House of Commons Science and Technology Committee The Forensic Science Service Seventh Report of Session 2010–12 Volume I: Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Additional written evidence is contained in Volume II, available on the Committee website at www.parliament.uk/science Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 22 June 2011 HC 855 Published on 1 July 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £22.00 The Science and Technology Committee The Science and Technology Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration and policy of the Government Office for Science and associated public bodies. Current membership Andrew Miller (Labour, Ellesmere Port and Neston) (Chair) Gavin Barwell (Conservative, Croydon Central) Gregg McClymont (Labour, Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) Stephen McPartland (Conservative, Stevenage) Stephen Metcalfe (Conservative, South Basildon and East Thurrock) David Morris (Conservative, Morecambe and Lunesdale) Stephen Mosley (Conservative, City of Chester) Pamela Nash (Labour, Airdrie and Shotts) Jonathan Reynolds (Labour/Co-operative, Stalybridge and Hyde) Graham Stringer (Labour, Blackley and Broughton) Roger Williams (Liberal Democrat, Brecon and Radnorshire) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental Select Committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No.152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at http://www.parliament.uk/science. A list of reports from the Committee in this Parliament is included at the back of this volume. The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in printed volume(s). Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are: Glenn McKee (Clerk); Dr Stephen McGinness (Second Clerk); Dr Farrah Bhatti (Committee Specialist); Xameerah Malik (Committee Specialist); Andy Boyd (Senior Committee Assistant); Julie Storey (Committee Assistant); Pam Morris (Committee Assistant); and Becky Jones (Media Officer). Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Science and Technology Committee, Committee Office, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general inquiries is: 020 7219 2793; the Committee’s e- mail address is: [email protected] The Forensic Science Service 1 Contents Report Page Summary 3 1 Background 5 The inquiry 5 What is forensic science? 7 2 The forensics market 9 Forensic science provision in the UK 9 England and Wales 9 Scotland and Northern Ireland 9 Recent history of the FSS 10 Forensic science for profit? 12 Police expenditure 14 A shrinking market 14 Full costs of police internal forensics 18 National Forensic Framework Agreement 20 Commoditisation 21 Fragmentation 24 The next procurement framework 26 Financial position of the FSS 27 The transformation programme 27 Conclusions 31 3 Private and police forensic science provision 33 Quality standards 33 Private forensic science providers 34 Police forensic laboratories 35 Impartiality and independence 38 Private forensic science providers 39 Police forensic laboratories 39 Powers of the Forensic Science Regulator 43 Input to the FSS closure decision 45 Transfer of FSS work and staff 45 Archives 49 4 Research and development (R&D) 55 Home Office Review of R&D 55 The Home Office’s consideration of the impacts to R&D 55 UK forensic science R&D 58 Forensic science research in universities 59 Coordination 62 Skills 64 5 The decision to close the FSS 67 2 The Forensic Science Service Consultation and evidence-gathering 67 Costs of closing the FSS 71 Alternatives to closure 73 Final conclusions 75 Conclusions and recommendations 77 Annex 85 Glossary 85 Formal Minutes 86 Witnesses 87 List of printed written evidence 87 List of additional written evidence 88 List of Reports from the Committee during the current Parliament 91 The Forensic Science Service 3 Summary The Forensic Science Service (FSS) is a Government-owned company. It provides services to police forces across England and Wales, together with other agencies such as the Crown Prosecution Service, British Transport Police and HM Revenue & Customs. Since the early 1990s, the FSS has gradually progressed from a public to a commercial organisation, and a market has developed in forensic services. The FSS competes with private forensic science providers and held around 60% market share in December 2010. On 14 December 2010 the Government announced its intention to “support the wind- down of FSS, transferring or selling off as much of its operations as possible” by March 2012. The FSS’s operating losses and the projected shrinking forensics market were cited, and during our inquiry we were also informed about legal constraints surrounding the decision. Overall, we consider that the Government, in making its decision, did not give enough consideration to the impact on forensic science research and development (R&D), the capacity of private providers to absorb the FSS’s 60% market share and the wider implications for the criminal justice system. These considerations appear to have been overlooked in favour of the financial bottom line. In addition, we consider that the Home Office’s Chief Scientific Adviser’s satisfaction with his exclusion from the decision-making process and his failure to challenge the decision to be unacceptable. The FSS’s dire financial position appears to have arisen from a complex combination of factors, principally the shrinking forensics market, driven by increasing police in-sourcing of forensic science services, and a forensic procurement framework that has driven down prices and does not adequately recognise the value of complex forensic services. The stabilisation of the forensics market is therefore now of crucial importance for all forensic science providers external to the police. We recommend that the Government introduce measures to ensure that the police do not further in-source forensic science services that are already available from external providers through the National Forensic Framework Agreement (NFFA). The current and previous Governments’ ambitions for a truly competitive market have been undermined by the police customer increasingly becoming the competitor. It is an issue of great concern that many police laboratories are not accredited to the same quality standards as the FSS and private sector providers offering services through the NFFA. We are of the view that the transfer of work from the FSS to a non-accredited police or private laboratory would be highly undesirable, as it would pose significant and unacceptable risks to criminal justice. The role of the Forensic Science Regulator is vital and we urge the Government to bring forward proposals to provide him with statutory powers to enforce compliance with quality standards. The FSS manages a large archive of case files, papers and retained materials. These are an important resource for the criminal justice system and we recommend that the archives, and the intellectual capability supporting them, remain as a single, accessible resource. Forensic science R&D in the UK is not healthy, and we call on the Home Office and Research Councils to develop a new national research budget for forensic science. 4 The Forensic Science Service While we consider that there could be merit in retaining the FSS as a public agency focusing on R&D, training, quality standards and the maintenance of forensic archives, we are not convinced that the separation of research and service provision would be the ideal outcome for the FSS. Winding down the FSS will be a complex task and we are not confident that an orderly transition can be achieved by the extremely challenging deadline of March 2012. We recommend that the deadline should be extended by at least six months to enable the Government to consult on and determine a wider strategy for forensic science. The FSS should be supported during this period and the transition process must be carefully monitored to ensure that it does not further contribute to market instability or lead to a diminution of service to the criminal justice system. The primary consideration throughout must be the health of the criminal justice system. The Forensic Science Service 5 1 Background The inquiry 1. Forensic science is integral to the criminal justice system and often plays a key role in providing evidence throughout criminal proceedings. On 14 December 2010, the Home Office announced that the Government-owned Forensic Science Service (FSS), then delivering around 60% of forensic services to police forces in England and Wales, would be wound down. The statement, which we set out in full, outlined the Government’s decision and rationale: The Forensic Science Service (FSS) was an executive agency which was granted trading fund status in 1999, a step designed to increase its financial flexibility. Then, following the McFarland Review in 2002, FSS Ltd was established as a GovCo, wholly owned by the government, in December 2005. The intention was that this be a transitional step towards a ‘public private partnership’. In the event, however, no further progress was made. This lack of progress has led in our view to opportunities for reform being missed, and continuing reductions in the value of publicly owned assets. The previous government did not reform the Forensic Science Service when it had the chance, and instead allowed it to maintain a cost base far higher than its commercial rivals. This meant that FSS continued operating uncompetitive terms and conditions and expanded its employment levels between 1999 and 2003. This was undertaken without bringing down the cost base towards a level where FSS would be able to compete. Commercial rivals, many established by former FSS members of staff, have taken market share from the former state run monopoly.