmed that the improvement of the West Midlands Police was significantly influenced by a number of ‘gaming’ type practices. The force during this period 1996‐ 1999 could be regarded as a template for a perverse policing model. The practices employed included:

1. Under‐recording in the form of alternative crime registers. 2. The conversion of post sentence admissions into offences Taken Into Consideration (TIC) and the re‐emergence of the malpractice associated with ‘Prison Write Offs’. (Patrick 2011b) 3. Shifting efforts towards easier to detect offences and the systematic redeployment of specialist officers traditionally committed to combating serious and organised crime in inner city areas to affluent suburbs (Patrick 2004). 4. Abuse of non judicial disposals, such as cautions and informal warnings, to improve the detection rate. This resulted in many individuals gaining a police record when the evidence was insufficient to secure a conviction at court. In some cases the suspect would be unaware they were being recorded as responsible for an offence, this included serious offences such as rape and kidnapping.

3.3. Despite including examples of the first three forms of ‘gaming’ in their report HMIC did not expose the force involved. In fact they stated in their annual inspection report that the West

67 Midland Police was not corrupt. Recorded crime subsequently increased by 16% the following year and the Home Office sponsored report on Police corruption (Newburn 1999:7) made it clear such behaviour would fall within more recent definitions of ‘corruption’. Another Home Office report (Miller 2003) went on to conclude that police corruption was organisational in nature:

“This suggests that corruption arises in a systematic way from the nature and context of policing. Such an observation is in line with previous literature (e.g. Newburn, 1999, Sherman, 1978) which dismisses the idea that police corruption involves a few rotten apples’ in an otherwise healthy barrel.” (Miller 2003:18)

3.4. Miller noted the correlation between high performing officers and corrupt behaviour and suggested that “performance measures such as crime and clear up statistics” should be used as a means of detecting suspicious conduct in relation to individual officers (Miller 2003:38). However this theoretical trajectory was not extended to suggest that high performing forces should also be suspected of widespread ‘gaming’. The ‘light touch’ inspection approach adopted by HMIC in relation to high performers appears to ignore this supposition.

3.5. Whilst the West Midlands Police made strenuous efforts to address ‘gaming’ particularly under‐ recording, abuses continued to surface. In 2004 it became clear the abuse of TICs was facilitating the importation of drugs into prison. The scale of the problem is evident from the impact on the force’s detection rate for burglary of dwelling houses (Fig. 2)

West Midlands Burglary Dwellings Detected: Total & TIC

6000 5000 4000 West Midlands Total Burglary Dwellings Detected 3000 West Midlands Burglary Dw

Detected 2000 TICs 1000 0

Number of Burglary Dwellings Dwellings Burglary of Number 1 3 4 5 6 /02 /0 /0 /07 1 6 0/01 003 005 200 2002/0 2 2004/0 2 200 200

(Fig 2)

3.6. Whilst trying to deflect the spotlight elsewhere Assistant Chief Constable Hyde’s explanation for this reversal in fortune amounts to an admission of previous misdemeanours in the West Midlands:

“We have very rigorous and ethical methods of detection and set ourselves the highest possible standards. We will not record something until it comes back from court whereas other forces will record it as a detection from the point it has been signed for by the defendant.” (Birmingham Post 20.4.2005)

68 4. Malpractice Spreads

4.1. An examination of forces known to have experienced similar problems with ‘gaming’ type practices re‐affirmed the reluctance of HMIC to expose such behaviours to public scrutiny (Patrick 2011c) and it was concluded that they were subscribing to a professional body approach to regulation, the antithesis of accountability in the democratic sense:

“it is incompatible with the concept of accountability as a series of linkages leading from the people to those with delegated responsibilities via parliament and the managerial hierarchy since it brings on stage a set of actors who see themselves answerable to their peers, rather than to demos” (Day & Klein 1987).

4.2. In the absence of any effective deterrent it is unsurprising that such practices have spread, partly through the promotion of individuals who have mastered ‘gaming practices’ and then employed them in new policing areas. Collier (2006) described this process as ‘competitive isomorphism’ and Eterno and Silverman linked the spread of malpractice to the promotion of NYPD officers to other Police Departments in the US. Another reason has been the simplistic, superficial duplication of the NYPD system and model throughout the US. The Police Federation of England and Wales have also been at the forefront of exposing such abuses, commissioning research which highlighted the phenomenon (Chatterton 2008):

“Current pressure from the management system is inducing more competitiveness and compelling people to engage in even more dubious practices: ‘We can’t be truly ethical about this because the rest of the BCUs aren’t and we’re not going to be the worse performing BCU. So as soon as you get a good performing BCU people from other areas go there to find out what they are doing that is going to benefit victims of crime on their area [sarcastic]. And nine times out of ten it’s not to do with best practice, it’s to do with how their housekeeping is better than our housekeeping. That’s the way of life.” (Chatterton 2008:46‐47)

4.3. This force by force infection is graphically illustrated by the sudden fall in recorded crime linked to the reinterpretation of the National Crime Recording Standard introduced in 2002 (Fig 2). The source of this can be traced to the Street Crime Initiative when extremely thin evidence suggested victims were reporting crime falsely in pursuit of bogus insurance claims. This led to victims being required to prove the validity of their reports (Patrick 2011a).

69 Nottinghamshire total recorded crime

165,000 160,000

155,000 150,000 145,000 140,000 135,000 False Reporting Policy & re- 130,000 interpretation of NCRS occurs in 2004 125,000 120,000 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fig. 2

4.4. The spread and scale of the abuse relating to detections became apparent when HMIC carried out a quality control audit of non‐judicial disposals, including TICs, in 2006/7 (Table 1):

Force Data Cautions TICs PNDs Cannabis Non Testing (Adult) Warnings Sanction Detections

Avon & Somerset Fair Good Poor Fair Good No judgement Bedfordshire Poor Poor Excellent Poor Fair Poor BTP Poor Fair Poor Poor Poor Poor Cambridgeshire Good Excellent Good Poor Fair No judgement Cheshire Poor Poor Poor Fair Poor Poor City of London Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor No judgement Cleveland Poor Poor Good Poor Poor Poor Cumbria Fair Fair Poor Fair Fair Poor Derbyshire Poor Fair Poor Poor Fair Poor Devon & Cornwall Por Poor Poor Poor Fair Poor Dorset Poor Fair Poor Poor Poor Poor Durham Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Fair Dyfed Powys Fair Good Poor Poor Excellent Poor Essex Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Gloucestershire Poor Fair Poor Poor Poor Poor GMP Poor Good Poor Poor Poor Poor Gwent Fair Good Poor Poor Poor Poor Hampshire Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Hertfordshire Poor Good Poor Poor Poor Poor Humberside Good Excellent Fair Fair Poor Poor Kent Fair Good Poor Fair Poor Poor Lancashire Poor Fair Poor Poor Poor Poor Leicestershire Good Excellent Poor Good Good Poor Lincolnshire Good Excellent Fair Fair Poor Poor Merseyside Poor Good Poor Good Poor Poor MPS Poor Fair Poor Poor Poor Poor Norfolk Good Excellent Poor Fair Excellent No judgement North Wales Fair Excellent Fair Fair Fair Poor North Yorkshire Fair Good Poor Fair Excellent Poor

70 Northamptonshire Poor Fair Poor Poor Poor Poor Northumbria Fair Fair Poor Poor Fair Poor Nottinghamshire Good Good Excellent Poor Good Fair South Wales Poor Fair Poor Poor Good Poor South Yorkshire Fair Fair Poor Poor Excellent Fair Staffordshire Excellent Excellent Excellent Excellent Excellent Excellent Suffolk Poor Fair Poor Poor Fair Poor Surrey Good Excellent Good Poor Poor Poor Sussex Fair Fair Poor Good Fair Poor Thames Valley Good Excellent Fair Good Excellent Excellent Warwickshire Good Excellent Fair Fair Good No judgement West Mercia Fair Excellent Fair Poor Poor Poor West Midlands Fair Good Good Fair Poor No judgement West Yorkshire Fair Good Fair Poor Good Poor Wiltshire Fair Good Poor Poor Excellent Poor

(Table 1)

4.5. In contravention of convention the full report was never made public however the abuse of informal warnings (included in the non‐sanctioned detection column) did lead the Home Office to withdraw them from the performance framework and led ACPO to approach the Information Commissioner (ICO) for advice on how to address the breaches of the Data Protection Act. The Commissioner crystallised the issue:

“From my perspective I am most concerned that individuals were not being informed that they were considered to be the perpetrator of an offence even though this did not involve a legal process, especially if such information could be used in future Enhanced Disclosure relating to them..... I am also worried by the sufficiency of evidence used. If a police force is going to label an individual as the de facto perpetrator then they must have a good objective reason for doing so.” (Information Commissioner 26.3.2007: Unpublished)

However, he declined to take any proactive action to alert the public.

4.6. The other ‘side of the coin’ in relation to this type of ‘gaming’ practice is the fact that offenders escape justice, as their offending behaviour is minimised or goes unchallenged. In the case used to highlight this (Patrick 2011c) a suspect recorded as responsible for kidnapping was never spoken to by the police and went on to murder a baby boy. It should also be noted Ian Huntley received an informal warning for a sexual offence prior to murdering two young girls. The remedial actions taken to prevent the abuse of the caution and informal warning procedures should have resulted in more appropriate interventions being employed to tackle criminality, particularly assaults where the offender is known to the victim, and this may provide an explanation for the reduction in homicides from 2006/7 (Fig 3). However this would require further research.

71 1,200 Homicides 1,000

800

600

400

200

0

Fig 3

2002/03 includes 172 homicides attributed to Harold Shipman.

2005/06 includes 52 homicide victims of the 7 July London bombings.

5. Conclusion

5.1. Good Governance and effective regulation committed to democratic principles of openness and accountability is the key to improving police leadership. The current system is wholly inadequate. The management information on which senior officers are held to account is little more than sophistry and it should come as no surprise that those presiding over such illusion should be involved in other forms of unethical conduct.

5.2. The introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners provides the means by which Chief Officers who proscribe to or ignore unethical practices can be removed. However addressing the current malpractice unilaterally would leave reforming Commissioners open to criticism for under‐ performance. Similar constitutional arrangements in the US have not been a bulwark to ‘gaming’ there. In the UK the political imperative to reduce robbery rates motivated a re‐interpretation of the National Crime Recording Standard leading to victims being treated as suspects (Patrick 2011a). This suggests that remedial action needs to be led by HMIC supported by Central Government. The appointment of a non‐police Chief HMIC provides the opportunity to reform this crucial body and realign it towards ensuring probity as opposed to concentrating on performance. The Home Affairs Committee could have a crucial role in scrutinising the work of HMIC and a new College of Policing would have a place to play in reinforcing the highest standards expected by the public.

5.3. The stated desire of the current Home Secretary to dismantle the central system of control through targets provides the opportunity for Central Government to distance itself from the performance of local Police Forces. This would enable it to return to its more traditional role of ensuring standards. However, it would still be advisable to be open with the public about the un‐

72 reliability of the existing police performance data to prevent a ‘moral panic’ when the issue is addressed. The current level of public scepticism and mistrust of official data should assist in managing this process. The twelve months following the appointment of the new Commissioners and Chief HMIC provides an opportunity for this process to occur. This would ensure the public have a valid means of assessing the effectiveness of those entrusted with delivering policing. Leaving the situation as it is will contribute to a gradual loss of public trust in the State.

Dr. Rodger Patrick ex Chief Inspector West Midlands Police. PhD based on the impact of Performance Management on Police Governance.

October 2012

References:

Bevan G. & C. Hood (2006). What’s Measured is What Matters: Targets and Gaming in the English Public Health Care System. Public Administration Vol. 84, No 3, 2006 (517‐538)

73 Chatterton, M., (2008), Losing the Detectives; Views from the Frontline. Police Federation of England and Wales

Collier P.M. (2006). In Search of Purpose and Priorities: Police Performance Indicators in England and Wales 1992‐2004. Public Money and Management 26:165‐72.

Day, P. & R. Klein, (1987). Accountabilities: Five Public Services. Tavistock Publications, London and New York.

Eterno John A. & Eli B. Silverman (2012). The Crime Numbers Game; Management by Manipulation. CRC Press Boca Raton Florida

Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC) (1999). Police Integrity England Wales and Northern Ireland. Securing and maintaining public confidence. June 1999 Home Office

Miller, J. (2003), Police Corruption in England and Wales: An assessment of current evidence. Home office Online Report 11/03.

Newburn, T. (1999), Understanding and preventing police corruption: lessons from the literature. Police Research Paper 110. Home Office

Patrick, R. (2004). The Lot of the Poor is Unlikely to Improve Until They Have a Greater Say in Their ‘lot’: Going Local and the Impact on the Distribution of Public Services. Vista Perspectives on Probation and Criminal Justice & Civil Renewal Vol. 9 No. 3 2004.

Patrick, R. (2011a). ‘Reading Tea Leaves’ an assessment of the reliability of police recorded crime statistics. The Police Journal, Volume 84 (No 1) pgs. 47‐67.

Patrick, R. (2011b). ‘A Nod and a Wink’: Do ‘gaming practices’ provide an insight into the organisational nature of police corruption? The Police Journal. Volume 84 (No 3) pgs. 199‐221).

Patrick, R. (2011c). 'Public Champions or Protectors of Professional Interests?' Observations on the performance of those bodies entrusted with the regulation of the Police Service during the era of New Public Management’. The Police Journal. Volume 84 (No. 4) pgs. 344‐371.

10

74 Written evidence submitted by the Department of Law & Criminal Justice Studies at Canterbury Christ Church University [LSP 16]

1.0 Executive Summary

1.1 This paper outlines key issues in relating to police professionalization drawing from the experiences of Canterbury Christ Church University in their engagement with police services in providing police education and training. Through this commentary we highlight the challenges to professionalization citing past and current arrangements in restricting the development of innovated policing programmes within higher education. We present recommendations to the committee focused on raising standards, removing barriers and proposals relating to the College of Policing.

2.0 Contributors

2.1 Dr Robin Bryant, Director of Criminal Justice Practice: Dr Bryant was jointly responsible with Kent Police for establishing a Foundation Degree in Policing for initial police training in Kent from 2004-2008. He has edited and contributed to several books on investigation and police training, and published and presented widely on investigative theory. Dr Bryant is also Director of Criminal Justice Practice which is part of the Department of Law and Criminal Justice at Canterbury Christ Church University offering applied research, evaluation, consultancy and training to the criminal justice sector

2.2 Dr Stephen Tong, Director of Policing: Dr Tong is Director of Policing and the Programme Director for the BSc (Hons) Police Studies & Policing (pre-service) programme at Canterbury Christ Church University for the past 10 years. He conducted doctoral research at the University of Cambridge, Institute of Criminology examining the contribution of police detective training to practice and has published on issues relating to the art, craft and science of policing and debates concerning police professionalization.

2.3 Dr Dominic Wood, Head of Department for Law & Criminal Justice: Dr Wood is Head of Department of Law & Criminal Justice at Canterbury Christ Church University. He is also Chair of the Higher Education Forum for Learning and Development in Policing. He was the joint programme director of the Kent Student

75 Officer Programme from 2004-2008 and has led on a number of innovative policing programmes over the past 18 years at CCCU.

2.4 The Department of Law and Criminal Justice Studies: The Department of Law and Criminal Justice Studies sits within the Faculty of Social and Applied Sciences with in the region of 900 students studying across a range of undergraduate and postgraduate programmes. It prides itself on the relationships it has built with the professions and currently offers popular undergraduate programmes in Applied Criminology, Crime & Policing, Forensic Investigation, Law and Policing, in addition to an in MA Policing/Criminal Justice and Criminology/Criminal Justice. The Department also has a number of PhD students focusing predominantly on policing related topics.

3.0 Key Issues relating to the improvement of standards and leadership

Context of Police Education and Training 3.1 The Home Select Committee remit in focusing on standards and leadership inevitably leads to an examination of the past and current arrangements for police education, training and recruitment. This timely examination of these issues provides the opportunity to review current arrangements and lessons learned from the past before the introduction of the College of Policing (CoP).

3.2 Throughout the duration of our working experiences with the police, National Police Training (NPT), Central Police Training and Development Authority (CENTREX) and finally National Police Improvement Agency (NPIA) have played a lead role in police learning and development. Whilst progress has been made through the endeavours of these bodies, a concern addressed in this submission is that these arrangements have stifled police services and educational providers in bringing about innovations and improvements in learning and development in policing.

3.3 Reports into police training have been critical (HMIC, 2002; BBC, 2003) and the police have also been criticised when fundamental errors or short comings have occurred in operational policing (e.g. Lawrence, Tomlinson, Hillsborough). At the same time it has been widely acknowledged that policing is becoming more complex and the police role requires a range of specialist skills and approaches that are based on good research, knowledge and understanding (Foster, 1999; Stelfox, 2009; Tong, Bryant & Horvath, 2009; Sherman, 2012).

76 3.4 However, we believe that police training has been too slow in responding to the challenges identified in the above reports. In particular, there continues to be too much emphasis placed upon ‘learning on the job’ at the expense of focused knowledge and skills acquisition (Bowling & Tong, 2006; Tong, Bryant & Horvath, 2009). The learning requirements of police officers today require a depth and breadth of knowledge that can only be attained through sustained study. There is a growing body of evidence and policy reviews that have called for more educational content in police programmes aimed at preparing police officers for a professional service (HMIC 1999; Foster, 1999; Neyroud, 2011; Flanagan 2008; Wood & Tong, 2009).

3.5 A new police qualification has been launched by the NPIA entitled the ‘Knowledge Certificate’. We have serious concerns about the appropriateness of this qualification in terms of developing necessary standards to avoid repeating past shortcomings of the police. It is our view that the current proposals for the ‘Knowledge Certificate’ present the prospect of a low educational award that fails to recognise and reward officers who are capable of demonstrating that they meet the required levels that we believe are required of a competent police officer (NPIA, 2012).

3.6 The CoP offers the possibility to review the current arrangements with the opportunity to increase quality and standards to a meaningful level in policing from new entrants through to future leaders into the police service.

Police Training & Education at Canterbury Christ Church University 3.7 In the early 1990s the university validated a Certificate in Education award for teachers and trainers in the post-compulsory sector of education and training. Students of the ‘Cert Ed’ included police trainers based at regional training centres. The initial ad hoc arrangements soon developed into more formal agreements that meant that bespoke Cert Ed programmes could be delivered exclusively to groups of police trainers at their own premises. At one stage this involved over 10 police training centres across the whole of the UK (including the Garnerville Training Centre in east Belfast). The Cert Ed continues to this day although the number of regional training centres has decreased because of changes in national police training. Although the content of the Cert Ed was the theory and practice of education and training our engagement with police trainers led to deeper understanding of the range of police training and the professional demands placed

77 on officers. We noted that both initial police training and more specialist training (for example, investigative training) content had academic value but was often not assessed, or assessed in non-rigorous ways and (perhaps as a consequence of this) rarely formally accredited. It was common at the time (and in many cases remains so) for police officers to undertake what should have been demanding (but certainly often expensive) training but to simply then to be ‘certificated’ as successful on the basis of attendance only. The Cert Ed remains a vibrant and successful programme within the university.

3.8 In 1996 the university was approached by the then Chief Constable of Kent Police (Sir David Phillips, latterly the President of ACPO) to collaborate on a new approach to police in-service training within an academic framework. The result was the validation of a BSc (Hons) Policing that supported the development of intelligence-led policing in Kent, and the recruitment of a number of large cohorts of students. Within a few years the offer of a BSc (Hons) Policing was incrementally extended to police officers outside of Kent and specialist options (in for example, patrol policing) were added. To date over 300 police officers have successfully undertaken this degree, in many cases financing their studies from their own resources and sometimes in the face of opposition from their forces rather than support. (There are, however, notable exceptions to this, most notably both Kent Police and British Transport Police supported police officers wishing to undertake in-service higher education at CCCU over a number of years). The BSc (Hons) Policing continues to prove attractive to the sector with over 80 new students starting in October 2012.

3.9 In 1997 the university began to address the needs of ‘probationary’ police constables: student police officers undertaking two years initial training after joining the police service until confirmation in post. Hitherto this initial training had received no formal academic recognition. A Certificate in Higher Education in Policing was designed in partnership with Kent Police. For a number of years all new recruits of Kent Police had the opportunity to undertake the Certificate with progression routes available to the BSc (Hons) Policing (see above). However, soon after National Police Training (NPT) and its successor, Centrex launched a ‘national’ Certificate for probationary police constables in collaboration with the University of Portsmouth.

78 3.10 There have since been various similar attempts at accrediting initial police training, but with little long term success. For example, in 2002 the Home Office made funding available for 500 places on the ‘national’ Centrex-approved Foundation Degree. However, the Foundation degree had very high drop-out rates and low completion rates and was subsequently withdrawn. A recurring problem that we have encountered has been the lack of a consistent message within the police and government, which has sent mixed messages to officers regarding the value of such programmes to their career progression within the police.

3.11 In 2002 the university again became involved with an innovative approach to policing; in this case through the Advanced Detective Training (ADT) programme of Kent Police. ADT was an initiative of Sir David Phillips (see above) and a direct response to the urgent need for well-trained, motivated and qualified early-career detectives. ADT was embedded within a BSc (Hons) in Applied Criminal Investigation and proved highly successful. However, after only a couple of intakes the ADT became ensnared by both restrictions at the national level (particularly the national promotion system) and costs that proved prohibitive for a single police force to bear.

3.12 In 2003 the Home Office sponsored an independent review of the learning requirement for police probationer training in England and Wales. This sought to provide a ‘modern vision of policing’ and a modernised initial policing curriculum to match. In the same year a BBC undercover reporter secretly filmed student police officer training at the Centrex Bruche training centre and uncovered examples of racist behaviour by trainees and inappropriate behaviour by trainers (BBC, 2003).

3.13 Also, HMIC (2002) examined initial police training at both national (Centrex) and local (force) level as one of its ‘thematic inspections’ and found the provision to be no longer fit for purpose.

3.14 The university and Kent Police responded to these national developments by jointly designing an accredited ‘Kent Student Officer Programme’ (KSOP). The underpinning academic award for KSOP was a Certificate of Higher Education in Policing, with progression routes available to officers to complete a Foundation Degree or BSc (Hons) degree in Policing. KSOP combined both the professional and

79 academic requirements for initial training in a completely integrated manner and was the first such programme of its kind.

3.15 For a period of 5 years all new recruits to Kent Police undertook KSOP on university premises taught and assessed jointly by university and police staff (the latter were seconded by Kent Police to the university). At the outset KSOP was adopted by the university as a pilot of the new national Initial Police Learning and Development Programme (IPLDP) but within a short period of time became one of the small number of ‘early adopters’. However, no significant funding was provided by the Home Office for this to happen; instead costs were met from Kent Police allocated resources and through a successful bid to the Higher Education Funding Council for England and Wales (Hefce). In 2008 Kent Police decided not to continue with the KSOP programme, both the light of their financial situation and the downturn in police recruitment. We believe that the continued lack of any formal requirement for police officers to have their initial learning assessed at this level also undermined the programme and contributed to its demise.

3.16 A significant development in recent years has been the introduction of pre- join (or ‘pre-entry’ or ‘pre-employment’) schemes and courses by some colleges and universities in conjunction with police forces. In 2002 the university launched its first full-time pre-service policing programme. This programme has developed over the years and students now complete some of the learning and training required to become a police constable before entry into the police through their duties as a special constable as well as their learning based within the university. In 2010 the university introduced a new revalidated pre-join Dip HE/BSc (Hons) Policing/Police Studies (Pre-join) at its campus in east Kent. The programme has proved exceptionally popular, despite the recent introduction of higher variable tuition fees.

College of Policing 3.17 In our view, the CoP offers an exciting opportunity to truly professionalise and improve standards in policing. In order to achieve this it will need to engage with a wide range of interested parties.

3.18 If the CoP is successful in this regard, we believe there is much potential in selling products internationally and thus contributing significantly to the running of

80 the CoP. The UK already has a strong reputation internationally in terms of both policing and the burgeoning relationship between police services and the higher education sector. There is a chance for the CoP to be at the pinnacle of police professionalization globally.

3.19 It is important that the CoP performs a leadership role in advancing police professionalism and in order to achieve this it will need to have epistemic authority within policing in ways that NPT, Centrex and NPIA did not. It needs to be aspirational and forward looking and in this respect we believe that the Level 3 ‘Knowledge Certificate’ fails to provide the appropriate professional confidence.

3.20 The CoP needs support in ensuring quality assurance. The HE sector has expertise and resources that could be drawn upon here, alongside the various professional police associations.

3.21 The CoP should also ensure that it draws upon (and where necessary commissions) research on what works in the development of effective police officers, policing specialist roles and police leadership.

Barriers to Professionalisation 3.22 The challenge for the NPIA and its predecessors has been to maintain minimum standards nationally across 43 services with different challenges, geography and resources. The objective of achieving consistency across a variety of police services that place different priorities on operational challenges and learning and development objectives inevitably gravitates towards minimum standards as opposed to the pursuit of excellence. The CoP needs to be able to assert with authority standards that that the professionalism of the police forward. There is an opportunity for the CoP to play an important role in developing the standards for ALL policing roles in this respect.

3.23 There is an opportunity for the CoP to make greater use of the established policing curriculum that exists within universities. Universities have a long tradition of helping the development of professional knowledge and modernisation of the workforce. This is a strategic objective at CCCU and specifically in relation to police work within the Department of Law and Criminal Justice Studies.

4.0 Recommendations:

81 4.1 The CoP should review, and recognise as appropriate, the learning that occurs on existing policing programmes within higher education, focusing in particular on the suitability of adopting HE level 4 (and above) learning requirements for the attestation of police constables;

4.2 The CoP should also recognise the opportunities to engage with academia in recognising existing pools of knowledge within the police and establishing relevant qualifications for promotion and specialisation within the police. Appropriate support for in-service police staff to engage with modernisation and professionalization, e.g. through CPD courses, should be encouraged.

4.3 The CoP should be informed by academic research into the police training, education and its impact on practice, and commission research to fill gaps in this knowledge;

4.4 The CoP should engage with academia in its endeavours to establish undergraduate benchmarks in policing and more broadly in establishing appropriate mechanisms for governing the quality assurance of learning and development in policing.

Bibliography

BBC (2003) The Secret Policeman, Panorama BBC.

Bryant. R, Bryant. S, Tong. S & Wood D (2012) ASC 547 Higher Education and Policing, Report submitted to the Higher Education Academy Social Sciences Cluster

Byford, L (1981) The Yorkshire Ripper Case: review of the Police Investigation of the Case, unpublished report of for Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary.

Flanagan, Sir R. (2008) Review of Policing—Final Report. London: HMSO

Foster, J. (1999) ‘Appendix 22: Memorandum by Dr Janet Foster, Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge’, in Home Affairs Committee, Police Training and Recruitment: Volume Two, London: The Stationery Office, pp. 382-391.

HMIC, (1999) Managed Learning: A Study of Police Training, London: HMIC.

HMIC, (2002) Training Matters, London: HMIC.

Macpherson, Sir William. (1999) The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, London: TSO.

82 Macvean, A & Cox, C (2012) Police Education in a University Setting: Emerging Cultures and Attitudes, Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, Volume 6, Issue 1, pp. 16-25.

Neyroud, P. (2011) Review of Police Leadership and Training: Volume One [online] Available at:

NPIA (2012) Professional Entry to Policing Pre-Join Strategy and Guidance Document, May 2012 Version 1.01

Sherman, L (2011) Professional Policing and Liberal Democracy, Benjamin Franklin Medal Lecture, Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce, London, 1st November, 2011

Tong. S, Bryant. R & Hovarth. M (2009) Understanding Criminal Investigation, Chichester: Wiley & Sons Publication.

Tong, S & Bowling, B (2006) ‘Art, Craft and Science of Detective Work’, Police Journal, Volume 79, No 4, pp. 323-329.

Wood, D and Tong, S. (2009) ‘The future of initial police training: a university perspective’. International Journal of Police Science and Management, 11 (3). pp. 294-305.

Submitted by Dr Robin Bryant, Dr Stephen Tong & Dr Dominic Wood on behalf of the Department of Law & Criminal Justice Studies, Canterbury Christ Church University (CCCU).

October 2012

9

83

Written evidence submitted by the Chartered Management Institute [LSP 17]

Executive summary:

• The Chartered Management Institute (CMI) fully supports the Government’s proposal to establish a College of Policing, the remit of which is to “enable the service to implement the standards it sets for training, development, skills and qualifications” and thereby to “raise the professional status of police officers and police staff”.

• The College should operate as a centre of excellence, showcasing professional leadership and management development across the whole police service in England and Wales. It should be responsible for establishing best practice, designating (rather than setting) standards for leadership and management training, development and qualifications, and promoting professionally accredited learning.

• CMI research shows that good leadership and management is the key to effective performance, to the engagement and motivation of officers and staff, and to gaining the public’s confidence. The development of these skills in the police service should start with first line supervisors and the learning process should continue throughout an individual’s career. The College of Policing has a major role to play in establishing this approach across all forces in England and Wales.

• The College’s first task must be to create a competency framework, based on leadership and management best practice, and contextualised appropriately for the police sector. The College then needs to establish a qualifications framework, which reflects evidence-based, ethical standards aligned to business needs and representing value for money. Advice on publicly available funding for adult learning (e.g. apprenticeships, further and higher education and specific skills schemes) would also be useful for the College to supply.

• The College of Policing needs to quickly establish its profile and reputation with its audience. It should focus on building a robust, value for money offering which cannot be obtained elsewhere, and membership should be quick and easy to access. In this way police forces will have a strong incentive to draw on its expertise, creating a “virtuous circle” of increasing the College’s brand and reputation, as well as strengthening leadership and management skills in the police service.

• We believe that it is possible for one institution to balance numerous responsibilities and do not see a conflict of interest between the designation of appropriate standards (which are developed in partnership with appropriate Awarding Bodies such as CMI) and the delivery of training and testing. The key is to have effective governance, clear separation of functions, and transparency of activity.

• The College should be responsible for police officers and civilian police employees alike – after all, police officers are civilians who have powers conferred on them by their warrant.

• We look forward to working with existing stakeholders and the College of Policing to support the development of professional leadership and management skills in the police service. This will build on our existing partnerships with police forces around the country, as well as with key sector bodies such as the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), the Police Superintendents Association (PSA), Skills for Justice and the Police Federation. It is important that the College has good links not only with the academic community, but also with professional and vocational stakeholders who can reflect the skills needs of police officers and staff on the ground.

• CMI has a strong track record of working with police forces around England and Wales to help improve leadership and management skills. We are the only Chartered professional body in the

84 UK dedicated to promoting the highest standards of management and leadership excellence. We represent 90,000 managers and leaders across all sectors, including 3,000 police officers and staff. We look forward to working with the police service to establish the College’s offering with regard to leadership and management development.

About CMI – our track record in the police and criminal justice sectors

CMI is responding to this call for evidence as the UK’s only chartered professional body for management and leadership. With 90,000 members across all sectors of the economy, and 3,000 in the police service, we represent managers from first line managers to the most senior levels of business and public sector organisations. We have 600 Approved Centres which deliver our qualifications, ranging from world-class universities, to technical colleges, employers and further education institutes.

We pride ourselves on taking best practice from a range of sectors and delivering professional leadership and management skills advice, products and services. We work with 54 police centres to deliver many leadership and management qualifications. We work closely with Skills for Justice to deliver leadership and management training and qualifications for the police, and have developed bespoke qualifications for the sector. We are the only awarding body to deliver the Multi Agency qualifications, which we developed in collaboration with Skills for Justice.

We are therefore well placed to respond to the questions posed by the Home Affairs Select Committee in its terms of reference for this inquiry. However, we have concentrated our response only on relevant questions raised by the terms of reference. For example, we are well-placed to respond to questions on setting and upholding standards and training, but we are not in a position to comment on police recruitment processes or the structure of the Metropolitan Police Force.

We have set out below our answers to the specific questions within our area of expertise. At the end of the document (see Annex A) we outline more information about our offering, including our qualifications and online learning resources, and some brief examples of work we have done with police forces around the country.

We would be happy to discuss our views more fully by giving oral evidence to the Committee’s Inquiry.

Specific comments on the Inquiry’s terms of reference

We focus on the following questions as listed in the Inquiry’s terms of reference:

1. The College as a centre of excellence – encapsulating and disseminating best practice 2. The value of good leadership and management and its effect on performance 3. Creating a competency framework 4. Creating a qualifications framework 5. Lessons learned from other professional bodies 6. The need to balance numerous responsibilities 7. Breadth of responsibility

1. The College of Policing – a centre of excellence for police leadership, education and training 1.1 We support and welcome the proposal to establish the College of Policing, which would be responsible for the key national standards, qualification frameworks, and leadership and training approaches for all 43 police forces in England and Wales. We understand the need for the sector to professionalise its skills so as to achieve consistency of standards across the country, and at different levels within the police. We also welcome the recognition that there has been an inconsistent approach to some aspects of leadership and management development, such as a lack of emphasis on frontline

85 leadership, talent management, promotion systems and equality and diversity, and we look forward to helping the College establish itself as a centre of excellence in leadership and management.

2. The value of good leadership and management and its effect on performance 2.1 The link between good leadership and management and improved organisational performance is clear. CMI and Penna commissioned a research project in 2011 to investigate the return on investment of management and leadership development. Launched at an All Party Parliamentary Group meeting in February last year by the Rt Hon David Willetts MP, Minister of State for Universities and Science, the report1 surveyed 4,500 managers across all sectors of the UK economy. The results showed that organisational performance and management abilities are clearly correlated, with effective management development linked to a 23 per cent variance in organisational performance, and a 32 per cent variance in people performance. The research revealed that qualifications, in particular, hit a ‘sweet spot’, with managers rating business school and professional body qualifications as the most effective forms of development.

2.2 These results show that leadership and management skills are key to the police service successfully meeting their current challenges, and police forces are “brought up to date and up to scratch”, as described by the Committee Chair.

2.3 Following on from this piece of research, CMI then examined the value of management qualifications on UK managers and employers2, and asked managers and leaders exactly why they valued professional management qualifications. Again, the results showed a strong link between professional management qualifications and improved performance, with 90 per cent of respondents saying that their management qualification improved their performance at work. This helps to provide the evidence that investing in leadership and management qualifications at all levels of the police service, for police officers and civilian staff, will raise performance levels, increase employee engagement and ultimately, raise the public’s confidence in the professionalism of the police in England and Wales.

3. Creating a competency framework 3.1 It is important that in creating an appropriate competency framework for the police service, the College does not reinvent the wheel. The Sector Skills Council, Skills for Justice, will have the input from the police at all levels to advise on the competency framework, based on its existing Policing Professional Framework (https://www.skillsforjustice-ppf.com).

3.2 In addition, CMI has wide experience of developing competency frameworks based on the National Occupational Standards (NOS) for Management and Leadership. The NOS covers six distinct competency areas and represent proven benchmarks of best practice:

• Managing self and personal skills • Providing direction • Facilitating change • Working with people • Using resources • Achieving results

3.3 We also have experience of mapping competency frameworks in other sectors to the NOS. For example, we have carried out substantial work in the health sector, working with the former National Leadership Council (now replaced by the Leadership Academy) to map the NHS’s Leadership Framework to the NOS, and also to CMI’s qualifications. We would be happy to advise the College of Policing on the

1 “The Business Benefits of Management and Leadership Development” – McBain et al, 2012 2 “The Value of Management and Leadership Qualifications” – Bradley et al, 2012

86 creation of a new competency framework for the police, and mapping it to the NOS for Management and Leadership.

4. Creating a qualifications framework 4.1 Again, CMI has extensive experience of advising sectors on appropriate leadership and management qualifications, using the Qualifications Credit Framework, which allows the learner to take vocational qualifications from basic team leading skills at Level 2 to strategic command skills at Level 8. The learner can determine the size and length of the qualification, from a bite-sized Award, through to Certificate and then a full Diploma.

4.2 Qualifications in leadership and management are essential at all levels of the police service, both for police officers and civilian staff, if the general public are to see the police as professionals, not just in terms of their technical competence (ie policing) but also in managing complex investigations, dealing with vulnerable people, managing teams and providing leadership in emergency situations.

4.3 Qualifications not only provide an individual with formal recognition of his or her skills while in service, but also allow the individual to gain valuable transferable skills, once they leave the police. Accredited learning also allows an individual to have their skills recognised by different employers and their peers.

5. Lessons learned from other professional bodies 5.1 As the only Chartered professional body for managers and leaders in the UK, we have many years of expertise in running a successful professional body which operates throughout the country at every level of management and leadership.

5.2 In our opinion, the College of Policing needs to quickly establish its profile and reputation with its audience. Its “brand” should be highly visible throughout the police sector, so that potential “customers” know what it offers and the value of that offering. Its membership application process should be easy accessible and quick to complete, and it should be transparent in terms of the different products and services it offers to different individuals, eg. civilian staff, front-line police officers up to the highest levels of police leadership.

5.3 Above all, the College’s offerings must represent value for money. It should be clear to the learner what the benefits are of developing their leadership and management skills, both in terms of individual and organisational outcomes. In this way police forces will have a strong incentive to draw on its expertise, creating a “virtuous circle” of increasing brand and reputation, as well as strengthening leadership and management skills in the police service.

6. The need to balance numerous responsibilities 6.1 We believe that it is possible for one institution to balance the numerous responsibilities as described in the Inquiry’s terms of reference, provided there are clear governance structures in place to provide the appropriate separation or “Chinese walls” that these diverse responsibilities would require. The College would have to create a structure which clearly separates the designation of education and training standards, for example, from any training function. Guarding the public interest should naturally follow as a consequence of the College disseminating best practice, designating professional standards and enhancing professional practice across the police service.

6.2 We do not see that there is a conflict of interest between the designation of appropriate standards (which are developed in partnership with appropriate Awarding Bodies such as the Chartered Management Institute) and the delivery of training and testing. However, the use of the words “standards setting” may be misleading. We do not believe it would be necessary or appropriate for the College to become an Awarding Body in its own right. Its role would be to designate the appropriate education and training standards for the police profession, rather than creating its own qualifications.

87

6.3 The key is to have effective governance, clear separation of functions, and transparency of activity.

7. Breadth of responsibility 7.1 We believe that the College should be responsible for police officers and civilian police employees alike – after all, police officers are civilians who have powers conferred on them by their warrant.

Annex A: More about CMI and what we offer

CMI Qualifications

A1. CMI has developed a wide range of leadership and management qualifications, covering all levels from Level 2 (GCSE) to Level 8 (PhD). Our QCF qualifications can be delivered in different sizes of learning, ie, in terms of an award, certificate or diploma . A list of our qualifications is attached at Annex A. As mentioned above, we have also worked with Skills for Justice to design bespoke qualifications for the police sector, eg. CMI Level 3 in Neighbourhood Management (QCF). We are also the only Awarding Body to offer qualifications in neighbourhood management and multi-agency working, and we have an excellent track record in delivering qualifications across the police service in England and Wales.

A2. We deliver our qualifications via our network of 600 approved centres, which span the country and include higher education institutions, further education colleges and individual employers. Through our approved centres we deliver CMI qualifications and qualifications awarded by other awarding bodies which have an accreditation arrangement with CMI. For example, students taking an MBA at London South Bank University also gain a Level 7 CMI qualification.

A3. In June 2010 CMI became accredited by Ofqual (Office of the Qualifications and Examinations Regulator) to deliver two police management qualifications. The formal accreditation means that CMI is a nationally recognised provider of the highest standard of management qualifications for the police. The qualifications were part of a new career development programme and were used to confirm promotions for Sergeants and Inspectors within the force. They have now been superseded by new Qualifications and Credit Framework (QCF) qualifications.

A4. Developed in partnership with Skills for Justice, the Sector Skills Council and standards setting body for the sector, CMI is able to offer senior police the opportunity to undertake the Level 4 Certificate in Police First Line Management (equivalent to a National Diploma) and the Level 5 Certificate in Police Management (equivalent to a university degree). These qualifications formalise learning and help officers to manage their own professional development and better plan, allocate and monitor work within their departments.

A5. Specifically, the qualifications ensure that senior police are assessed in terms of their personal effectiveness, leadership skills and ability to manage resources. Candidates undertaking the Level 4 qualification, for example, cover topics such as how they supervise and respond to critical incidents and how they prepare for law enforcement operations. Those undertaking the Certificate in Police Management are assessed for their ability to develop operational plans and identify threats and risks.

A6. Some of our approved centres work very closely with individual police forces, and build up good working relationships with them over many years. For example, Peak Management Service Ltd, in Rotherham, South Yorkshire, has delivered CMI Level 3 and Level 5 Diplomas to 60 individuals from South Yorkshire Police. Peak Management Service has run continuous Level 3 and Level 5 CMI Diploma programmes for the force, using some of the force’s staff as the centre’s associates to cut costs, but using Peak Management’s learning materials. This might be a funding model worth pursuing under the new structure.

88

Chartered Manager

A7. CMI is the only organisation able to award Chartered Manager status – this gives individuals the same professional recognition as other Chartered professionals such as Chartered Accountant and Chartered Surveyor. As with other Chartered professions, Chartered Manager is awarded on the basis of the individual’s demonstrated professional management and leadership skills, and requires individuals to keep up to date with continuing professional development and management best practice. There are over 2,300 Chartered Managers practising in the UK at the moment, with 50 of these from the police and justice sectors.

CMI’s continuing professional development offering

A9. CMI offers a range of products and services to support managers at every level to access learning resources and develop their skills. We have various products which support managers and leaders with their continuing professional development. Those taking our qualifications have access to ManagementDirect and all the resources it offers, as part of their learning materials.

A10. ManagementDirect is an online tool which covers a wide range of learning resources, including management best practice checklists, CMI’s library, access to our team of researchers who can find and recommend learning resources for our members, and access to a wide range of e-journals and e-books. ManagementDirect is being used by a range of public sector organisations, including Greater Manchester Police. It is a flexible portal which can be customised by the client, providing in-house training materials and access to company continuing professional development resources.

A.11 ManagementKnow helps managers assess their management knowledge, skills and experience. Developed in association with Cognisco, the leading employee assessment organisation, it has been designed to help managers spot their weaknesses in performance management and employee engagement in order to ensure the harm they cause to their teams is minimised. We have developed this tool in response to our research, which found that a lack of competence and misplaced confidence amongst bosses is creating a stressed out workforce.

A12. According to the research data, 74 per cent of employees have made decisions they do not feel qualified to make because their manager is not supporting them. As a consequence one in three managers no longer have faith in what their manager does. Although the research findings are not specifically from the police sector, they demonstrate a general lack of professionalism and expertise in the UK management community as a whole, covering all sectors.

A13. The tool focuses on the two aspects of management competence – performance and engagement. As a result of measuring performance in both areas, managers are given a bespoke development programme designed to build on their existing knowledge and capabilities, and to plug any weaknesses or gaps.

CMI’s work in the police sector – some examples

• CMI approved centres in the police service A14. CMI authorises a wide range of learning establishments, employers and training centres to deliver its qualifications. Many employers decide to become approved centres so they can deliver CMI- accredited learning to their staff.

A15. To date there are 600 CMI approved centres throughout the UK, including 41 in the police service. These range from the British Transport Police, City of London Police, Greater Manchester Police, Kent Police Force, the Metropolitan Police Force, North Yorkshire Police, the Police Service of Northern Ireland and Surrey Police.

89

• South Wales Police wins “Management team of the year 2012” Award A16. At its annual Awards dinner CMI presents awards to outstanding management and leadership practitioners, both individuals and teams, in a range of categories. The 2012 winner of the “Management Team of the Year” award was South Wales Police Leadership, Equality and Development (LEAD) Team.

A17. South Wales Police polices 42 per cent of the population of Wales and has a vision to be the best at understanding and responding to its communities’ needs. The LEAD team has overcome barriers and shown effective leadership in order to implement a Leadership Development Pathway for managers across the organisation, with the following results:

¾ 97 per cent of its officers and staff are very satisfied with the leadership development they receive

¾ The provision of community based equality and diversity training to managers has supported South Wales Police in rejoining the top 100 organisations in the 2012 Stonewall index.

• Trevor Service, Police Service of Northern Ireland (development of qualification) A18. Trevor Service is a police officer with the Police Service of Northern Ireland. He works in the leadership department for the Northern Ireland Police College, and has developed a course in neighbourhood management for police officers and members of the local community.

A19. The challenge was to develop a leadership course that, in the post-conflict environment of Northern Ireland, could be taken by neighbourhood police officers and by representatives of different communities to improve their neighbourhood management skills and work with the police – without positioning it as a police course, as this would put off applicants from attending.

A20. Trevor wanted a course that would be useful for neighbourhood police officers and members of the community to help them solve problems in their local areas and improve quality of life – as well as offering a well-regarded external qualification. Trevor said at the time: “This is a unique step for us. We wanted to have communities trained in an external qualification along the same lines as neighbourhood police officers so they would understand each other’s objectives and work together. Offering the public the opportunity to attend our training courses was something we had never done before.”

A21. Trevor began developing a course for police officers and citizens by adapting workbooks designed by the National Police Improvement Agency, accredited by CMI as a Level 3 Introductory Certificate in Neighbourhood Management. He particularly welcomed the flexibility offered by CMI in rewriting the course to suit the needs of community representatives and the emphasis on practical tools to help them manage, rather than a wholly academic course. Applications for a place on a pilot course were oversubscribed and the course has been very popular. Trevor says: “Having the CMI on board did us a big favour because they saw it not as a police course but as a management course. Having a reputable external qualification is very valuable.”

• CMI’s Accords with police professional bodies A23. Three years ago CMI set up a membership agreement with the Police Superintendents Association of England and Wales (PSAEW). This agreement was extended to become the Exclusive Police Association Offer as a consequence of including the Association of Police Superintendents of Scotland (ASPS) and Superintendents Association of Northern Ireland (SANI). It offers all members of these organisations membership of CMI at a discounted rate. CMI also has a General Police Offer membership offering to individuals who are not a member of any Police Associations. In this way police officers are able to access CMI’s resources, expertise and networking opportunities as well as the opportunity to take professional leadership and management qualifications.

CMI October 2012

6

90

Written evidence submitted by the Home Office [LSP 18]

Letter from Keith Bristow QPM, Director General, National Crime Agency, to the Chair of the Committee, 11 October 2012

NATIONAL CRIME AGENCY

Thank you for your invitation to appear before the Committee as part of your ‘Leadership and Standards in the Police’ Inquiry. I look forward to seeing you on 16 October. In the meantime, I am happy to answer your specific questions and provide an update on our progress to create the National Crime Agency.

Work in Progress So Far

Much has been done since I last appeared before you. We are making good progress to set up the Agency, secure early operational results, and ensure wider law enforcement is ready for the NCA becoming fully operational by the end of 2013 (subject, of course, to the passage of the Crime and Courts Bill).

The NCA will be a highly visible agency of operational crime-fighters, protecting the public by cutting serious, organised and complex crime. Recognising that the threat is changing and our response must also evolve, the NCA will have an explicit mandate to lead and task the entire law enforcement response, on the basis of a single, authoritative intelligence picture. Its new approach and broad remit will deliver a step-change in tackling the damage inflicted by organised crime in this country – manifested in street corner drug-dealing; trafficking of men and women into modern-day bondage or prostitution; online sharing of horrific images of sexually abused children; and cyber-enabled scams that deprive people of their life savings.

I am pleased with the progress we are making to stand up a fully operational Agency by the end of next year. The NCA will go after some of the most risky and dangerous people that affect our communities – preventing and disrupting their criminal behaviour, taking their assets and stopping them from harming the public. Key elements of the NCA’s operating model include:

• four specialist Commands pulling together to protect the public – Economic Crime, Border Policing, Organised Crime and Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP); • a flexible operational taskforce, to provide the core crime‐fighting capability; • a National Cyber Crime Unit, to deliver a more targeted response to the most serious cyber crime, support transformational change in wider law enforcement, and significantly enhance crime‐fighting partnership work with industry and the intelligence agencies; • a multi‐agency Intelligence Hub, enabling law enforcement to work together to deliver against a compelling and shared picture of the threat; and • an effective set of tasking arrangements, to coordinate the NCA’s and partners’ assets and to target activity against the highest priority criminals.

The operational status of the Agency and its commands and timetable for bringing the Agency into operation

91 As you know, the Crime and Courts Bill will provide the legislative basis for the new Agency. It was introduced in the House of Lords in May and the NCA provisions have completed committee stage. Ministers have been clear, however, that we cannot wait for the formal establishment of the Agency at the end of next year to start to see operational improvements. Early progress is therefore already being driven through a set of ‘shadow’ NCA commands, to better protect communities from the scourge of serious, organised and complex crime.

Under the leadership of its Director David Armond, shadow arrangements for the Border Policing Command are in place, with an initial core of SOCA, police, UK Border Agency and Border Force staff. This will deliver, for the first time, a unified, strategic intelligence picture and operational activity to deliver border security. Similarly, on economic crime, one early joint operation against Eastern European money launderers led to 13 arrests and important follow-up work against more dangerous criminals. Further operational and disruption activity is ongoing, including with international partners on boiler room fraud, and operations against those involved in pensions fraud.

Shadow arrangements for the other Commands, the National Cyber Crime Unit and the NCA’s intelligence functions are also taking shape. The Organised Crime Coordination Centre (which will become part of the NCA’s Intelligence Hub) is up and running and already conducting intelligence work which is making a difference operationally. Its effectiveness is underpinned by a strong multi-agency team, with crime-fighting officers from SOCA, ACPO, HMRC and UKBA. From next month, a shadow Intelligence Hub will begin providing intelligence support to the shadow NCA Commands, and shadow tasking arrangements will test how key operational partnerships will work.

Powers and responsibilities that will be incorporated in the Agency

In terms of precursor functions, agreement has been reached since my last update to you that the Proceeds of Crime Centre (POCC) will also transition into the NCA from the NPIA by the end of this year (via SOCA). POCC accredits and monitors financial investigators, operates a professional register and provides international training on request.

Current staffing and senior appointments

The NCA will largely comprise officers and staff from SOCA, CEOP and other precursors and I expect it to have in the region of 4,000 officers when it is established (as the NCA’s main precursor, SOCA’s headcount in July 2012 was 3,816). Precise numbers who will transfer to the NCA from other bodies (such as the Police Central eCrime Unit currently in the Metropolitan Police Service) are subject to discussions with the MPS and other bodies and those officers and staff affected.

The Bill also provides for the recruitment of volunteer ‘NCA Specials’, who will bring additional specialist skills to help tackle some of the most serious and complex criminality impacting on the UK. Over the next year we will continue to develop and finalise the NCA’s workforce, including looking at how we can embed officers and staff from other organisations to maximise the Agency’s crime-fighting strength and expertise.

Key to the effectiveness of the NCA is appointing the right operational leadership, with a proven track record in fighting crime at a senior level. As you know, I took up post at the end of 2011. Since then, David Armond, Trevor Pearce and Peter Davies have been appointed as Directors designate of the Border Policing Command (BPC), Operations, and the Child Exploitation and

92 Online Protection Command (CEOP) respectively. Recruitment campaigns for Directors designate of the Organised Crime Command (OCC) and Economic Crime Command (ECC) began in July and we expect to appoint both soon.

Funding arrangements for the Agency

As we have previously said, SOCA’s budget (including CEOP) will form the bulk of the NCA’s delegated budget. In the first full year of operations (2014/15) that is now expected to be around £403m (reflecting NPIA functions that have been transferred, or will shortly transfer). Like SOCA, the NCA will also have supplementary funding streams, which fluctuate year on year (around £40m in 2012/13). We expect these arrangements will continue for the NCA, as will CEOP’s ability to raise and hold funds from donors. As I explained when I last wrote, the NCA budget will continue to develop, as the precursor landscape evolves and delegated budgets are revised.

I welcome the opportunity to provide you with this update on our progress and I look forward to seeing you and the rest of the Committee on 16 October.

Keith Bristow QPM, Director General National Crime Agency

October 2012

2

93 Supplementary written evidence submitted by the National Crime Agency [LSP 18a]

Email from National Crime Agency to the Committee, 25 October 2012

Keith Bristow’s evidence session

Keith Bristow said he would go back to the Committee in response to Steve McCabe’s questions around £3m funding for coordinating intelligence around organised crime in the last financial year. The response on that point should be as follows:

“The National Crime Agency as such would not have been given any money to coordinate intelligence in the last financial year. We believe that the £3m figure quoted by Steve McCabe MP refers to a range of funding that was budgeted by the Home Office in 2011/12 to cover organised crime coordination more broadly, including the Organised Crime Coordination Centre (OCCC) housed within SOCA.

The Organised Crime Coordination Centre is a key building block for the National Crime Agency’s Intelligence Hub. It is already in place and is being developed with partner agencies; enabling police forces and other law enforcement partners to identify linkages between organised crime groups and agree the best approach for tackling them.

Although Home Office funding was set aside in 2011-12, the OCCC was ultimately funded from within SOCA’s budget that year. In 2012-13, the Home Office has budgeted £1.958m of additional funding to support the operation of the OCCC. In addition to this, SOCA also supports the OCCC from their ongoing budget in terms of providing officers and staff, premises and IT.”

National Crime Agency

October 2012

94 Written evidence submitted by the Home Office [LSP 19]

Letter from Rt Hon Damian Green MP, Minister of State for Policing and Criminal Justice, to the Chair of the Committee, 30 October 2012

I am grateful to the Committee for launching an inquiry into leadership and standards in the police. Recent events regarding police integrity and the creation of the College of Policing provide a timely opportunity for these issues to be considered. The Committee will already be aware, following the debate in the House on the report of the Hillsborough Independent Panel, my Right Honourable friend the Home Secretary undertook to provide further detail to Parliament on proposals to address police integrity before Christmas.

As you are aware, the Home Secretary announced the selection of Alex Marshall as the Chief Executive on 24 October and we expect to make an announcement on the chair in due course. Once in post, we anticipate that the senior leadership of the College will take a number of decisions about the way in which the College will operate following its creation.

Please find enclosed the Government's written submission. If you require any further information or evidence on any issues, I would be pleased to provide it.

Rt Hon Damian Green MP Minister of State for Policing and Criminal Justice

MEMORANDUM

Summary

1. The British model of policing by consent is one of which we are rightly proud. Every day, police officers risk their lives to protect the public, intervening in often dangerous situations, usually unarmed. They command the authority of the public because they carry out their work with the public’s consent. The Government is committed to maintaining this model.

2. To enable it to thrive, it is essential that the police abide by the highest standards. It is vital that we have confidence in police leadership to take difficult decisions; that new recruits to the police have the right skills, abilities and aptitude to provide an effective service to the public; that existing police officers have the right incentives to ensure that they acquire the skills they need to fight crime; and that police officers and staff abide by the highest standards of integrity.

3. The Government has embarked on an ambitious programme of reform aimed at improving standards in the police. In 2010, it commissioned Tom Winsor to carry out a review of police pay and conditions to make recommendations so that pay and conditions of service could maximise officer and staff deployment to frontline roles where their powers and skills are required, that were fair and reasonable for the taxpayer and police officers and staff and facilitate the introduction of modern management practices in the police. Tom Winsor reported in March 2011 and March 2012.

95 4. In 2011, the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act received Royal Assent. This removed the role of central Government from the appointment of senior police officers outside London, handing responsibility to those closest to the public: Police and Crime Commissioners and Chief Constables.

5. In 2011 in response to revelations about phone hacking, the Government established the Leveson Inquiry and commissioned the Independent Police Complaints Commission to report on police corruption and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary to consider instances of undue influence, inappropriate contractual arrangements and other abuses of power.

6. The Government will establish the College of Policing, first as an interim body and then as a statutory body as soon as Parliamentary time allows. The College will have a key role in improving standards in police leadership, for new police recruits, for existing police officers and to ensure that the police uphold the highest standards of integrity. This is an ambitious series of reforms. They are necessary to maintain the British model of policing.

Raising standards

7. We are fortunate in this country to have the finest police in the world. It is important that police officers and staff continue to acquire and develop the skills they need to provide a high quality service to the public.

Police Leadership

8. At the most senior levels in the service, the public must have the confidence that those appointed to the most senior ranks have undergone rigorous examination and assessment before appointment. To ensure that this is the case, the Government has made it a statutory requirement for aspiring senior police officers to pass both the Senior Police National Assessment Centre and the Strategic Command Course before gaining promotion to the rank of Assistant Chief Constable.

9. On 15 November, Police and Crime Commissioners outside London will be elected. They will have the sole responsibility for the appointment of Chief Constables. They will hold their Chief Constable to account for the delivery of an efficient and effective police force, one which delivers policing and community safety services in the local and national interest. To do this, Chief Constables will need to understand fully the concerns of their communities, bringing communities closer to the police, building confidence in the force and ensuring trust. PCCs, with their powerful directly elected mandate, will hold Chief Constables to account for the extent to which they are able to grasp the concerns of their communities. They will have the ultimate power to remove poorly performing Chief Constables.

10. On 22 November, the powers of Chief Constables to appoint Deputy and Assistant Chief Constables will come into force. This will give Chief Constables the power, for the first time, to appoint the rest of their top teams. Since Chief Constables need to understand fully the concerns of their communities, they are best placed to take decisions about the mix of skills, abilities and individuals they need on their

96 top team in order to provide an effective policing service to their communities. They will be held to account for the decisions they take by their PCC.

New Recruits to the Police

11. Below chief officer ranks, the Government is committed to raising standards. Tom Winsor’s Independent Review of Police Officer and Staff Remuneration and Conditions contained a series of recommendations aimed at improving the skills and abilities of police officers and staff.

12. For those wanting a career in the police, Tom Winsor recommended that they should hold either a level three qualification, or else have served as a member of the Special Constabulary, a PCSO or in another police staff role considered by a Chief Constable as appropriate experience. To provide the most effective service to the public, it is imperative that the police recruit the very best candidates. Raising the standards of new recruits to the police will enable officers to provide a more effective service to their community. They will be able to work with less supervision as they will be more able to take the right decision and follow the correct process. This will free up those working in a supervisory role, enabling police forces to deploy more resources to the frontline.

13. Tom Winsor also recommended the introduction of a fast track scheme for promoting rapidly the very best candidates. The police currently have a scheme, the High Potential Development Scheme, which aims to promote candidates to the rank of Inspector within five years. Tom Winsor recommended that the police should be more ambitious and seek to promote the most capable officers to the rank of Inspector within a period of three years. The Government believes it is important that the police are able to promote its most talented and able officers to senior positions more quickly.

14. Currently, there is only one route to the police for those wanting a career as a police officer: to start as a Police Constable. Leadership skills needed in more senior ranks cannot be tested rigorously enough during the constable recruitment process.

15. The Government recognises that there are outstanding leaders in the police in England and Wales. However, it is not in the best interests of the police or the public that the police can only select its leaders from a narrow pool of officers. Tom Winsor has recommended the introduction of a scheme to recruit individuals from outside the police directly at the rank of Superintendent and, for those with relevant experience overseas, at the rank of Chief Constable. These recommendations will provide the police with access to a wider pool of talent than is the case currently making it more able to fight crime and protect the public. The Government will be consulting on these recommendations.

Serving Police Officers

16. The Government is also committed to raising the skills of those officers currently in the service. For too long, there has been insufficient incentive for officers to develop their skills. For the vast majority of police officers, the only determinant of

97 pay progression has been length of service. Experience and time served are not the sole determinants of how ably a police officer can provide an effective service to the public. To do so, they must also have the right training, the right knowledge and the right skills.

17. The recommendations in Tom Winsor’s Review propose a move away from a system in which pay progression is largely governed by time served and towards a system where those who seek to develop their skills and work in the most challenging roles are rewarded more fairly for their efforts. This will mean focusing pay where it provides greatest incentive to the acquisition of skills and provides greatest encouragement to creating a culture of continuing professional development.

18. The Government believes that these recommendations form a good basis for discussion and consultation, including through the formal police negotiating machinery.

Police Integrity

19. Allegations of unlawful or inappropriate behaviour by police officers must be taken seriously. Such allegations can undermine public confidence in the police and their ability to provide an effective service to the public. The Government has consistently acted on concerns about police integrity. Following the revelations about phone hacking in July 2011, the Government established the Leveson Inquiry to examine relationships between the police, politicians and the press. The Government also commissioned the IPCC to report on police corruption and HMIC to consider instances of undue influence, inappropriate contractual arrangements and other abuses of power in police relationships.

20. Both the HMIC and IPCC reports made clear that corruption is not widespread, nor is it considered widespread, in the police. The IPCC report also made clear that, where corruption does exist, it is corrosive of the public trust that is at the heart of policing. The police recognise that it cannot be complacent about police integrity. The Government is grateful for the work ACPO have done on reviewing existing governance arrangements for professional standards in each police force and including enhanced training on integrity as a part of the Strategic Command Course.

21. However, the Government will not allow problems that give wider cause for concern in relation to the integrity of the police to affect public confidence. Lord Justice Leveson will report shortly on the findings of his inquiry, and operations Elvedon and Weeting continue to uncover the involvement of individual police officers and police staff in the activities of News International. The report of the Hillsborough Independent Panel raises further issues that strike at the heart of the trust the public have in police officers. Operations Elvedon and Weeting and the report of the Hillsborough Independent Panel generates a level of public concern and loss of confidence in the police that is damaging to the reputation of the vast majority of decent, hard-working police officers, and therefore to the service’s ability to police with consent.

98 22. It is partly for this reason that the Government has significantly reformed the policing landscape and the accountability mechanisms for the police. As part of this reform agenda, we are establishing the College of Policing that will put police integrity and transparency at the heart of its work to protect the public interest. How the College works alongside HMIC and the IPCC to build public confidence is of the utmost importance.

The College of Policing

23. The College of Policing will be central to future work to raise standards. The core mission of the College will be to fight crime and to safeguard the public by ensuring professionalism in policing. It will do this through the delivery of five key areas of responsibility.

24. First, it will have responsibility for setting standards and developing guidance and policy for policing, as well as the frameworks within which those standards can be tested. It will develop the national police curriculum for police training. It will devise and carry out examinations and assessments to determine the suitability of individuals seeking a career in the police or those wishing to gain promotion. Depending on the outcome of negotiations through the Police Negotiating Board, these frameworks may determine the way in which police officers are rewarded. Aspects of the business area structure that currently rests within ACPO will, where relevant, be integrated into the governance of the College of Policing.

25. Second, it will build and develop the research evidence for policing. To ensure that the police in England and Wales continue to provide a high quality service to the public, the College will ensure that police forces, as well as individual police officers and staff, are able to learn from the very best examples of policing across the world. The research evidence should be capable of being used by both police officers and staff in the course of their day-to-day work. The College will facilitate its use. The research evidence should also be used by PCCs to inform the way in which they spend their budgets. The College should work alongside academics to help build this evidence, although police officers and staff should play a central role in this work.

26. Third, it will support the professional development of police officers and staff. Although the College will be responsible for delivering some training, the emphasis will be much more on its role in developing a market for police training. Analysis carried out by Deloitte suggests that only 8% of expenditure on police training is on that provided by organisations outside the police. This equates to approximately £290 million. The Government recognises that there are some fields where it will continue to be appropriate for the College to deliver its own training, particularly those that are high risk, low volume and require the use of specialist equipment. However, over time the College will deliver less training directly and, instead, play a greater role in accrediting, licensing and quality assuring third party training providers.

27. Fourth, it will support the police, other law enforcement agencies and those involved in crime reduction to work together. To respond efficiently and effectively to the threat of serious organised crime and terrorism, police forces will need to

99 work across boundaries, either between police forces or other organisations. The College of Policing, through its work to set standards and to accredit and quality assure training will support the police and those other organisations involved in crime reduction to work together.

28. Fifth, it will act in the public interest. As part of its role in enhancing this model, the College will be responsible for maintaining and promoting the ethics and values of policing. Reflecting the Government’s approach, the College will be more accountable to the public by the inclusion of a number of Police and Crime Commissioners on the governing board of the College.

29. The creation of the College will reflect best practice from other professional bodies. Policing is a crucial public service and the governance of the professional body must reflect this. The College must be governed in the professional interest to ensure that its decisions have credibility and legitimacy. To achieve this, the Chief Executive will be a senior police officer and the board will have representatives of Chief Constables, the superintendent ranks, the federated ranks and police staff.

30. The College must also be governed in the public interest. Bodies responsible for setting standards in other, key public services in the United Kingdom in fields such as medicine, nursing, dentistry and the legal profession are governed in the public interest. The College of Policing should follow their examples, as well as those operating in other professions internationally. To ensure the College is governed in the public interest, the chair of the board will be independent of the police. The composition of the board will follow the examples of the General Medical Council, the General Dental Council and the Nursing and Midwifery Council. It will contain an equal split between police representatives and non-police representatives, including Police and Crime Commissioners.

Home Office October 2012

6

100 Written evidence submitted by the Home Office [LSP 19a]

Letter from Rt Hon Theresa May MP, Home Secretary, to the Chair of the Committee, 14 January 2013

I am writing to you following the Urgent Question debate in the House of Commons on 8 January 2013 about the disappearance of Ibrahim Magag, an individual who absconded from the restrictions placed on him by a Terrorism Prevention & Investigation Measure (TPIM) notice on 26 December 2012.

Following your question, and the question from Kevin Brennan MP, as to whether the police are in possession of Mr Magag's passport, I undertook to check what might be said in public on this matter. You also raised this issue with the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police in his evidence session to the Home Affairs Select Committee later the same day.

The TPIM Act provides the ability to impose restrictions on an individual leaving a specified area or travelling outside that area, along with measures designed to help enforce that restriction. These measures can include a requirement not to possess a travel document without permission, and a requirement to surrender any travel document in the individual's possession. Similar provisions were available under the control order legislation.

There would normally be restrictions on the detail we can provide on individual measures in a control order or TPIM notice and steps taken to ensure compliance with these measures. However, on this specific occasion, due to information that is already in the public domain and because the anonymity orders in place regarding Magag's control order and subsequent TPIM notice have been lifted, it is possible to answer your question. I can confirm that the police have been in possession of Magag's passport since he was first made subject to a control order, and that they have retained possession since he became subject to a TPIM notice. As the Commissioner confirmed in his evidence to the HASC, the Identity and Passport Service have no record that Magag has sought to apply for a new passport. I understand that the Commissioner will write separately to the HASC confirming this information.

I would like to reassure you that the police, security service and other agencies are doing everything in their power to apprehend this man as quickly as possible. They also continue to assess that Magag is not considered to represent a direct threat to the British public at this time.

I will place a copy of this letter in the Library of both houses of Parliament.

Rt Hon Theresa May MP, Home Secretary

101 Written evidence submitted by the Home Office [LSP 19b]

Letter from Rt Hon Damian Green MP, Minister of State for policing and criminal justice, to the Chair of the Committee, 1 February 2013

The Home Secretary has today updated Parliament about the latest developments in the establishment of the College of Policing. A copy of her Written Ministerial Statement is attached.

Specifically, she has announced her intention to appoint Professor Shirley Pearce as the non- executive Chair of the College of Policing. Professor Pearce will take up her post soon. I am sure you will join me in welcoming her to this critically important role.

The Home Secretary has also confirmed that the College became operational on 1 December 2012 and that Alex Marshall starts in post as Chief Executive on 4 February 2013.

The appointment of Professor Pearce as Chair will provide a significant boost for the College as it establishes its authority as the professional body for policing.

Rt Hon Damian Green MP

Minister of State for policing and criminal justice

Annex

Home Office Written Ministerial Statement, Friday, 1st February 2013

Update on the College of Policing

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Theresa May): In October I set out further information about the establishment of a professional body for policing, the College of Policing. I can now update the House with progress on its establishment. I am very pleased to announce my intention to appoint Professor Shirley Pearce as Non-executive Chair of the College. Professor Pearce recently concluded seven successful years as Vice Chancellor at Loughborough University and brings with her a wealth of experience in developing the health professions, in higher education, in research and development, and in working in partnership across sectors to further joint interests. Earlier in her career Professor Pearce qualified and practised as a clinical psychologist before taking on a range of lecturing and senior executive roles, primarily at University College London and the University of East Anglia. Professor Pearce will bring extensive experience in the education and professionalisation arenas, and significant senior leadership experience to her role at the College. The College became operational on 1st December 2012 and it will be established on a statutory basis as soon as Parliamentary time allows. Alex Marshall takes up his full-time role as the Chief Executive of the College from Monday 4th February.

102 Written evidence submitted by the Home Office [LSP 19c]

Letter from Rt Hon Theresa May MP, Home Secretary, to the Chair of the Committee, 17 April 2013

Thank you for your letter of 2 April about private compensation claims by police officers against members of the public.

I understand the strength of concern generated by recent reporting about a serving police officer making a civil claim against a member of the public.

Police and other emergency service personnel put themselves at risk every day to protect the public, which deserves our respect and recognition. Where police officers have been affected by an injury on duty there are a number of ways in which officers can access appropriate financial support, whether through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority or through specific provision for police officers in cases of serious and permanent injury. I am also aware that, similar to other professions, a number of private insurance arrangements are available to officers. am satisfied that there are sufficient avenues available to police officers should they need to access financial support for an injury suffered on duty.

That is why I am disappointed that an officer would decide to take civil action against a member of the public and am confident this is not representative of the vast majority of police officers, who accept that risk is a part of their job. No member of the public who calls the police in good faith should fear being sued for compensation.

The Home Office does not collect or hold any information on compensation claims made by police officers and there is currently no national guidance on this matter. I have instructed officials to look into this issue further, and we will consider what further action might be appropriate when the extent of the problem is clearer.

It would not be appropriate for me to comment further on this case in the circumstances. However, I hope that this reassures you that I take seriously the concerns raised by this matter and I will take action if necessary to ensure that the public can have confidence in the police.

Rt Hon Theresa May MP, Home Secretary

April 2013

103

Written evidence submitted by the National Policing Improvement Agency [LSP 20]

The National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the Home Affairs Committee (HAC) Inquiry on Police Leadership and Standards.

The NPIA is a Non Departmental Public Body (NDPB) whose functions are to be phased out by 31 December 2012. Its key responsibilities have been to develop and manage core policing ICT infrastructure (National Police Databases, Airwave, Police National Network etc) and provide police leadership and development training.

As the major provider of leadership and training services to policing and the development of evidence based practice and standards, we have a unique perspective helping the Home Affairs Committee’s consideration of police leadership and standards.

It is not appropriate for the NPIA to give an opinion on how the College of Policing should be managed or operated. Our evidence is intended to provide factual information about the historical and current position in respect of the evolving role of police leadership.

As requested we have provided a briefing in grid form showing where our functions have moved in the new landscape (see Annex A). We are also responding directly to questions 2.2-2.4 and 2.8-2.9 of the Consultation and have included a brief overview (see Annex B) of the history of police leadership services, our current role in the leadership arena and the future of those services following the closure of the NPIA.

Paul Minton Acting Chief Executive Officer National Policing Improvement Agency

2.2. WHAT LESSONS CAN BE LEARNT FROM OTHER PROFESSIONAL BODIES WITHIN THE UK AND FROM OTHER PROFESSIONAL BODIES IN OTHER COUNTRIES?

Professional bodies within the UK The term ‘professional body’ is used in the UK to describe a variety of organisations with very different remits. At the broadest level, the bodies can be distinguished based on whether they operate to protect the interests of the profession or the public interest. Where the balance lies for a particular professional body will vary. Those focused on protecting the public interest, include, statutory or regulatory bodies which set standards of professional competence (such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council; and the General Medical Council). Others also act as a trade union focusing on protecting their members’ interests (The Royal College of Nursing, the British Medical Association). There are other models which fall somewhere along this

104 continuum, including those bodies that are learned societies for particular academic disciplines (e.g. the Institute of Physics) or those that operate a quasi-regulatory function (the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development).

The College of Policing is being established in the public interest. It will set the standards for the profession; identify, share and enable the use of evidence of what works in policing; support the education and professional development of police officers and staff, and enable and motivate staff and partners to work together to achieve a shared purpose. This is to ensure that police officers and staff continue to develop the skills and abilities to fight crime and protect the public.

Police professional bodies in other countries The NPIA have conducted a review of the structure of policing in eight countries (see Annex E) to understand how those countries organise the provision of operational policing and selected support services to the frontline. The review identifies which different aspects of these services are provided at different organisational levels - nationally, regionally, locally or outsourced to other organisations.

Only one other dedicated police professional body could be identified - the Australasian Institute of Policing1. Other countries, where policing is delivered at a regional level, have a central police body or bodies that operate at a national level and deliver some functions similar to those that are intended to be delivered by the College of Policing. The National Police Agency in Japan, for example, is a central coordinating body, whose main role is to determine general standards and policy and have responsibility for police training, standards of recruitment and inspection.2

Lessons learned from other professional bodies The NPIA have not identified any research formally identifying lessons learnt from other professional bodies. That said, there are a number of challenges to the role of a professional body that have been highlighted through informal communication, descriptive research and reports in the media. A key area for learning is around maintaining public trust in the body and the profession (particularly those that self-regulate) and the importance of legitimacy in the practice of professional bodies to drive up public confidence3.

• Having clear separation between the representation of professionals in relation to employment matters, contracts or pay and in protecting the public interest is likely to be important in building public trust. The College is not the representative body for any of the members of the policing profession as this function is provided by the existing staff associations i.e. the Police Federation, Superintendents Association and the Chief Police Officers' Staff Association.

• Governance is also likely to be important in building public confidence. The Royal College of Nursing Council (RCN), which is responsible for the overall governance of the RCN and ensures it meets its statutory purposes, is made up of nursing professionals directly elected by RCN members. The College of Policing will have an appointed Chair, independent of the service, and its Board will have an equal balance of police and non-police representatives, including Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs). The PCCs and the non-

1 https://www.aipol.org/vb/cmps_index.php 2 Internal RAI Paper on International Policing Models (July 2012) 3 Gold, J., Rodgers, H., & Smith, V. (2002). The future of the professions: are they up to it? Foresight 4(2),

105 police service representatives will help to ensure that the body serves the public interest.

Professional bodies also often have a role in managing the level of bureaucracy for their profession.

• The Higher Education Better Regulation Group (HEBRG) has examined the challenges in defining professional, statutory and regulatory bodies (PSRBs) and how they work with higher education4. The review found that most professional bodies placed maintenance of standards at the heart of their work often as part of their statutory responsibility to ensure minimum standards to enter a profession. The burden of quality monitoring against the standards was identified as a significant issue for HE staff.

• In policing, Jan Berry5, HMIC and others have previously commented about the need for standards and guidance to be created often as a proportionate approach to the reduction of risk, in order to reduce associated bureaucracy. The College of Policing intends to build on the work delivered by NPIA, on behalf of the tripartite partners, to consolidate guidance into Authorised Professional Practice (APP) and significantly reduce the amount of national guidance in circulation, encouraging the use of professional discretion and bringing consistency.

2.3 IS IT POSSIBLE FOR ONE INSTITUTION TO BALANCE RESPONSIBILITIES FOR: REPRESENTING POLICE SERVICES; SETTING AND UPHOLDING STANDARDS; TESTING AND REWARDING; TRAINING; AND GUARDING PUBLIC INTERESTS?

The NPIA is responsible for delivering police leadership training and the development and sharing of evidence-based practice influencing standards across the police service and works alongside other core policing institutions many of whom will remain in the new landscape. The College of Policing will interact with many of those same institutions. These include:

• Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) • Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) • Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) • Home Office • Police Federation/Superintendents Association

The institutions mentioned would all to a degree have to balance those responsibilities listed in question 2.3 with the public interest.

The NPIA’s experience in balancing responsibilities has included challenges such as:

4 Higher Education Better Regulation Group (HEBRG), 2011, Professional, statutory and regulatory bodies: an exploration of their engagement with higher education, available at http://www.hebetterregulation.ac.uk/OurWork/Documents/HEBRG_PSRB%20report_FINAL.pdf, accessed 23 January 2012. 5 Berry, J. (2010) Reducing Bureaucracy in Policing – Full Report, available at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/police/reducing-bureaucracy/reduce-bureaucracy- police?view=Binary

106 a) demonstrating value for money b) creation of internal/external bureaucracy c) buy-in from the service d) working in silos e) lack of independence

Solutions that were implemented with varying degrees of success to meet the challenges were:

a) emphasis on business planning/performance and risk management b) embedded gateway challenging internal/external processes c) strong project/programme management regime whilst building closer working relationships with stakeholders, in particular with ACPO being key reference group leads. d) portfolio management/robust commissioning process e) governance structure with independent non-executive Board representation

In conclusion we believe it is possible for a single institution to balance those responsibilities listed in 2.3 and we expect that the College will bring coordination and synergy to protecting the public interest in this area especially as it moves to statutory status independent of government.

2.4 WOULD IT BE PREFERABLE TO CREATE TWO SEPARATE INSTITUTIONS TO PROVIDE DELIVERY FUNCTIONS AND PROFESSIONAL REPRESENTATION?

The government reform programme aims to consolidate the landscape. It is the intention that the work of policing business areas will be integrated into the College of Policing. This will bring the delivery and professional representation functions closer but the operational responsibility for forces will continue to remain separate not within the College.

Single Organisation Structure In the NPIA’s experience where delivery and representation are contained within the same organisation there is a need to ensure that adequate controls are in place so they do not become self-serving. These measures include a strong independent commissioning process supported by an independent governance process. This involves separating business design and technical delivery functions by creating business and technical design authorities to generate and manage requirements.

Following on from a strong commissioning process is the need for a robust portfolio management function. This is to ensure that the organisation takes a joined-up approach avoiding silo working which can be typical of large organisations with competing internal operational interests.

The NPIA has also found that there are benefits and drawbacks to a single organisation that both defines standards and is then responsible for delivering them. An organisation that covers both aspects in one organisational infrastructure benefits through more efficient development and implementation processes. However, there isn’t the same level of scrutiny in the creation and implementation of those standards due to a lack of delineation. Therefore, the development of good quality assurance, licensing and accreditation processes are essential in order to counteract this dis- benefit.

107 Organisations where the functions are separate Our experience is that where delivery functions and professional representation are separate there is a different set of concerns.

Delivery organisations can have problems understanding the business requirement and likewise professional representation have problems articulating it. Thus making it difficult for the delivery organisation to prioritise its’ resources.

The remedy is similar to that of a single organisation. The creation of a strong portfolio management function in the delivery organisation and a gateway between both organisations ensuring the professional body has an idea of the capacity of the delivery organisation to resource the business requirement.

Where the professional organisation is a loose arrangement i.e. there is no statutory obligation to act together, new products can be generated, which once delivered are not taken up by all members of that profession. National mandated standards along with good quality assurance, licensing and accreditation can help in this respect. Similarly, the ability to role out national standards and processes allows product delivery to be mechanised ensuring value for money. Lack of national standards can lead to bespoke development increasing costs exponentially. Delivery organisations in the ICT arena can be particularly susceptible to this.

2.8 ARE POLICING RECRUITMENT PROCESSES FAIR AND OPEN, AND HOW COULD THEY BE IMPROVED?

For the purposes of this response, policing recruitment processes have been considered not only to represent the initial recruitment into the police service, but also the national processes in place for recruiting / selecting officers into roles in higher ranks. An overview of the current workforce balance is outlined in Annex C and an overview of all primary assessment processes is outlined in Annex D.

What processes are in place to ensure fair and open recruitment?

National recruitment standards for the role of a police constable and special constable currently exist in terms of eligibility for appointment, many of which are based on the Police Regulations and Special Constable Regulations. These are set out in various circulars:

• NPIA 03/2012 Police Service Recruitment: Biometric Vetting Checks • NPIA 02/2011 Police Service Recruitment: Eligibility criteria for the role of police constable • NPIA 01/2011 – Special Constables: Eligibility for recruitment • NPIA 06/2011 - Police Officer Recruitment: SEARCH® Pass Mark and Prioritising Candidates • NPIA 02/2012 – Guidance on fast tracking a former police officers into the special constabulary • Home Office 25/2003 – National Recruitment Standards: Police Eyesight Standards • Home Office 43/2004 – National Recruitment Standards: Recruitment fitness testing • Home Office 59/2004 – National Recruitment Standards: Medical Standards for police recruitment

108 These national standards assist in helping to achieve consistency, transparency and fairness in the recruitment process across all forces. They also ensure clarity for applicants and for those who may wish to consider a career in the police service. These job related standards also reduce the risk of legal challenge at employment tribunals.

For a number of the recruitment / assessment procedures currently in place for the police service, mechanisms exist not only to set the standards, but also to administer and quality assure the assessment processes on a national co-ordinated basis.

These processes apply to certain roles and ranks (i.e. entry level, sergeant, inspector, High Potential Development Scheme (HPDS) selection and Senior Police National Assessment Centre). They do not provide comprehensive coverage across the full rank structure (e.g. selection for chief inspector, superintendent ranks is done at a local force level).

Standards Used for Assessment These are primarily included within the Policing Professional Framework6, which includes the National Occupational Standards and Policing Personal Qualities (or competencies) associated with each rank / role in the service.

The NPIA has worked in close collaboration with Skills for Justice in the development and maintenance of the Policing Professional Framework, and the long-term ownership and maintenance of the framework is likely to be an early consideration for the new College of Policing.

Assessment Design Processes To ensure that the recruitment and promotion assessment processes identify the right people and are fair to all candidates, a multi-stage assessment design model is used. This includes extensive consultation about the required standards and expectations of the roles with a range of key stakeholders, including Police Staff Associations, Force Recruiting Teams, Independent Diversity Advisors, Positive Action Teams, post holders as well as members of the wider community. All design processes are overseen by Chartered Occupational Psychologists who are transferring into the College.

Evidence of Effectiveness A significant body of evidence has been assembled to demonstrate the effectiveness of the assessment centre7 methodology currently used for the national recruitment and selection systems in selecting the right people.

In addition to the regular analysis of candidate performance, separate studies have been completed which demonstrate that performance at the assessment centre processes predicts future performance in the role8/9.

6 See http://www.skillsforjustice.com/Other-Products/PPF-for-the-Policing-and-Law-Enforcement- sector-

7 Hardison, C. M., & Sackett, P. R. (2007). Kriteriumsbezogene Validita¨t des Assessment Centers: lebendig und wohlauf? [Criterion-related validity of assessment centers: Alive and well?] In H. Schuler (Ed.), Assessment Center zur Potenzialanalyse (pp. 192–202). Gottingen, Germany: Hogrefe. Potenzialanalyse (pp. 192–202). 8 Predictive Validity of the Police SEARCH® Recruit Assessment Centre, CENTREX internal report 9 Predictive Validity of the Specials Recruit Assessment Process. NPIA Internal Report, 2011.

109 Consistency of assessment is also critical in such a large scale assessment process – this has also been demonstrated through inter-rater reliability research.10

In addition, candidates tend to report that the assessment centre approach is considered to be fairer than other selection approaches11. In the nationally provided police assessments candidates are surveyed and asked about a range of issues including perceived fairness. Ratings regarding fairness tend to support reports of perceived fairness found in the general literature.

In addition, the Senior Police National Assessment Centre has also been shown to predict subsequent performance12.

Further details of the research that has been conducted can be provided on request.

Entry Level At initial entry into the police service, there are three nationally co-ordinated assessment processes:

• Police SEARCH® Recruit Assessment Centre (Police Constables) • PCSO Recruit Assessment Process (Police Community Support Officers) • Specials Recruit Assessment Process (Special Constables).

All of these primary assessment processes can be preceded by Competency Based Application forms, and a number of forces are now using additional sifting criteria to manage the high numbers that are applying to join the service.

For the recruitment of Police Constables, some forces have used an additional interview once the national assessment centre has been completed.

At the time of writing, there are no national recruitment processes in place for high volume police staff roles, although NPIA have recently developed a selection assessment for the Call Handler role.

A short summary of each of the primary assessment processes discussed above is provided in Annex D.

What monitoring do we do? The central co-ordination of each of the assessment processes enables the gathering of national data on all candidates, both in terms of key biographical factors, and also their performance in the assessment process.

Through capturing this data on a regular basis, the NPIA is able to provide regular national analysis reports for each of the national assessment processes.

In additional to this, NPIA has regularly conducted further statistical analysis, which helps to determine the biographical factors most associated with success at the assessment process. For the Police SEARCH® constable recruit assessment centre, these have typically been candidates’ academic attainment (those with higher previous academic attainment being more successful, sex (females tending to be more successful than males) and age (patterns vary across different assessment

10 Police SEARCH® inter-rater reliability report, CENTREX internal report. 11 Hausknecht, J.P., Day, D.V. & Thomas, S.C. (2004). Applicant Reactions to Selection Procedures: An Updated Model and Meta-Analysis. Personnel Psychology, 57, 639-683. 12 Predictive Validity of Senior Police National Assessment Centre (2011). NPIA Internal Report

110 processes). These analyses have been conducted by independent diversity advisors and statisticians13. First language, ethnic origin and religion have also been found to be related to success but to a lesser extent and these findings are not consistent year on year.

Analysis of factors associated with success at the Police SEARCH® assessment centre was also conducted by Professor Richard Disney for the independent analysis are part of the recent Winsor review (Winsor Part I, pp 79-101), which found that candidates’ sex and previous policing experience (as a Special or PCSO) were particularly associated with success.

For the promotion processes to sergeant and inspector rank, results and analysis reports are provided after each process to the Police Promotion Examinations Board (PPEB). Ongoing analysis of progress within the National Police Promotion Framework (NPPF) is also reported to the PPEB.

What can be done to improve current processes? Recently, Tom Winsor conducted an extensive review of the recruitment processes within his Independent Review of Police Officer and Staff Remuneration and Conditions (Appendix B, pages 96-102).

Winsor made a number of recommendations in relation to the recruitment processes that have since been considered by the Police Advisory Board of England & Wales, which has subsequently made a number of recommendations to the Home Secretary. These include options for future minimum qualification requirements for joining the service as a police constable.

Work has also been commissioned by the Initial Police Learning and Development Programme (IPLDP) Central Authority to review the relationship between pre-join qualifications currently provided for the Police Service (e.g. the Policing Knowledge Certificate and Diploma14) and the recruitment assessment processes currently used within the police service.

Winsor also highlighted an article published in 2007 by Dr Ian Waters et al15 in respect of the barriers to joining the police faced by people from black and minority ethnic communities, and what factors would encourage their interest in a career as a police officer.

The authors found that in those communities, the status of policing had been eroded and did not match other professions such as law and medicine. Other barriers included the nature of the job, particularly long hours and exposure to danger, perceptions of racism and sexism and the negative reaction of friends and family. The research also found that many respondents harboured significant ill-will towards the police. They also had a limited knowledge about what a police career would involve, and had fears about police culture. Nevertheless, some did express potential interest, with around one-third indicating that they might join the police. The Waters report concluded that the quality of the service provided to local ethnic minority communities was as important as any recruitment campaign. Poor personal

13 e.g. Stephenson, G., and Mallon, J. (2008) Patterns of variation in the success rate among candidates in the SEARCH 2007/08 process. Independently produced report for NPIA. 14 NPIA Professional Entry to Policing Strategy - http://www.npia.police.uk/en/19194.htm

15 Waters, N. Hardy, D. Delgado and S. Dahlmann (2007) Ethnic Minorities and the Challenge of Police Recruitment, I., The Police Journal, Vol. 80, pages 191-21687

111 experiences, such as where the police stop and search individuals, could create significant, negative impressions of and feelings towards the police.

The findings about reactions from and the influence of friends and family in relation to considering a career in the police service is also supported by the analysis of the UK Graduates Career Survey in 2009 (unpublished). This analysis needs to be interpreted with caution, however, as it based on a non random survey of final year students from selected universities in the UK.

A Home Office report on recruitment was published in 2000 as part of its work to increase police recruitment from black and minority ethnic communities following the Macpherson report16.The report indicated that respondents who thought they would have support from family and friends appeared more likely to consider applying to the police service.

2.9 IS THE METROPOLITAN POLICE FORCE OVER-REPRESENTED IN SENIOR POSITIONS?

In answering this question we have consulted the Metropolitan Police Service and are providing the comparative data as we are best placed to do so.

There is no single accepted definition within policing of what constitutes a senior position. As a result in practice some consider this to be Inspector rank and above, superintendent rank and above or ACPO level roles17. We have taken the definition to mean ACPO level roles and then more specifically chief constables.

Based on Home Office data18 within England & Wales there are reported to be 134,101 officers (excluding BTP and central service secondees). Of these there are 32,140 (24.0%) in the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

There are 209 ACPO level officers in the 43 police forces. Of these, 35 (16.7%) are with the MPS. Therefore, the proportion of ACPO level officers serving in the MPS is less than the proportion of MPS officers in the police service.

Each force has a single chief constable, but the rank structure of the MPS is different. MPS have four Assistant Commissioners, one Deputy Commissioner and one Commissioner. The rank of Assistant Commissioner is considered to be equivalent to chief constable in other forces. This would mean the MPS has six out of the 48 chief constables (or equivalent) serving in the 43 forces of England & Wales rather than 1 as in every other force. In this sense the MPS is over-represented at this level by virtue of its different size and rank structure. Although given the MPS represents 24% of serving officers, its representation at Chief Constable level is only 12.5% of the total at this rank.

16 Stone V and Tuffin R (2000) Attitudes of People from Minority Ethnic Communities Towards a Career in the Police Service, Home Office Police Research Series Paper 136

17 By ACPO level roles we refer to Assistant Chief Constables, Deputy Chief Constables and Chief Constables and their equivalents 18 Home Office Statistics Bulletin. Police Service Strength July 2012

112 In order to become an ACPO officer those at superintendent and chief superintendent level undertake the Senior Police National Assessment Centre (PNAC).

Since 200719 416 candidates have undertaken Senior PNAC. Of these, 51 (12.3%) have come to the assessment whilst serving as an MPS officer. This is lower than the MPS representation in policing overall and slightly lower than their representation within ACPO currently.

There have been 195 successful candidates, a success rate of 46.9%. Of these successful candidates 31 (15.9%) have been from the MPS. This is comparable with their representation within ACPO.

This data suggests that the MPS are, possibly under represented within the assessment which serves as the gateway to ACPO level roles. However, this only accounts for the force the officer is from at the time of taking Senior PNAC and does not consider whether or not they have served within the MPS at an earlier point in their career. This may or may not be considered to be relevant to the interests of the Home Affairs Select Committee.

Chief Constables Within the rank of chief constable (and equivalent) there are 48 officers serving in forces in England and Wales. Using the Home Office Senior Appointments Panel (SAP) database there are 10 (23.2%) forces out of 43 where chief constables or equivalents currently or previously served in the MPS at some level (i.e. PC or above). This is in keeping with the size of the MPS as a proportion of the police service overall.

Of the 48 officers currently working in forces at chief constable and equivalent level, 14 (29.2%) are currently or previously from the MPS. This exceeds the MPS proportion of the police service and ACPO. However, this may be in part because: the MPS has 6 posts at this level compared with only one in every other force; current employment is included; and employment at any rank has been included. For instance, of the 6 MPS posts only half previously worked for the MPS below ACPO level.

Therefore, it may be more appropriate to consider the proportion of chief officers who served in the MPS at ACPO level prior to their current role. Of the 48 officers there are 7 (14.6%) who have done this. This shows that in terms of previous employment the MPS is broadly proportionate to its representation within ACPO.

In addition, the question and Chair’s note suggests there is something unique about the MPS’s contribution to policing at chief constable level. In order to consider this fully it maybe useful to consider whether other forces make a similar contribution?

For example: Merseyside represent 3% of police strength and 1.7% of ACPO. However, there are 720 (16.3%) of the 43 forces whose chief constables currently or previously worked within this force. In addition they have 8 (16.7%) of the 48 officers currently serving at chief constable or equivalent level. These percentages exceed

19 Based upon Senior PNAC Annual Results and Analysis Reports 2007 – 2011, NPIA 20 Based on those currently serving as chief constables. In instances where there is a suspension the role used for calculations is that of the substantive chief constable

113 Merseyside’s proportion of both police strength and ACPO. They also show greater variance between their size and impact than the MPS. Please note this example has been drawn to illustrate this point that may be less, equally or more true of other forces too. A full analysis would be required to address this proposition in full.

Annex A

Where are NPIA products and services going?

NPIA products and services have been categorised under the following headings:

1. National Information Services 2. National Information Systems in Development 3. Training and Leadership Services 4. Workforce Development 5. Operational Support and Advisory Services 6. Knowledge, Professional Practice and Policy 7. Value for Money, Performance and Capability Building

1. National Information Services

NPIA National Information Systems have transferred to the following destinations:

Product/Service Sub Product/Service Destination Date of Move Airwave Home Office 1 October 2012 National Databases PNC Home Office 1 October 2012 ViSOR Home Office 1 October 2012 National Firearms Licensing Home Office 1 October 2012 Management System (NFLMS) NABIS (Ballistics) Home Office 1 October 2012 NMPR ( Mobile Home Office 1 October 2012 Phone Register) IDENT1 & Livescan Home Office 1 October 2012 Fingerprint Service National DNA Home Office 1 October 2012 Database National IT Systems Automatic Number Delivered by 3rd Plate Recognition Home Office 1 October 2012 Party Suppliers (ANPR) Driver Offender Home Office 1 October 2012 Retraining System HOLMES2 (inc. National Mutual Aid Home Office 1 October 2012 Telephony Casualty Bureau) NSPIS Home Office 1 October 2012 JARD (Joint Access Home Office 1 October 2012 Recovery Database) Jtrack (IDIOM) Home Office 1 October 2012

114 Crime Mapper Home Office 1 October 2012 Code List Management System Home Office 1 October 2012 (CLMS) now called Listpoint The Police National Home Office 1 October 2012 Database (PND) National National Fingerprint Identification Home Office 1 October 2012 Office Services PNC Reconciliation Home Office 1 October 2012 Microfiche Library Home Office 1 October 2012 Prison Licenses Home Office 1 October 2012 ACPO Criminal Subject Access 1 April 2012 Records Office (ACRO)

2. National Information Services in Development

NPIA National Information Systems in Development transferred to the following destinations:

Product/Service Sub Product/Service Destination Date of Move MIDAS and Lantern Home Office 1 October 2012 (Mobile ID) PentiP Home Office 1 October 2012 CRASH Home Office 1 October 2012 Architecture, Technical Chief Technology Assurance and Test Home Office 1 October 2012 Officer Programmes Services Information Assurance Home and Accreditation 1 October 2012 Office Services Schengen Information System Home Office 1 October 2012 (SIS II)

3. Training and Leadership Services

NPIA Training and Leadership Services have transferred or will transfer to the following destinations (please note dates are subject to change but are planned working assumptions):

Sub Product Service Destination Date of Move Product/Service Learning Development, College of Strategy and Forensic Centre 1 December 2012 Policing Specialist Training Delivery The National College of 1 December 2012

115 Centre for Applied Policing Learning Technology (NCALT) Initial Police Learning and College of Development 1 December 2012 Policing Programme (IPLDP) Learning Strategy College of 1 December 2012 and Development Policing College of Command Training 1 December 2012 Policing Quality Assurance College of 1 December 2012 and Licensing Policing Quality Assurance College of Management 1 December 2012 Policing Systems (QAMS) Interim move to Serious Organised Crime Proceeds of Crime Agency (SOCA) 1 November 2012 Centre (POCC) before going to National Crime Agency (NCA) College of Covert Training 1 December 2012 Policing Investigative College of 1 December 2012 Training Policing Police National College of 1 December 2012 Search Centre Policing ICT Learning College of 1 December 2012 Programmes Policing National Examinations Recruitment College of 1 December 2012 and Assessment Selection and Policing Assessments National Police College of Promotion and 1 December 2012 Policing Selection National Police College of Promotion 1 December 2012 Policing Framework Police Service College of Senior Selection 1 December 2012 Policing Products College of Beyond 360° 1 December 2012 Policing National College of Police Core Leadership College of Leadership and Development 1 December 2012 Policing Leadership Programme Services Foundation for College of 1 December 2012

116 Senior Leaders Policing Senior Leadership College of 1 December 2012 Programme Policing Leading Powerful College of 1 December 2012 Partnerships Policing Strategic Command College of 1 December 2012 Course Policing Senior Leadership programme for College of 1 December 2012 Special Policing Constabulary High Potential College of Development 1 December 2012 Policing Scheme Graduate Entry College of 1 December 2012 Programmes Policing Executive College of Development 1 December 2012 Policing Programme International College of Academy, 1 December 2012 Policing Bramshill

4. Workforce Development

NPIA products and services in Workforce Development have transferred or will transfer to the following destinations (please note dates are subject to change but are planned working assumptions):

Sub Product/Service Destination Date of Move Product/Service Advisory Support Workforce on Occupational College of Policing 1 December 2012 Strategy Health, Safety and Welfare Performance Development College of Policing 1 December 2012 Review 30 Plus Home Office 1 December 2012 Programme Matters relating to legislation and employer Special supported policing Constabulary and will transfer to the 1 October 2012 (Home Office) and 1 Police Support Home Office. December 2012 (College of Volunteers College of Policing Policing) Programme will provide policy, set standards and continue to produce guidance. National Matters relating to 1 October 2012 (Home Office) and 1 Recruitment legislation will December 2012 (College of Standards transfer to the Policing)

117 Home Office. College of Policing will provide policy, set standards and continue to produce guidance. Matters relating to legislation will transfer to the Home Office. 1 October 2012 (Home Office) and 1 National Fitness College of Policing December 2012 (College of Standards will provide policy, Policing) set standards and continue to produce guidance. Matters relating to legislation will transfer to the Home Office. College of Policing National Police will provide policy, 1 October 2012 (Home Office) and 1 Promotion set standards and December 2012 (College of Framework continue to Policing) (NPPF) produce guidance and support the Police Promotion Examinations Board

5. Operational Support and Advisory Services

NPIA Operational Support and Advisory Services have transferred or will transfer to the following destinations (please note dates are subject to change but are planned working assumptions):

Sub Product/Service Destination Date of Move Products/Services Interim move to Serious Organised Crime Operational Specialist Agency (SOCA) 1 April 2012 Support Operations Centre before going to National Crime Agency (NCA) Interim move to Serious Organised Crime Crime Operational Agency (SOCA) 1 April 2012 Support before going to National Crime Agency (NCA) Interim move to Serious Central Witness Organised Crime 1 April 2012 Bureau Agency (SOCA) before going to National Crime

118 Agency (NCA) Interim move to Serious Organised Crime Serious Crime Agency (SOCA) 1 April 2012 Analysis before going to National Crime Agency (NCA) Interim move to Serious Organised Crime National Missing Agency (SOCA) 1 April 2012 Persons Bureau before going to National Crime Agency (NCA) Uniform Operational College of 1 December 2012 Support Policing Interim move to Serious Organised Crime National Injury Agency (SOCA) 1 April 2012 Database before going to National Crime Agency (NCA) College of CBRN 1 December 2012 Policing College of Police Gazette 1 December 2012 Policing

6. Knowledge, Professional Practice and Policy

NPIA products and services in Knowledge, Professional Practice and Policy have transferred or will transfer to the following destinations (please note dates are subject to change but are planned working assumptions):

Sub Product/Service Destination Date of Move Product/Service Forensics 21 Forensics Quality Home Office 1 October 2012 Programme Standard ADAPT Home Office 1 October 2012 Next Generation Home Office 1 October 2012 Fingerprint System Eforensics Home Office 1 October 2012 Eforensics Hashset Home Office 1 October 2012 Database Protection of Freedom Act Home Office 1 October 2012 Implementation project Forensics Home Office 1 October 2012 Pathology Forensics Home Office 1 October 2012 Procurement

119 Forensics Policy Home Office 1 October 2012 Forensics Innovation and Home Office 1 October 2012 New Business Practice College of 1 December 2012 Improvement Policing Manual Guidance Criminal Justice College of for Preparation for 1 December 2012 and Local Policing Policing Case Files Integrated Offender College of 1 December 2012 Management Policing 101 Non- Home Office 1 October 2012 emergency Support to delivery of National CJS College 1 December 2012 Efficiency of Policing Programme Digital Engagement College of 1 December 2012 and Social Media Policing Accountability College of through Community 1 December 2012 Policing Engagement Local Policing and College of Community 1 December 2012 Policing Volunteering Reducing Home Office 1 October 2012 Bureaucracy National Custody College of 1 December 2012 Liaison Policing Equality, Diversity EDHR Strategic College of and Human Rights 1 December 2012 Advice Policing (EDHR) College of Operational EDHR 1 December 2012 Policing Research and Research and College of 1 December 2012 Analysis Analysis Policing The National Police College of 1 December 2012 Library Policing College of POLKA 1 December 2012 Policing Project team to Home Office Protective National Police Air with the rest Services 1 October 2012 Service (NPAS) going to lead Programme force, West Yorkshire Coordination of College of 1 December 2012 CCD Activity Policing

7. Value for Money, Performance and Capability Building

120 NPIA products and services in Value for Money, Performance and Capability Building have transferred or will transfer to the following destinations (please note dates are subject to change but are planned working assumptions):

Sub Products/Services Destination Date of Move Products/Services Information Systems Home Improvement Strategy 1 October 2012 Office (ISIS) National Procurement Home 1 October 2012 Hub Office Efficiency and Knowledge Support Unit (formerly known College of as Cost Effectiveness, 1 December 2012 Policing Capability Support and Continuous Improvement)

Annex B

AN OVERVIEW OF POLICE LEADERSHIP TRAINING

1. The Historical Context

In 1948 the National Police College was established. From 1948 to 1960 it was located at Ryton-on-Dunsmore, Warwickshire, but it moved to a permanent base in Bramshill in 1960. In 1979 its name was changed to the Police Staff College,

The Staff College was headed by a Board of Governors, half appointed by the Home Secretary and half by local authorities. Junior, Intermediate and Senior Command Courses were run, for Inspectors/Chief Inspectors, Superintendents, and Chief Superintendents/Superintendents respectively. There was also the Special Course for sergeants.

Under Part 4 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 the Staff College at Bramshill became part of Centrex, the Central Police Training and Development Authority. Centrex had the responsibility for many aspects of police training and development. There had been a move away from running Police Training Centres to running police trainee/initial probationer courses in-house under the auspices of Centrex.

Centrex was responsible for overseeing the design and delivery of probationer training, investigators training and other key areas. Centrex was also responsible for evaluating police training to see if it actually works. Centrex also set the national police promotion exams, probationer development tests and advised on the assessment of recruits.

Centrex was replaced by the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) on 1 April 2007 and as of that date Bramshill became part of the National Policing Improvement Agency who established the National College of Police Leadership in 2008.

In August 2010 Chief Constable Peter Neyroud was commissioned by the Home Secretary (Theresa May) to undertake a review of police leadership. The Neyroud Report ‘Review of Police Leadership & Training’ was published in March 2011 and contained recommendations for professionalising policing within the context of a professional body.

121 In December 2011 the Home Secretary announced the decision to create a professional body for policing which is to be established by the end of 2012. Meanwhile the Winsor Review produced its Part 2 report in March 2012. This report also contained reference to the professional body for policing.

On the 16 July 2012 The Home secretary laid a written ministerial submission which established that the professional body would be known as the ‘College of Policing

2. The National College of Police Leadership

The role of the National College of Police Leadership (NCPL), based at Bramshill is to improve the quality of all our leaders through developing and delivering a range of leadership programmes for the police service. Our programmes have been developed with extensive consultation with forces to ensure they provide future police leaders with the skills and knowledge they need to serve the public.

The National College of Police Leadership has a mandate agreed nationally that it will: a) Continue to deliver the newly designed leadership development programmes for senior police leaders from chief inspector through to chief officer and police staff equivalents. b) Continue to develop and deliver this suite of leadership development products in consultation with partners, based upon the policing domains, to equip senior police officers and staff with the skills needed to deal with complex operational, business and executive leadership issues. c) Continue to work in partnership with ACPO and other public sector bodies to assist in developing expertise in:

I. the business skills to run an effective, efficient policing service and to make the necessary critical judgements - helping ensure the Service has the business and organisational management skills needed to improve value for money, II. developing partnerships through the executive domain, III. the operational and tactical areas of policing through the professional domain. d) Continue to develop a range of products, in partnership with ACPO leads that delivers top teams, reinforces business concepts and assists in delivering and managing the transformational changes currently taking place. e) Promote Equality and Diversity and encourage those from under-represented groups through the offering of relevant and targeted positive action programmes.

NPIA runs a number of key leadership programmes including the:

• Strategic Command Course (SCC) - The course is primarily delivered through a series of highly demanding strategic exercises which are designed to stretch the participants’ knowledge, skills, attitudes and abilities across the executive personal qualities from the Policing Professional Framework. These are augmented by external speakers who bring their own experiences of leading at strategic level from a broad range of organisations. Additional expertise is provided by subject matter experts who work with the participants during the exercises.

• Leading Powerful Partnerships (LPP) aimed at chief superintendents, police staff and other partners at equivalent levels - The Leading Powerful Partnerships programme is designed for multi-agency leaders in senior roles who must work effectively to release innovation, influence others and enhance partnership working. The aim of the programme is to prepare participants to embrace the strategic

122 challenges and to enable them to reflect on the kinds of strengths that great leaders might require to develop powerful partnerships.

• Senior Leadership Programme (SLP) aimed at superintendents and police staff equivalents - The aim of the Senior Leadership Programme is to provide a structured leadership development programme to enable delegates to improve their leadership skills to meet the challenges facing the Police Service. This programme is designed for the development of Superintendents and equivalents in their current role, and for those aspiring for promotion to Chief Superintendent. Delegates are required to complete introductory modules of EDHR and Finance for Non Finance Managers prior to commencing the core modules of Executive skills, Professional Policing skills and Business skills. Each element of the programme consists of pre work, attendance and then the application of learning to the workplace.

• The Foundation for Senior Leaders (FSL) aimed at chief inspectors - The Foundation for Senior Leaders Programme consists of three separate modules. Each module is aligned to either the Executive Skills, Business Skills or Professional Policing Skills element of the National Leadership Strategy and can be used towards qualifications in 'Leadership and Management' with the Chartered Management Institute. It aims to provide delegates with the knowledge, understanding and skills required within the complex business of policing.

NCPL course deliveries 2011/12 Course title Module Deliveries Delegates Total delegates Leading Powerful n/a 4 50 200 Partnerships Foundation for Executive 13 24 312 Senior Leaders Business 11 24 264 PPS 12 20 240 Specials 4 16 64 Senior Executive 12 24 288 Leadership Programme Business 13 24 312 PPS 11 24 264 EDHR 11 24 264 FNFM 12 24 288 Positive Action Junior 50 12 600 Leadership Programme Senior 6 16 96 Strategic 1 50 50 Command Course

Total 160 3242

Key: PPS – Professional Policing Skills EDHR – Equality, Diversity & Human Rights FNFM – Finance for non-Finance Managers

• The High Potential Development and Graduate Entry Schemes (HPDS) - The current High Potential Development Scheme was launched in 2008 and is open to Constables and Sergeants. It is a national talent management programme which

123 involves academic studies (Warwick Business School Post Graduate Diploma in Police Management). NPIA delivered modules and supported development (e.g. action learning sets, secondments, etc). The scheme lasts for five years and when scheme members are eligible they can be promoted supernumery to force establishment. In the final year members can undertake a masters degree.

The initial stage of HPDS leads to Post Graduate Diploma in Police Leadership. After completion of the postgraduate diploma HPDS officers will undertake a period of professional consolidation, where they will apply their learning in force. High performing scheme members will also have the opportunity to study a Masters qualification in Police Leadership. HPDS officers will normally be promoted to the next rank when they satisfy the Chief Officer that they are competent which can speed up the progression of the HPDS officers, but standards are very high for these officers.

A graduate entry scheme is available for forces to use, where they have successful recruits who are graduates and who are showing high potential.

HPDS Volumes Pre 2008 members 13 Cohort 1 63 Cohort 2 51 Cohort 3 58 Cohort 4 64 Cohort 5 (anticipated) 60 Total 309

124 The diagram shows the current HPDS delegates by force.

Northumbria 1-0-1-0=2

Cumbria Durham Cleveland 1-1-1-0- 0-1-2-1-0=4 1-1-4- 0=3 PSNI 1=7 5-2-1-1=9 N orth Yorkshire 0-2-1-2=5 Merseyside 0-0-3-1= 4 2-0-0-1=3 Lancashire

1-0-0-1-3=5 W Yorks South

GMP Humbersid 2-4-2-1 =9 Yorkshire 4-1-5-3=13 e 1-1-2-1-0=5

Lincs Cheshire DerbysN Notts 0-2-2-0=4 North 2-1-0-1=4 - 3-1-0- 1-1-1-0=3 2 - 2=6 S taffs 0-0-1-1=2 Norfolk West Leics 3-0-0-1=4 Midlands 2-1-0-1=4 3-3-7-3=16 Cambs West 1-1-0-1-1=4

Suffolk Dyfed- Northants 1-2-0-1=4 1-0-1-0=2 N Beds 1-0-2-0=3 2-0-0-2=4 0-0-1-0=1 Essex Warwickshire Gloucs TVP Herts 2-1-1-3=7 Gwent 2-1-2-3=8 South Wales 1-0-1-0=2 0-0-1-1-2=4 0-0-3-0=3 1-1-1-2=5 1-0-3-1-3=8 City-of-London

0-2-0-1=3

Wiltshire Surrey 1-2-1-0-1= 5 Kent 2-0-1-1-1=5 Avon & Somerset 0 0-1-0-0=1 Hampshire 2-1-3-2=8 Sussex States of Jersey 1-0-2-1-3=7 Dorset 0-0-0-1=1 Devon & BTP 0-2-1-1=4 Cornwall 0 1 1 3 1 2=8 Metropolitan 3-17-7-6-12=45

125 Annex C

Workforce Balance

The current police service workforce strength is routinely reported by the Police Service Strength Home Office Statistical Bulletin, and this source should be consulted for more in- depth analysis of current workforce balance (e.g. Dhani, 201221).

An extensive analysis of recruitment and progression within the police service was completed by NPIA in 201022, which reported on specifically on the attraction, recruitment and progression of female and BME officers within the police service.

Gender

The current proportion of female officers in England and Wales is 27.0%. This compares to a proportion of 16.1% that was recorded in 1999.

There is an under-representation of females at the senior ranks of Chief Inspector or above (16.8 per cent) as compared with police constables where females account for 29 per cent of all officers (see Table 1).

In 1999, the proportion of female officers at the ranks of Sergeant and Inspector was 8.2% and 5.6% respectively. In contrast, in 2012, these figures had risen to 19% and 18%.

Between 2001 and 2003, 20.8% of the 2391 candidates attending the Police SEARCH® assessment centre were female. By 2011, this proportion of attendees had risen to 30.1%.

To provide context to this but not a direct comparison, females account for approximately 45 per cent of all those in employment across all occupations in the United Kingdom aged 16 to 59/64 (Office of National Statistics 2012)23.

Ethnicity As at 31 March 2012 Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) officers in England and Wales account for 5.0% of all officers. The proportion of BME Officers in the police service in England and Wales has increased in recent years from 1.9% in 1999, to 2.9% in 2003, to the current proportion of five per cent. The Metropolitan Police has the largest proportion of BME officers (10.1 per cent). Table 1 presents the proportion of BME Officers at each rank and shows that there is an under-representation at senior ranks as compared with police constables (Dhani, 2012). The current Police Service Strength document also provides an overview of how the proportion of BME officers has increased over recent years.

At the rank of Sgt, the proportion of BME officers was 1.2% in 1997, and at the Inspector rank was 0.6%. These figures have increased to 3.6% and 3.4% respectively in 2012.

Between 1994 and 1998, around 4% of applications to join the police service came from BME candidates24

21 Dhani A 2012 Police Service Strength England and Wales 31 March 2012 Home Office Statistical Bulletin http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/science-research-statistics/research- statistics/police-research/hosb0912/hosb0912?view=Binary This publication provides further breakdowns statistics on the police workforce including civilian staff, and breakdowns by age and police force. 22 NPIA Equality in Employment Report – Policing in England & Wales 2010. 23 Office of National Statistics 2012 Labour Market Release September 2012 Further national labour market statistics are available from http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference- tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-222511 24 Career Progression of Ethnic Minority Police Officers, Police Research Series Paper 107. http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/policerspubs1.html

126 In contrast, for the most recent analysis period (November 2010 to October 2011), over 14% of successful Police SEARCH® candidates were from a BME background.

The increased proportion of BME candidates attending the Police SEARCH® recruit assessment centre means that the proportion of BME officers within the police service is likely to increase, although the recent downturn in recruitment numbers will moderate the rate of this change.

Females police officers from BME groups account for 1.2 per cent of all police officers in England and Wales. BME officers are particularly under-represented at ranks of Chief Inspector and above with 0.4 per cent of officers at these ranks being women from BME groups (Dhani, 2012).

To provide some context, although again not a direct comparison, employees from BME groups account for approximately 10 per cent of all those in employment across all occupations in the United Kingdom aged 16 to 59/64 (Labour Force Survey 2012).

Table 1: Female and Black and Minority Ethnic police officer representation amongst police officers (including Central Service secondments) by rank as a 31 March 2012, England and Wales

Rank Percentage of Female Percentage of Black and Officers Minority Ethnic Officers ACPO rank 18 2.8 Chief Superintendents 12 3.2 Superintendents 16 3.9 Chief Inspectors 17 3.7 Inspectors 18 3.4 Sergeants 19 3.6 Constables 29 5.4

Total 27 5.0 Source: Dhani A 2012 Police Service Strength England and Wales 31 March 2012 Home Office Statistical Bulletin

In interpreting the statistics, it is important to recognise that the processes overseen by NPIA primarily qualify an individual for recruitment or promotion. They do not necessarily guarantee the individual the position in question, as this will ultimately be a decision for the employing force.

127 Annex D

An Overview of Primary Assessment processes

Police SEARCH® Recruit Assessment Centre The Police SEARCH® assessment centre is the process used by forces in England & Wales to select applicants for the role of Police Constable.

The assessment centre was introduced in 2001, and is currently used by all 43 Home Office Police Forces, plus some non-Home Office forces. The assessment centre was established as a direct response to comment and recommendations made by previous Home Affairs Select Committees and HMIC Inspections.

The introduction of Police SEARCH® represented the first time in the Police Service’s history where the 43 Home Office forces apply a systematic and transparent recruitment process for selecting police constables using a common system which applies a nationally agreed standard.

Since its introduction, over 100,000 candidates have been assessed using the Police SEARCH® assessment centre, and 70,000 candidates have been identified as being suitable for the role of police constable.

The assessment centre tests the skills and abilities needed to perform effectively as a Police Constable, and consists of four role acted interactive exercises, two written exercises, a competency based structured interview and two ability tests of numerical and verbal reasoning.

The assessment centre is designed and scored centrally, but is offered to forces in a range of different delivery options to meet their specific needs. Forces themselves can deliver the assessment centre, deliver it in collaboration with other forces, or have the assessment centre delivered centrally for them. Thus, while standards are set centrally and the system provides consistency across the country, the delivery of the system itself has sufficient flexibility to adapt to the specific needs of individual forces.

PCSO Recruit Assessment Process The PCSO assessment process was introduced in 2006, much of the design and content was based on the success factors established through the Police SEARCH® assessment centre process.

Five exercises make up the Police PCSO Recruit Assessment Process; two role acted interactive exercises, two written exercises, and a competency based structured interview designed to tests the skills and abilities necessary for effective performance as a PCSO. As of 2012, these exercises will form a subset of those included within the Police SEARCH® assessment centre, which acknowledges the overlap between the two roles and helps to streamline the recruitment processes across different roles.

To date over 10,000 candidates have attended the PCSO assessment process, and 19 forces have used the process.

Special Constable Recruit Assessment Process The Special Constable assessment process was introduced in 2010, as part of the Special Constabulary National Strategy. The process was designed to reflect the requirements of forces – i.e. to have a job relevant selection system, which could be used flexibly by forces in evenings and weekends to suit the requirements of the role.

The current Special Constable Recruit Assessment Process consists of a situational judgement test, a written exercise and an interview. To date, over 5000 candidates have been through the process, and 30 forces have adopted the national model.

128 Initial Promotion – Sergeant & Inspector Selection into the roles of Sergeant and Inspector is currently supported by two national systems.

The OSPRE® Police Promotion system runs in 33 forces, and consists of the OSPRE® Part I examination of law and procedure, and the OSPRE® Part II work sample assessment centre. The OSPRE® police promotion system is designed and delivered by the NPIA, and has been in place since 1992.

The National Police Promotion Framework (previously known a the Police Promotion Trial) has been operating since 2002, and provides an alternative, four step selection process which includes recommendation by line manager (Step 2), law and procedure examination (Step 2 – same as OSPRE® Part I), in-force competency-based selection process (Step 3), and 12 month work-based assessment to demonstrate competence in the role (Step 4). The NPPF thus enables localised delivery of certain part of the promotion process, while operating under a national licensing and data capture arrangement.

A decision on the future of the sergeant and inspector promotion systems was recently referred by the policing Minister onto the College of Policing25. Therefore, in the coming months the College will have a critical role to play determining the future police promotion system, and subsequently assisting the service in implementing the outcomes of this decision.

The governance of the police promotion systems for Sergeant and Inspector currently falls to the Police Promotion Examinations Board (PPEB), under the terms of the current police promotion regulations.

A detailed evaluation of the National Police Promotion Framework was completed for the PPEB in April 201126, which gave a comprehensive summary of the relative strengths and limitations of the two promotion systems.

High Potential Development Scheme (HPDS) Selection The scheme is overseen by the HPDS Professional Reference Group on behalf of the ACPO Workforce Strategy Business Area.

Access to the scheme is through a three stage assessment process. Stage one involves an in-force application which is required to be supported by the officer’s line manager and force ACPO lead. In addition, many forces also undertake interviews. Stage two seeks to sift the high numbers of applicants by using a nationally designed and delivered written exercise and bespoke situational judgement test. Those successful go onto the final stage which is an assessment centre containing an interactive exercise, group exercise, oral briefing exercise and interview.

Stages two and three involve consistently trained and quality assured assessors from superintending ranks within the police service and non-service assessors who includes who have held senior management positions, undertaken senior selection in organisations and/or are members of police authorities.

Since its introduction there have been 1486 candidates apply. Comprehensive data for stages two and three have been kept throughout but data from stage one is available since 2009. Data is based on candidates self reported categories and some have chosen not to complete all categories so there is some missing data. However, based on the data there have been 1117 applicants. Of these there has been 702 (62.8%) male applicants 332 (29.7%) female applicants. This is higher than the female representation within policing. There have been 870 (77.9%) white applicants and 83 (7.4%) BME applicants. Again, this is a higher representation of BME officers than in policing in general.

25 Letter from Policing Minister to Chair of PPEB, 9th August 2012. 26 http://www.npia.police.uk/en/17779.htm

129

Based on success at stage three (since 2008) there has been 382 male candidates with 161 (42.1%) successful. There have been 184 female candidates with 85 (46.2%) successful. There have been 525 white candidates with 226 (43.0%) successful and 37 BME candidates with 20 (54.0%) successful.

These results mean that as a proportion of successful candidates females represent 33.5% and BME officers 7.9%. These are higher than the representation of these groups within policing in general.

Candidates survey reports show candidates believe the process to be both fair and relevant.27

Senior Police National Assessment Centre (Senior PNAC) Senior PNAC is a nationally designed and delivered assessment centre. It is open to officers of superintendent or chief superintendent ranks.

Applicants are required to complete an application which must be supported by their chief constable. Supported applicants undertake the assessment which includes a written exercise, group negotiating exercise, media exercise, chief officer briefing and, presentation and interview.

Exercise are assessed by consistently trained and quality assured assessors. Service assessors are chief officers and non-service assessors are as those used within HPDS assessments outlined earlier.

Responsibility for Senior PNAC was taken on by NPIA in 2007 and was formerly administered within the Home Office Assessment and Consultancy Unit when it was introduced in 2005.

There is now a legal requirement that anyone appointed to a rank higher than Chief Superintendent (i.e. ACC/Commander and above) has to have satisfactorily completed the Senior Police National Assessment Centre and Strategic Command Course. These are provisions within Annex B of the Secretary of State’s determinations, made under Regulation 11 of the Police Regulations 2003.

The assessment centre and course are governed by the Strategic Command Course Professional Reference Group Chaired by CC Sara Thornton.

Since 2007 there has been 416 candidates undertake Senior PNAC, of these 195 (46.9%) have been successful. There have been 356 male applicants with 161 (45.2%) successful and 59 female applicants with 34 (57.6%) successful. There have been 395 white applicants and 20 BME applicants with 187 (47.3%) and 7 (35.0%) success rates respectively.

Females make up 17.4% of successful candidates and BME officers 3.6%. For females this is comparable to the current proportions within ACPO (17.2%) and higher than the current BME representation in ACPO at 2.8%28.

Upon surveying candidates they have rated the assessment centre as being fair and relevant.29

27 Annual Results & Analysis Reports containing success and candidate feedback survey results are available annually for 2008 – 2011. 28 Home Office Statistics Bulletin Police Service Strength England and Wales, 31 March 2012. 29 Annual Results & Analysis Reports containing success and candidate feedback survey results are available annually for 2007 – 2011.

130 Annex E

International Policing Structures This paper examines the structure of policing in eight countries to understand how those countries organise the provision of operational policing and selected support services to the frontline. It provides a high-level overview of services delivered by the main police support bodies in those countries listed as derived through online research.

Canada In Canada, there are three levels of police forces: municipal, provincial and federal. Constitutionally, law enforcement is a provincial responsibility, and most urban areas have been given the authority by the provinces to maintain their own police force. All but three provinces, in turn, contract out their provincial law enforcement responsibilities to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the federal police force. RCMP Contract Policing is provided through Police Services Agreements which are negotiated between the federal government and provinces, territories and municipalities. It has been common practice to refer to the Police Service Agreements as contracts, hence the origins of the term “contract policing”. RCMP members in contract policing maintain a federal policing presence across the country. They are deployable across jurisdictions when required and called upon to assist in major investigations, emergencies, and national events that are beyond the policing capacity of a province, territory, municipality to address alone.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) provides support to all police forces in Canada through the operation of support services including the: • Canadian Police Information Centre, • Criminal Intelligence Service Canada, • Forensic Science and Identification Services, • Canada Firearms Centre and • Canadian Police College. http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/

Criminal Intelligence Service Canada (CISC) is comprised of nearly 400 law enforcement agencies across Canada. CISC is a strategically-focused organisation that facilitates the timely production and exchange of criminal information and intelligence within the Canadian law enforcement community. CISC supports the effort to reduce the harm caused by organised crime through the delivery of strategic intelligence products and services and by providing leadership and expertise to its member agencies. Its fundamental purpose is to facilitate the timely production and exchange of criminal intelligence within the Canadian law enforcement community. There are ten CISC provincial bureaus that operate independently while maintaining national service delivery standards. The intelligence collected and analyzed through the provincial bureaus is instrumental in the creation of the national intelligence products and services delivered by Central Bureau. http://www.cisc.gc.ca/index_e.html

The Canadian Police Research Centre (CPRC) was originally founded in 1979 as a partnership between the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the National Research Council of Canada to provide a focal point for research relating to law enforcement. In 2007, it became an official federal program. The CPRC has a national focus, a single coordinated effort to support research and develop technologies for Canada’s law enforcement community, and it promotes interaction between the police community, government, industry, universities and other research organizations. The CPRC ensures that research results, expertise, information and facilities are shared among all partners. The collaborative effort of the CACP, RCMP and NRC continues to result in the sponsorship of numerous research projects and in the development of new products and information sources for the public safety market. http://www.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/drdc/en/centres/drdc-css-rddc-css/programs-programmes/cprc- ccrp/

CSIS is Canada's national security establishment whose role is to investigate threats, analyze information and produce intelligence. It reports to, and advises, the Government of Canada to

131 protect the country and its citizens. Key threats include terrorism, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, espionage, foreign interference and cyber-tampering affecting critical infrastructure. CSIS programs are proactive and pre-emptive. http://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/index-eng.asp

Australia In Australia there are two distinct, but similar, levels of police force, the various state police forces and the Australian Federal Police (AFP). The state police forces are responsible for enforcing state law within their own states (including cities within the states) while the AFP is responsible for the investigation of crimes against Commonwealth law which occurs throughout the nation. The AFP also has responsibility for a community policing role (similar to the state police) in Commonwealth territories (including the Australian Capital Territory (ACT)) and works closely and collaboratively with all Australian police forces and criminal investigative agencies and Crime Commissions. http://www.afp.gov.au/

The AFP provides some operational support to other Australian jurisdictions. For example, it is responsible for the Australian Bomb Data Centre and the Australian Illicit Drug Data Centre. The AFP also offers investigation services to other departments and agencies, on serious and complex matters such as fraud, people smuggling, organised crime.

The Australian Institute of Police Management (AIPM) provides training, at middle and senior management levels, for law enforcement and some related bodies (e.g. fire services). The Institute is administered by the AFP and is governed by a Board of Control comprising all Australian and New Zealand police commissioners. The Institute provides executive leadership and management development opportunities to improve the corporate performance and productivity of Australasian law enforcement and allied agencies. The Institute plays a key role in developing police managers and executives through its management and leadership programs, applied research and consultancy services. Selection for AIPM courses is by the individual’s own agency (which has to pay), providing that the individual meets AIPM entrance requirements. http://www.aipm.gov.au

Other organizations also provide support. The ANZPAA is probably the nearest Australian equivalent to the NPIA, although it is a non-operational agency. It is a joint initiative of the Australian and New Zealand Police Ministers and Commissioners. Its mission is to “research, develop, promote and share strategic policing initiatives to enhance community safety in Australia and New Zealand”. In 2009, the ANZPAA convened an Information and Communications Technology Committee and a Procurement Committee. http://www.anzpaa.org.au

There is a central agency (an executive agency established in 2000, whose CEO reports to the Australian Minister for Home Affairs), CrimTrac, which provides information and investigative tools, e.g. the national automated fingerprint identification system (NAFIS). CrimTrac is the central repository of information which each jurisdiction feeds into and retrieves information from. “Our primary role is to provide national information sharing solutions to support the effective operation of police services and law enforcement agencies across state and territory borders. We broker a wide variety of information to assist investigations by law enforcement agencies and are responsible for finding emerging information technologies and opportunities to enhance information sharing.” http://www.crimtrac.gov.au

Research in criminal justice and policing issues is undertaken by the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC). The AIC is a statutory authority which is Australia’s national research and knowledge centre on crime and justice. On the AIC website, the AFP is listed amongst its ‘partners’. http://www.aic.gov.au

Each Australian State police force, including the AFP, does its own police training. However, the AFP does provide some specialist training to other agencies, particularly police from other

132 Pacific Island and South-East Asian countries, but including Australian law enforcement and related agencies.

There is also the Australian Graduate School of Policing, which is part of Charles Stuart University (and is co-located with the AIPM). It has senior police officers on its Board of Studies. http://www.csu.edu.au/faculty/arts/agsp/

1The Australian Crime Commission (ACC) is an Australian Government national intelligence and investigation agency established under the Australian Crime Commission Act 2002 as a statutory authority to combat serious and organised crime. It reports directly to the Minister for Home Affairs. http://www.crimecommission.gov.au/

The International Deployment Group (IDG), established in February 2004, has the capacity to provide officers for the Australian Government's domestic and international stability and security operations. Between 2006 and 2009, the IDG expanded to 900 of an approved 1200- strong staff. The group contributes to the development, maintenance or restoration of the rule of law in countries that seek Australia's support, as well as to United Nations and domestic initiatives such as the Northern Territory Emergency Response (NTER). http://www.afp.gov.au/policing/international-deployment-group.aspx

New Zealand New Zealand Police is the lead agency in New Zealand and although headed by a Commissioner, is a decentralised organisation divided into twelve districts, each with a geographical area of responsibility, three communications centres and a Police National Headquarters that provides policy and planning advice as well as national oversight and management of the organisation. http://www.police.govt.nz/

The Royal New Zealand Police College is the central training institution for police recruits and police officers.

In September 2007 the New Zealand Government announced the establishment of an organised crime agency to increase cooperation by New Zealand government agencies in the targeting of serious and organised crime. The Organised and Financial Crime Agency of New Zealand (OFCANZ) is an agency hosted within the New Zealand Police and was established on 1 July 2008. http://www.ofcanz.govt.nz/

Japan Law enforcement in Japan is provided by the Prefectural Police under the oversight of the National Police Agency (NPA). As the central coordinating body for the entire police system, the National Police Agency determines general standards and policies; detailed direction of operations is left to the lower echelons. In a national emergency or large-scale disaster, the agency is authorized to take command of prefectural police forces. The NPA’s duties include; dealing with natural disasters, emergencies and civil unrest, tackling organised crime, police training and police communications.

The Central Office of the NPA includes: • planning, • information, • finance, • procurement and distribution of police equipment, and • five bureaus (Police Admin - concerned with police personnel, education and training, Criminal Investigation - in charge of research statistics, Traffic, security, Regional Public Safety, & Police Communications) http://www.npa.go.jp/english/index.htm

133 Sweden There are 21 county police authorities in Sweden. Each has a County Police Authority, which is headed by a County Police Commissioner. There is also a County Police Board, consisting of local politicians and the commissioner. The Commissioners and the members of the board are all appointed by the Swedish Government. The County Police Authorities report to the National Police Board, which, in turn, reports to the Ministry of Justice.

The Swedish National Police Board (Rikspolisstyrelsen) is the central administrative and supervisory authority of the police service. It is also the supervisory authority of the National Laboratory of Forensic Science and is responsible for the central provision of IT to the regions. The SNPB is headed by the National Police Commissioner who is appointed by the government.

The SNPB is also, through the National Police Academy, responsible for the training of police officers. It is also the principal agency for the Swedish National Laboratory of Forensic Science.

The National Police Board also consists of two national departments: a) The National Bureau of Investigations [Criminal Investigations Department], that is responsible for: • Organised Crime • National Task Force • Police Liaison Officers

The National Bureau of Investigations also works at the local level of the police organisation, providing reinforcement for police authorities as required and is in charge of the Police Helicopter Service, Swedish Police Peace Support Operations and the National Communications Centre. b) The Swedish Security Service prevents and detects offences against national security, fights terrorism and protects the central Government. It is responsible for:

• VIP Protection • Counter terrorism • National security http://www.polisen.se/

The Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (BRA) is an agency operating under the Ministry of Justice and is the national centre for research and development within the judicial system. BRA also provides the official crime statistics, evaluates reforms, conducts research to develop new knowledge and provides support to local crime prevention work. http://www.bra.se/bra/bra-in-english/home.html

Norway The Norwegian National Police Directorate (Politi- og lensmannsetaten) is the official police force in Norway which are run by the Minister of Justice and Police. The department consists of 27 regional areas and seven national special forces. The department has about 11,000 employees. The police districts consist of police stations and district offices. Police stations are led by a Chief of Police who is responsible for the geographical district around his precinct. Each police regional district has its own Police Commissioner who is the leader of that district's police practice.

The seven National Forces include: (i) National Criminal Investigation Unit (Kripos) that combats organised and serious crime with special expertise in tactical and technical investigations and that acts as a central advisory body; (ii) Norwegian Police University College responsible for training, higher education and research; (iii) National Mobile Police services that carry out police duties focused around traffic safety work but can be deployed to

134 support forces when required; and, (iv) National Police Computing and Material service that procures, develops and manages police joint ICT solutions, develops operational police materials and manages the police’s communication solutions. https://www.politi.no/vedlegg/rapport/Vedlegg_858.pdf

Netherlands The Dutch police consists of 25 regional police forces and the National Police Services Agency (KLPD)30. Each of the Netherlands' 25 police regions is headed by a regional police board, consisting of mayors and a chief public prosecutor. The KLPD is headed by the Minister of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (since 1 January 2000). He is responsible (with the Minister of Justice) for the overall quality of policing in the Netherlands.

The KLPD carries out national and specialist police tasks. It collects, files, processes, manages, analyses and distributes information, and carries out other support tasks. It guards the Royal Family and other important persons; and, it procures police weaponry, uniforms, and other equipment. Functions under KLPD include: National criminal Investigations Service; Specials Investigations Applications Service; Traffic; rail; Water; Aviation; Mounted Police; Dogs; Operational Support and co-ordination (DOC); Royal and Diplomatic Protection.

The National Criminal Intelligence Service (NRI) (a division of the KLPD) supplies criminal intelligence and expertise to the police forces. By maintaining databases containing data on crimes and criminal modes of operation and other information the NRI helps to provide information on organised crime and serious forms of supraregional crime. Also part of the KLPD, the National Criminal Investigation Service is part has a role is to investigate organised and other serious crime which extends across regional or national boundaries in terms of the nature of the crime or the identity of the group involved.

The Operational Support and Coordination Service (DOC) assists the KLPD itself and the regional police forces and other government services in matters relating to public order and security. It has four main functions: operational support, operational coordination, information coordination and the provision of teleservices. (part of KLPD)

A regional force decides on such matters as funding, staffing, equipment, buildings, organisation, operational management, information systems and computerisation and the organisation of the regional criminal investigation department. They deal with community policing; investigations service; traffic; arrest; environmental crimes’ criminal intelligence unit.

Interregional cooperation in tackling crimes of medium seriousness involves six supraregional teams that concentrate on robberies, ram raiding and domestic burglaries by gangs that operate nationwide, the distribution of child pornography, trafficking in human beings and other types of crime committed by groups active in two or more regions. However, they also deal with categories of fraud committed by persons other than insiders. The Supraregional Investigation Forum decides which cases will be investigated by the supraregional teams. The forearm consists of representatives of the Public Prosecution Service, the force managers and the heads of forces.

The Information and Communications Technology Agency (ITO) is an agency of the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, which delivers reliable and confidential ICT services for

30 In the future (anticipated 2013), a single nation police force will replace the existing system and forces. The force will consist of 10 territorially defined police units which will each be responsible for police work in their part of the country. For all policing duties that can best be performed at national level (such as those currently carried out by the National Crime Squad), a national unit within the national police force will be established. In addition, a police service centre will be created within the national force to handle all support services related to operational management (such as information technology, purchasing, accommodation and human resources) (http://www.interpol.int/Member- countries/Europe/Netherlands).

135 the public order, safety and security and criminal justice sectors. ITO plays a major role in C2000, the nationwide digital network for mobile communication between the police, fire services and ambulance services.

The Police Training and Knowledge Centre, which was for many years known as the National Police Selection and Training Institute (LSOP), is responsible for the new approach to police training. Police Academy is part of this. http://www.politie.nl/English/

There is an Economic Investigative Service that is non-police, although it works closely with them. This includes the investigation of economic crime such as fraud and other white-collar crime.

The Royal Military Constabulary is divided in accordance with civil and military tasks; the former include Royal protection; Airport Policing and security; and cross border policing and security.

The Police Academy (Politieacademie) is an independent administrative body, funded by the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (the same ministry which is responsible for the police and KLPD). The Politieacademie assists forces to produce applied research and is active in disseminating knowledge and research findings. Its statutory core task is to serve as a knowledge centre of and for the police. The Police Science and Research Programme (Politie en Wetenschap) is an independent section of the Police Academy’s Knowledge Network. http://www.politieacademie.nl http://www.politieenwetenschap.nl/english/index_1024.html

The Research and Documentation Centre (Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek-en Documentatiecentrum (WODC)), part of the Dutch Ministry of Justice, is responsible for conducting and commissioning research (and publishing its research), advising on the research needed to answer policy-related questions, disseminating knowledge in the field of justice and collecting criminal justice information provided by external organisations. http://english.wodc.nl/organisatie/

France There are two national police forces in France; the National Police and the National Gendarmerie. The National Police is the main civil law enforcement agency in France with primary jurisdiction in cities and large towns. It comes under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of the Interior and has around 150,000 employees. The National Police conduct security operations and criminal enquiries and maintain specific services for criminal enquiries. It is divided into directorates including directorates and sub-directorates for uniformed patrol and response, forensics, counter-terrorism and cyber crime.

The National Gendarmerie is a military police force with a civil mandate. Its primary jurisdiction is in smaller towns and rural areas. Sub-divisions of the National Gendarmerie include the Mobile Gendarmerie, responsible for public order, the Republican Guard responsible for protection including official escorts, and specialist divisions such as the Maritime Gendarmerie and Air Transport Gendarmerie. There is also a 66,000 person strong divisional gendarmerie whom carry out a community policing role and are supplemented by specialist units such as roads policing, criminal investigation units, air support and nautical units. http://www.gendarmerie.interieur.gouv.fr/eng/Sites/Gendarmerie/Presentation

The municipal police are the local police forces of towns and cities. They are under the direct authority of the mayor and carry out duties required by the town council for crime prevention, public order, security, and public safety including the monitoring and regulation of road traffic, assisting citizens and reporting crimes for which they have no jurisdiction. Municipal police can carry out arrests but are required to deliver the perpetrator to an officer of the National Police or National Gendarmerie.

33 136 Written evidence submitted by the Association of Chief Police Officers [LSP 21]

Introduction

The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the Home Affairs Select Committee’s Inquiry into Leadership and Standards in the Police. With regard to the Committee’s terms of reference, this submission sets out a professional view from the operational leaders of policing on current opportunities and challenges facing the police service, with specific reference to the new College of Policing (CoP) and police leadership.

The coming changes in policing are framed by a decade of falling crime and increased public trust and satisfaction in the police. According to an Ipsos Mori poll conducted last year police officers are considered some of the most trustworthy professionals in the UK, ranked above Business Leaders, Civil Servants and politicians,1 evidence also supported by Sir Chris Kelly and his Committee on Standards in Public life’s most recent report2.

The resounding success of the Olympic and Paralympic games this year is a testament to the police officers, police staff and partners, who have met one of the greatest security challenges of our time with aplomb. Such achievements are a result of the careful planning that the service and its partners put into this event over the past four years. Police leaders have undoubtedly led from the front throughout this process.

Policing in the UK is built upon a relationship with the public. While the nature of policing attracts scrutiny and contentious debate that can put this relationship to the test, the bond remains strong and it must be continually nurtured. The College of Policing is a tremendous opportunity to establish policing as a recognised profession with a stronger body of evidence‐based practice and professional ethics. It will allow policing to promote research, and take greater ownership of leadership development.

The Prime Minister, Home Secretary and this Committee have all publically noted that the police service has responded impressively to the challenges of reducing budgets, reform and change. We believe the future of police leadership will continue to move policing forward to better serve the public.

The Association of Chief Police Officers

The Association of Chief Police Officers brings together the expertise and experience of chief police officers from England, Wales and Northern Ireland. ACPO is an independent, professionally‐led strategic body. In the public interest and, in equal and active partnership with Government and the Association of Police Authorities (APA) (and APCC in future), ACPO leads and coordinates the direction and development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The Police and Justice Act 2006 confirms ACPO as a statutory consultee. In times of national need, ACPO, on behalf of all chief officers, coordinates the strategic policing response.

1 Ipsos Mori, Trust in Professions 2011, www.ipsos‐mori.com 2 Committee on Standards in Public Life ‘Survey of Public Attitudes in Public Life 2010’, http://www.public‐ standards.org.uk/Library/CSPL_survey_Final_web_version.pdf

137

The functions of ACPO include facilitating decision making by chief constables at a national level, providing national policing coordination, national policing communication, national development of professional policing practice and providing oversight, through chief officers to some national policing units. In the absence of a federal model of policing it provides a voluntary structure to secure national agreements which underpin the ability of all forces to deliver consistent and interoperable policing to keep citizens safe and secure.

There are presently 307 members of ACPO, comprising chief officers holding a rank at or above Assistant Chief Constable (or Metropolitan Police Service equivalent: Commander). They also include senior police staff colleagues of equivalent status, for example heads of human resources and finance, and in some forces heads of communication and legal services.

The College of Policing

On 15 December 2011 the Home Secretary announced to Parliament that she intended to establish a Police Professional Body (PPB) whose mission “will be to develop the body of knowledge, standards of conduct, ethical values, skills and leadership and professional standards required by police officers and police staff in England and Wales, supporting them to more effectively fight crime. The professional body must work in the public interest and will include work on the following areas: ensuring police officers and staff have the qualifications and skills to provide a high quality service to the public, maintain their professional competence, keep their skills and knowledge up‐to‐date and uphold the highest standards of conduct and ethical values.” She further announced that the Police Minister would lead a Developing Professionalism Working Group (DPWG) which would work through detailed implementation. As of the 16 July the police service has been working toward a College of Policing.

ACPO President, Sir Hugh Orde welcomed the announcement, stating:

“Chief officers welcome today’s announcement of a College of Policing. The professional recognition that it will bring to the police service in future, for the skills and expertise officers and staff demonstrate daily, is a significant step for policing. A solid framework for working with universities and others to develop the evidence base for policing is also an exciting opportunity.

“What now lies ahead is the task of successfully transferring those important functions currently carried out by the National Police Improvement Agency in a smooth and timely manner. I am pleased to note that the Home Secretary has supported the continuation of the vital work conducted by the ACPO Business Areas and over the coming months chief officers who lead in these areas will ensure that relevant non‐operational national policing continues to be delivered through the new structure.

“For the College of Policing to be a success we must now work to ensure that it represents the service as a whole.”

The objectives for the College of Policing are still being developed. But as of 16 July 2012, the Home Office stated that the College would:

138 Protect the public interest by:

• promoting the values of effective policing • learning from and supporting improvement in policing • maintaining ethics and values

Set and enhance first‐class national standards of professionalism to ensure excellence in operational policing by:

• developing a set of nationally agreed standards for officers and staff to attain • providing frameworks for standards to be tested and achievement rewarded • supporting national business areas

Identify evidence of what works in policing and share best practice by:

• providing access to a body of knowledge that is informed by evidence‐based research and best practice • continuing to develop an understanding of the evolving threats to public safety and enable the service to retain the capabilities needed

Support the education and professional development of police officers and staff by:

• developing and maintaining the national policing curriculum, assessment and accreditation frameworks • delivering leadership and specialist training • accrediting and quality‐assuring training providers • developing future leaders and expertise through effective talent management

Enable and motivate staff and partners to work together to achieve a shared purpose by:

• working with partners to make the best use of specialist knowledge • supporting desired behaviours and actions that embody the service’s values • ensuring interoperability with partners and other sectors

The College of Policing is seen by ACPO as a tremendous opportunity to set up policing as a recognised profession with a stronger base of evidence based practice and professional ethics. It will allow policing to take a greater ownership of leadership development and promote research.

It is vitally important that the College of Policing has the support of the police family as a whole. Whilst led by a Chief Constable (as Chief Executive, providing the critical link into Chief Constables’ Council), the Chair will be independent of policing and supported by a Board that will bring together the right mix of police and non‐police individuals to provide essential oversight and challenge.

Its primary focus will be to develop policy in those areas where interoperability is critical, without constraining local freedom unless absolutely essential. It will set standards and disseminate best practice to police forces – independent of government and in an entirely transparent way.

Whilst initially the College will clearly inherit an essential legacy from National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA), looking forward it will engage with universities and the wider academic world. This is

139 an exciting prospect that could really build on the existing professionalism and expertise that exists in the service. It will assist in providing a framework for developing dynamic relationships with academia that have not been possible under current arrangements.

We are pleased to note the importance of that the ACPO Business Areas is recognised,3 and believe that it is sensible that the college builds on the existing ACPO Business Area structure. Whilst there will be a degree of complexity to this, it is right that the College owns the development of policy and practice, answering to the Chief Executive before Authorised Professional Practice (APP) is examined and signed off by Chief Constables’ Council and operationalised across the country.

Authorised Professional Practice

In September 2010 Chief Officers agreed a wide‐ranging review of guidance across all ACPO business areas. This review resulted in the decision to consolidate and replace current guidance with Authorised Professional Practice (APP). APP streamlines existing guidance onto a single online platform and to date, has seen a 60% reduction in policy documents, equating to a reduction of thousands of pages of guidance. The central aim of the programme is to make critical operational information available in a much clearer and simpler way to frontline staff in police forces.

There is a huge amount of policing know‐how and corporate memory encapsulated within these Business Areas. Given that it will be the task of the College to identify future challenges and how we might build the capacity and capability to deal them, it is important that it draws on these existing resources at practitioner level.

The police service and the College should ensure APP is built around evidence and is underpinned by tactical doctrine that sets out the design and intended effect of all frontline roles. The College should work with the police service to develop the curriculum and standards for training of officers in law, procedure and evidence‐based practice to equip them with the knowledge to operate as independent professionals in the field.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) believes that with the imminent creation of the College of Policing and the development of the police service’s accumulated policy and guidance into a tighter body of APP, the time is right to recommend a renewed focus on the frontline police officer.4 The creation of a single, clear mission for policing, with resonance throughout the service, is of central importance to successfully establishing the professionalisation of these frontline roles.

ACPO has agreed a National Decision Model (NDM), a critical element of which is the ‘Statement of Mission and Values’ (annexed5). This is a clear statement that for policing, all our decisions and each stage of our decision making process should be driven by our mission and values. The Statement of Mission and Values and the NDM provide a framework for all police officers, all police staff and all

3 Within the ACPO set up there are 14 Business Areas, 340 chief officers making up ACPO and 336 separate police functions or types of crime (‘portfolios’) that are nationally led and coordinated by a Chief Constable, ranging from police use of firearms to metal theft. These roles are supported inside and outside the police service by the ACPO Communications Team which responds to national media enquiries concerning policing and crime reduction. 4 HMIC, Taking Time for Crime, 2012, p. 18 5 Not printed.

140 police leaders. This emphasis on our mission, values and ethics is consistent with the intentions of the new College of Policing.

National Decision Model

Police leaders will need to undertake to provide the required knowledge and to shape the infrastructure around the newly designed APP in the same way it has for what it currently designates as guidance. This approach would support an approach to pay and reward that recognises contribution, skills and expertise rather than experience.

Relationship with ACPO

ACPO has identified areas where there is clearly an overlap between aspects of the current role of ACPO within the policing landscape and some of the intended functions of the new College. ACPO has therefore been working constructively to review the role of ACPO going forward.

The College will have a clear focus on developing individual professionalism. However, ACPO has a role in developing service‐wide operational approaches such as, neighbourhood policing and intelligence‐led policing, and has provided a structure for operational decisions, co‐ordination and communication at a regional and national level. Given the operational and constitutional responsibilities that are vested by law in Chief Constables; these roles may not sit comfortably within a standards body.

We firmly believe that the functions performed by ACPO ‐ in particular the bringing together of the Chief Constables of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, the operational leadership of the service, the important role of the President to consult with colleagues and, with their mandate, to speak on behalf of the service ‐ should be retained. However, ACPO also recognises the need to change to provide the appropriate fit with the new College of Policing and provide sustainable governance and transparency to ACPO itself.

141 As noted, the Chief Executive of the College will be embedded in Chief Constables’ Council (CCC). But as the College is a non‐operational and inclusive organisation (with the Police Federation of England and Wales, Superintendents Association of England and Wales, Police Staff Council and Police and Crime Commissioners on the board), operational police matters such as national incidents that require the professional voice of the leadership of the service to comment upon will remain the remit of the operational leaders of the service, at local, regional or national, level depending on the event.

It is ACPO’s view that the existing arrangement of Chief Constables’ Council needs to be delineated from the College and enshrined in statute. It is important that there is a separate forum for Chiefs to speak with one voice on national operations and policy, which would not be appropriate for a college. Our opinion is that there is also a key role for the ACPO president, who, after consultation with chief constables and having received their mandate, can speak on behalf of the whole service. There are also areas of national coordination such as the Police National Information Coordination Centre (PNICC) and counter terrorism that need to exist outside the CoP structure.

Our workforce

ACPO provided a submission to the ‘Review of Remuneration and Conditions of Service for Police Officers and Staff’ led by Tom Winsor, setting out a view on how we ensure a workforce, from top to bottom, which is recruited, trained and motivated to deliver the challenges of the future.

In this submission we stated that current reward packages are not ‘fit for purpose’ and represent a significant missed opportunity to motivate our workforce at all levels. Tom Winsor has completed his review and the Police Arbitration Tribunal delivered their ruling on the first part of his recommendations on 09/01/12 and we expect the decision on the second part imminently.

Overall, the decisions appear to strike a balance between the need to achieve savings given the national economic situation and the financial pressures facing individual police officers. Chief officers would like see a greater move towards future longer term pay reform, which better reflects skills acquired over time served. We see this as an integral step to developing the leadership of the police service further and improving standards across the board.

Police staff: All colleagues are part of the professional policing family. Police staff and PCSOs now represent 38% of the police workforce in England and Wales, with staff represented at almost all management levels in forces and across all policing functions. The role of police staff is integral to modern policing. There has been some development activity common to both officers and staff. For example, NPIA courses, including the Strategic Command Course (SCC), are available to officers and staff alike. The College of Policing is an opportunity to enhance further an integrated, skilled and efficient workforce.

ACPO continues to consult and seek the best processes to ensure that the police service draws from an ever wider range of talented people. The police service has shown over recent years it has the capability, at all levels of the organisation, not only to deal with the most complex and challenging operational environments but also the business skills to redesign the organisation in the face of rapid reductions in budget and considerable structural change. Building on this knowledge base and experience, whilst finding innovative ways to attract talent is vital to the future of the service and will be a critical mission for the College.

142 Leadership development in policing and other sectors

“One of the real challenges that police leaders face is that we have all largely only ever worked for the police service and that has some real strengths in terms of shared history and ethos; all of us have been operational cops on the front line but it also carries with it some real challenges in that our outlook can be very narrow.”

Sir Peter Fahy QPM

Chief Constable, Greater Manchester Police and ACPO lead for Workforce Development

The police service does not operate in isolation. Increasingly, it operates in partnership with service providers across all sectors. National policing developments and security concerns as well as global trends and capability and capacity issues strengthen the need for stronger connections across the public and private sector. It is important to develop any future police leadership strategy based on best practice and collaboration across sectors to achieve the best outcomes.

Leadership development should include opportunities to gain experience of other sectors; and leadership programmes can benefit by involving colleagues from a range of backgrounds. The College of Policing presents a particular opportunity in this area. Well established bodies such as the Royal Colleges of Surgeons and Physicians are held in high regard and promote a sense of professionalism and expertise that enhance public trust and confidence. It is just such a position that the College of Policing should aspire to reach, and engaging with senior leaders within those and other relevant bodies should be a key milestone in the College’s establishment and development.

Officers can gain skills and experience of significant value by taking on roles and academic opportunities outside of the service, and as such, ACPO supports making it easier for officers to take career breaks or leave and re‐enter the service after periods of outside employment.

The NPIA publication A Strategy for the 21st Century, Leading Policing, explains some areas of best practice that policing can draw upon.6 The strategy maps out a development journey through the various ranks with a movement to externally accredited qualifications providing a mixture of theory and performance in the workplace.

We recognize that there is an opportunity in linking into the development activities of other organizations, where there is a clear benefit for policing. Established links with leadership training outside the police service include the Windsor Leadership Trust, the multi‐agency Leading Powerful Partnerships course run by the NPIA and attendance on the Top Management Programme which used to be run by the Civil Service College. This is something the College of Policing will no‐doubt continue.

Common components of leadership development programmes in recent years include more emphasis on emotional intelligence and ethical leadership, as well as personal leadership, operational leadership, and business skills.

Ethics and values are covered in all leadership development programmes in the UK police service. This allows participants to explore the dilemmas involved in modern policing. Speakers with

6 National Policing Improvement Agency, A Strategy for the 21st Century, Leading Policing, 2008, pp. 31‐40

143 experience of challenging operational situations and incidents which have led to public enquiries are used to provoke thinking. Participants are presented with an ethical framework and the approporiate tools for ethical decision making.

The Strategic Command Course (SCC) is aimed at superintendents, chief superintendents and police staff equivalents who are seeking promotion to chief officer rank (i.e. Assistant Chief Constable, Commander and Assistant Chief Officer).

The SCC (programme evaluation annexed7) is primarily delivered through a series of highly demanding strategic exercises, which are designed to stretch the participants' knowledge, skills, attitudes and abilities across the following three key areas:

• Business Skills • Executive Skills • Professional Policing Skills

UK police officers and staff must pass the Senior Police National Assessment Centre (Senior PNAC) or Senior Staff Selection Process. Delegates from other agencies will be expected to have been selected on the basis of their ability to operate at executive level within their own organisation.

The Campaign for Leadership, part of the Work Foundation, maintains a large database of profiles of leaders in the UK across all sectors. The database, holds information on over 37,000 profiles of leaders, has been built over the past few years around individual leaders and their peers and staff completing a Liberating Leadership Profiling instrument. This tool gathers self‐assessment and staff/peer perception data across thirty‐eight constructs which have been identified from research to be critical in effective leadership performance. The constructs include the ability to show vision, inspire staff, approachability, fairness, trust in staff and willingness to seek feedback.

Over five thousand profiles of police leaders are included on the database. A comparative analysis of the database carried out by the Campaign for Leadership revealed that police leaders compare favourably with leaders in other parts of the public sector and other sectors.

The police service places great store on leadership qualities and perhaps has focused less on the management requirements. This has generally not become an issue when the workforce charged with delivery has been predominantly omnicompetent officers, who are entirely flexible and inherently resilient.

However with a climate that has rising demands and increasing public expectation set against a challenging financial landscape, policing is becoming more specialized and in almost every field there is a movement to accredited qualifications and a record of practical application. It is often the level of expertise which counts rather than the rank of an individual officer. ACPO has argued in its submission to the Winsor report that the pay and reward system needs to change to recognise these developments.

Entry routes

7 Not printed.

144 Chief constables are already of the opinion that the business of policing should not be left to the police alone. Every force has experts brought in from outside in areas such as human resources, finance, investigation and IT. The quality of these individuals is high and they add real value to policing.

We want to ensure that the best people get to senior positions in policing, and that we harness valuable skills from other sectors in leadership roles where possible.

There is very little evidence available or research carried out as to how successful direct entry may or may not be for policing. In the absence of such objective evidence the debate has tended to become much polarised.

Currently, ACPO supports direct entry under the following provisos:

• The Office of Constable must remain at the heart of British policing, as the bedrock of service culture and representation of independent law enforcement to the general public.

• Those taking up officer roles must have the operational skills and experience to perform their role effectively and safely.

• Those taking up officer roles must have the generic operational skills and experience to provide their Chief Constable with the required level of flexibility and capability to be deployed at their rank.

• Robust and respected accreditation processes must be put in place to ensure that the skills and expertise required at each of the different ranks can be reliably and accurately assessed.

In terms of operational policing, the level of expertise, training and experience required is extremely specialised. ACPO is very conscious of the value the service takes from senior management teams with extensive operational experience, and the operational credibility and confidence this generates in officers in the field.

There may be some situations where a candidate from outside of the service has particular skills or experience for a role, however direct recruitment should never be at the expense of operational competence.

Given the level of risk managed by the service it is crucial that senior officers are competent from day one. Progression through the ranks provides a strong test over an extended period of the operational aptitude and ability that the public has a right to expect. However, we are aware that the requirement to serve in every rank limits the pool of individuals who may be selected for senior officer positions to those who have worked within the service for a significant period of time.

There are already many opportunities to join the service in higher positions as police staff members and it is only those roles considered to be highly operationally sensitive which are limited to experienced police officers. Civilian staff members are well represented at all levels including senior management teams and make an enormous contribution to service delivery across all forces.

145 ACPO believes that any direct entry should be considered solely on a role‐by‐role basis where the qualities of a specific position or candidate justify it.

We do not support the selection of a select group of recruits for immediate service at middle management level under an ‘officer class’ model. This two‐tier recruitment system seen in the military does not reflect the cultural and structural differences between the organisations ‐ modern policing is built on a history of meritocracy, and equality of opportunity, which ACPO feels should continue to be respected.

All police officers and staff who have the potential to perform well in senior positions should be nurtured and developed from an early stage in their service, and therefore the emphasis should be placed on enhanced talent management and accelerated promotion processes in order to achieve this. In its submission to the Winsor Part 1 report, ACPO stated that accelerated promotion for exceptional talent, for both police officers and staff, should be a key element of increasing professionalism within policing.

Police Leadership and Standards

We live in an age where trust in authority is waning. A succession of events continues to undermine the public’s belief in those in positions of influence and status in society. The senior leadership of the police service recognises that policing is not immune from, and may often find itself in the eye of, this storm.

A great strength of British Policing is its openness and willingness to be held to account for our actions. Transparency is vital in all we do, for it breeds trust and confidence. High levels of accountability are critical if we are to maintain the consensual policing model that is so admired around the world, based on the citizen’s confidence and support.

Policing is a risk business and as such chief officers, on whose shoulders that collective risk is placed, inevitably become the focus of attention when things go wrong, given the nature of the business this is entirely right.

Policing takes place in society’s uncontrolled spaces and in these spaces, unfortunately, errors are made, situations develop, and outcomes are not always those originally intended. The buck stops with a Chief Constable and when an investigation is necessary, it will look toward the force leader. However, the existence of investigations is not a reflection on the quality of the leadership of the service, but a reflection of the necessary accountability structure of the police service.

Complaints against Chief Constables and senior officers are rare, considering the millions of contacts police forces have every year, and those that there are, are often low‐level and unfounded. Yet, the fact that the investigation took place in the first place, often adds to the perception of a shady and untouchable leadership. The reporting of an investigation taking place is often what makes the headlines but the conclusion of an investigation, where no fault is found, rarely does. In a profession where confidence and integrity is fundamental perception can be as important as fact.

146 Recent events in some forces have demonstrated that, as in all forms of public life, there are undesirable individuals. The fact, however, that it has been the police service itself that has reported, investigated and then dispensed appropriate justice as a result of these incidents is testament, not to an introverted and unaccountable service, but to one that removes ‘bad apples’ from the barrel when they are found.

The police service also recognises the need to assess the health and integrity of the barrel itself. The recent HMIC report on police integrity gives an encouraging picture about police integrity, but it does deliver some clear recommendations for organisational change and consistency across the service. Through ACPO and specifically the work of the Professional Standards and Professional Ethics portfolios, ACPO is responding very positively to those recommendations.

We also recognise that on its own it is not enough for British policing to be, in the Home Secretary’s words, “the finest in the world”, or to rely on rising trust and confidence figures. The service must respond positively and quickly to ensure that we are in the vanguard of public service leadership.

We plan to keep a focus on this significant challenge by working closely with HMIC and the College of Policing. This would be enhanced by the commissioning of external scrutiny in respect of integrity and senior police leadership. We will, through the Workforce Development/Professional Standards Business Area working with the Professional Ethics Business Area, develop a response which includes the development of robust standards, clear guidance for colleagues, training and information as well as tackling bad behaviour. The Association sees this as being absolutely a role for the leadership of the service. We recognise that only with clear and strong direction from the top will policing be able to demonstrate the openness, transparency and accountability needed to continue growth in public confidence and trust.

Much work has already been undertaken in this regard. ACPO Professional Standards portfolio has commissioned a report from Transparency International UK (annexed8), which makes recommendations about how we might achieve a more transparent corporate governance structure. The Association is currently assessing how best to take these recommendations forward. ACPO guidance has also been produced on gifts, gratuities, and hospitality as well as business interests and secondary employment. It is intended that forces will ensure their own policies and procedures fall in line with this. The emphasis going forward in relation to the application of standards will be consistency and transparency.The CoP opens up a significant opportunity for a more professional approach to standards, values and ethics and for police ethics to be as influential across the police service as medical ethics has been across medicine.” The future of police leadership

Police and Crime Commissioners will have a rich pool of candidates to choose from when they take office, and there is an abundance of talent coming up through the ranks who will lead the service in future. Do we need to voice some thoughts on process of how PCCs will select and also on Reg 11?

As above, ACPO believes that the College of Policing presents an opportunity for developing future police leaders further, but do not recognise that this automatically infers inefficiency, or deficiency,

8 Not printed.

147 in the current pool. To strive for improvement is not an admission of failure but a sensible goal for an organisation that relies on strong leadership.

Chief Constables will need to continue to take responsibility for national talent management to ensure staff with clear potential for the most senior positions are identified at an early stage and get the best balance of operational experience, secondments and other opportunities. Facilitating talented people will continue to be a priority for ACPO and must be a priority for the College. A national training capacity and facility for policing excellence is absolutely essential in maintaining standards and bringing forth high calibre future leaders of the Service.

Talented people need to reach the senior positions at an early stage in their service but ambitious individuals must also appreciate the expectation that they will need to move forces to gain the full range of experience and this takes time. The accelerated promotion schemes and entry at Inspector level, as proposed by the Winsor Review, may broaden the base from which senior leaders are drawn from.

Should the proposals be accepted at the Police Arbitration Tribunal the service will watch closely what effect they have. As for ‘direct entry’ at higher levels, eg. Superintendant ranks, it is felt that a pilot should be conducted before any such scheme was operationalised. The job description for a Chief Constable is seven pages long, and while many skills from other professions are transferable, the role is unique in public life and attempts to change it must be considered with caution.

Police forces already bring in individuals from a wide array of backgrounds in non‐warranted roles. Assistant Chief Officers (who are members of police staff) play a vital and influential role in UK policing. They are regularly drawn from successful careers in finance, human resources, IT and more and bring a wealth of experience into policing.

It is important that development opportunities include working and training with other sectors and the opportunity to obtain mainstream qualifications through external providers. It is often suggested that senior officers lack the business skills to run an organisation the size of a police force. However, there is ample evidence of police leadership dealing with not only operational challenges but also with organisational change; never more has this been demonstrated than under the current CSR.

The development of business skills has been strengthened in both the Independent Commanders’ Course and SCC. At the same time it is inevitable that every middle or senior manager in the police service (and this is true for other sectors) is having to learn quickly the realities of managing in a time of uncertainty where the need to deliver more for less is paramount. A copy of the most recent SCC programme and evaluation is annexed to this submission.9

It is critical that police leaders throughout their career are trained and assessed against mainstream standards which recognise the realities of the size and complexity of budgets and projects that police leaders are held accountable for but also that they are supported by professionals with particular expertise in finance, human resources and other business disciplines.

Policing is undoubtedly a vocation, which makes discussing matters of remuneration difficult. While we believe that private sector performance related payments should have no place in policing, it

9 Not printed.

148 must also be recognised that the business of policing requires a unique and specialised skillset, with a salary that reflects this. Chief police officers work in unique, imprecise environments, and we rely on them to make split second decisions. There is no doubt that this should be recognised. However, we are clear that this should be done in a fair and transparent way, with regard to pressures on the public purse.

Conclusion

With seniority comes greater expectation and accountability, and those who lead must do so by example. The overwhelming majority of all those who work within policing – including those who lead the service ‐ work tirelessly to serve their communities with commitment and integrity. The public quite rightly expects all police officers to demonstrate the very highest standards of professional conduct.

Police leaders are subject to a range of inspection and investigation regimes and the almost daily scrutiny of police authority members (and PCCs in future), the media, local politicians and members of the public. They deal with ever more complex operational situations and some of the most intractable social problems in the country. Individual cases will always attract attention and concern but put in the context of the challenges of modern policing and the progress made in reducing crime and improving police performance British police leadership compares well to other sectors and policing around the world.

Policing has nothing to fear from greater accountability to the public. Police leadership is strengthened by independent oversight and challenge. The public interest is best served by having a lessons learned approach which encourages staff to report concerns and acknowledges that police professionals work in complex situations where social attitudes change over the years.

What must be recognised is that the public we serve overwhelmingly have confidence in the police. The police service is currently facing wide‐ranging reforms but the commitment of police officers of all ranks to get on with the job is unwavering.

Association of Chief Police Officers

November 2012

13

149 Supplementary written evidence submitted by the Association of Chief Police Officers [LSP 21a]

Letter from Sir Hugh Orde OBE QPM, President of the Association of Chief Police Officers, to the Chair of the Committee, 15 November 2012

I write further to your letter on the subject of PACE codes dated 24th October.

The issues arising from the suspension of Detective Superintendent Fulcher are, as you allude to in your letter, somewhat sensitive and subject to an IPCC investigation. Clearly therefore ACPO is working with the constraints of that investigation whilst determining the necessary response required.

Discussions are being held between the ACPO Crime and Criminal Justice Business Areas and Chief Constable Jon Murphy, who speaks for ACPO on major and serious crime investigations, has prepared guidance for chief constables on this Issue. I am hopeful that I will be in a position to update you more fully on this matter in due course,

In the meantime, as requested, I am pleased to enclose the latest published figures showing the gender balance and proportion of ethnic minority officers and leaders Within the ranks of the service at this time.

Sir Hugh Orde OBE QPM, President of the Association of Chief Police Officers

Annex Rank Representation by Gender England and Wales - 31st March 2012 (Latest Available)

Rank CON SGT INSP C/INSP SUPT C/SUPT ACPO TOTAL Female Officer Volume 30278 4000 1159 297 145 46 37 35962 % Female Officer Representation 29.4% 18.7% 17.6% 17.2% 16.3% 12.1% 17.7% 26.8% Male Officer Volume 72656 17371 5431 1430 745 334 172 98139 % Male Officer Representation 70.6% 81.3% 82.4% 82.8% 83.7% 87.9% 82.3% 73.2% Total Officers 102934 21371 6590 1727 890 380 209 134101

Rank Representation by Aggregated Ethnic Group England and Wales - 31st March 2012 (Latest Available)

Rank CON SGT INSP C/INSP SUPT C/SUPT ACPO TOTAL Minority Ethnic Officer Volume 5540 778 228 64 36 12 6 6664 % Minority Ethnic Officer Representation 5.4% 3.6% 3.5% 3.7% 4.0% 3.2% 2.9% 5.0% Total Officers 102934 21371 6590 1727 890 380 209 134101

This report has been produced by the NPIA Equality, Diversity and Human Rights (EDHR) Unit. It contains basic statistical information collected, summarised and contextualised from Annual Data Returns (ADRs) which are sent to the Home Office for inclusion into the Police Service Strength Bulletin.

Association of Chief Police Officers November 2012

150 Supplementary written evidence submitted by the Association of Chief Police Officers [LSP 21b]

Letter from Sir Hugh Orde OBE QPM, President of the Association of Chief Police Officers, to the Chair of the Committee, 10 May 2013

Further to the Committee’s evidence session on Leadership and Standards in Policing (23rd April 2013), I felt it might be helpful to write to the Committee to address some of the questions raised about the steps the leadership of the service has taken to address diversity issues within policing.

Much has changed in the police service over the last twenty years. While there is still some way to go, the service has shown that it is willing to listen and learn from past events.

The College of Policing provides a suite of national leadership development programmes, which form part of the overall talent management strategy within the police service. I have briefly outlined details of the existing schemes to encourage talent within policing, in particular, those which specifically reach out to minority groups.

High Potential Programme

The current version of the High Potential Development Scheme (HPDS) has been running since 2008. This is proving useful in progressing those from under-represented groups, including women and BME officers.

Positive Action Programmes

Positive Action is about creating a level playing field to enable people to compete on equal terms. It describes a range of measures which aim to eliminate unlawful discrimination and promote equality of opportunity. A number of positive action programmes have existed over the years in different forms.

In November 2012, a new suite of programmes was launched to aim to balance the needs of the service and individual officers, support forces (emphasising their responsibilities by engaging line managers and others), and make best use of our resources in a way that will make the most difference.

Currently, stages 2 and 3 focus on BME and female officers, although the College of Policing intends that this will eventually be extended eventually to those with other protected characteristics. The new programmes consist of: o Stage 1 (Emerging Potential) is aimed at practitioners (constable to inspector and staff equivalents) and we are producing a 2 day module trainers’ pack as a resource for forces to deliver internally or across regions. o Stage 2 (Releasing Potential) is aimed at chief inspectors; this links with college courses (Foundation and Senior Leadership Programmes) but also provides three 1.5 day workshops, action learning sets and mentoring. o Stage 3 (Realising Potential) is aimed at superintending ranks including those aspiring to ACPO.

151 This links with the Leading Powerful Partnerships programme, has three 1.5 day workshops and provides some professional coaching support as well as ACPO mentoring.

Mentoring Mentoring from senior officers within the Service provides invaluable inside knowledge and experience, and forms a key part of the stage 3 ‘Realising potential’ programme for superintending ranks.

The opportunity to network with senior officers is viewed by many delegates as important in taking the next steps in their career, but is also beneficial in helping to address the isolation that can come from senior leadership – in particular that which can arise from being one of only a few representatives from a minority group.

There is currently pool of over 60 ACPO mentors who have signed up to take part in this programme, which currently includes 16 BME candidates.

Other links to Talent management

BME scout programme – a group of 20 BME officers drawn from current HPDS officers and Releasing Potential chief inspectors. HPDS Development Advisors work with this group on a local force basis to identify and support high potential individuals from BME backgrounds to apply for current HPDS and future fast track programmes. The group has the support and involvement of HPDS ACPO lead, DCC Giles York.

Trident

As a final point, the subject of Operation Trident also came up during the session. Hansard records the following comments from Mr Fuller:

“It is the same principle I used when I set up Operation Trident to tackle gun crime in London. It is not a soft thing. The relationship with the black communities in particular in London was essential in gleaning intelligence.”

Operation Trident was the original concept of Detective Chief Inspector Steve Kupis and I was its first commanding officer, appointed by Denis O’Connor. Since the late 1990s when first established, Operation Trident has gone through various forms, including under the command of Mr Fuller. The contribution of DCI Steve Kupis and his colleagues to its creation should not be overlooked.

Sir Hugh Orde President, Association of Chief Police Officers

Association of Chief Police Officers

May 2013

152 Supplementary written evidence submitted by the Association of Chief Police Officers [LSP 21c]

Police officers working abroad

I write in relation to your query about the number of British police officers working abroad. As you will know, UK policing has a worldwide reputation for excellence and for bringing progressive policing practices to the international arena. International policing assistance provides opportunities to support UK national security and international development priorities and can help tackle organised crime, terrorism and illegal migration at its source.

Through the International Affairs portfolio led by Deputy Chief Constable Colette Paul, ACPO provides the support necessary to ensure the UK policing can provide a seamless deployment of police resources. It brings together experience and expertise in overseas policing deployments and provides a forum to share best practice in delivering effective policing overseas.

The interdepartmental International Policing Assistance Board, chaired by DCC Paul, sets the strategy for police assistance overseas and considers requests. Forces intending to provide assistance require the approval of their Police and Crime Commissioners, on the basis of recommendations from Chief Constables.

UK officers are routinely involved in a range of international assistance work including:

Peace support operations, including: conflict prevention; post-conflict stabilisation and recovery; peace enforcement and peace keeping.

Security and justice sector training, reform and development activities supporting foreign state police agencies and government authorities.

The deployment/secondment of police officers and police staff to foreign states and international organisations in order to build relationships and liaison mechanisms which improve police operational capability both at home and abroad.

Strategic international engagement, in order to share best practice, develop doctrine and provide networking assistance to UK forces and agencies.

Through the International Affairs portfolio we are aware of 36 serving officers deployed overseas, selected from forces across the UK, including MoD Police and Scotland. These are as follows:

Afghanistan – 21 Kosovo – 9 Sierra Leone – 1 South Sudan – 1 Liberia – 1 Libya – 1 Occupied Palestinian Territories – 1 Yemen – 1

You may also be interested to know more about the work of the International Academy (IAB) based at Bramshill. On an ad hoc basis police officers seconded to the College of Policing will take part in delivering training in operational policing and police leadership through the IAB. 12 police officers were deployed within the last year with their home forces being:

Hampshire X 2 BTP Sussex South Wales X 2 Lincs MPS PSNI D&C Dyfed Powys SOCA

153 In addition seven seconded police officers work within the IAB and frequently travel overseas as part of their duties. These officers are from the following forces:

D&C Hampshire X 3 Surrey x 2 Humberside

The Contributing to European Police Cooperation through Learning (CEPOL) programme is also based at Bramshill. The overseas courses it runs each year attract approximately 107 UK police officers and around 160 overseas police officers or staff. CEPOL currently has eight foreign police officers attached to it from the following countries:

Hungary Latvia Germany Greece Denmark Sweden Italy Slovak Republic

In relation to your enquiry as to whether foreign police officers are working within the UK, I am not aware of any officers from overseas deployed in an operational capacity. That said, a number of scholarship and secondment agreements do exist with various countries, whereby police officers and staff support learning programmes at institutions overseas. We currently have a superintendent from Hong Kong as a visiting tutor at Bramshill, while each year up to four senior officers support a number of courses on the Senior Leadership Programme at the Australian Institute of Police Management (AIPM).

I hope this information is of use to you.

Sir Hugh Orde OBE QPM President of the Association of Chief Police Officers May 2013

154 Written evidence submitted by John Kenny [LSP 22]

In the early 1980s the government in its wisdom decided it would save a considerable amount of the time of doctors if patients were allowed to extend from 3 days to 7 days the length of time that they could self - certificate themselves unfit for work.

I was at the time a serving Metropolitan Police inspector and I predicted that human nature being what it is the average employee would take advantage of this generous concession and I therefore submitted a number of suggestions via my chain of command designed to control sick leave abuse.

When my ideas were contemptuously dismissed I resorted to airing my views in various police publications and this resulted in my being severely criticised in my annual appraisals.

My predictions about an escalation in sick leave proved to be correct but not until millions of pounds of taxpayers' money had been wasted.

The problem was eventually brought under control by the use of management tools which I'd proposed and had rejected years earlier.

A credible Home Affairs Select Committee would scrupulously investigate my allegations in the public interest.

PS

My only conclusion for the Met's failure to implement such basic management tools much earlier than it did do was because so many corrupt officers were being allowed to retire on ill - health pensions during that period and this entailed lengthy periods of sick leave prior to retirement and deliberate mismanagement of sick leave neatly camouflaged this cynical ploy

John Kenny (Metropolitan Police, 1965‐1995)

November 2012

155 Written evidence submitted by James Satherley [LSP 23]

I would normally bite your hand off for the opportunity to attend the [Committee’s international conference on leadership and standards in the police service] however I am due to be medically retired on the 23rd of January 2012 against my wishes to leave the office of constable. Policing meant everything to me & I hope someday I can return to the policing environment in some capacity & continue to make a difference to the communities I once served. I know however that any job I have now should I be lucky enough to secure one will not compare to the vocation of an officer. I cannot believe in the current climate the Government are so brazen to change the face of policing in such a dramatic way & make such an important role in British society an unknown entity.

We can make cut backs, we can streamline, we can be more efficient & effective but we need to concentrate on where we aim our efforts. For the past 11 years every front line response police team I've worked on have been under resources, over stretched & we are only scratching the surface of crime being committed under our noses. The ability to deal with serious crime in a timely effective way has been lost but no one realises or even bats an eyelid.

We are burdened with paperwork, endless litigation that prevents us from being one step ahead of the criminals then we wonder why we are always playing catch up. Our senior managers forget how to police the minute they get designated an office, they forget the realities & are only concerned with political speech that skirts the subject instead of Listening to what is happening in reality. So many middle managers are backbiting to get promoted to the few limited jobs, they don't care who's career they step on the get there. Money is thrown down the drain just to decide what type of shirts we wear operationally as whole departments are set up to discuss how a police officer should look. Not to mention the time & money invested in operational equipment to assist us in doing our jobs on the street, most of which are over three years in length before an antiquated device is rolled out to officers only to be recalled a year later as it's unfit for purpose (PDAs) a prime example. We seriously need to get a grip & have a national/regional force where we all operate the same computers, crime recording systems etc etc, the list is endless. Unfortunately whatever Government is in power they say they are looking after the long term future but only deal with problems with short term fixes. This gets us nowhere yet we have our terms & conditions changed part way through our contracts, put up with ever harder working conditions with the prospect of being seriously injured every duty commenced even when not on duty. I've had my finger ripped from its socket requiring two operations to fuse my joint & now my finger no longer works, my head has been stapled after an attack, I've been rammed in a police car, assaulted in other incidents more times than I can remember, had personal threats to be tracked down & killed along with my family. I can't wait to see what standard of officer is recruited & expects to put up with that sort of job for 19k a year. Then this will of course play into the hands of the government as they don't want committed staff with a future & career as we are expensive, they want us to join then leave before we start costing them a pension, we will then be even more of a drain on society when old as we won't have the pension to look after ourselves & will have to draw from the state, hence again short term plans with no forward thinking. I wouldn't give up any of my injuries & threats towards me because I know I worked as hard a possible to bring offenders to justice, will future recruits feel the same? I very much doubt it.

Please keep me posted with the outcome of the debate. If you think there is any point me going then please say so & I will make every effort to attend.

James Satherley December 2012

156 Written evidence submitted by Nigel Lloyd [LSP 24]

Unfortunately I am unable to attend the international conference on Leadership and Standards in the police service on Monday 14th January but, as a retired senior police officer and former national lead of police leadership I do have some views. Nelson Mandela once said that 'with vision and action you can change the world'. We seem to be concentrating our efforts on developing strategy and visionaries without matching that investment in those that can put leadership, integrity and standards into action, namely team leaders, sergeants and inspectors.

There is a national training package (Core Leadership Programme) but police forces are confused about its status and links to national qualifications. They also lack the capacity and in some cases the capability to deliver leadership training. Where forces do deliver training few have work placed development as part of that process so training is delivered in isolation and loses credibility and effectiveness. The return on investment is questionable although there is a lack of any evaluation to support either view.

There has never been a mandate for leadership training at sergeant and inspector level. So whilst people need a driving license to drive and regular training for taser, firearms and unarmed defensive tactics, you can be in change of a shift of police officers without any formal training whatsoever. In these economically challenging times leadership training can be avoided and there is a lack of consistency from force to force as to how and when their frontline leaders are developed. A few simple questions to police forces in England and Wales around what is delivered, when it is delivered, who it is delivered to, and how it is delivered will reveal the situation.

There is a way forward;

The national leadership training for sergeants and inspectors should be revised in terms of content and delivery methodology and linked to national management qualifications (Level 3 and 5 respectively), so that their professional development is proven and valued, as well as additional operational elements.

The development programme for sergeants and inspectors should be mandatory. There should be consistency between forces so that the performance and standards of officers working across boundaries, mutual aid and transfers between forces are seamless. It should commence from the point that officers are successful in their promotion examinations and include being mentored in the workplace.

Delivery of the programme should be by suitably qualified trainers who have a good understanding of policing, learning and development and leadership.

Evaluation and quality assurance of the development programme should be independent of the design and delivery to add credibility and validity to the findings and to ensure that forces were complying with the national framework and standards.

My fear is that academics and strategists will complicate the debate causing delay, disharmony between the stakeholders and ultimately disadvantage those that would benefit most; frontline officers and the public. Much of the basis of what is required already exists and a different but more effective approach is not beyond reach.

I was the national programme director for the Core Leadership Development Programme and I was responsible for turning that programme around from one that was largely being ignored by forces to one

157 that was adopted by all forces in England and Wales with the exception of the Metropolitan Police. I held regional and national conferences on leadership and was privileged enough to have Sir Peter Fahy as Keynote Speaker. I am a Fellow of the Chartered Management Institute and an approved assessor of national leadership qualifications. I continue to design and deliver leadership training to police forces and I am a qualified trainer and I have a degree in Education and a Masters in Educational Leadership and Management where my research was blended learning and organisational development in policing. More detail about my background and achievements can be gained by clicking on the LinkedIn link below.

My background, experience and qualifications gives me an almost unique perspective on leadership development in policing and the ability and knowledge to engage with key stakeholders, understand and develop a way forward. I would be very grateful to you for the opportunity to undertake work on your behalf or be part of the process. It would be the highest honour for anyone with their heart in policing to be asked to help develop the future of leadership in policing and in particular frontline policing.

Nigel Lloyd January 2013

2

158

Written evidence submitted by Hugh Oliver-Bellasis [LSP 25]

Forgive me for adding to your postbag by email, but your recent writings about Police integrity and morale were interesting. I am a member of the Independent Advisory Group [IAG] for the Hampshire Police Force.

The first thing to say is that that our IAG is proactive, inquisitive and is clearly helpful to the Force. I believe it actually makes a difference [but I would say that!]. Secondly, I do not believe that every police force is identical, in fact far from it? I meet a number of members of other forces and am sometimes less than impressed.

The Government cuts have been very painful, but in Hampshire terms, the cuts have ensured the Force has left no stone unturned to make sure they meet the exacting standards they have set themselves. You are right to question what is happening, but I suggest that we have to be careful not to destroy police confidence in highlighting the deficiencies in some forces and assuming one cap fits all.

I suggest that policy has encouraged Forces to pursue target driven goals and that has affected performance in other areas. Complex as it is, changes are needed and in Hampshire that is well under way; the force is well lead.

I would be delighted to meet and share my limited experience.

Thank you for your time to read this note.

Hugh Oliver-Bellasis

January 2013

159

Written evidence submitted by Detective Constable Chris Panther [LSP 26]

I would like to thank you for the opportunity to attend the Conference yesterday. I found it interesting and I would of liked to add something to it unfortunately time was short and only a few questions were posed.

I would like to raise a point on the standards of policing which I believe to be very relevant. DR Julian HUPPERT asked a question of the speakers whether too much change in the police service at once can have a negative impact on the ability of the police to maintain standards and leadership. Sir Hugh ORDE answered in that he felt the police has a can do attitude towards change. Which to a certain extent is correct. I would like to say that we have had WISOR part I and II, then the HUTTON report into our pensions and also the report from Peter NEYROUD on police leadership. The police are being beaten with a very large stick by the current government, if they wish to maintain the high standards that the public expect, then the government would be foolish to expect Standards and Moral to remain high in light of all these changes. After all the future leaders are our current sergeants and constables, most are as you said ‘felt no support from the government” and some felt like leaving.

They (the government) can go some way to re-balance this. I feel it is safe to say that most officers above the rank of SUPT will not be affected by the pension changes, it will be the constables, sergeant and inspectors. These are the future leaders of the police. The current proposals are divisive and equally unfair, a colleague of mine is set to lose out to around £300,000 if his pension is changed.

The government in one sweeping moment can raise Moral and therefore standards will raise through officers natural enthusiasm will return if they didn’t apply the Hutton report retrospectively. It should apply to new recruits only.

On another point of Integrity, I found it difficult to listen to Tom WINSOR when we were discussing Police integrity, his reports integrity has been questioned as it is a carbon copy of the speech from David CAMERON in 2006. This is not new information to you. Yet the police’s integrity is being questioned and even a report has been produced on it! By Dr WESTMARLAND.

When officers see integrity issues at the top of the pile not being dealt with properly and challenged and dealt with. How do you think they feel when their integrity is constantly challenged.

It appears there is one rule for the lawmakers and another for everyone else.

Lastly on that point I found it an eye opener that Lord WASSERMAN referred to the resignation of a Chief Constable as not a big deal as there are plenty of capable officers who can fill his shoes. That is a clear message that the law makers actually don’t give a hoot for my colleagues at high rank, so they certainly don’t give a hoot for the constables who are significantly worse off after this governments changes.

Mr VAZ you are in a position to advise this government and are championing the debate on police pensions. All are interlinked and if a sensible outcome is reached standards and leadership will absolutely increase. However if the government continue then you don’t need me to tell you what will happen. Detective Constable Chris Panther

January 2013

160

Written evidence submitted by Colin Taylor [LSP 27]

Firstly, thank you so much for the opportunity to attend the [Committee’s international conference on leadership and standards in the police service].

I briefly spoke to Mr Vaz afterwards and he apologised for any questions that I may have had, but didn’t get the opportunity to ask, and requested I forwarded them on so the committee could consider them. They are not questions, but more of observations that I hope may assist your enquiry.

1, Since the changes to police pay, conditions and pensions, morale amongst officers (particularly constables) has seriously declined. Also, as the Winsor proposals have not yet been fully implemented, morale I fear has not yet hit rock bottom. It is only once the full effect of his proposals are established, and officers can see how they will be financially hit, as well as how insecure their jobs will become, only then do I believe that morale will hit a base level. This could be years away, what with the time scales he proposes. With low morale amongst officers, integrity must surely become an issue. If officers become disillusioned with their job, and how they are being treated, then officers will take the view of “why bother”. When this happens (and it’s already started!), discipline and standards slide downwards. It’s a natural thing to occur when the workforce do not feel valued by their leaders, and believe you me, at this moment in time, most police officers feel very undervalued and unwanted by this government. Officers feel that they are being battered left, right and centre, whether it be on our pay, conditions and pension, or the unwarranted attack upon “The Police” by the British media.

When I read stories about the failings at Hillsborough, Orgreave, the number of deaths in police custody, the Andrew Mitchell incident….(the list goes on) then I, a response constable in North Cornwall are made to believe that I am responsible for all of this and not the few individual officers involved. That is how the media report it, and are poisoning the public against us with their headlines. Do not underestimate how damaging this is upon us, especially when our own leaders, the Home Secretary or indeed the Minister for Police do nothing whatsoever to defend us.

Whatever the outcome of your enquiry into standards, leadership and integrity of the police, nothing will progress forward until something is done to improve our morale. Indeed, one of the manifesto pledges of the Devon and Cornwall PCC was to improve the morale of its officers.

Mr Vaz made a very good point recently in a press article, and that is if you are pushing major organisational change and reform through, you need to take your workforce with you to ensure its success. The government’s attitude towards police officers at this time has demoralised us so much, that their reforms are being pushed through without us, and if you haven’t got the ones you need to make the reforms a success with you, then it will fail.

2, The lady from the Black Police Association raised the question about the imbalance of minority groups within the police. My observation here is as follows.

In the last 15 years or so, entry standards in the police (both academic and fitness) have been significantly lowered as it was felt that it was preventing minority groups from joining. Tom Winsor’s proposals for entry standards are that recruits must now have at least 3 A level qualifications and pass a fitness test which will soon encompass a military style assault course. The Police Federation have already raised concerns about this, as by its very nature, will exclude certain good quality recruits, who would make excellent police officers and represent the community they serve, but will be excluded because they don’t hold academic qualifications, or meet the high fitness criteria. If you apply the same problems

161 we had 15 years ago, when the then high standards did not attract minority applicants, to those of Tom Winsor’s, then will the same problems not reoccur ?

Mr Vaz mentioned that he would welcome comments and input from front line officers such as myself to assist your enquiry. I am very passionate about the vocation I took up 16 yrs ago, and passionate about giving the best to the communities I serve. I have many more observations from the practitioners point of view which, if you feel would benefit your investigations then I would be most willing to help in any way I can.

Again, many thanks for yesterdays opportunity.

Colin Taylor

January 2013

162

Written evidence submitted by Detective Constable Allen Jordan [LSP 28]

Firstly can I thank you for the invitation to attend [the Committee’s international conference on leadership and standards in the police service], I found it very interesting and informative.

I was unable to ask questions at the time but having reflected on the content of the conference would like to make the following observations which I think may be worth considering when the committee next meet.

I was interested and pleased to hear a number of the speakers making comment about the fact that police officers should have the right training and tools to do the job and the fact that the training should be done by accredited trainers and should form part of ongoing professional development. My only concern with this, with the 20% cuts already made is when are officers going to have the time to be abstracted to complete this training. Logistically at this present time officers would in my opinion struggle to be abstracted from their current role to fulfil this training need without incurring overtime costs ?

I would also make mention about the issue of integrity which was at the forefront of the issues raised by many of the speakers. My observation with this are twofold.

Is integrity going to suffer due to the suggested police pension reform ? Officers who may have been tempted with corruption in the past have always looked at what they could lose, and the pension was a huge financial incentive to ‘keep your nose clean’. Will this still be the case? Financially, officers of a certain age/career level (12-15 years for example) are now finding themselves in some cases £300,000 worse off with having to work an extra 10 years for this reduction! That as I am sure you would agree is a lot of money to try and salvage especially if mortgages and other savings were dependant on it ?

This brings me on to my second observation – Are the government doing too much too soon ? Well in my humble opinion it is YES ! Yes there are savings to be made and Yes I would agree that the police force could work more efficiently and effectively but making so many changes over a short period of time has destroyed the morale within the police force. Why for example make changes to officers pensions when they thought they were over half way through their service ? And why do it in a way that means the government HAVE to change the law to implement it ? We serve the Queen and enforce the law, yet can then be told that the Government can change it to suit !

Surely bringing in a new pension is something that should be done for new recruits who know what the terms and conditions of a pension they are joining ? I for one do not moan or have any issues with the housing / rent allowance officers get – I joined after this time and knew (well, thought I knew) what I was entitled to.

The Right Hon Keith VAZ said good leadership was representing and listening to the rank and file officers, and that officers should not be afraid to tell the leaders when they are making mistakes or doing things wrong. Well in my opinion this is the Governments’ mistake!

If changes need to be made then make them, but make them fair for EVERYONE ! £300,000 pounds loss overnight due to a decision made by the Government does not seem FAIR or RIGHT to me.

Yes I am one of these officers, who now has to work for a further 11 years in a job that, as was explained in the conference is a vocation. I just hope I have the stamina to keep going for the full 41 years. 163

I will continue to work as hard as I can for the police service and will strive to continue with my professional development which has been thwarted due to the cuts made. I am still a keen and enthusiastic officer but cannot deny that my motivation and morale has been ‘dented’ over these latest proposals.

Again thank you for the opportunity to attend.

For info - £300,000 = 11 extra years full pension contributions (at least £51,000) (reduced commutation to approx £70,000 a reduction of £55,000) / 11 years of not receiving a pension that I had signed up for approximately £198,000) not to mention the interest that could have been made on my commutation or the fact I now need to remortgage to cover the deficit that would have been paid by this.

Detective Constable Allen Jordan

January 2013

164

Written evidence submitted by Vicky Robinson [LSP 29]

I attended yesterday's police leadership conference and at the end Keith Vaz suggested those with comments could email them. I hope this is the right address for that.

I have worked in policing as civilian support staff since I left university and was a cadet before then. I have been privileged to work in several forces supporting the development of management understanding and performance management.

I listened with interest to the views regarding direct entry but feel there is a point that never gets raised. This is probably reinforces the original view. There are some amazingly talented specialist civilian managers within the police service, however without the police rank they are often not given the authority they deserve. Direct entry, in my opinion, is reinforcing this notion that you have to hold a warrant card to be an effective police leader. If more was done to effectively integrate and understood the role of civilian staff, particularly at a senior level, direct entry would not be required. Vicky Robinson

January 2013

165

Written evidence submitted by Gary Jackson [LSP 30]

I was a delegate at the above event on 14th January 2012, I am a serving Police Sergeant with 20 years’ service, firstly I would like to thank The Rt Hon Keith Vaz for inviting me following my initial correspondence to him regarding a number of concerns I have regarding the changes to the Police Service, in particular the changes to pay and conditions and for me personally the draconian changes to the Police 1987 Pension and unconstitutional changes to legislation to make those changes effective.

I ask that he is sent a copy of this email.

It was apparent at the event that it is the current Governments intention in my own personal opinion to change the Police Service so much that it will eventually lose its position of being one of the most respected in the world.

I was reassured to see firsthand however that The Rt Hon Keith Vaz and some other influential people still understood and respected the unique role of the Police Constable, and that they will obviously continue to support our role in society, I thank him and the others for that.

I have copied below a lengthy account that is on web page on Face Book called ONE POLICE UK, the story is true, I know this because I was one of those officers involved, the Government needs to understand the thousands of comments this story is getting at this time it reflects the true picture, what is important to know it what happened straight after the incident concluded, all officers including myself went straight back to calls for service attending numerous more 999 calls before being late off without taking any meal breaks, it was 8 hours into this shift before I even got a drink! the Government really need to consider what they are doing. Police Officers everywhere go above and beyond their duties because that's why they joined the service often to the determent of themselves and their families everyday 24/7.

Gary Jackson January 2013

Annex

More than just 'Crime Fighters'? Please take the time to read this ‐

SHORTLY before 1500hrs on New Year’s Day (01 January 2013) a call was made to the police reporting a body being found on the banks of the River Humber, Close to Welton Waters, in Welton. To get to the location, officers first on scene had to walk a considerable distance in extremely bad under foot conditions to get to the remote location.

Once at the scene a man’s body was sadly discovered and an undertaker and Yorkshire Ambulance Service NHS Trust were immediately requested.

Due to the closing light and impending high tide expected that evening the evidence was secured and the gentlemen’s body was removed by officers in the dark and in hazardous conditions to a safer setting.

At this point the undertaker, David XXXX and his associate had arrived at the safer location and were in the process of carrying out their work. As the officers were making their way back to their police vehicles around three quarters of a mile away from Welton Waters, 51‐year‐old Mr XXXX, the undertaker suddenly collapsed as he was walking.

The officers could see Mr XXXX was having a massive seizure and had stopped breathing. The officers at the scene were faced with one body already and Mr XXXX

166 fighting for his life, suffering a heart attack with no pulse. Fortunately, the paramedic who had been called to certify the initial death was able to get back to his vehicle for the equipment he required.

The police officers and Mr XXXX's associate immediately started CPR and spent around the next hour, rotating turns to keep him alive. The CPR was coordinated by two officers, whilst the remaining six officers took turns to provide CPR and oxygen into Mr XXXX's lungs.

Helicopter assistance was the only option available due to the location Mr XXXX had collapsed, being inaccessible to most vehicles.

Mr XXXX was airlifted via the Sea King helicopter to Hull Royal Infirmary accompanied by the ambulance service paramedic. Whilst on the 7‐minute flight CPR was continued by the aircraft crew and a pulse was eventually found as they came to land.

An advanced radio message had been relayed to Hull Royal Infirmary and this ensured that a medical 'crash team' was waiting to receive Mr XXXX at the hospital's helipad. As soon as the Sea king touched down, the crash team took the undertaker into the hospital's emergency treatment room.

Mr XXXX was taken to the High Dependency Unit at Hull Royal Infirmary for several days, before being transferred to Castle Hill Hospital for further care. Inspector Phil North who was an integral part of the life saving mission visited Mr XXXX at his bed side on Saturday 05 January, where he was said to be sat up chatting with his family and had no recollection of any of the events that night.

The Consultant who dealt with David XXXX as he was rushed to Hull Royal Infirmary indicated to Mr XXXX's family that the actions by those involved had been outstanding and it was through those actions he was still alive.

Inspector Phil North said: “All the individuals involved in this incident acted with complete professionalism with an absolute desire to do everything possible to keep Mr XXXX alive. I was proud to see all the agencies working together in such difficult circumstances. Seeing Mr XXXX sat in his hospital bed alive and well will be something I and all other officers who helped keep Mr XXXX alive will never forget.

"Paramedic, John Dunwell who had attended the initial scene to certify the death, described the actions of the officers performing CPR as 'absolutely top notch’. What my team and self experienced that night will stay with us for a very long time and am delighted Mr XXXX is making a steady recovery."

Divisional Commander for the East Riding, Chief Superintendent Rich Kerman said: “I am very proud of the police officers and paramedic who attended this incident for their prompt response when Mr XXXX collapsed. All our police officers receive regular first aid training and their actions in this case helped to save a life. I am proud of them all. I also wish to send my best wishes to Mr XXXX and his family and hope he makes a speedy recovery."

Aircraft Captain Lieutenant James Bullock described the scene he saw on arrival at the incident site: "Landing on the access track would have been the most obvious place, but it would have made it considerably more difficult for the team carrying the casualty to the helicopter. We therefore made a crew decision to land close to the area. Due to the soft, muddy ground, I held the air crafts weight on the rotors to ensure that the helicopter didn't get bogged down. This allowed the casualty to be loaded on board swiftly and minimised the time needed to get him to hospital. This rescue incident was a superb example of teamwork, with all the people with the essential, life‐saving skills needed to sustain the casualty's life were in place.

167 “With every second being vital, the casualty was carefully carried on a stretcher, borne by members of Humberside Police, into the waiting Sea King helicopter. Once on board, the ambulance paramedic continued to coordinate the undertaker's medical care and CPR during the short, 7 minute flight to Hull Royal Infirmary. It was during the final few minutes of this flight that the undertaker started to show signs of life by breathing unassisted; however he continued to receive intensive medical care.”

RAF winchman/medic, Sergeant Matt Fowler described the care: "The police recovery team on‐scene had some very highly‐trained medics and the care the casualty received from them and the ambulance paramedic was the one factor that made all the difference. The ambulance paramedic did a superb job of managing the care and specialist treatment before we arrived and also throughout the short, 7 minute transit flight to Hull Royal Infirmary. This was a textbook operation."

Mr David XXXX is due to have a triple heart bypass next week.

I wish Mr XXXX a speedy recovery, and want to say a massive WELL DONE to everyone involved. The officers were a credit to the uniform, as was the paramedic, helicopter crew, and hospital staff. Fabulous team work.

Just 'crime fighters'? We are MUCH more than that!

Gary Jackson

January 2013

168 Memo to From Viv Nicholas Steve McCabe MP Date Monday 14th January 2013 Mark Reckless MP

International Conference on Leadership and Standards in the Police

Seven observations having attended the whole of today’s excellent session :‐

(1) Expectations of the public. Keith Vaz’s introduction from the chair was very well crafted but I would like to develop the theme regarding public expectations. Mr Vaz identified that the public will have expectations of the police and also a concern on how much they are paying for the police. My own experience over the last 20 years is that we are seeking to move to higher ground than ‘policing by consent of the public’ to ‘policing with the cooperation of the public’ and if that is a realistic and appropriate expectation – then we should also be aiming to articulate some thoughts on what the police can expect of the public.

(2) Whilst it is appropriate to question and challenge the leadership and standards in the police – my personal view is that there is much to commend within the current policing culture. Over the past few years – I had the opportunity to train as an external, independent assessor and then serve on two senior management assessment courses at Bramshill Police College and was very impressed with both the process and standards of the police staff both organising and participating in the exercise.

(3) I would urge some caution in seeking to devolve the current research and training tasks undertaken by the police and associated agencies to academe. My personal experience is that academics have an especially heightened sense of their own culture and interests and often have difficulty in undertaking genuinely collaborative work with other organisations.

(4) Procurement. I served as an independent member of Thames Valley Police Authority from 2005‐9 and took a particular interest in the transfer of custody management to the private sector. This facet of policing is both critical and has a high reputational risk and I remain doubtful as to whether there were any benefits associated with this – and most other – aspects of policing that have been transferred to private providers. The number of providers is small and whilst a saving might be apparent in the short term – I have yet to see any evidence that savings and/or efficiencies are gained in the mid‐ and long‐term. Clearly such policies should be evidence driven as opposed to being dogma driven.

(5) The evidence from Singapore included a very signicant observation – some criminals are always operating at the leading edge and are ahead of most legitimate businesses and the police. It is therefore imperative that the police have the preparedness and ability to attract the very best talent in order to successfully combat new criminal practices.

169 (6) The audience today made several strong contributions challenging the progress being made to ensure the optimum representation within police staff in terms of gender and race. Whilst the capacity to make progress is limited at the present time due to a slow down in recruitment – I would suggest that additional effort is expended in the areas of police cadets and specials – which need not always be undertaken with a view to future employment – but can help to develop the understanding as to the challenges associated with policing within the wider community.

(7) I have not been an advocate of the appointment of Police and Crime Commissioners but today started to develop the view that we should perhaps be prepared to allow the initiative to run for three to four election cycles. I suspect that a quick observation can be made to as to the paucity of genuinely independent candidates in this first round which was dominated by elected politicians or past police staff. The importance of induction training was stressed throughout the day – should we be prepared to offer appropriate training to prospective PCC candidates?

170

Written evidence submitted by Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe QPM, Metropolitan Police Commissioner [LSP 32]

Thank you for your letter dated 9 January 2013, received in my office on the 17 January, following my appearance at the Home Affairs Select Committee on 8 January 2013.

I am aware that by now you will already have received a letter of response, dated 11 January, from Deputy Assistant Commissioner Pat Gallan answering your questions regarding Operation Alice.

Please find below additional information which I had agreed to provide the Committee.

1. Has the Metropolitan Police Service retained Ibrahim Magag's passport?

In relation to the retention of Mr Magag's passport I can confirm that we continue to hold this document, which has been in our possession since he became subject to the TPIM notice. I am aware that the Home Secretary has also written to you regarding this matter.

We are continuing with our efforts to locate and apprehend Magag as quickly as possible.

2. What is the MPS doing to deal with the importation of stun guns in to the UK?

Tackling gun crime and the supply of firearms, including tasers, is a priority for the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). Where we have intelligence on the possession and use of these weapons, we will use all appropriate tactics to take them off our streets and keep the public safe.

Over the past three years we have seen the number of reported crimes in which a taser has been used fall from 94 in 2010, 58 in 2011 to 53 in 2012. The number of tasers we have seized has also reduced significantly during this period, from 252, 150 to 122 over the same period. Most recoveries were by means of police intervention, primarily search warrants.

I attach for your information a further breakdown of crime types where a taser was used in London, as disclosed by the MPS under a recent Freedom of Information Act request.

While the numbers are relatively low and are reducing year by year, it is our view that the use of tasers in criminality in London is not a common problem and this picture is the same nationally. Parcel post is the preferred method of stun gun importation and bulk importation by air fright is on the increase.

The MPS and other forces across the UK continue to work jointly with the National Ballistics Intelligence Service, the UK Borders Agency and the National Crime Agency to take action against those involved in criminal activity involving firearms / stun guns and to suppress and prevent these weapons from entering the country.

In the last 18 months, the MPS have undertaken numerous such joint operations in relation to postal importation of firearms. These deployments, at large postal hubs, targeted the importation of firearms and led to the seizure of a number of firearms/component parts and ammunition. As recently as last week, a joint operation with UK Borders agency led to the recovery of 13 illegal stun guns, which were destined for London. This operation is still ongoing. Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe QPM, Metropolitan Police Commissioner

23 January 2013

171

Written evidence submitted by Deputy Chief Constable Simon Edens, ACPO lead on anti-social behaviour [LSP 33]

Thank you again for the opportunity to give evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee on 8th January 2013 in the session on Leadership and Standards in the Police Service.

During the session that afternoon you asked me a number of questions about the register of police officers' business interests which we hold here in Leicestershire. I was unable, at the time, to provide you with any details about the number of officers on the register; I am now pleased to provide you with that detail.

Leicestershire Police's register currently shows that 353 police officers (17% of the force establishment of police officers) have been authorised to pursue business interests and additional occupations.

Police staff (employees who are not sworn officers) are also covered by our policy and the register shows that 209 members (18% of police staff establishment) have been similarly authorised.

I have reviewed the uncorrected evidence transcript from the session and I would like to clarify the statement I made that 'the vast majority of second jobs on that list were people who owned property and were letting that property out... .'

Having now looked at the numbers in more detail and reconsidered this statement it is clear that it is the greatest proportion rather than the vast majority of entries in the register that relate to officers who own property and let it out (142 out of 353 listed). To put this in to context the next nearest category is 22 (Lecturer/trainers).

The figures for police staff show that just over a fifth (44 out of the 209 staff listed) is registered for owning and letting property.

I respectfully request that this matter is clarified in my evidence. Deputy Chief Constable Simon Edens, ACPO lead on anti-social behaviour

24 January 2013

172 Written evidence submitted by Professor Simon Holdaway [LSP 34]

1. This memorandum was prompted by following your Twitter account of the Home Affairs Select Committee’s recent conference about leadership and standards in the police service. Twitter was not an ideal means of communication to follow proceedings but sufficient to draw-out speakers’ main themes, which surprised and, in most cases, disappointed me. Chief officers who addressed the conference did not seem to be aware of new ideas on leadership and, importantly, academic research directly relevant to policing.

2. The conference was well publicised and had a high media profile, which might account for the lack of new ideas expressed by most speakers. Their preference was to find safety in old rather than promote novel ideas.

3. My evidence will focus upon leadership and its implications for the management of the police. Before doing that, I make one point about integrity in the police service. General statements of confidence characterised contributors’ talks. The two UK chief officers who spoke did not seem to be aware of Dr Louise Westmarland's important research about officers’ views on integrity and policing standards, which has been available for some time (Westmarland 2005). I interpret that as a lack of awareness of, or unwillingness to address in public, important matters directly related to police integrity. Apart from current and recent cases involving senior/chief officers, questions about police integrity directs attention to the working culture of the lower ranks, which is a matter of direct importance for chief officers but ignored by your speakers. This suggests that chief officers’ attention is directed to high profile integrity and, importantly, away from research of direct relevance to their task of leadership.

4. A starting point for police chief officers is to ask, ‘What kind of an organisation am I leading?’ The question needs addressing within the context of some basic features of leadership (and management, which is closely related) of constabularies.

These features are:

i. Police leadership is trying to influence officers’ somewhat ‘private’ actions. Managerial control diminishes lower you go down the rank hierarchy. Importantly, constables have significant freedom from managerial control and supervision (Stinchcome 1963). This long-standing research finding remains highly pertinent to contemporary policing. ii. A related feature is that despite being ordered in a hierarchy of rank, the police are not like the armed services or many other disciplined organisations. Chief officers do not issue orders that directly translate to lower-ranks’ compliance. Policy, law and other forms of direction are refracted through an enduring occupational culture (Holdaway 1983; Loftus 2009). Leadership should entail

173 awareness of this culture and its effects on the ways in which chief officers’ leadership is perceived and understood by lower ranks. It requires an acute awareness of the features of the police occupational culture. This would encourage a leadership style, and form of management, that address the influence and impact of occupational culture on what officers take for granted as ‘police commonsense’, itself a highly selective assemblage of ideas and related actions. iii. Many calls on the police service from the public are unrelated to crime (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3806299.stm). This fact runs counter to the Home Secretary’s understanding of police work but it is so. Chief officers are leading an organisation involved in solving diverse problems requiring skills of negotiation, peacekeeping, conflict resolution, discretionary use of the law and many other resources. In addition they must take account of the central place of other organisations, sometimes called ‘partners’, in the resolution of incidents and in policing more generally. iv. Leading/managing a constabulary is not like leading/managing a private sector business. The market for personal and collective security seems to be infinite; the consumption of goods and services related to it is not easily managed and not capable of satisfaction (Flemming and Grabovsky 2009). Policing by constabularies is bounded in a way other markets are not. Awareness of these limits is crucial for officers who lead and manage constabularies.

5. Some of the comments of the two chief officers addressing the conference can be considered in light of these fundamental features. My general point is that they did not speak in terms that suggested leadership is understood, considered or being developed with reference to the particular context outlined above. Leadership was viewed as important; as having effects on organisational structures; on officers’ motivation; as the work of chief constables. Alternative styles of leadership and their possible effects on constabularies and officers were not considered, meaning that the status quo was accepted a sufficient.

6. There may well be chief constables in post who have explored and perhaps developed what in managerial jargon is called ‘transformational management/leadership’, or some other more innovative form, which clearly implies an alternative practice and style. If there are such chief officers, it is interesting to note that the President of the Association of Chief Officers of Police (ACPO), who was speaking on their behalf, did not refer to their innovative leadership practices and styles, or their effects. The suggestion is that ACPO is not an innovative and, perhaps, representative organisation. Organisations seeking professional status often defend the status quo rather than challenge accepted wisdom.

174

7. If the College of Policing is to become an organisation fostering innovation in leadership it needs to embrace ideas advocated by members of institutions and organisations lying beyond police boundaries. This would entail clearly engaging with the particular context of policing outlined here and consideration of new practices that address it. The college will also need to draw on the work of innovative police leaders who perhaps do not strongly identify with ACPO, and engage them fully. Importantly, the Governing Board should ensure that it challenges any sign of an inward-looking, taken for granted approach to ideas, even if they appear to be novel.

8. Effective police leadership requires officers well informed about the latest academic research of relevance to policing. Every constabulary needs someone in a post who can identify such work and inform chief and other senior officers about its application to their constabulary. At the conference, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police said that ‘policing needs an academic base’ and that one way to develop this would be for constabularies to part-fund Chairs in Police Studies.

9. What a remarkable statement considering that an academic research foundation for policing has existed for thirty or so years. There are many academics, including a good handful of professors, who specialise in the police. Centres for ‘Police Studies’ (a name I do not find helpful), are in place. My concern is that your chief officers seemed not to be aware of crucial resources that would inform much of their work, including their leadership of a constabulary, even though they were representing their colleagues at a high profile conference.

10. Moreover, these comments are all the more pertinent in view of the Commissioner’s own indication of his leadership style. When appointed Commissioner, he announced that he was engaging in ‘a war against crime’, as he had done when he was appointed Chief Constable of Merseyside. Consulting research evidence would inform him that crime has reduced nationally during the last years; that the idea of police engaging in a ‘war’ is hardly appropriate imagery to encourage effective neighbourhood policing; that public views of crime levels are likely to be distorted by it; that one central value of the occupational culture in need of reform is the notion that police work is centrally about crime rather than a more considered practice of prevention, work with other agencies and members of the public; and that a ‘war’ on crime can never be won.

11. The College of Policing has been given the task of disseminating research findings considered directly relevant to policing. This requires a number of conditions within constabularies. Chief officers have to be open to and

175 appreciative of the consideration of social science research findings. Lower ranks need to accept that there is ‘best practice’ and should be aware of it, moulding best practice within the local context; A narrow, ‘scientific’ view about the validity of social science research should be avoided. If it is not avoided crucial research of direct relevance will not be identified and police work will be less effective. Equally, the idea that solutions to police problems from research can be taken from, as it was, a supermarket shelf of findings and applied directly to practice should be avoided. This does not prohibit the use of findings, not by any means; it does mean that police leaders should encourage and monitor how ideas from research are applied to the particular contexts within which they are more or less pertinent.

12. There is a tendency in the police to respond to immediate matters rather than follow a strategic approach to long term, often underlying subjects of importance. It was almost by accident that the subject of the ethnic diversity of ACPO ranks was mentioned at the conference. I have conducted Home Office and ESRC funded research about ethnic relations within constabularies for over 15 years, relating my work directly to police policy and practice in three books (Holdaway 1991; Holdaway and Barron 1997; Holdaway 2009). One important factor in the history of ethnic diversity within the police is how it captured chief officers’ attention for a good number of years following the Lawrence Report and then tailed off. Strong leadership in this area of work, based on relevant research and a clear notion of positive action, should be commonplace to chief officers. Many years ago the Home Office published guidance from academic research to inform practice in this area but, again, interest in it declined and we find a situation in which there is a deficit of minority ethnic officers holding chief officer rank (Home Office 1989).

13. My view is that the urgency with which the ethnic composition of the police workforce has become a matter of immediate attention and action is of concern. Pressing action is required but this is no substitute for a long-term strategy, including awareness of existing diversity of the police workforce and a need to increase this. Chief officers need to discuss and develop strategy with their minority ethnic officers and support staff; they need to draw on the experiences of erstwhile minority ethnic officers, not least to ask about a suitable leadership style that embraces the whole of the workforce and is sensitive to minorities within it.

14. Finally, a point about ACPO. As an academic I have observed policing for over 40 years. As a Police Authority member I have played my part in appointing chief officers and in rendering a constabulary accountable for its performance. One very clear aspect of policing evident from this work has been to observe how the majority of officers seeking promotion to chief officer posts associate themselves with ACPO committees and are in all but name sponsored by chief officers who serve on those committees. It has also been apparent to me that the majority of candidates for chief officer posts have

176 (how can one put it) been in the ACPO mould. My view is that this has, unintentionally, tended to stifle imaginative and innovative approaches to police leadership.

15. Recent changes, not least the removal of ACPO and HMIC from the chief officer selection process, should influence for the good but I am not sure about that. For example, the College of Policing could easily slip into the propagation of evidence-based policing as a form of rhetoric that chief officers use but do not consider carefully. Time and again I have heard chief and other officers talk about research evidence (sometimes put as ‘the science behind this’) to support policing, without an apparent understanding of how to evaluate evidence or the breadth of social science methods of research.

16. In light of the arguments presented in this paper, the College of Policing needs constantly to reflect upon its work. Crucially, a more reflective, self- critical, strategic practice of leadership should replace the historic, short-term approach of many officers. References

Flemming, J. and P. Grabovsky (2009). "Managing the Demand for Police Services or How to control and Insatiable appetite." Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice 3(3): 281-291.

Holdaway, S. (1983). Inside the British Police: A Force at Work. Oxford, Blackwell.

Holdaway, S. (1991). Recruiting a Multi-Racial Police Force. London, HMSO.

Holdaway, S. (2009). Black Police Associations: An Analysis of Race and Ethnicity within Constabularies. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Holdaway, S. and A.-M. Barron (1997). Resigners? The Experience of Black and Asian Police Officers. Basingstoke, Macmillan.

Home Office (1989). Equal Opportunities in the Police Service. 87/1989, Race, Policy.

Loftus, B. (2009). Police Culture in a Changing World. Oxford, OUP.

Stinchcome, A. (1963). "Institutions of Privacy in the Determination of Police Administrative Practice." American Journal of Sociology 69(2): 150-160.

Westmarland, L. (2005). "Police Ethics and Integrity: Breaking the Blue Code of Silence." Policing and Society 15(2): 145-165.

Simon Holdaway Emeritus Professor of Criminology and Sociology, Sheffield University and Professor of Criminology, Nottingham Trent University February 2013

177 Written evidence submitted by A. J. Wright [LSP 35]

Royal Commission in Policing in the United Kingdom

I write to you in your capacity as Chairman of the Select Committee established to look in to Police Accountability, integrity, internal corruption and malpractice which I understand is due to sit later this month.

May I say at the outset that I realise that you are a very busy man and I do not intend to burden you with a lengthy document but I feel passionately about policing in the United Kingdom and never in my life have I felt so despondent and so deeply concerned at what Government are doing to the Police Service that I do feel the need to make a number of points to you.

You should know that I retired from the Hertfordshire Constabulary as a Chief Superintendent, after thirty years of service, in December 2004. My last role was that of Area Commander for the Eastern area of the county which consisted of some 500,000 residents and roughly half of the geographical area of Hertfordshire. I commanded some 1300 officers and members of the Police Support staff.

In my latter years of service I was Silver Commander in respect of the Police negotiations that saw the peaceful resolution of the hijacking of an Afghan Airlines aircraft which was forced to land at Stansted Airport in February 2000 and I was also Silver Commander at both the Hatfield and Potters Bar rail crashes in 2000 and 2002 respectively.

I am currently the Secretary for the Hertfordshire Branch of the National Association of Retired Police Officers, although it is important for me to assert that I am acting entirely as a ‘private’ individual in respect of this letter. My wife retired in November 2012 after a lengthy career as a Hertfordshire Police Officer and my eldest son is a serving Detective Sergeant. My brother retired in 2008 after thirty years of service as a Police Officer with both the Hertfordshire Constabulary and the City of London Police.

I provide this information not to seek some sort of aggrandisement but merely to show that I am a highly experienced (albeit retired) Senior Police Officer with a deep understanding of policing in this country and as I have indicated above I am passionate about my former profession and indeed the exceptional men and women that serve our communities as Police Officers up and down the land.

I should also say that my letter will not refer to the current pay and conditions of serving officers or indeed the shameful Government attack on their pension arrangements about which I know you have some knowledge. I contend that that is a matter for another day and another discussion

Notwithstanding the above comment, it is precisely because you seem to be me to be prepared to ‘raise your head above the parapet’ and challenge some of the nonsense being proposed by the present Administration in relation to Pay and Conditions that I now turn to you for help and support.

I have touched very briefly on Pay and Conditions and as important as they are in attracting the right people to the Service and retaining experienced Officers, I consider there is a much greater and more insidious threat to the Police Service which the Government actually seems to be relishing and that is the almost total demoralisation of the Service. This is a ‘plan’ which

178 seems to me to have been implemented almost immediately after the Coalition Government was formed in May 2010.

I am very happy to elaborate on my views either in writing or verbally in the future and cite the clear evidence that exists to confirm that this is indeed the case but as indicated above I intend to keep this initial contact as brief as possible.

It may be helpful, therefore, if I provide a number of ‘bullet points’ which I believe set the scene for what I am genuinely concerned will eventually culminate in the dismantling of the Police Service of England and Wales as we know it. Ultimately the principles of Robert Peel, which have largely stood the test of time since 1829, will be consigned to the dustbin, sacrificed on the altar of privatisation and credit card policing by ‘operatives’ that are little more than Security Guards with the power of arrest, answerable and accountable only to the Board of G4S or some other ‘mate’ of the Tory Party.

(Incidentally, I have specifically not referred to the Scottish Police Service. My information and indeed personal observation is that the Scottish Government maintains and indeed clearly and publicly displays a respect for their Police Officers which has all but evaporated in England and Wales (see below) and that as a result Officers in Scotland generally feel valued and supported.)

Policing in England and Wales- January 2013- Some observations

1. The current government driven by the Conservative Party and in particular a number of Cabinet Ministers are determined to ‘sort the Police Service out’ and David Cameron, specifically, has a few scores to settle in respect of the failure of the discredited ‘Sheehy proposals’ of the early 1990’s with which he was closely connected.

2. As a result, a carefully orchestrated campaign has been launched to ‘rubbish’ the Service and to portray officers, particularly at junior level, as racist, lazy, incompetent, overweight ,overpaid and with their snouts firmly in the ‘Gold plated pension’ trough.

3. This campaign has been shamefully endorsed by certain national Newspapers, notably the Daily Mail which seems intent to perpetuate this nonsense on a daily basis. (Of course the Government cannot control the Press, well at least not publicly but the lack of ANY form of rebuttal of the more ludicrous rants by the news media from Government Ministers speaks volumes)

4. The appointment of Tom Winsor as HMI was a provocative and spiteful act by a Home Secretary who simply did it because she could despite the fact that Mr.Winsor is woefully unqualified for the post. Hardly the epitome of ‘Adult government’ or leadership. I know that you have major concerns at this appointment, Mr Vaz and to your credit you have actually had the courage to say so.

5. The Government and a number of SPADS employed to work in right wing think tanks have perpetuated the clear lie that the Police Service is resistant to change and is somehow stuck in the 1960’s. This is absolute nonsense and it is an insult to the thousands and thousands of officers that have experienced and embraced MASSIVE changes over the years. By the way I have literally lost count of the number of ‘Reviews’ I have been involved in and subject to since I was a young Constable in 1975. IT IS SIMPLY UNTRUE TO SUGGEST THAT THE SERVICE IS RESISTANT TO CHANGE.

179

6. Another lie being perpetuated by the Media and certain Government Ministers is that the Police Federation is the ‘Most militant’ union in the country. What absolute tosh! The Federation, in my view, has largely let their members down over the past two and a half years by the lack of action and lack of a well-articulated argument. To suggest that a Staff Association is ‘Militant’ when the members have NO means of withdrawing their labour or working to rule or applying any other type of pressure to make their point is ludicrous and actually rather pathetic.

7. On the subject of Staff Associations I believe it is also relevant to point out that in my view ACPO has become little more than a self- serving club which seems to have no other objective than to protect its members and appease which ever Political Party happens to be running the country at any given time. Their lack of support for ‘rank and file’ officers and lack of real engagement with the momentous issues affecting policing over the last five years or so has been lamentable.

8. I am not going to shy away from making mention of the Inquiry in to the Hillsborough Disaster and would not seek for one second to diminish the unimaginable grief and pain that the families and friends of those who died must be feeling. It is of course right that a thorough investigation in to all of the circumstances takes place and where the Police Service and the South Yorkshire Police in particular are found to have acted unlawfully then of course appropriate action should be taken. Incidentally, I expect the same robust investigation and where appropriate action to be taken against ALL of the other organisations involved in this tragedy including Sheffield Wednesday Football Club, who will have made a significant sum of money from the fixture, the Local Licensing Authority in Sheffield and the Firm of lawyers who advised the then Chief Constable.

I have made specific mention of Hillsborough because already it is being used as a stick to beat the Police Service with and will no doubt be cited as yet another reason to denigrate the entire Service.

May I just point out that the tragedy occurred almost 24 years ago. The vast, majority of current operational officers (Constables, Sergeants, Inspectors) currently serving in the South Yorkshire Police and indeed up and down the country would have been at infant or junior school in 1989 and a significant number would not even have been born. I look to those in authority, including you Mr.Vaz, to ensure that such officers are properly protected from the point scoring nonsense that will inevitably fall from the mouths of the Media and certain politicians as the investigation progresses.

9. Despite the fact that I could continue in the same vein, I consider it is now appropriate to bring my letter to a close. In summary Mr Vaz I believe that the relationship between the Government and the Police Service in 2013 has all but broken down or at the very least is so toxic as to be alarming.

Most Police Officers have lost confidence in a Government that they believe holds them in utter contempt. (By the way what a supreme irony it is that a body of people that almost to a person would have voted Conservative over many, many years are now likely to vote for ANYBODY with the ability to damage the Government at the next General Election. I, for one, will NEVER vote Conservative again).

Given that the Police Service feel unsupported and frankly after many years of political interference by successive governments and I include Labour Governments in this

180 assessment, utterly confused as to what is required from them, I believe the time has come for a Royal Commission in to Policing.

Glib and ludicrous comments from the Home Secretary such as ‘Your job is to cut crime, nothing more and nothing less’ reveals to me that she has an alarming and naïve notion of just what policing in the 21st Century is really about. If the Police have nothing to do but ‘Cut crime’ who, for example, will search for missing children and other vulnerable people? Who will stand on rain swept motor ways and assist in the removal of charred and broken bodies from burnt out vehicles? Who will police the hundreds and hundreds of demonstrations, marches and football matches ups and down the country? Who will provide reassurance at Airports and major Railway Stations? Who will protect the Houses of Parliament and Downing Street? Etc etc etc. Perhaps she would have G4S deal with these policing issues?

As you well know, the last Royal Commission in to Policing was undertaken in 1962, when you and I were six years old! I need hardly point out that the last fifty one years has seen monumental and unimaginable changes to every aspect of life in the United Kingdom and of course this includes policing.

I believe that the public are also similarly confused. Despite the advent of instant news, the Internet and a far more open society in terms of information there are still huge numbers of people who have absolutely NO idea of the pressures facing Police Officers or what in reality the job involves. Hugely enjoyable but pathetically unrealistic TV programmes such as ‘Midsommer Murders’ and ‘Lewis’ etc. have done nothing to show the viewing public that actually policing is not about solving murders in leafy lanes and beautiful university cities but is more about dealing with a broken society and the results of years and years of failure by successive governments. In 2013 Police Officers go to work each day knowing that they are quite likely to be assaulted, will almost definitely be vilely verbally abused and will be almost definitely be subject of complaint by a public that really do have no perception of the work officers do. (Bit like the experience of a Member of Parliament, I guess, except that MP’s, unlike Police Officers, are rarely subject of physical assault or murdered thankfully!)

I also accept without hesitation, by the way, that like any other occupation the Police Service has its share of thugs, bullies, racists and incompetents and no doubt a few who fiddle their expenses and claim for items they have no right to but despite what the Media would have the country believe the number of such miscreants is miniscule and the reality is that they are hunted down mercilessly and dealt with accordingly. There would certainly be no prospect whatsoever, for example, of a Police Officer who was found to have fiddled their expenses keeping his or her job.

I urge you, please, to do all within your power to progress the case for a Royal Commission. I see no other way to resolve what I believe has become a dangerous situation and one that will only degenerate further, particularly as I, like others, genuinely fear significant civil disorder in the months ahead as ‘Austerity’ and the deeply held sense of injustice felt by certain sections of Society bites more deeply.

The people of the United Kingdom deserve the best possible Police Service and the brave men and women performing that highly demanding task have every right to expect the support of HM Government and indeed the public they serve. I know such support has to be earned but a good starting point would be ‘Well just exactly what DO

181 the Public and the Government want from us?’ A Royal Commission would go a long way towards answering that question.

In conclusion, may I say that I am very happy for you to make use of all or any part of this letter as you see fit. I am also very happy to meet with you or a member of your team if you feel that I can be of any assistance in your work.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter.

A.J.WRIGHT (Mr) Retired Chief Superintendent- Hertfordshire Constabulary 1974 – 2004 March 2013

182 Written evidence submitted by Tim Passmore, Suffolk Police and Crime Commissioner [LSP 36]

Further to my attendance at the Home Affairs Committee yesterday, I thought it was important to clarify the issue of my staff costs with you and your fellow committee members.

It was incorrectly suggested that I have made substantial increases to the cost of my office compared to the previous Police Authority administration. I have nine staff posts in my office; the same as the predecessor Police Authority. These nine comprise 8.8fte; I have no deputies or other support. I am very open about all expenditure by this office and the details are clearly itemised on my website www.suffolk-pcc.gov.uk.

It is very important to be mindful that in making comparisons between PCC corporate budgets that they will, depending upon local practice, have varying constituent elements. Comparison therefore of the top line budget figures is unhelpful; the underlying elements need to be explored and understood.

My corporate budget is clearly set out on my website. The staff pay is £490K with on-costs of £157,500 and transport expenses of £11,500, which totals £659K.

For clarification, the figure of £1.7m, which you quoted, is in fact broken down as:

Employee Costs (salaries with on-costs & travel) £659,000

PCC Costs (salary with on-costs & travel) £107,000

Supplies & Services, fees and contingency £253,000

Internal & External Audit and Audit Committee £140,000

Community Safety Fund £600,000

You will appreciate that the £600K Community Safety Fund, awarded by the Home Office, is included in the budget. This fund is used to commission services that contribute to my police and crime objectives, and does not contribute directly to the running of the office. This year I have granted funds to the county’s five Community Safety Partnerships, the Suffolk Drug and Alcohol Action Team, Positive Futures and the Youth Offending Service.

Tim Passmore, Suffolk Police and Crime Commissioner May 2013

183 Written evidence submitted by Alan Hardwick, Lincolnshire Police and Crime Commissioner [LSP 37]

Thank you for inviting me to give evidence to the Committee.

I know you were pursuing a very specific line of questioning to facilitate the writing of your imminent report to the Home Secretary but I would welcome the opportunity to engage with you on wider policing and criminal justice issues, either as part of your work next year on Commissioners or outside of this should the opportunity arise.

On the immediate issues that you are considering, I would like to set out in writing my views regarding leadership and standards in policing.

I welcome the creation of the College of Policing and many of the recommendations Mr Winsor made with regard to both the professionalisation of the service and the concept of direct entry. We need to invest more heavily in developing the leadership capabilities of our police officers, particularly in organisational management, if we are to deliver efficient and effective policing in the modern age. We must make greater efforts to draw on expertise from outside the police profession, whether that be private sector or elsewhere in the public sector. Direct entry will only go a small way to facilitating this.

In terms of Standards, you will not be surprised that I take the view that the existing legislative framework for police officers requires review. In particular this is in the light of the recent high degree of scrutiny around the relationships police officers have with the media and the work HMIC carried out with regard to integrity. In the case of my own Chief Constable, you will be aware that there is some ambiguity about the role of CPOSA. I don't believe the general public would take the view that it is appropriate or desirable for the most senior police officers in the country to be involved in direct negotiations around employment disputes and compensation payments for other chief officers and "friends". CPOSA's role, what it should and shouldn't do, needs to be more clearly defined.

Given the Select Committee's concerns about decision making in the Police and Crime Panel it might be useful to you to understand a little more about the very different approach I took as Commissioner. I was supported by a very experienced private legal firm, Andrew and Co who had provided monitoring officer and legal services support to the Police Authority for many years and include a former Chief Executive of the Police Authority on their staff. They were supplemented by Counsel's advice as required. You will be aware the allegation came from a very senior and credible police source and who had shared it informally with HMI, IPCC, CPOSA the Home Office and other senior police colleagues before it reached us.

I consulted with IPCC prior to making the decision to suspend. My own IPCC Commissioner, Ms Amerdeep Somal, indicated in a telephone conversation that she had received a copy of the allegation letter sent to my Chief Executive, expected us to "record" the matter and refer it to the IPCC immediately and believed Mr Rhodes' conduct, if proven, was serious and potentially criminal. She specifically said she would not dissuade me from the course of action to suspend I ultimately took. I was aware that my decision so early in the life of PCCs would attract attention but having taken careful advice I could not ignore what is and remains a very serious allegation against my Temporary Chief Constable.

Like many Commissioners, I am concerned about the Home Secretary's plans to widen the remit of the Independent Police Complaints Commission. My own interaction with the IPCC relating to the allegation against my Temporary Chief Constable left me with the impression that the organisation is not fit for purpose for its current role. After I referred the matter to them there was a significant delay in receiving a formal response which, without the involvement of Deborah Glass and Dame Anne Owers, would have been completely contrary to the advice i had received from Ms Somal. It is not acceptable for organisations such as the IPCC to fail to be consistent in cases of police professional conduct. Police and Crime Commissioners must rely on their advice and support and uncertainty does nothing for public confidence and is unsettling for all involved.

Turning to wider issues, you will be familiar with the funding challenges we face in Lincolnshire. I have attached to this letter some key facts about our position, which I hope may be useful to you and fellow Committee members.

184 I know you are also familiar with our partnership with G4S and the importance of our collaborative activity among the PCCs and Forces of the East Midlands. As you are an MP in the region, I would very much like to extend an invitation to you to visit us and learn first hand our approach to maximising efficiency and effectiveness through our partnership working. Please let me know if you would wish to do this and we can arrange a mutually convenient time.

I hope we can meet again, either in Westminster or here in Lincolnshire in the not too distant future.

Alan Hardwick, Lincolnshire Police and Crime Commissioner May 2013

Annex Police Force Funding – England 2012/13

On average, local Council Tax payers funded 31% of the cost of policing in their local area – in Lincolnshire, however, local people funded 41% of the cost of policing.

This puts Lincolnshire people in the top quartile in terms of their local contribution towards policing, alongside Norfolk, Warwickshire, Gloucestershire, North Yorkshire, Dorset, Surrey.

In spite of the large contribution made by local people, spending on policing per head of population in Lincolnshire is the lowest in England at £154 per head of population.

185

Essex spends the 2nd lowest per head of population at £155 per person – but the people of Essex only contribute 34% of the total cost of policing.

If Lincolnshire was funded at the same level as Essex per head of population, more than £825,000 additional funding would be available – enough to fund 20 additional police officers.

186 Lincolnshire’s police grant funding per head of population is 35th in the English league table of 37 police force areas (excluding London) and there are 8 police force areas where grant per head is at least 50% more than Lincolnshire’s grant per head.

To highlight the extent of the funding differential, if Lincolnshire’s funding per head of population was commensurate with the contribution made by local people, i.e. top quartile, a further £27m would be available for policing in Lincolnshire. If Lincolnshire’s spend per head of population were only at the average for English forces this would imply an additional £17.5m.

Put another way, if all English forces (excluding London) spent at the same level per head of population as Lincolnshire this would produce a saving of in excess of £1bn set against the £5.5bn government grant provided to English forces (excluding London) through central government formula grant.

OPCC for Lincolnshire 9 May 2013

187 Written evidence submitted by Alex Marshall, Chief Executive, College of Policing [LSP 38]

Thank you for your letter of 1 May asking for information on the Certificate in Knowledge of Policing. I have responded to each of the questions you raise below. I have also included some brief background details.

The Certificate in Knowledge of Policing was introduced in April 2012. It was developed from the Curriculum of the Initial Police Learning Programme and accredits underpinning knowledge from the broader Diploma in Policing. The Diploma in Policing is the National Minimum Professional Qualification for a new constable and the Certificate is a means towards achieving the Diploma.

The Certificate was developed by the College of Policing with Skills for Justice, the Sector Skills Council. The qualification was developed in response to initiatives in police forces to offer a similar course but without appropriate external accreditation, which would not have had consistent recognition as learning towards the Diploma.

The Certificate enables individuals applying to the role of police constable to complete part of the Diploma in Policing prior to entry into the service. This allows candidates to take responsibility for their learning.

The College of Policing is working very closely with police forces and with providers to support the introduction of the Certificate. The College recognises that this is a new approach but to date there has been a very positive and engaged response from providers.

1. Who will issue these certifications? The Certificate is offered by three Awarding Organisations: City and Guilds; OCR; and Skills for Justice Awards. These are commercial organisations that approve local assessment centres to assess and award the Certificate. The learning required to achieve the Certificate is offered by these assessment centres, which are within Further Education, Higher Education and the independent sector.

The College has introduced an ‘Approved Provider Scheme’ to ensure that all providers are formally assessed and approved by the College as suitable providers, capable of the necessary rigour of both teaching and assessment. Providers will, from June 2013, be required to provide data every 6 months on the diversity profile of the recruitment and retention of candidates.

2. Who will require this certification? There is no national requirement for candidates to achieve the Certificate in Knowledge of Policing. A small number of police forces have introduced this requirement locally including the Metropolitan Police Service who has worked closely with the College. Most forces are likely to continue to operate a mixed entry arrangement at least until there are sufficient candidates holding the Certificate across the county.

3. The requirements to attain this certification There are currently no specific entry requirements for the course and qualification. Many of the current candidates are PCSOs and Special Constables. However, all

188 providers must make it clear to candidates that the qualification does not in any way guarantee success in recruitment to a police force.

4. The method of assessment for attaining this certification The Certificate is a modular qualification, made up of 10 units at Level 3 of the Qualifications and Credit Framework. It is assessed via a mix of methods including tests, open book assignments and closed book assignments. The Certificate is offered as full time, part time, evenings only and weekends only. There are currently no distance learning providers but it is expected that we will approve a distance learning provider.

5. How much this certification will cost The cost of awarding the Certificate currently varies between £750 and £1000 per candidate.

6. When this certification comes into force, and to whom it will apply The Certificate in Knowledge of Policing was introduced in April 2012. There is currently no national requirement for candidates to achieve the Certificate.

7. How applicants are expected to pay for this certification The qualification is approved for funding by the Skills Funding Agency (within the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills); arrangements for funding for individual candidates meeting the Skills Funding Agency criteria will be managed by providers. We will be monitoring the level of funding provided going forward.

8. Who made the decision to introduce this certification? In December 2011 the Association of Chief Police Officers Cabinet approved a strategy ‘Professional Entry for Policing’ which set out the benefits of the Certificate in Knowledge of Policing. Part of the rationale for the initiative is to align entry to policing more closely with other professions. The College of Policing is now responsible for this work and is actively supporting and assisting police forces and providers.

I hope the above of is of use. We would be pleased to provide further information as this initiative progresses.

Alex Marshall, Chief Executive, College of Policing May 2013

189 Written evidence submitted by Ray Wootten, Chair, Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel [LSP 39]

Re: Information requested at the Home Affairs Select Committee on Leadership and Standards in the Police held on the 14 May 2013

As requested at the Home Affairs Select Committee on Leadership and Standards in the Police on Tuesday 14th May 2013 I attach the written legal advice that I received from the Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel's Legal Adviser. I also attach a timeline of events from the initial suspension of the Temporary Chief Constable through to the Extraordinary Meeting of the Panel held on 9 May 2013.

The Home Affairs Select Committee also enquired as to how the legal adviser to the Panel was appointed. I would like to clarify the legal advice given was from the Monitoring Officer for East Lindsey District Council who host the Police and Crime Panel for Lincolnshire.

Following the oral evidence which I provided to the Committee I released a press statement to clarify the position regarding my testimony.

I believe that I inadvertently gave the incorrect impression that I was not allowed to hold an extraordinary meeting of the Police and Crime Panel. I now accept that this was incorrect.

The correct position is that I was given advice that it was not desirable to hold a meeting of the Police and Crime Panel to discuss the suspension of the acting Chief Constable whilst various legal and HR issues were still under investigation, for example the Judicial Review and the Sir Peter Fahy investigation, which is still on-going. It was important that we did not compromise those reviews.

Following careful consideration, as chairman, I decided not to hold a meeting earlier, which I still stand by. However, I did decide to hold a meeting on the 9 May to appoint the Task Group which will start work once the Sir Peter Fahy report is completed.

I have already apologised to the legal officer I referred to at the Select Committee. I am very sorry that this misleading impression was given, my only explanation was I felt under excess pressure at the hearing and did not explain the situation clearly enough.

I acted in good faith throughout. I gave evidence to the Select Committee in order to assist the matter. I held a meeting of the Panel on 9 May 2013 for the purpose of arranging a Task Group so that we are able to respond to the wider issue of performance as efficiently as possible at the correct time.

I will be standing down as Chairman of the Police and Crime Panel at the annual general meeting in June.

Councillor Ray Wootten Chairman of the Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel May 2013

Annex A

Legal Advice – 20 March 2013

190 As you say, the legislation is largely silent on this and I guess that is why the LGA guidance places so much emphasis on the need for the PCP and the PCC to agree a sensible working protocol on what information can and will be shared between them and when the PCP should sensibly be scrutinising decisions & actions of the PCC.

Has such a protocol been set up?

Presumably the PCC has complied with his statutory obligation formally to notify the PCP of the suspension (S38)?

I don’t think there has ever been a question of anyone saying the PCP cannot legally look at this decision – the question is whether it is sensible and safe for them to do so now. My strong advice remains that it is entirely premature for the PCP to look into the question of the suspension. In particular:

- The role of the PCP to review or scrutinise decisions /actions of the PCC is expressed in the Act as something they ‘must’ do (S28(6)). However this is not an unfettered power. They must (S28(2)) exercise this to support ‘the effective exercise of the functions of the PCC for the area’. - The relationship between the PCC and the CC is one of employer/employee. That brings with it the power to suspend and the power to dismiss – and the act sets out a number of processes which must be followed in those circumstances, some of which require the involvement of the PCP. The power to suspend does not require the involvement of the PCP, only their formal notification. - The relationship between the PCC and the CC is a governed by employment law, police regs, contractual issues etc. Suspension is not, as a matter of fact and law, proof of (or even an insinuation of) guilt, regardless of how it may be construed, and is a relatively routine ‘tool’ available to employers in the discipline of employees.

As I understand it, the suggestion is that the PCP wish to be assured that the PCC has been through proper process in undertaking the suspension. I am not told whether that wish for reassurance arises from any evidence or implication that he has not and, if so, where that came from. In reality the PCC could attend the meeting, say ‘yes I have followed proper process’. The issue is what do the PCP do then? Their role is to support the effective exercise of the functions of the PCC. I am sure it is not their wish to undermine his position as an employer and it would be difficult to see how an investigation by them at this stage if it were to come to the conclusion – supported by expert evidence or otherwise – that he had not actually followed proper process could in any way be construed as ‘supporting’.

A positive working relationship between the PCC and the PCP is essential – it can of course be robust but it must be positive. In my view, calling the PCC to a meeting to ask him to account for actions which he is entitled to take in law is not at all conducive to such a relationship. If the CC and those advising him feel the suspension was improper or the investigation and decision following it flawed, then they have rights as regards that. The PCP has a statutorily defined role if that decision leads to retirement/resignation/dismissal. It also has a clear scrutinising role if the CC takes legal action as regards the process and either wins

191 or loses, as part of its role of supporting the effective exercise of the PCC’s functions.

As set out above, my strong advice remains that the PCP should not hold a meeting and summon the PCC to account for his actions at this stage. I understand the PCP’s wish for assurance and would suggest a formal letter from the Chair asking for such assurance from the PCC.

I hope this helps – perhaps a conversation between Stuart Davy as C Ex of the ‘host’ authority and Cllr Wotton might help?

Let me know if you need anything else from me.

Eleanor

Annex B

Timeline for Home Affairs Select Committee

25th February 2013 (late evening)

The Lincolnshire Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) informed the Chairman of the Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel that he had suspended the Chief Constable and referred the matter to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).

26th February 2013

The Chairman of the Panel informed the Panel’s Corporate Support Officer that the PCC had suspended the Chief Constable. The Chairman requested that details be sought in regard to the Panel’s involvement in the suspension process.

The Panel’s Support Officer emailed the Panel’s Legal Adviser requesting a legal opinion on whether the Panel had any involvement in the suspension process under statute. It was confirmed that the Panel did not have any involvement in the suspension process.

The advice was emailed to Panel Members by the Panel’s Support Officer.

27th February 2013

The Panel received a letter from the PCC informing the Panel of the Chief Constable’s suspension.

The Panel issued the following press release:

‘The Panel has been informed by the PCC of the suspension of the temporary Chief Constable Neil Rhodes whilst potential conduct matters are being investigated by the IPCC. The Panel does not have any involvement with this investigation and it would be inappropriate for the Panel to make any further comment whilst the IPCC investigation is ongoing.’

192 2nd March 2013

The Chairman of the Panel emailed Panel Members to inform them that he had spoken twice to the PCC and that any information received from the PCC would be circulated to Panel Members to keep them informed of developments.

The Chairman of the Panel informed Panel Members that they would be required to hold a Meeting if the Chief Constable is called upon to retire or resign by the PCC.

11th March 2013

The IPCC issued a press release stating that whilst they believed the potential conduct matter required investigation it did not amount to serious corruption or misconduct which would merit an IPCC investigation. The matter was referred back to the Commissioner for local investigation and for him to determine the way forward.

13th March 2013

The Panel released the following press release;

‘The Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel was informed of the suspension of the Chief Constable on Tuesday, 26th February 2013. The Panel is unaware of the reason for the Chief Constable's suspension. It is understood that the Independent Police Complaints Commission has informed the Police and Crime Commissioner for Lincolnshire, Alan Hardwick, that they don't intend to investigate the matter further and that the matter is best dealt with locally. Until the local investigation is completed it is inappropriate for any further comment to be made by the Panel.’

14th March 2013

The PCC appointed the Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police Sir Peter Fahy as investigating officer. The PCC commented;

“I am pleased to appoint Sir Peter Fahy to conduct an independent and rigorous investigation and I look forward to receiving his findings in due course.”

The Chairman of the Panel was notified by the PCC of the appointment of Sir Peter Fahy to conduct the investigation.

The Panel released the following press release;

‘The Police and Crime Panel is aware of a local investigation being carried out into the Chief Constable, Neil Rhodes of Lincolnshire Police but is unaware of the circumstances surrounding his suspension from duty. The Police and Crime Panel’s role is to scrutinise the performance of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Lincolnshire to help ensure that policing remains effective in Lincolnshire. This scrutiny will be based on fact and not speculation. The Panel is not in a position to take a view on the matter until the Commissioner has concluded his investigation and an outcome is reached. Where an issue with performance is indentified we will hold the Commissioner to account.’

193

15th March 2013

The Panel wrote to the Commissioner to request that it be kept informed of the progress of the independent investigation and of any actions the Commissioner may take as a result of its findings.

16th March 2013

The Panel’s Support Officer received an email from the Chairman of the Panel asking for legal advice on interpreting section 28 (6) of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011.

18th March 2013

The Panel’s Support Officer emailed the Legal Adviser for clarification on section 28 (6) of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 and if this would support holding a Meeting of the Panel to investigate the issue further.

The Chairman of the Panel emailed the Panel’s Support Officer with advice which he had received from Mark Norris from the Local Government Association in relation to what powers the Panel have under the legislation.

19th March 2013

In response to the Panel’s letter sent on 15th March the Commissioner emailed the Panel stating that he would endeavour to keep the Panel informed of developments.

The Chairman of the Panel emailed Teresa May and the Minister responsible for Police and Criminal Justice for further advice regarding the legislation.

The Panel issued the following press release;

‘On behalf of the Panel, I have written directly to the Home Secretary, Teresa May, to make her aware of the current situation with the Chief Constable in Lincolnshire and to seek reassurance that the Panel’s view that it should scrutinise performance as opposed to operational process is correct.’

The Panel’s Corporate Support Officer telephoned the Chairman of the Panel to confirm that written legal advice had been sought from the Panel’s Legal Adviser and that a copy of the advice would be provided to the Panel.

The Chairman of the Panel emailed the Panel’s Corporate Support Officer to confirm that he and the Vice Chairman had agreed not to call a meeting until the Sir Peter Fahy investigation had concluded and would set up a Task and Finish Group after this date.

20th March 2013

Written legal advice received from the Panel’s Legal Adviser confirmed that the Panel could legally look at the PCC’s decision but that it was a matter of whether it is sensible and safe for them to do so now (The legal advice is attached).

194

The legal advice was emailed to Panel members by the Panel’s Support Officer.

The Chairman of the Panel requested that the Panel’s Support Officer write to the PCC asking for assurances regarding the protocol the PCC had followed in suspending the Chief Constable. The findings in the Judicial Review held on 26th and 27th March overtook the need for the letter seeking assurance from the PCC.

25th March 2013

The PCC informed the Chairman of the Panel of the reason for the suspension of the Chief Constable and that the details will be made public the following day.

26th March 2013

The Chairman of the Panel emailed Panel Members with details provided by the PCC on 25th March 2013.

Following the public release of information relating to the Judicial Review the Panel issued the following press release;

‘The role of the Police and Crime Panel is to scrutinise the performance of the Police and Crime Commissioner. Where a performance related issue is found to be affecting Policing in the county we will rigorously challenge the Commissioner and hold him to account. On behalf of the Panel, I have already written directly to the Home Secretary, Teresa May, to make her aware of the current situation with the Chief Constable in Lincolnshire and to seek reassurance that the Panel's view that it shouldn't be involved in an internal police investigations is correct. It would be inappropriate for the Panel to comment further at this time given the ongoing investigation.’

The Chairman of the Panel emailed Panel Members to confirm that an open meeting will be organised once the case has finished and that he has contacted the Home Office for advice and clarification.

27th March 2013

The Chairman of the Panel contacted the Panel’s Legal Adviser for further advice prior to the conclusion of the Judicial Review. The advice received states that the current legal action may not be the last of any legal action the Chief Constable may take against the PCC and also that the Judicial Review may state that the suspension was only unlawful due to a procedural defect which the PCC could correct and then re-suspend the Chief Constable. It outlines the risk of holding an extraordinary meeting during continuing legal proceedings and in the run up to County Council elections (The legal advice is attached).

The Panel released the following press statement:

‘The Police and Crime Panel is well aware of its responsibilities and they are to support the effective exercise of the functions of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Lincolnshire and to scrutinise the PCC’s performance. It is not the role of the Panel to challenge the Police’s internal HR processes. Where a performance related issue is found to be affecting Policing in the county we will

195 rigorously challenge the Commissioner and hold him to account. It would be inappropriate at this time for the Panel to comment further given the ongoing investigation.’

28th March 2013

The outcome of the Judicial Review which overturns the suspension of the Chief Constable is made public.

1st April 2013

The PCC announces that Neil Rhodes will continue as Temporary Chief Constable until the completion of the investigation into allegations about his conduct and any consequent procedures were complete.

The Chairman of the Panel received a letter from Damien Green MP the Minister for Police and Criminal Justice which clarifies that the legislation does not set out any specific power or procedure for the scrutiny of a decision to suspend a temporary chief constable, however, as mentioned the Police and Crime Panel has a wide remit to “review or scrutinise decisions made, or other action taken, by the relevant PCC in connection with the discharge of the Commissioner’s functions under section 28 (6) of the act”. The suspension of a Chief Constable is a decision or action falling within this review and scrutiny function.

The Chairman of the Panel requested the Panel’s Corporate Support Officer organise an Extraordinary Meeting of the Panel to take place on the 26th April to look into the effect the suspension of the Chief Constable has had on the performance of Lincolnshire Police and also to look at establishing a Task and Finish Group to look into the events surrounding the suspension of the Chief Constable. The Panel’s Corporate Support Officer highlighted to the Chairman of the Panel the legal advice given on 27th March which advised of the potential risks of holding a Meeting prior to the County Council Election.

2nd April 2013

The Chairman of the Panel emailed the Panel’s Corporate Support Officer requesting an Extraordinary Meeting of the Panel to take place on either the 9th or 10th May to avoid the County Council Elections.

3rd April 2013

The Chairman of the Panel emailed the Panel’s Corporate Support Officer stating that the PCC has informed him that the initial report of the Sir Peter Fahy investigation should be ready in the next two weeks.

4th April 2013

The Chairman of the Panel emailed the Panel’s Corporate Support Officer requesting an Extraordinary Meeting of the Panel for the sole purpose of looking at establishing a Task and Finish Group to look into the events surrounding the suspension of the Chief Constable.

5th April 2013

196

The Chief Executive of East Lindsey District Council wrote to the Chairman of the Panel. The letter summarised the advice received and asked the Chairman to confirm which date he wished the Extraordinary Meeting to take place on.

8th April 2013

The Panel Support Officer emailed the Chairman of the Panel to seek clarification over which date the Extraordinary Meeting is to take place on. The Chairman of the Panel replies that he has asked members for their preference and given them 1 week to respond.

14th April 2013

The Chairman of the Panel emailed the Panel’s Corporate Support Officer calling for an Extraordinary Meeting of the Panel to be held on Thursday 9th May at East Lindsey District Council to consider setting up a Task and Finish Group to look into the events surrounding the suspension of the Chief Constable Neil Rhodes.

29th April 2013

The Chairman of the Panel received an email from the Second Clerk to the Home Affairs Select Committee to call the Chairman of the Panel to give oral evidence about the work of the Police and Crime Panel on Tuesday 14 May at 3.30pm in the House of Commons, Westminster.

9th May 2013

An Extraordinary Meeting of the Panel is held. The Panel agreed to establish a Task Group to “examine the events surrounding the decision by the Police and Crime Commissioner for Lincolnshire to suspend the temporary Chief Constable, Neil Rhodes, from duty, to enable the Panel to ascertain whether any lessons may be drawn there from”

Members of the public are inadvertently excluded from the Panel Meeting. The Chairman of the Panel and East Lindsey District Council staff apologise to the members of the public. The Chairman of the Panel provided information on what the Panel had agreed to members of the public.

East Lindsey District Council issued an apology to the members of the public excluded from the Meeting and to the journalists present. The apology is later reported in the local media.

197 Written evidence submitted by AC Cressida Dick, Metropolitan Police [LSP 40]

I am responding to your letter of 25th April 2013, in which you ask for a written update on the progress of Operations Elveden, Weeting and Tuleta. In the letter addressed to DAC Kavanagh, you ask seven questions which I deal with in order.

I am also responding, in this letter, to the three questions you ask of the Commissioner in subsequent correspondence, dated 9th May 2013. The response I give to question six seeks to provide you with the specific information you request.

Question 1 - Details of arrest and prosecutions to date. The total of arrests across all operations currently stands at 121, and can be broken down as follows, Operation Elveden 65, Operation Weeting 36, Operation Tuleta 20. To date there have been 5 convictions, 31 charges, 69 suspects bailed for further enquiries and 16 people informed that there will be no further action taken against them. The convictions are for Misconduct in a Public Office and relate to four police officers and one prison officer. The main Operation Weeting trial has been listed for 9th September 2013; the CPS is in the process of considering whether Operation Elveden defendants and/or Operation Sacha defendants (perverting the course of justice) should be joined to the Operation Weeting trial.

The arrest and charge figures are correct as at 22nd May 2013. It is likely there will be further increases in these figures by 9th July 2013, when I am due to give evidence at the Home Affairs Select Committee.

Question 2 - An update on your estimate of the number of victims of phone and computer hacking. Operation Weeting estimate that there are 3,700 "potential victims" of phone hacking, in that their names and phone numbers are in the hacking related material that police hold.

Of that total there are just over 1,000 "likely victims", where there is an additional indication that they may actually have been hacked. This includes, for example, recordings of voicemail messages and details of Personal Identification Numbers. The numbers are still subject to some change as the evidence is developed.

Operation Tuleta has recorded 154 allegations of computer hacking, of which evidence has been found to substantiate 59 of those complaints.

Question 3 - Your policy regarding leaks by police officers to the press where no payments have been made.

Operation Elveden's terms of reference are "to investigate alleged criminal offences that police officers or public officials have accepted money for supplying information to journalists". The terms of reference have not been changed, however when suspected criminal wrongdoing that does not include payment comes to light it cannot be ignored.

Of the 64 arrests made on Operation Elveden, only one has been where payment is not a feature of the investigation. It is difficult to comment further on this issue without potentially prejudicing future prosecutions.

I would seek however to emphasise that it is in the public interest that police and the media have an open and honest relationship and the MPS actively promotes this on a daily basis.

Question 4 - A proposed time line for each investigation.

New evidence continues to be uncovered in all three investigations. For example, Operation Weeting has recently made new arrests in connection with both News International Newspapers and Mirror Group Newspapers. The length of all three investigations will be

198 dependent on the evidence uncovered, the level of cooperation being provided by the newspapers being investigated and resourcing levels.

Numerous case files are in the process of being constructed for consideration by the CPS and, without pre judging their charging advice, there is the potential for further trials in the future. Where defendants have already been charged the CPS is considering the composition and order of trials as there is, at times, a cross over in evidence between investigations.

All of the factors mentioned have implications for the time each investigation will take to reach a conclusion, and there are at present too many variables to make an accurate prediction. I can say however that the investigations have been provided with funding up until April 2015.

Question 5 - Costs to date and estimated costs for each operation.

In 2011/12 the investigations cost £9 million and in 2012/13 £11.3 million, making the cost to date £20.3 million. The costs are as follows:

• Operation Weeting - £13 million, • Operation Elveden - £5.7 million, • Operation Tuleta - £1.6 million.

The budget forecast for 2013/14 is £12.4 million and for 2014/15 is £6 million.

Question 6 - Staffing and leadership arrangements.

The total staff allocated to the three operations in 2012/13 was 195; the total for 2013/14 has been reduced to169.

Each operation has a detective superintendent in the role of senior investigating officer. A detective chief superintendent oversees the three investigations and reports to Commander Neil Basu.

Neil was recently appointed to the role, with the departure of DAC Kavanagh to become Chief Constable of Essex. I continue to be the Management Board Lead so Commander Basu reports to me, as did DAC Kavanagh and DAC Akers. Neil is in the process of meeting with the senior investigating officers for each of the operations, and will, as his predecessors did, keep me regularly updated.

Question 7 - Any other information you consider relevant . The issue of the proportionality of police action when arresting journalists has been the subject of some critical media comment. In response, on 26th March 2013, I wrote to the Executive Director of the Society of Editors. For ease of reference I have attached a copy, as it sets out the police response to the issues raised.

I do hope that this summary provides you with the clarification you are seeking; I look forward to updating the committee further on 9th July 2013. Please bear in mind that the figures I have quoted in this letter may have changed by that time. In the meantime, if you require any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact this office.

Cressida Dick Assistant Commissioner Metropolitan Police Service May 2013

199 Annex A

Letter from AC Cressida Dick to Executive Director of the Society of Editors, 26 March 2013

I am writing to you concerning the Metropolitan Police investigation into allegations of inappropriate payments to police and public officials (Operation Elveden) which is running in conjunction with the Operation Weeting phone-hacking inquiry.

In the light of some recent reporting and commentary about Operation Elveden I thought it would be helpful to reassure editors on a number of points. I am sure you will understand that for legal reasons I will not refer to current active cases.

I believe it is important to remember that we are not investigating victimless crimes nor has the remit of Operation Elveden been extended to any police officer who has simply spoken with a journalist, as has been suggested. The investigation is about police officers and public officials who we have reasonable grounds to suspect have abused their positions in return for corrupt payments. However when suspected criminal wrongdoing that does not involve payment comes to light it cannot be ignored.

The investigations being carried out do not mean that the Met wants or intends to stop officers talking to journalists. Providing it is above board and follows the straightforward guidelines that have been in place for many years, police officers interacting with journalists are not matters for Operation Elveden. It is in the public's interest that police and the media have an open and healthy relationship and we actively promote this on a daily basis.

Some commentators have drawn inaccurate conclusions about our motives, perhaps because they are not (quite properly) privy to the reasons why individuals have been arrested. Those of us who do know the facts will not discuss them as this could prejudice potential criminal proceedings but I can reassure you that there is extensive deliberation before each and every arrest.

The investigation teams assiduously follow the Court of Appeal guidance that to attract criminal sanctions the suspected misconduct in question would normally have to amount to an affront to the standing of the public office held and to fall so far below the standards accepted as to amount to an abuse of the public's trust in the office holder.

Safeguards in the form of external oversight also exist. As well as the Independent Police Complaints Commission supervision of the investigation, officers are working closely with the Crown Prosecution Service at every stage. On the evidence submitted by police, the CPS makes independent decisions about charging that take careful account of the Director of Public Prosecution's guidelines to prosecutors which require them to consider whether the public interest served by the conduct in question outweighs the overall criminality before bringing criminal proceedings.

I would also like to assure you that there are sound operational reasons for the times of day we elect to arrest people and, although this has been criticised, we consider it would be wrong to compromise potential evidential opportunities because those being detained are journalists, police officers or other public officials. We genuinely try to carry out these arrests in a low key manner and as swiftly as possible. This is often best achieved by assigning several officers to the various tasks needed to be carried

200 out following an arrest. An appropriate level of resources reduces the time spent by police in someone's home and the disruption this causes to those involved.

There has also been criticism that journalists have been put 'under surveillance' by Operation Elveden when the reality is that discreet checks being made in the immediate run up to arresting an individual at a certain time and location are a necessary police procedure.

There is also genuine concern on our part about the length of time that some of those arrested have been on bail. We are doing all we can to conclude matters as quickly as possible but it should be appreciated that the delays are the result of the complex nature of these inquiries. There have been millions of emails, documentation, complex communications data and trails of financial transactions that require painstaking analysis as evidence has gradually emerged. It is regrettable that there has been slow progress in some - but by no means all - cases but I am satisfied that the decisions being made by the investigating officers are the right ones and will withstand future scrutiny if challenged.

Finally, it is important not to lose sight of the fact that this investigation is about alleged corruption in public bodies. An unintended and, I hope, short-term consequence of this may be a negative effect on relations between police and journalists. This is unfortunate but in no way undermines the value the MPS puts on the role of a free and investigative press in a democratic society - indeed this investigation is the result of such journalism.

We want open, professional and trusting relationships between our officers and journalists.

Cressida Dick Assistant Commissioner Metropolitan Police Service

201 Written evidence submitted by Nick Gargan QPM, Chief Constable, Avon and Somerset Constabulary [LSP 41]

OFFICE OF CHIEF CONSTABLE

You wrote to me last week requesting that I supply "a week in the life of a Chief Constable". As the week requested was not a full week (owing to Bank Holiday Monday on 6th May) I am supplying the week commencing 13th May. I hope that this is acceptable.

Here goes:

Monday Began with the weekly Chief Officer round up meeting. We planned the Chief Officer group meeting for later in the month, discussed promotion selection processes as well as staff briefings for later in the week.

After the Chief Officer briefing I travelled to Yeovil (93 miles round trip) to meet with the Chief Executive of South Somerset Council and his Council Leader Cllr Mike Best. This meeting was to discuss opportunities to collaborate to save money, as well as for me to explain boundary changes which are currently being implemented within the Constabulary. As a new Chief Constable it was also an inaugural opportunity to say hello.

I travelled back to Police HQ and met with the Deputy Chief Constable for his annual appraisal, as well as to discuss his appointment as Deputy Chief Executive at the College of Policing in London (and my corresponding need to find a new DCC).

At 5.00 p.m. I was due to play 5-aside football with members of staff from Police HQ, but unfortunately there were insufficient numbers for a meaningful game to take place! Instead, I had discussions with the Strategic Director of HR on the policing protocol order 2011!

Tuesday I sat down with my PA for diary planning as well as to record hospitality and expenses in order that they could be published on the website. I then saw a member of the Covert Authorities' Bureau to consider a request for authorisation under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.

I was then delighted to receive a letter from the Cabinet Office thanking Avon and Somerset colleagues for their support in the trial of Integrated Offender Management in Bristol. Sadly my delight turned to slight disappointment when I asked the Cabinet Office for permission to tweet this letter, in order that a broader policing population could see details of this fine piece of work. Sadly, the Cabinet Office Press Office requested that I did nothing to publicise the correspondence. A shame.

Later on Tuesday morning I met briefly with Sue Mountstevens, the Police and Crime Commissioner before we were both joined by Lord Taylor, Home Office Minister, as part of his visit to Avon and Somerset. We discussed his time with our Serious and Organised Crime teams as well as Offender Management, the iniquities of the way in which the police funding formula is applied as well as our positive response to Home Office consultation on direct entry. It was a friendly, positive and upbeat meeting.

I spent Tuesday afternoon travelling down to the Police Federation Conference, pausing on the way to be interviewed by BBC Radio Somerset.

Early on Tuesday evening, I joined a telephone conference of regional Chief Constables and PCCs to discuss a joint response to an offer of Home Office funding in support of organised crime investigation. I then attended a dinner at Police Federation conference as a guest of the Sergeants' Central Committee.

Wednesday

202 In the morning I started the day with a live radio interview with BBC Radio Bristol at 8.05 a.m. before heading straight into the conference hall at Bournemouth. There I participated in a panel discussion, on the role of the private sector in policing. After the conference session, I remained in Bournemouth to listen to the speeches of the Home Secretary and the Chairman of the Police Federation before travelling to London to attend a meeting at Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary. I am a member of the Reference Group for HMI's Valuing the Police programme, a role which forms part of my new set of wider responsibilities as the ACPO lead for Finance and Resources. Later that day I attended the annual CBI dinner as a guest of Capita where I discussed the future of police custody (and other) outsourcing with Capita's Chief Operating Officer.

I travelled back late on Wednesday evening, arriving home in the early hours of Thursday.

Thursday I was up early and travelled to Taunton to join a group of local dignitaries welcoming 40 Commando Royal Marines home from Afghanistan. I also visited Taunton Police Station and spoke to operational colleagues involved in the policing operation in support of the parade.

On my way back to Bristol, I made a pre-arranged stop off at Bristol Airport to observe policing arrangements there and meet the team. I was briefed about discussions on funding for airport policing both in terms of Special Branch officers as well as our uniform presence.

I then travelled back to Police HQ and had a meeting with Dairy UK to discuss the police response to the future badger cull. There then followed a meeting with our Head of Communications about stakeholder engagement for the rest of 2013, then a discussion with the PCC about funding models and finally a further application for a covert authorisation, this time under the Police Act 1997.

At the end of the day I joined a meeting between our PCC and the Head of Neighbourhood Watch across Avon and Somerset to discuss how the Constabulary could support Watch schemes more effectively.

Friday I joined the weekly regional teleconference for Chief Constables before holding my weekly meeting with the PCC. I then met with the Head of our Central Authorities Bureau to discuss some changes to our policy for the authorisation of covert activity by me as senior authorising officer.

I also received a briefing on my attendance at the forthcoming Licensing Policy Scrutiny Board which was to take place the following week in Bristol.

Later on Friday morning, I gave three further covert authorisations, before hosting the regional annual lunch for retired ACPO officers (attended by several former chief constables including, three from Gloucestershire, two from Devon and Cornwall, two from Avon and Somerset and one from South Yorkshire!).

Once the lunch had finished I addressed a group of 80 senior leaders from across the Constabulary, detailing changes that are taking place across the Constabulary and asking for their feedback on these as well as their support in delivering a new vision for the Constabulary. On Friday evening I attended the Spring Banquet of Bristol Merchant Venturers' organisation, comprising local business leaders.

Saturday I spent most of the morning in conversation with the Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police who asked me to agree to undertake an investigation into his force. This prompted discussions with my PCC, senior colleagues in Avon and Somerset and further contact with Chief Constable Gilmore.

Sunday I attended the Rush Sunday Civic Service: a traditional Whitsun service which is held in St. Mary Redcliffe Church, Bristol. The Chief Constable processes alongside members of the Constabulary Mace Escort in a service

203 that dates back many centuries. I attended the short reception in the grounds of St. Mary Redcliffe Church before returning home.

To paraphrase the legendary Assistant Commissioner Bill Griffiths of the Metropolitan Police (now long retired) "the rest of the week was then my own!"

Additionally in the course of the week I received 360 emails and sent 97. I also received 54 meeting requests. I also tweeted about my week and about the exploits of the force, sharing over 50 tweets with around 5,000 followers. I also kept in touch with senior on-call officers in the Constabulary. In the week the force dealt with:

• 1,836 reported crimes • 8,538 calls for police services • 4,117 emergency calls (999) • 13,504 non-emergency calls • and attended 4,269 incidents

Conclusion I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the Committee's inquiry on leadership. I have found this exercise very interesting. I hope that the committee finds this interesting and, I hope, useful.

Nick Gargan QPM, Chief Constable, Avon and Somerset Constabulary May 2013

204 Written evidence submitted by Stephen Kavanagh, Chief Constable, Essex Police [LSP 42]

OFFICE OF CHIEF CONSTABLE

May I apologise for the email response to your letter of interest in to the routines of a Chief Constable dated the 14th May. For some reason it was only received in my office on the 25th.

Due to the time I have left to respond I will focus on ‘A week in the life of a Chief Constable’. I hope you will find it helpful:

Monday 20th

An early 7 am start at my office to review incidents/crimes of note over the weekend followed by an 0800 Chief Officer meeting to review the last weeks activities , meetings and incidents to identify cross cutting issues, opportunities or risks. Followed by a brief discussion on what the team has planned for the forthcoming week.

Between 10am and midday I held ‘Road Show’ meeting with 70 first and second line supervisors, both police officer and police staff. We discussed my vision for the force, the standards expected, values that underpin our policing and how I need their support on re-enforcing the issues that matter.

At midday I received a briefing regarding a sensitive freedom of Information request from the Force Lawyer and Freedom of Information lead. I made the decision to release the data asked for.

I then had a working sandwich in my office with the Deputy Chief Constable and discussed Domestic Abuse approaches within force.

At 2pm I met with the Force representatives for LGBT issues to discuss levels of inclusivity, support for diverse groups and how I could ensure a supportive environment for all colleagues.

At 3pm I had a preparatory meeting with colleagues relating to the release of the IPCC report on the 21st regarding the domestic abuse murder of Maria Stubbings and how I wanted Essex police to respond.

At 5pm I prepared for a forthcoming Criminal Justice Board and reviewed Essex police performance in this area.

Between 6pm and 7pm I completed letters and emails.

Tuesday 21st

At 6am I went to my office to review overnight events and prepare for my media briefings in relation to the murder of Maria Stubbings. &am to BBC studios and media briefings till 4pm.

(My Chief Officer Team had their weekly meeting at Basildon Police station with junior staff and officers present to break down barriers followed by time ‘back on the shop floor’ working with colleagues performing front line duties – patrol, custody, front office work etc)

At 4pm I received a briefing on Essex Community Partnership arrangements and initiatives on bring policing closer to local partners. That was followed by further media briefings and between 7pm and 9.30 pm I held a further ‘Road show’ meeting with in the region of 50 Special Constabulary officers to promote my vision, expectations and to listen to their ideas and concerns.

Wednesday 22nd

At 0700 I attended my office to review overnight incidents and coverage of the IPCC Stubbings report. Meeting with Deputy Chief Constable regarding his chairing of previous days meeting.

205 At 0900 I met with Police federation Representatives to discuss their issues and concerns together with opportunities for the future.

At 1000 I met with my Finance Director re CSR2 and current financial challenges and at 1100 I met with an exasperated PA to discuss the diary for the week.

At 1130 I met with the Chief Executive from the PCC’s office to discuss governance arrangements and relationships.

Between 1230 and 1300 I worked at my desk with a sandwich.

Between 1300 and 1530 I worked on RIPA authorities for covert policing matters with a Detective Superintendent and received presentations for officers requesting my authority on a variety of issues

At 1530 I met with a Chief Superintendent regarding work being done on domestic abuse and career development for senior officers.

At about 1610 we were interrupted with the awful news regarding the awful murder of Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich. I contacted local military leads and called a force response meeting for 1700. I then chaired a meeting to ensure military staff were properly protected and that adequate reassurance support was provided to local Muslim communities. I handed over to the Force Gold.

At 1820 I left to attend the Thurrock Mayor making ceremony which concluded at about 2200.

Thursday 23rd

I had an 0800 meeting on performance with the PCC. I then held a meeting to prepare on an IT project Board and then went to a six force board on a new IT system being developed for the region. The meeting was chaired by the Essex PCC.

This was immediately followed by a meeting of the six regional Chief Constables dealing with issues of local regional crime units/ air support arrangements and other collaboration/partnership issues.

I then had a working lunch with my Criminal Justice lead in preparation for a meeting next week and then had a meeting with the UNISON union leads for the force to discuss their issues of concern and opportunities for the future.

I then travelled to London to hold a meeting on CSSC initiative and how to introduce it to Essex to increase communication and support to businesses.

Friday 24th

I visited the regional CTIU (Counter Terrorism Intelligence Unit) where I received a briefing on how CT issues are managed in the region and explored emerging challenges. During the visit we became aware that a flight was being re- directed to Stansted airport following an incident on an inbound flight. I went to the operations room and monitored the command and control of the incident on the radio, liaising with SO15 and supporting the CT officers present. I stayed in the Ops room until the incident was brought to a safe conclusion.

I then wrote my weekly blog for the force and dealt with emails and correspondence.

I took the weekend off! Unusually there were no events to attend in support of Essex police or county charities.

I hope this gives you a flavour of what type of things go on.

Stephen Kavanagh, Chief Constable, Essex Police May 2013

206 Written evidence submitted by Mick Creedon QPM, Chief Constable, Derbyshire Constabulary [LSP 43]

When we spoke on the telephone last week I undertook to give you a written response to the questions you raised with me in your letter of the 3rd April. You'll recall that I wrote to you in some detail and explained the difficulties in responding to all the questions and suggested that we have a face to face meeting.

Subsequent to our conversation I have again considered the questions you asked and in the spirit of trying to be open to your Select Committee oversight, but at the same time guarding against compromising a very complex, difficult and protracted ongoing enquiry, I offer the following at this stage.

The number and nature of the files still to be reviewed: At this time there are 34,000 computer files have yet to be transferred onto the secure HOLMES (Home Office Large/Major Enquiry System), where they will be subject of the necessary processing, reading, indexing and actioning. 'Actioning' is the term used to describe how a document is examined and how 'actions' are created which are in turn allocated to operational staff so they can make their investigations in a planned and properly managed way. Some documents might result in no actions at all whereas others could raise dozens of lines of investigation.

The 34,000 computer files are approximately equal to 50,000 individual documents. As you can see this is a complex and time-consuming task and on a conventional murder investigation, this number of documents would be exceptional and would represent only the very largest and complex type of investigation I am still working with the existing investigation team to assess how we will best deal with this mass of documentation; each document has to be considered in the context of this very wide-ranging enquiry and if the reviewer identifies any investigative actions they must be raised as a result. You are aware that the SDS was operational for four decades and the nature of material includes intelligence records, photographs, targeting strategies, resource lists, reference documents, receipts, authorisations, RIPA applications and much more besides.

The costs of the operation to date and projected future costs: I am informed that the current cost of operation Herne to date is £1,250,000. This includes staff, premises, installation of HOLMES and necessary security measures. The cost of maintaining this operation with its current staffing levels for a ·12 month period is projected to be around £1 .66m. I am being given a monthly cost which I can supply you with at a future date should you consider it helpful to the Committee.

The numbers of police staff and officers working on the operation: Twenty-three police officers form the HOLMES major incident room and outside enquiry team. Ten police staff members support the HOLMES incident room and perform analytical and research actions. I have my own representatives in the incident room who are not Metropolitan police staff. These officers are now taking the overall lead for the enquiry in line with the request from Mr Hogan-Howe for me to take over this work from the MPS.

Whether any disciplinary proceedings against officers have been initiated: There are a number of ongoing separate investigations within Operation Herne, some of which are being supervised by the IPCC. No matters have yet been concluded either in the sense of criminal or misconduct issues. As those investigations continue it would be inappropriate to discuss their detail.

Whether any arrests have been made:

207 The changes brought about by the revisions to Code G of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 has meant that any interviews under caution can be conducted by prior arrangement and without the need to make an arrest. It has not been felt proportionate or necessary to use any of the powers of arrest provided by PACE but this will be continually reviews on a case by case basis. The operation remains in the evidence collection phase.

How many dead children's identities do I estimate have been used by undercover officers? Investigations continue into this aspect of Operation Herne. I am not able to answer this question at this time with any degree of absolute certainty but I can say that this was common practice within the SDS.

How is the operation dealing with speculative inquiries from relatives who are asking the Met to confirm that their children's identities were not used? The Metropolitan Police Service has received a number of such enquiries. No families of children whose identities have been used have been contacted and informed. No answer either positive or negative has yet been given in relation to these enquiries from families. This issue is very complicated and mistakes could put lives in jeopardy.

As I take control of the enquiry addressing this issue and providing some reassurance to the public is one of my foremost concerns.

How many children the Metropolitan Police have identified as being born out of a relationship conducted by an officer undercover and whether the parents/and or children in those circumstances have been informed and what financial support is being provided to them: I have to reply along the same lines as for the above question. This remains an ongoing live investigation and it would not be appropriate for me to provide any detail about this element of Operation Herne.

You ask a series of questions about my own role, staff from Derbyshire working in London, my time on the investigation and my visits to London. I understand your concerns following our very helpful conversation, but I have to reassure you that I feel confident that I have the necessary time and support to carry out this role whilst also maintaining my leadership of the Derbyshire Constabulary and my other national responsibilities. I have one full time member of staff from the East Midlands working in London and at present the rest of the investigation team is made up of Metropolitan police officers and staff. I am in the process of reviewing this and there will be more staff from Derbyshire and the East Midlands. The Home Office have given me complete reassurance that any additional local costs incurred will be met in full by them so that the local Derbyshire ratepayer is not penalised. Mr Alan Charles, my local Police and Crime Commissioner has been fully briefed on the operation and my commitments and he is likewise confident that the interests of the Derbyshire Constabulary and the people of the county and city will not be compromised.

I hope you appreciate that at the direct request of the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service I have accepted the leadership of this complex, highly sensitive and necessarily protracted enquiry, the scope of which stretches back over four decades. Unravelling all the complexities of this is going to take a considerable effort and not a little time. Please be assured that I am satisfied with the scale and quality of the resources I have available at present and that the terms of reference are robust and will allow me to deal with the issues properly.

When we spoke we discussed the terms of reference and you will recall that I was keen that you sight of these so that you are aware of the scope of my work. The Commissioner's office

208 has agreed that you should have sight of these and I attach them for your information.1 You will note that these are still marked as 'Draft'. This is purely due to the fact that we are waiting for any response from the IPCC. I have already met them with Deputy Commissioner Mackay and they have given their comments. I am not anticipating any further changes but as we have not yet heard back, they are officially only a draft version. Lastly, whilst I am comfortable you having sight of the TOR I would ask that these are kept as confidential at present and not shared with others.

Mick Creedon QPM, Chief Constable, Derbyshire Constabulary May 2013

1 Not printed.

209 Written evidence submitted by British Naturism [LSP 44]

I understand that the Committee are holding a session on police standards so it is an opportune time to draw to your attention a growing problem. In order to keep this email as brief as possible I will not go into any details but we can provide further information on request.

The increasing institutional gymnophobia amongst police officers is having a serious chilling effect on the practice of Naturism, and there are about four million self professed naturists in the UK (Ipsos MORI 2011). We only deal with a relatively small number of cases of police action against our members but in recent years roughly a third of the complainants have been off duty police officers. If on duty officers are included the proportion approaches a half. The acquittal rate, for those who are able to mount a defence, has been 100%. It is of very serious concern that some people have felt unable to mount a defence due to the cost, the stress, and the risks associated with publicity.

Off duty police officers have become a running joke amongst naturists who follow naturist legal affairs. The alienation is growing.

There are two major problems: 1. inadequate diversity and human rights training. Often it doesn't even occur to officers that naturists also have rights. 2. an unthinking assumption that all public place nudity must automatically be a serious sexual offence and that any likely sounding offence must be applicable.

The initial arrest is usually for "indecent exposure", an offence that does not even exist, and there then follows a daisy chain of mistakes and wasted money before the case is dropped or an acquittal results. That is little consolation for people who have lost their job or are thousands of pounds out of pocket due to the inadequate compensation.

It is essential that from the start of the process, the police get it right. We hope that the committee will be able to raise these issues with the police.

Malcolm Boura, Research and Liaison Officer British Naturism April 2013

210 Written evidence submitted by Patricia Gallan QPM, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police [LSP 45]

Letter from Patricia Gallan QPM, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police, to the Chair of the Committee, 11 January 2013

Thank you for your letter of 9th January 2013. I appreciate the concerns of the Home Affairs Committee and I would, of course, upon completion of the investigation and at a time that will not prejudice any possible judicial proceedings, be happy to come and give evidence to the Committee.

I can confirm that the investigation is progressing expeditiously and that I am in regular and personal contact with Deborah Glass, Deputy Chair of the IPCC and I have also recently apprised the CPS of the investigation.

I will address the points raised in your letter in turn: a) To date the estimated cost of Operation Alice is £82,500. This is solely the cost for staffing the operation since the case was reopened on 15th December 2012. b) The investigation is progressing as expected. An advice file will be submitted to the Crown Prosecution Service by the end of January asking them to consider whether there should be relevant and appropriate charges arising from the investigation. c) The original team engaged in the leak investigation in September 2012 consisted of 4 officers. d) Since the case was reopened in December 2012 the team has increased in size and a Detective Superintendent has been appointed as the SIO. The original 4 officers form part of the larger team. There are no known conflicts of interest and there has been no reason to remove any officer from the team. e) The team are made up from officers from the Department of Professional Standards. f) I have included the Terms of Reference agreed with the IPCC. Deborah Glass has strategic oversight for the IPCC and I am in regular contact with Deborah updating her personally. In addition to this high level oversight the IPCC have appointed a Senior Investigator, Steve Reynolds, to monitor the investigation and liaise regularly with the Senior Investigating Officer. As part of the supervision by the IPCC, Steve Reynolds has a meeting scheduled on Monday 14th January with the SIO to review the investigation to date.

Patricia Gallan QPM, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police 11 January 2013

Background:

DPG officers spoke with Mr Mitchell on the evening of the 19th September 2012 as he was leaving Downing Street, requesting that he used the side pedestrian entrance to leave the street rather than via the main vehicle gate. Mr Mitchell took exception to this as he had his pedal cycle.

DPG officers reported the content of the verbal exchange to their line management via email. The content of this email subsequently appeared in both The Sun and The Telegraph newspapers.

On Thursday 13th December 2012, the MPS received fresh information that resulted in the re-opening of the investigation into the alleged unauthorised disclosure of information on

211 Saturday 15th December 2012. The information handed to Police included a DVD containing CCTV footage of Downing Street on the said 19th September, at the time of Mr Mitchell leaving Downing Street and a bundle of e mails pertaining to the incident. The Deputy Chief Whip had received an e mail from a constituent stating that he witnessed, with his nephew, the events of 19th September 2012 at Downing Street between the Police Officers and Mr Mitchell.

Revised Terms of Reference:

1. To investigate the circumstances surrounding the Police Officer's claim to have witnessed the incident in Downing Street. 2. To establish if there is any evidence of a conspiracy between this officer and any other person. 3. To investigate the allegations made by the Rt. Hon Andrew Mitchell in his statement that police lied in the police log dated 19th September 2012. 4. Establish what, if any criminal or misconduct offences are apparent. 5. To progress the supervised investigation to wherever the evidence takes it. 6. Establish if there is any organisational learning as a result of this investigation.

Patricia Gallan QPM, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police 11 January 2013

212 Written evidence submitted by East Lindsey District Council [LSP 46]

Letter from Emma Baldwin, Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel Officer, to the Clerk of the Committee, 7 June 2013 regarding a letter received regarding the evidence the Lincolnshire Police and Crime Commissioner Alan Hardwick gave to the Committee [14 May 2013]

I am writing on behalf of the Task Group established by the Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel to look into the events surrounding the suspension of the temporary Chief Constable Neil Rhodes by the Lincolnshire Police and Crime Commissioner Alan Hardwick.

The former Chairman of the Panel Cllr Wootten received a letter from a member of the public (Mr Pheby) regarding the evidence the Commissioner gave to the Home Affairs Select Committee meeting on the 14th May looking into Leadership and Standards in the Police. The contained concerns which the writer of the letter wished the Task Group to consider. The Task Group has agreed that the matters raised fall within its current scope and have written to Mr Pheby to inform him of this.

The Task Group also agreed to send the letter to the Home Affairs Select Committee due to the information contained within it and its connection to the evidence the Commissioner gave to the Home Affairs Select Committee on the 14th May 2013.

East Lindsey District Council June 2013 Annex A

To Cllr Ray Wootten Chairman Lincolnshire Police and Crime Panel

Dear Cllr Wootten,

Police and Crime Commissioner Alan Hardwick

Please forgive me for writing to you again regarding my concerns, as a Lincolnshire ratepayer, over the suspension of the Chief Constable by the Police and Crime Commissioner Alan Hardwick.

On May 14 I watched the Home Office select committee session reviewing Leadership and Standards in the police service via the Parliament TV channel.

Link- .

As you will be aware, the select committee heard evidence from both yourself and the Lincolnshire PCC Mr Hardwick.

I paid particular attention to the questions put to Mr Hardwick by Mr Vaz and his committee members and to his answers.

213

Subsequently Radio 4's "the Report" programme on May 16 dealt with a review of the first few months of Police and Crime Commissioners. As you may be aware the programme featured Lincolnshire.

Link-

I was surprised to hear on this programme (20.20 minutes into the recording) that the journalist asserted:

"...In February he (AH) suspended the temporary Chief Constable Neil Rhodes. The Commissioner had previously told Mr Rhodes that he didn't want him to lead the force anyway, handing him a pile a/job adverts to emphasise the point...."

And after 21.40 mins:

"Neil Rhodes is back as the temporary chief constable of Lincolnshire Police, having to run the force with a commissioner who doesn't want him in the post "

Recalling the questioning of Alan Hardwick by Mark Reckless MP, I went back to Parliament.tv to check what was said.

The questioning went as follows:

Mark Reckless - " ...and are there any personal circumstances between you and the chief constable which others might think could have affected this decision?"

Alan Hardwick - "No sir, there are no circumstances at all"

Mark Reckless- "Are you sure?"

Alan Hardwick- "Yes sir"

Keith Vaz -".....and before his suspension, presumably as commissioner you had a number of meetings with him?"

Alan Hardwick- "Oh yes"

Keith Vaz- "Any disagreements?"

Alan Hardwick- "None".

This new information appears completely at variance to the answers Mr. Hardwick gave the select committee. I then read the judgment of HH Judge Stuart Smith in the judicial review case. (It is on the internet at the following link):

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc-/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2013/1009.html&query-rhodes &method=boolean

214

I saw that the assertion in the radio programme appeared to be correct. The judge said in Para 60- 63:

60. On 11 December 2012 Mr Hardwick met Mr Rhodes and told Mr Rhodes that he did not wish Mr Rhodes to be the Chief Constable of Lincolnshire Police.

61. The next day, 12 December 2012, was the day of the conversation which has given rise to these proceedings. Also on that day the applicant started to make applications for posts outside Lincolnshire. Mr Hardwick would have known that this would happen and he had encouraged it. Specifically, and looking ahead, he would have known that Mr Rhodes was in the middle of a selection process on 25 February 2013, because the meeting at which he suspended Mr Rhodes was arranged for that evening to avoid a clash with the selection process the next day.

62. Although it was plainly necessary for the applicant to consider options, he remained committed to remaining in post at Lincolnshire if he could. Accordingly, he wrote to the Chief Executive of the PCC on 7 January 2013 by a letter dated 6 January 2013 in the following terms:

i. "2. Joining Lincolnshire Police as a constable in 1986 and later returning as DCC in 2008, it is a matter of intense personal pride for me to have Jed this force as Chief Constable for the past year. It is still my desire to continue leading the force, if the Commissioner has a change of heart. I bear him absolutely no ill will in this matter.

ii. ...

iii. 5. On our first meeting that day the Commissioner told me that, after long consideration 'and I have thought of little else recently' he had decided I was 'not the man to lead Lincolnshire Police with (him) in the future. He thought I 'would make an outstanding chief constable in a larger force' and that the work I had done around outsourcing would make me 'a very attractive candidate'. He then handed me a range of advertisements that he had asked staff to print out for him of chief constables' jobs currently available across the country. I reaffirmed to him my commitment to Lincolnshire Police and asked him why he didn't consider me suitable. The PCC's only comment was that he had found our first meeting on the weekend of his appointment 'a little bit heavy' but felt I would be 'a good chief constable in another force'. He wanted 'his own man'. He strongly encouraged me to apply for roles in other forces and said he thought, in due course 'you will thank me for this'. He said, on three occasions during this initial conversation that 'who I want at chief constable is my decision to make and I have made it'. iv. 6. I returned to meet him again later that day. I asked him to consider working with me for a further year to build a relationship. . He was reluctant to do this. I made clear, yet again, my absolute commitment to Lincolnshire Police and the fact that in recent years there had been many opportunities available in other forces, but I had stuck with my commitment to Lincolnshire.

215 v. 7. In terms of the practicalities of applying for other jobs at the present time, I outlined my personal circumstances, which he was aware of from previous, recent conversations. Although I have two older children, one working and one away from university, my youngest, 17 years is part way through his 'A' levels. My wife has recently had a very serious illness and is in recovery from it. My mobility, in terms of moving home, is severely limited as a consequence.

vi. 8. In our third, brief meeting towards the end of the day, the Commissioner gave me the assurance of absolute confidentiality in relation to our conversation, in order that I could pursue external applications without prejudice. I was grateful for that. vii. 9. Since that time I have continued in my role as Chief Constable diligently and professionally. I have shared with the PCC positive proposals to complete the operational reshaping of the force, and sought always to protect his reputation and that of the force in the way we conduct our business. However this matter concludes, I will continue in that vein as a matter of personal integrity. viii. 10. I am in a very uncertain position at the moment and I would ask for clarity in relation to the following matters. ix. 11. Is the PCC able to reconsider his decision in relation to my future?

x. 12. Is the PCC proposing to extend my FTA as temporary chief constable at all, and if not has there been any decision as to when it will conclude?

xi. 13. I should be grateful if you would ask the Commissioner to consider these matters."

63. On 14 January 2013 the PCC's Chief Executive wrote to the applicant, stating that his fixed­ term appointment as TCC would not be extended when it expired on 31 March 2013. In that letter he said that the decision not to extend was irrevocable. There is a dispute between the parties about whether sufficient notice was given, but that dispute does not form part of the matters for decision in these proceedings.

In Para 63 above, the judge clearly states that there was a dispute between the PCC and his chief constable, prior to his suspension. This is in addition to the clear dispute between the PCC and his CC as to whether the CC should remain in post. This is not what Mr Hardwick appears to have said in his reply to Mr Vaz.

In addition examination of the PCC's payments schedule on his website reveals legal bills from Andrew and co Solicitors in December 2012 for £2450.00 and In February 2013 for £3670.00. Did these relate to legal advice sought by the PCC in relation to the disputes with the Chief Constable? This could be simply established by asking the PCC to disclose that legal advice or at the very least the bills themselves to see what they relate to. Link: http://www.IincoIns hire-pcc.gov.uk/Document-Libra ry/500-Reports/500-report---Dec-2012.pdf

Andrew & Co Solicitors ref 507205 Office of the PCC for legal Services £2,405.00

216 http://www.IincoInshire-pcc.gov.uk/Document-Library/500-Reports/500-report-Feb-2013.pdf

Andrew & Co Solicitors ref 511495 Office of the PCC for legal Services £3,670.00

To my mind this is a very serious issue. Of course I am not in possession of all the facts and it may be that I have misunderstood what the judge and the radio 4 programme were saying. However there is clearly a potentially serious issue here and I consider it is essential that the Police and Crime Panel investigate the matter to establish the truth.

My suggestion is that the issue is added to the scope of the Task Group's terms of reference, so that they can address the issue in their report. Whether the matter should be reported to the IPCC would of course depend on any conclusions reached. Respectfully I do not consider it would be appropriate for the Chief Executive to investigate himself as the issues relate to decisions and discussions that he was intimately involved in.

As a member of the Lincolnshire public I thought it my duty to bring this issue to your attention. I am a retired journalist and editor and believe strongly that parliamentary select committees are a vital aspect of democracy and they rely on people giving clear and truthful accounts.

In the light of the above I wonder if you may feel it necessary to seek some clarification from Mr Hardwick by perhaps:

1. Seeking copies from him of the judicial review judgment and court pleadings. 2. Asking him whether there was any correspondence between him and the chief constable (or their lawyers) on any other matters of dispute prior to the suspension issue. 3. Adding this issue to the terms of reference of the task group investigating his decision to suspend the Chief Constable.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely,

Malcolm Pheby

217 Written evidence submitted by Kevin Maxwell [LSP 47]

I. Introduction Kevin Maxwell is black, gay and a former officer of the Metropolitan Police Service’s (MPS’) Special Operations 15 Directorate (SO15). SO15 is a specialist, elite unit with “expertise in intelligence analysis and development, investigation and operational support activity”. It has the ultimate responsibility for “bring[ing] to justice anyone engaged in terrorist, domestic extremist and related offences”. 1 Whilst at SO15, Mr. Maxwell was a Special Branch officer based at Heathrow Airport with counter-terrorism responsibilities. During his four-year tenure with SO15, Mr. Maxwell publicly and bravely challenged racism and discrimination within the MPS. As a result of the continued harassment and discrimination he suffered, Mr. Maxwell was forced to leave a job he always wanted to do and to which he was deeply committed.2 His private information was leaked to The Sun. He was threatened with the OFFICIAL SECRETS ACT should he talk about his experiences. Rather than address Mr. Maxwell’s legitimate and serious complaints, instead, Mr. Maxwell believes that the MPS sought to discredit and intimidate him into silence. Such was the victimisation experienced by Mr. Maxwell that he now suffers extensively from the long-term disabling effects of chronic depression, characterised in the main by high anxiety. On 12 February 2012, an Employment Tribunal (ET) found the MPS responsible for forty-four counts of harassment of and discrimination against Mr. Maxwell. The MPS appealed this decision. On 14 May 2013, the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) upheld the original judgment on almost all counts. Despite this clear judgment against it, the MPS continues to refuse to accept its wrongdoing and to fight Mr. Maxwell.3 From the outset, Mr. Maxwell’s intentions have been clear. He does not wish to damage the reputation of the MPS. Instead, he hopes to highlight weaknesses and areas for development within the Service and, by doing so, improve the climate in which black and minority ethnic officers (BME) and LGBT officers serve.

II. Background After serving with the Greater Manchester Police (GMP) for approximately seven years, in October 2008 Mr. Maxwell joined the MPS’ SO15 team at Heathrow Airport, having come top in Interview Board. During the eight months that followed, Mr. Maxwell suffered regular harassment and discrimination from his fellow colleagues. Two tribunals have held that the basis of abuse was his sexual orientation and the colour of his skin.4

1 Metropolitan Police Service, ‘What is SO15?’, http://www.metpolicecareers.co.uk/ctc/what_is_so15.html. Date of last access: 12 June 2013. 2 The Guardian, ‘Black and Gay Police Officer Hounded Out like “Enemy of the State”’, 18 May 2013; The Times, ‘Why Kevin Maxwell refused to be a gay poster boy for the police’, 23 May 2013. 3 Employment Tribunal, Judgment, Mr. K Maxwell v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, 12 February 2012; Employment Appeal Tribunal, Judgment, Mr. K Maxwell v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, 14 May 2013. 4 Employment Tribunal, Judgment, Mr. K Maxwell v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, 12 February 2012; Employment Appeal Tribunal, Judgment, Mr. K Maxwell v. Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, 14 May 2013.

218

A. First Claim – Failure of senior managers leads to formal claim In December 2008, Mr. Maxwell first informed senior management at the MPS of the racism and homophobia that he experienced on a near daily basis. Despite a move from the SO15 team based in Terminal 3 to another team in Terminal 5, the discrimination and harassment continued. These events had such a profound psychological impact upon Mr. Maxwell that he began to suffer from high anxiety and, by summer 2009, displayed signs of severe depression. Given the rapid deterioration of his mental health, on 26 July 2009 a physician placed Mr. Maxwell on sick leave due to stress. Initially, Mr. Maxwell tried to discuss his concerns with various members of the MPS’ senior leadership team. Their initial response was to ignore or be dismissive of Mr. Maxwell’s concerns. However, when he later raised a grievance, the MPS proceeded to intimidate and victimise Mr. Maxwell in order to silence him. Indeed, a sizeable proportion of the discrimination and victimisation that Mr. Maxwell faced actually occurred during this ‘whistleblowing phase’, and whilst he was convalescing. Given the repeated inability of the MPS to handle his complaints satisfactorily, on 14 May 2010 Mr. Maxwell submitted an initial claim to the ET. B. Second Claim – MPS leaked Mr. Maxwell’s personal information to the press A short time after submitting his formal claim, Mr. Maxwell received a telephone call from the MPS’ Press Officer, Alex Fedorcio, informing him that The Sun’s then Crime Correspondent, Anthony France, was to publish an unflattering article about him. Mr. France’s article was to assert that “[Kevin Maxwell] was running a weak claim in order to obtain a significant amount of money [from the MPS]”, that “[he] had a history of submitting unsuccessful claims for race discrimination at other [police] forces including the Greater Manchester Police”, and that his claim was “without foundation”.5 None of these allegations are true. Before submitting his claim on 14 May 2010, Mr. Maxwell had never submitted any other formal complaint. As to this claim being weak, events have now demonstrated that they were, in fact, serious and legitimate. Moreover, two tribunals have now held that the MPS leaked Mr. Maxwell’s private information because he brought a formal claim against them.6 The ET held that the information Mr. France possessed had “a high amount of knowledge”, impossible to discern without a primary source.7 By leaking personal information to the press, not only would the article serve to smear Mr. Maxwell and thus unfairly damage his reputation, but it would also endanger the safety and security of one of the MPS’ own counter-terrorism officers, his then partner, Mr. Alex Parr (a civilian), and other family members. Mr. Parr submitted a complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).8 The IPCC judged that the original MPS investigation into the leak was inadequate and ordered it to be carried out again. This time it found that The Sun had made two payments for Mr. Maxwell’s information.9

5 Employment Tribunal, Judgment, Para. 211. 6 Ibid., Paras. 296-8; Employment Appeal Tribunal, Judgment, Para. 83. 7 Employment Tribunal, Judgment, Para. 211. 8 Note: warranted officers are not permitted to submit claims to the IPCC, so Mr. Maxwell’s partner, Mr. Parr, filed the initial complaint. 9 Letter from Detective Sergeant Helen Thomas to Mr. Alex Parr, 11 October 2012.

219 However, even this investigation was inadequate since it failed to name or pursue the person(s) whom had received the payment(s). Mr. Maxwell, therefore, escalated his complaint to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, the Rt. Hon Theresa May, on 14 October 2012.10 Mr. Maxwell has yet to receive any response from the Secretary of State. Although the article never went to press, Mr. Maxwell was extremely distressed by the MPS’ leak. Instead of protecting him, the MPS, once again, had resorted to victimisation. This was particularly cruel since, by summer 2010, the MPS was well aware of Mr. Maxwell’s health issues. Critically, this episode also raises further serious questions about the MPS and its well-known culture of leaking confidential information.11 As a result of this incident, Mr. Maxwell submitted a second claim to the ET for further victimisation and harassment. The leak of personal information about one of its own counter-terrorism officers suggests that senior managers in the MPS either approved this unauthorised (and possibly criminal) activity or have lost control of the officers under their command. The failure to carry out a proper investigation is a further indictment of the leadership in failing to take such matters seriously. C. Employment Tribunal & Employment Appeal Tribunal Judgments On 12 February 2012, the Employment Tribunal (ET) held that the MPS had committed forty-four counts of discrimination against Mr. Maxwell. This included nineteen counts of harassment, fourteen counts of direct discrimination and eleven counts of victimisation.12 Rather than accept and seek to remedy its wrongdoing, the MPS appealed almost every finding to the Employment Appeal Tribunal (‘Appeal Tribunal’). On 14 March 2013, the Appeal Tribunal upheld over ninety percent of Mr. Maxwell’s complaints.13 Mr. Justice Supperstone remarked, “It is clear that the tribunal considered all the evidence in relation to each and every allegation with considerable care”.14 He concluded that the basis of the MPS’ appeal was “without merit”.15 The MPS had been warned almost a year previously by the Appeal Tribunal “[to] consider whether all of [its] grounds [of appeal] should be argued in light of the difficulties…”.16 The MPS ignored the judge’s warning to its own detriment and at considerable cost to the public purse. The decision to persist with a futile appeal, rather than tackle the problem of discrimination, suggests failure of the MPS’ leadership to understand the problem and to take the correct action. If senior managers had taken decisive action when required, it may have prevented the inevitable harm to both Mr. Maxwell and the MPS itself. As the Tribunal had said:

Note: this correspondence is not in the public domain. Upon request, and subject to Mr. Maxwell’s approval, we will be able to provide the Committee with a copy of this document. 10 Letter from Mr. Kevin Maxwell to Rt. Hon Theresa May MP, Secretary of State for the Home Department, 14 October 2010. Note: this correspondence is not in the public domain. Upon request, and subject to Mr. Maxwell’s approval, we will be able to provide the Committee with a copy of this document. 11 This claim is sustained by a large number of recent incidents. See, amongst others, The Independent, ‘Former Met police officer Paul Flattley jailed for selling information about Kate Middleton and John Terry to The Sun’, 5 June 2013; The Guardian, ‘Police officer found guilty of trying to sell information to the News of the World’, 11 January 2013; Metro UK, ‘Phone hacking: News International ‘paid Met police officers for information’, 6 July 2011; The Times, ‘Met officer arrested for leaking information to press without payment ‘, 15 February 2013; BBC News Online, ‘Operation Elveden: Three arrested in Hertfordshire and Surrey’, 17 January 2013. 12 Employment Tribunal, Judgment, Paras. 238-301. 13 Employment Appeal Tribunal, Judgment, Paras. 84-9. 14 Ibid., Para. 84. 15 Ibid., Para. 86. 16 Employment Appeal Tribunal, Order for Directions, 1 May 2012, Para. 11.

220 “The Tribunal also finds it surprising, given the number of senior officers involved, that applying the Reporting of Wrongdoing Policy in the laudable and clear terms set out within the police was not tackled head on… Had the Respondent embraced and implemented its own Reporting Wrongdoing Policy correctly at the outset, then matters might have turned out differently.”17 Following three years’ litigation and two lengthy tribunal processes, two employment judges had found serious failings at the highest levels within the MPS. The MPS’ only response to the EAT’s decision was to claim they were “disappointed by the Employment Appeals Tribunal's decision” (rather than the discriminatory conduct of its own officers).18 To the best of our knowledge, at no point has the MPS’ leadership accepted the findings of the tribunals. Nor have they issued an apology to Mr. Maxwell for his long ordeal.

III. Failures of Leadership within the Metropolitan Police Service The failures within the MPS can broadly be subdivided into two different areas: A. Failure to address racial and homophobic discrimination and harassment amongst officers at operational level; B. Failure of senior leadership to investigate allegations, protect complainants and prevent further victimisation.

A. Discrimination and Harassment amongst Officers at Operational Level The Tribunal found a number of examples of day-to-day discrimination and harassment amongst low/mid-level officers whilst on duty. Examples include:19 − SO15 officers regularly used BME officers as “buffers” whilst undertaking so-called ‘random’ embarkation controls. This practice consisted of requesting that officers of black, Asian or Middle Eastern appearance or descent stop passengers from black, Asian or Middle Eastern backgrounds. As Mr. Maxwell’s recounts, ‘blacks don’t complain when they are stopped by blacks’. Once the departing passengers had been stopped by officers of apparently the same or similar ethnic background, they were ‘handed over‘ to white officers for further inspection. The ET found that using minority officers in this way was tantamount to direct discrimination and racial harassment.20 − A white officer, who was one of Mr. Maxwell’s colleagues at Heathrow Airport, referred to a fellow black colleague as “one of those people”. It was clear to Mr. Maxwell that this comment referred to colour of their joint colleague’s skin, and that the officer had also intended to harass Mr. Maxwell by this comment.21 − During a rest break at Heathrow Airport, one of Mr. Maxwell’s colleagues began to discuss “gays”. Amongst other offensive remarks, he spoke disparagingly about “them taking it up the arse”.22

17 Employment Tribunal, Judgment, Para. 301. 18 The Times, 15 May 2013. 19 The Employment Tribunal found that all of the incidents listed in this section constituted, in fact, direct discrimination or harassment. It should be noted, however, that a few of these claims were dismissed upon the MPS’ appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal since Mr. Maxwell’s application fell outside the specified window for complaint (ninety days). Nevertheless, these incidents have been included within this Submission since they are relevant and were upheld in spirit by the Tribunal. 20 Employment Tribunal, Judgment, Para. 32 & 263-4. 21 Ibid., Para. 268. 22 Ibid., Para. 265.

221 − During a counter-terrorism training session at Paddington Police Station, the instructing officer projected an image depicting a man at a fairground. The officer said: “[he] is as gay as a gay in a gay tea shop”. All of the other officers in attendance, including senior members of the Command, laughed.23 These events are but a few examples of the discrimination and harassment that Mr. Maxwell experienced on a near daily basis whilst based at Heathrow Airport. He first raised concerns with the supervising officer of his line manager in November 2008 but the MPS did not take him seriously. Of equal concern to the Committee will be the potential for the so-called ‘buffering tactics’ to lead to direct discrimination against the general public. For instance, if the criterion on which a commanding officer decides which member of his/her team should stop a specific passenger is because the officer and passenger supposedly possess a similar appearance/ethnicity, this is a highly discriminatory practice against both officer and passenger alike.24 If the MPS fails to address racism and discrimination within in its own ranks, the ‘spill-over’ of such racism and bigotry onto the general public is inevitable. Accordingly, before addressing how it treats the public, the MPS needs to get its own house in order. Mr. Maxwell submits that the MPS leadership must root out racism and homophobia against its own officers in the lower ranks, before it will able to prevent discriminatory attitude and behaviour towards the general public. B. Failure to Investigate Accusations, Protect Complainants and Prevent Further Discrimination Perhaps the most surprising element of Mr. Maxwell’s case was the MPS’ failure to adequately investigate Mr. Maxwell’s accusations and, in turn, affect any remedial action. The MPS, instead, proceeded to adopt a stance towards Mr. Maxwell that was at first complacent and disinterested, and then became characterised by intimidation and victimisation. The Tribunal was particularly worried by a number of incidents: − During Mr. Maxwell’s initial period of illness, senior officers at the MPS treated his complaints of racism and homophobia and issues about his health dismissively, adopting a disparaging approach towards him. For example, the Tribunal noted that they recommended to each other by email that they should have “a large malt in hand” when dealing with his case.25 − When speaking with his designated point of contact at the MPS, Detective Inspector Quantrell (herein DI Quantrell), Mr. Maxwell commented that it was “difficult being gay and black in the police”. DI Quantrell responded: “That’s life”. The Tribunal affirmed that the MPS did not take Mr. Maxwell’s claims seriously and senior staff members tried to minimise their importance. They, instead, implied that racism and homophobia were ‘natural’ and inevitable occurrences in the Police Service and that he should not try to challenge this.26 − When Mr. Maxwell began to recount specific accusations against former colleagues, DI Quantrell advised him that others would be wary of him “if you get them [fellow officers] in trouble with the organisation”. Mr. Maxwell was thus advised by a senior officer not to follow the formal channels of complaint lest it affect his reputation or future career prospects at the

23 Ibid., Para. 269. 24 In the interests of balance, it is important to note that the Employment Tribunal affirmed that on some specific occasions, this ‘targeting’ practice may be acceptable, but only when there is a sensible, legitimate and logical reason why it is more appropriate for an officer from a particular background to approach a specific passenger. Crucially, this ‘targeting’ must be very much the exception, not the rule. 25 Ibid., Para. 99 & 273. 26 Ibid., Para. 274.

222 MPS. Through the use of the word “trouble”, in particular, the senior MPS officer appeared to render Mr. Maxwell a sort of ‘problem’ or ‘obstruction’.27 − The next month, DI Quantrell tried to access Mr. Maxwell’s confidential personnel file at the GMP’s offices. The GMP telephoned Mr. Maxwell to inform him that a representative of the MPS had tried to acquire his records without his permission. When Mr. Maxwell questioned DI Quantrell he informed Mr. Maxwell that it was he whom was attempting to ascertain whether “he [Mr. Maxwell] was a troublemaker or okay”. Once more, the MPS’ inference was clear: without any formal investigation, they sort to immediately disbelieve Mr. Maxwell’s accusations and were convinced that he was both a troublemaker and a problem that needed to disappear.28 − During a MPS Case Conference on Mr. Maxwell’s situation, DI Quantrell carelessly misreported a complaint by Mr. Maxwell that fellow officers at Heathrow Airport had called him a “faggot” and a “queer”. In fact, different homophobic insults had been used. The Tribunal stated “the lack of detail is important because it does show a lack of care in dealing with [complaints of discrimination]”. Judge Byrne stated that “[this] illustrates perhaps subconscious assumption…” as to what a gay person should find offensive.29 − The Tribunal also found that DI Quantrell’s excessive attempts to contact Mr. Maxwell during October 2009 were victimisation. DI Quantrell’s continual requests for updates regarding his health intimidated Mr. Maxwell. Since he had already been on sick leave for the best part of three months, it was unreasonable for his designated point-of-contact to call on several occasions each week to obtain an update. Moreover, DI Quantrell was unwilling to permit contact via email, Mr. Maxwell’s preferred form of communication. Instead, he always insisted on communication via telephone, something that increased Mr. Maxwell’s anxiety. Despite the MPS’ knowledge of Mr. Maxwell’s high anxiety and severe depression, it seems that senior members of the MPS were still willing to pressurise and bully him.30 − Following an informal meeting with representatives of the MPS, Mr. Maxwell dispatched a formal letter registering his unhappiness with the manner in which the MPS had dealt with his complaints of racism and homophobia. Mr. Maxwell received angry text messages from DI Quantrell that lambasted him for submitting a formal grievance. Again, the MPS disapproved with Mr. Maxwell’s desire to follow the regular channels for complaint, and instead attempted to pressurise him to take another course.31 − When Mr. Maxwell met Detective Chief Inspector (‘DCI’) D’Orsi, it was conceded by the DCI that SO15 was not an appropriate Directorate for Mr. Maxwell because, he admitted, the counter-terrorism command had “issues” with racism and homophobia. Instead, the Detective Chief Inspector suggested that Mr. Maxwell “would be more suited to local policing and not a specialist department” as the “officers are more diverse and [he] won’t see the issues that [he] had at Special Branch”.32 The Tribunal considered that the DCI was conceding that there were issues of racism and homophobia in SO15, but instead of rooting it out, the MPS preferred that Mr. Maxwell move to another department so that they could continue ignoring a serious problem. 33 The Tribunal’s findings against the MPS may be summarised as follows: - failure to take allegations of harassment and discrimination seriously;

27 Ibid., Para. 278. 28 Ibid., Para. 282. 29 Ibid., Para. 280. 30 Ibid., Para. 284. 31 Ibid., Para. 286. 32 Ibid., Para. 149. 33 Ibid., Para. 285.

223 - failure to investigate allegations sensitively and expediently, or at all; - persistence of an institutional culture geared towards ‘containment’ and ‘covering-up’ instead of investigation and redress; - regular employment of intimidatory tactics to exert pressure upon victims so that they do not to raise a formal grievance; - repeated failure to train officers in how to implement the MPS’ Reporting of Wrongdoing Policy; 34 and - failure to address institutionalised racism and homophobia within specific operational commands.

Both tribunals found that one MPS officer in particular, Nigel Quantrell, to be responsible for the harassment and victimisation that Mr. Maxwell received whilst he was convalescing. It is therefore surprising that this member of the MPS's senior leadership team has been promoted on two occasions since 2009. First, it seems that Mr. Quantrell served as Chief Inspector of Hillingdon Police with, quite shockingly, responsibility for, inter alia, diversity and professional standards.35

In December 2012, Mr. Quantrell was then promoted to Superintendent of Lambeth Police with overall responsibility for Operation Trident in the borough.36 As per the MPS’ own description of this Operation, a key “enabler” is community relations: “speaking and listening to communities and acting on their concerns”.37 Given the ET and EAT’s definitive findings against Mr. Quantrell, it is extraordinary that he has been promoted to posts that require developing trust with different communities in one of London’s most diverse boroughs. By promoting officers like Mr. Quantrell to such senior ranks, moreover, the inference is clear: those who abuse are promoted; those who report wrongdoing are victimised. Mr. Maxwell submits that the failure to take discrimination seriously and failure to investigate are failures of leadership that have a trickledown effect upon the organisation as a whole. MPS’ senior managers must take the lead and set the example that discrimination is not acceptable. This can only be done by a commitment at the highest level to proper investigation and accountability. The MPS’ culture of ‘containment’ and ‘covering-up’, moreover, punishes the victims and not perpetrators. As this submission demonstrates, various senior MPS officials acknowledge that racism and discrimination is part of the fabric of the MPS.

IV. Impact Upon Diversity and Equality in the UK Police The human element of this Submission concerns the sad but preventable story of how a competent and well-regarded young police officer was “hounded out [of the MPS] like an “enemy of the

34 Judge Byrne concluded “the Respondent failed to train officers in the application of the [Reporting of Wrongdoing] policy and failed to comply with it on this occasion” ET Para 301. Note: Emphasis added. 35 Metropolitan Police Service, Organisation Chart for Hillingdon Police (6 December 2011), http://www.met.police.uk/foi/pdfs/who_we_are_and_what_we_do/borough/hillingdon_organisational_ chart_2011.pdf, Date of last access: 13 June 2013. 36 Metropolitan Police Service, Senior Leadership Team for Lambeth Police http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Senior-Leadership- Team/1400016941335/1400016941335?scope_id=1257246764163', Date of last access: 13 June 2013. 37 Metropolitan Police Service, Trident: Gun Crime Command, http://content.met.police.uk/Article/Who-we- are/1400014982729/gangcrime, Date of last access: 13 June 2013.

224 state”.38 Indeed, in his final Performance Development Review, Mr. Maxwell’s supervising officer remarked: “[Kevin] takes full responsibility for his work which is completed to a high standard”. Concluding: “[he is] a strong team player […] well-liked and respected by the team who value his contribution and effort”.39 Beyond Kevin Maxwell’s story, however, there are also broader concerns for the MPS as an institution. Mr. Maxwell notes recent evidence provided by Retired Chief Superintendent Dal Babu to the Home Affairs Committee concerning the lack of BME officers in UK police services and, in particular, the failure of these officers to be promoted to senior ranks.40 Current MPS Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, however, believes that there could be a BME MPS Commissioner within ten years.41 This seems somewhat unlikely since there are currently no BME officers from any UK police service on the strategic command course, an executive training course for mid-level officers seeking promotion to chief officer rank. Indeed, earlier this year, the Minister of State for Policing and Justice, the Rt. Hon Damian Green, commented that he “was struck by how far we still need to improve representation of women, black and minority ethnic populations and other protected groups in the police, especially at senior levels”.42 Sir Peter Fahy, Lead Spokesperson on workforce development for the Association of Chief Police Officers and Chief Constable of the Great Manchester Police, recently asserted that a more diverse police force should be a legal requirement: This is not about targets or political correctness. It is about operational need. Policing is unique, we need to be legitimate within the community because of the exercise of power. Often we are out there resolving disputes between communities and we need officers that understand different communities and different backgrounds. Then there is the practical stuff about surveillance and undercover officers […] the operational need is great.43 Charles Crichlow, President of the National Black Police Association (NBPA), concurs: “It is unacceptable that in the twenty first century less than 5% of Police Officers in England and Wales are from Black and ethnic minority backgrounds”.44 The NBPA also claim that the MPS is still largely “institutionally racist”, citing evidence of disproportionate use of stop-and-search against the black community and lack of advancement by senior minority officers.45 The public agree. 59% of BME Londoners consider the MPS as “institutionally racist”.46 In order for the Police Service to recruit a greater quantity of officers from BME backgrounds, they must change widespread public perception. Crucially, this change must start from within. This is supported by the recent evidence of Mike Fuller, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of the Crown Prosecution Service and Former Chief Constable of Kent Police, to the Home Affairs Committee: “One of things I did [whilst at Kent Police] was to make it quite clear that racism would not be tolerated, very much a zero-tolerance policy, and that has to come from the top and there has to be will

38 The Times, 15 May 2013. 39 Employment Tribunal, Judgment, Para. 69. 40 House of Commons, Home Affairs Committee, Uncorrected Transcript of Oral Evidence: Leadership and Standards in the Police Service, 23 April 2013. 41 Evening Standard, ‘The Met “could have its first black chief within the next ten years”’, http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/the-met-could-have-its-first-black-chief-within-the-next-10- years-8580062.html. Date of last access: 14 June 2013. 42 The Guardian, ‘Call for new law to force police to tackle diversity crisis at the top’, 27 January 2013. 43 Ibid. 44 National Black Police Association, NBPA Press Release: Stephen Lawrence, Twenty Years On, http://www.nbpa.co.uk/home/nbpa-press-release, Date of last access: 14 June 2013. 45 Ibid. 46 ITV News Online, ‘59% of minorities thinks Met is institutionally racist’, 23 April 2013.

225 from the top and the top management team and governance mechanism as well”. 47 We also submit that elite police commands such as Special Operations 15 are particularly sensitive in nature. Not only does SO15 undertake counter-terrorism operations at all ports of entry into and exit from London, but we also understand from media reports that this Command is charged with the responsibility for investigating the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby.48 Given the intense media interest in this case, the actions and behaviour of officers belonging to SO15 are likely to come under high levels of scrutiny. If some of the officers that have been seconded to the Command are unable to interact with their colleagues without resorting to discriminatory victimisation and harassment, this does not bode well for this Directorate’s treatment of the general public. Moreover, given the nature of its duties, any failures in the counter-terrorism command could have a serious impact upon national security and, as such, place the general public at risk.

V. Conclusion Kevin Maxwell was a young and talented police officer who had served with distinction in the Greater Manchester Police. His abilities were well known to his superiors, and he was well liked and respected by his colleagues. Shortly after the Metropolitan Police Service created Special Operations 15 – an elite command charged with the responsibility of providing a rigorous and coherent response to threat of terrorism in London – Mr. Maxwell was invited to join. Soon after commencing his role at Heathrow Airport, he became upset and concerned by the racist and homophobic manner in which a number of his colleagues behaved. When Mr. Maxwell tried to raise his concerns with senior leadership in SO15, he was ignored. As the harassment and discrimination at Heathrow continued, Mr. Maxwell became evermore distressed and anxious. Such was the trauma of these events that our Client was forced to take extended sick leave and later resign his position. He now suffers from chronic depression characterised by high levels of anxiety, he is unemployed and homeless, and possesses spiralling levels of personal debt. He feels utterly betrayed by the MPS. He feels the MPS tried to destroy him. As this Submission makes clear, this outcome was preventable. Had the leadership within the MPS acted more swiftly and decisively to tackle discrimination and harassment, the MPS would still benefit from an excellent asset, and Mr. Maxwell would still have a home and a job. Large sums of taxpayers’ money and countless hours of MPS time, moreover, would have been saved. As opposed to admit fault and sanction corrective behaviour, the MPS pursued Mr. Maxwell through two employment tribunals. In both, the MPS was found to be at fault. The clock cannot be set back for Mr. Maxwell, nor the years of suffering undone. Through his campaigning efforts, he seeks to improve the climate under which black and other minority officers serve. Ultimately, he hopes that no other officers suffer like he has. By way of conclusion, Mr. Maxwell offers the Committee the following recommendations: − Change should come from the top: If the MPS wishes to stamp out racism, homophobia and other prejudice within the MPS, there must be decisive and unwavering support at the highest echelons in the MPS. − Zero Tolerance on discrimination at operational levels: If the MPS wants to prevent racism and

47 House of Commons, Home Affairs Committee, 23 April 2013. Note: emphasis added. 48 Sky News Online, ‘Woolwich Murder Suspect “Held Two Months Ago”’, 26 May 2013.

226 discrimination, they must apply a zero tolerance policy at all operational levels. All complaints must be treated seriously, thoroughly and vigorously investigated and, where necessary, appropriate sanctions applied. − Ensure a victim-centred approach: When undertaking internal investigations into specific complaints, the MPS’ principal focus must be to protect victims. The MPS must not seek to harass or victimise whistle-blowers into silence. − Rigorously enforce standards within MPS to prevent ‘spill-over’ into interactions with the public: If the MPS wants to ensure that its officers treat the general public with the according dignity and respect, they must first get their ‘own house’ in order. A police service that is discriminatory on the inside, will also be discriminatory on the outside. − Change requires transparency and openness: The MPS current culture of ‘containment’ and ‘covering-up’ punishes the victims and not the perpetrators. To affect meaningful change, the MPS must be open and transparent in its investigations, both to serving officers as well as the general public as a whole. − Procedures exist to be enforced: The employment tribunals found that the MPS had an adequate Reporting of Wrongdoing Policy (RWP) but failed to implement it. Going forward, the RWP must be an essential part of management training; senior management who circumvent the RWP should be punished. − The MPS needs to change in order to achieve wider community participation: Recent polls have shown that trust in the Police amongst BME and other non-white communities remains low. So long as the MPS appears to be ‘institutionally racist’, the MPS have little chance in recruiting more candidates from diverse backgrounds.

Kevin Maxwell

With the kind assistance of McCue & Partners LLP: Courtenay Barklem, Matthew Jury and Stefan Hyman

June 2013

227 Supplementary written evidence submitted by the Home Office [LSP 19d] [Reported to the House of Commons, 2 July 2013]

Letter from Rt Hon Damian Green MP, Minister of State for policing and criminal justice, to the Chair of the Committee, 1 July 2013

At my most recent session before your committee, I undertook to write to you on three issues: - • Levels of police officer transfers between other police forces in England and Wales following publication of Tom Winsor's report recommending a starting salary of between £19,000 and £21,000 for new constables; • The register of Chief Constable interests; • Publication of the Taser statistics.

During the session, you also requested that I provide additional information on the Police ICT Company. I would also like to clarify the evidence I gave in response to the Committee's questions on undercover law enforcement operations. Further detail on each of these issues is provided below.

Police Officer Transfers

The Home Office does not publish data regarding the number of police officers who transfer to another as a matter of routine. To assist the Committee in its Inquiry, I have provided figures for the period 2007/2008-2011/2012. If the Committee wishes to write to me again later this year, I would be happy to provide figures for 2012/2013 when those figures become available.

Transfers to other Home Transfers to non-Home Office Office police forces police forces 2007/2008 1515 64 2008/2009 1408 66 2009/2010 891 39 2010/2011 355 16 2011/2012 322 28

The information in the table shows that the rate of transfers from one police force to either other Home Office police forces or to non-Home Office police forces has declined steadily since 2007/2008. There could be a variety of factors explaining this reduction. These could include reductions in recruitment levels (and the recruitment and promotion freezes introduced by many police forces) in the run-up and subsequent to the spending review announcement in 2010. The figures do not appear to show that the prospect of changes to police pay and conditions had a dramatic impact on the number of police officers transferring from one police force to another.

Register of Chief Constable Interests

As the Home Secretary made clear in her statement on 12 February, and in line with the recommendations made by Lord Justice Leveson, national registers of chief officers' pay and perks packages, gifts and hospitality, outside interests, including second jobs, and their contact with the media will be published online.

The register will include business interests, as well as interests in voluntary groups and other associations. The College is designing, and will own and maintain the register. It is in discussion with partners as to the most appropriate location for publication of the registers.

228

Publication of Taser statistics

Dr Huppert has recently tabled a question about publication of Taser statistics. My answer explained that the original database used to store the Police Use of Taser statistics was created in 2003. This version of the database became increasingly outdated and was operating outside of its original design specification. A decision was taken to develop a new database in 2011 which would automatically enter the data from the Taser data forms. We have experienced significant issues with the migration to this new version of the database.

We have resolved these problems and are in the final stages of a thorough data validation exercise. We will publish this information in the Autumn. As these figures will be managed as Official Statistics, we will pre-announce the date of publication and at the same time, announce the dates of subsequent statistical reports. I will be happy to ensure that the Committee is made aware of these dates when published.

Police ICT Company

The Police ICT Company was established in June 2012 to transform how the police buy and use technology. It is currently jointly owned by the Home Secretary and the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners.

The Company is designed to be agile and flexible in size; and will act as a gateway to enable the police to access private sector expertise, skills and experience through partnerships with industry. Recruitment for a Chair and work to identify suitable premises for the new Company is underway.

The Company will have a core team who will provide strategic advice and guidance, procurement, implementation and contract management services to its customers. Some PCCs, and other law enforcement agencies, are using these services now. Work is already in progress with Gloucestershire, Staffordshire, Thames Valley and Hampshire.

Scrutiny of undercover officers

During the hearing, I gave evidence on the scrutiny of undercover law enforcement officers. I said that we were raising the authorisation level to Chief Constable for these kind of activities. Having read the transcript of the session, I wanted to clarify that our proposal to raise the authorisation level applies to long term deployments, as recommended by HMIC. Deployments which extend beyond 12 months will have to be authorised by the Chief Constable and approved by the Office for Surveillance Commissioners. Deployments of shorter duration are authorised by an Assistant Chief Constable and will be notified to the OSC. The OSC can raise any concerns with the authorising officer and will monitor the authorisations as part of the on-going inspection regime. In light of the report by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary published on 27 June, I am also reviewing the internal authorisation levels for shorter deployments, and considering whether there is more that needs to be done to strengthen the process in relation to more short-term operations.

If you or your Committee require any further information on any issues relevant to your inquiry, I would be pleased to provide it.

Rt Hon Damian Green MP, Minister of State for policing and criminal justice July 2013

229