Race and Faith Inquiry - formal response by the MPA

Report: 6a
Date: 25 November 2010
By: Chief Executive

Summary

This report sets out the MPA’S formal response to the Race and Faith Inquiry recommendations insofar as they relate to the Authority. The report also sets out, in broad terms, an Authority view of the recommendations relating to the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS).

A full copy of the Race and Faith Inquiry report can be obtained on the MPA website. (www.mpa.gov.uk/downloads/publications/race-faith-inquiry.pdf)

A. Recommendations

That

1. members agree the approach to the implementation of the Inquiry Panel’s recommendations at paragraphs 13-15; and
2. the implementation and monitoring of recommendations be delegated to the Communities, Equalities and Engagement Committee.

B. Supporting information

Background

1. When the Race and Faith Inquiry was announced, the Mayor of London made clear his reasons for setting it up, saying “Clearly the issues of race and discrimination in the Metropolitan Police must be examined. That is why I have asked Cindy Butts to look at some key questions, such as the progression of Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) candidates through the ranks of the service, the relation between staff associations and management, and the extent to which there is visible and effective leadership around race and faith issues.” Both the Authority and the Race and Faith Inquiry report acknowledge the significant progress that the MPS has made in the last ten years, particularly around recruitment, and the changes it has made and the steps it has taken to address under representation in all its forms. Where both the Inquiry Panel and the Authority diverge from the MPS perspective is in the belief that the culture of the organisation has changed quickly enough.

2. It is the Authority’s view that taking action to deliver the recommendations without delivering cultural change is not enough. As the Inquiry Panel pointed out, there is a need for a ‘fresh and energetic commitment to making the principles of equality, diversity and human rights a practical reality for people in the MPS’. In addition, although this Inquiry was concerned with the issues of race and faith, the Authority considers there should be no hierarchy of equalities in the response to the Inquiry’s recommendations and that – wherever possible – they should be read as applying to all under-represented groups.

3. The Authority and the MPS have yet to finalise the arrangements for implementing the recommendations and embedding the lessons learnt from the Inquiry in order to deliver sustained cultural change. This will be the subject of further discussion once this report has been considered.

Culture

4. The staff associations, the Trade Union Side (TUS) and the Staff Support Associations (SSAs) can provide a litmus test for the organisation in shifting the culture and values of the Service to become more recognisable to under-represented staff (recommendations 1 and 2). The business case for equality and diversity in the police service is well established, but the Authority believes this needs to be more readily promoted across the Met as a business priority since there is clear evidence that it enhances creativity, encourage innovation, and improves organisational performance and productivity. Research shows that a diverse team works more effectively to solve problems, provide a rich variety of approaches and is more innovative in providing lasting solutions, all of which will be critical in delivering the Inquiry’s recommendations and improving performance at a time of significant financial challenges. (The flip side of this is the damage and cost to organisations who do not appreciate the impact of not recognising the business case in terms of reputation and quality of service delivery.)

5. As the Mayor highlighted in launching the Inquiry, there needs to be clear and unambiguous leadership of race and faith issues and in the MPS this must be from Management Board as an entity and individual Management Board members personally. In the Authority’s view it is not a role for one member of Management Board or part of the MPS, whether the Deputy Commissioner or the Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate (DCFD), since the perception amongst many staff associations, trade unions and SSAs is that inevitably responsibility at the most senior levels of the organisation is then abrogated to that one individual or Directorate. Demonstrating visible leadership in every Business Group, leading from the front on equality and diversity, and actively engaging and discussing race and faith issues are vital at all levels of the MPS.

6. This means leadership across all aspects of equality and diversity - race, gender, gender identity, disability, age, religion or belief, sexual orientation, people who work part-time and alternative working patterns, people with different educational and social backgrounds, and people with caring responsibilities. Showing visible leadership in this area includes promoting and using the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) process in all aspects of policing, practising equality and valuing diversity when making decisions about staff, modelling inclusive behaviours with confidence; creating an inclusive working environment for diverse teams of people; and creating opportunities to engage with people from different backgrounds. In other words, all the MPS’s senior managers must accept a responsibility to tackle disproportionality, and to engage with the staff associations, trade unions and SSAs on issues of equality and diversity in order to achieve the positive changes we are all working for.

7. In addition to leadership, the Authority considers that communication is also vital. Whilst the staff survey is a useful tool, and having Diversity Executive Board and a Performance Board oversee performance is undoubtedly valuable, the issues and outcomes from their activities need to be clearly, positively and regularly communicated to all staff, and the opportunity provided for feedback. If Business Groups fail to deliver real and lasting change, for example in response to the Inquiry report or the action plans arising from the staff surveys, this should be publicly addressed.

Promotion and selection

8. Promotion should be based upon objective evidence against the required criteria, with assessments and feedback carried out by trained, objective assessors. The MPS were intending to introduce an independent special advisory group to provide some form of external scrutiny or assessment of promotion processes, but this has not yet been taken forward. In terms of the Inquiry report, central to recommendations 5 (around temporary promotions) and 7 (promotion and lateral development into specialist units) is the need to ensure transparency. In any event, the Authority would like to see consideration given to using a more diverse group of independent assessors who have been properly trained in assessment, cultural awareness etc. In terms of internal temporary promotions (other than for the Trial of Work Based Assessment (TOWBAR) where they are obligatory), these should be time limited in order to avoid ‘blocking’ substantive promotion opportunities.

9. In addition, the Authority believes that removing the right of veto will not remove the line manager’s right to assess an application, but it will make clear the basis of his or her evaluation and it is the Authority’s view it should apply equally to lateral development or transfer opportunities, training courses, mentoring, coaching or secondment opportunities etc. As the Inquiry Report identified, at the present time there is a culture of “informalism” where things are done outside the written process, including discouraging would be applicants, and this needs to end. It will be clear from the response to the recommendations that issues around promotion need further discussion between the MPA and the MPS.

Retention

10. The Authority acknowledges the success of the MPS’s recruitment activity, but there needs to be a similar acknowledgement by the Met that not enough is being done to address disproportionality in terms of resignations, Personal Development Review (PDR) outcomes, Employment Tribunals (ETs), Fairness at Work (FaW) cases and disciplinary action (recommendation 6). This is an example of action being taken which has not delivered sufficient change; the Authority believes the Met must implement this recommendation and follow through if the outcome is unsatisfactory. For example, having experimented with other models of exit polling in the past the MPS currently carries out exit interviews by phone, by questionnaire or in face-to-face discussion depending upon the needs of the individual, but it is not clear that there is sufficient organisational learning from the process and a more creative, proactive approach is required.

11. The Inquiry Panel drew specific attention to the work of Professor Simon Holdaway who identified that exit interviews are an inadequate tool for understanding and addressing the issue of BME retention, since resignation is not one decision but the culmination of a series of decisions which have been triggered in the course of one’s employment. The Authority concurs with his findings and considers that unless there is a more effective monitoring system for analysing the experiences of BME staff during the course of their employment, the MPS will not gain a better understanding of the contribution and impact on resignation levels.

Learning and development

12. The Authority acknowledges that the MPS Leadership Academy has carried out some innovative and ground breaking work around leadership development. Nevertheless, there needs to be a broader and more sustained commitment to incorporating equality and diversity more clearly as part of the leadership and development philosophy for all managers and staff (recommendations 3 and 8) and greater collaborative working with the DCFD. This is particularly important if DCFD are to develop and promote the equality and diversity agenda, including holding the organisation and managers to account for delivery, as envisaged by the Inquiry Panel. One option the Authority has put forward, which could be rolled out under the ‘Professionalism’ strand, may be to adopt a similar approach to that used for intrusive supervision, i.e. for this, as part of the Presence agenda, managers spent a day showing how they would demonstrate their ability to know what their people are doing and ensuring it is done properly. In terms of these recommendations managers needing to show how they would demonstrate their ability to develop staff, for example by providing mentoring, coaching or secondment opportunities.

Response to the recommendations addressed by the Authority

13. The following paragraphs set out the MPA response to each of the relevant recommendations and sub recommendations as follows:

• Agree
• Disagree
• Needs further discussion.

It will be part of the implementation process to ensure that both the MPA and MPS responses can be evidenced:

Recommendation 4

14. A more flexible approach to recruitment, to increase diverse representation at senior ranks and develop the entire organisation and its performance, is required. This means:

1. organising a national symposium, hosted by the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), to explore the benefits and practicality of multi-point entry for police officers, removing the requirement to progress through every rank. Agree – will take place in City Hall on 12 January 2011; and
2. instigating discussions with the Government on the issue of multi-point entry. Agree – part of Authority’s response to “Policing in the 21st century: reconnecting police and the people,” consultation.
3. investing in streamlining the channel from PCSO to police constable so that suitable candidates can be fast tracked. Agree – action taken

Recommendation 9

15. The Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) must reinforce its oversight, scrutiny and direction of Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) diversity strategy and performance and address the challenges which currently exist within the MPA. This means:

1. strengthening the equality and diversity expertise within the organisation at a sufficiently senior level through the appointment of a Head of Diversity Agree – a new Head of Equalities and Engagement took up post on 20 September 2010.
2. arranging for the Head of Diversity to sit on the MPA’s Senior Management Team (SMT); Disagree - the preferred option is for the post holder to be a professional adviser to SMT, attending meeting regularly but not a formal member.
3. reviewing and making improvements to ensure equalities are integrated throughout ALL of the MPA’s work and in particular its committees and sub committees; Agree – part of a number of work streams
4. reviewing the focus and terms of reference of the MPA Communities, Equalities and People (CEP) Committee and its sub-committees; Agree – this will include robust oversight of EIAs within both the MPA and MPS
5. ensuring equalities is adequately resourced in the current restructuring exercise to deliver Met Forward; Agree – Authority’s future budgetary considerations will, of necessity, depend upon decisions arising from the recent publication of the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) but there is provision in planned budgets,
6. communicating more effectively with its partners and stakeholders about its priorities with regard to equality and diversity; Agree - will initially be achieved through the Community Safety Partnership (CSP) and Community Police Engagement Group (CPEG) briefings, but will, in due course, be extended to the London Crime Reduction Board (LCRB).
7. being explicit about its expectations of senior police leaders through the recruitment and promotion process for ACPO officers; Agree – candidates will be expected to champion equality explicity and diversity within their business group and challenge any areas of poor performance - and
8. championing the case for change in national structures through the Association of Police Authorities (APA). Agree - In the light of “Policing in the 21st century: reconnecting police and the people,” there will clearly be changes for the APA and future governance structures for the police service.

16. According to the ‘Principles of Policing’ expounded by Charles Rowan and Richard Mayne as the first and joint Commissioners of the Met, the police provide a uniform presence on the streets of London by recognising “always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.” In order to do so, the police must “maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.”

17. Nearly two hundred years later, every member of the police service is still expected to use his or her best endeavours on behalf of the public to tackle everything from low level disorder to counter terrorist activities; the Authority expects the Met to address the Inquiry recommendations and, the issue of under representation and disproportionality within its own staff, in a similarly comprehensive way.

18. The Authority and the MPS will continue to champion equality and diversity through both the implementation of this Inquiry report and other related work. There is no doubt the Authority has been a real catalyst for genuine and lasting change in terms of the level of under-represented groups in the MPS, providing both financial and practical support for a range of initiatives. In the next few years the challenge for the MPA or the new Policing and Crime Commissioner (PCC), having set high standards and expectations, is to rigorously hold the MPS to account until these have been achieved.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equalities Impact

1. There are enormous equalities and diversity impacts arising from this report. Whilst an EIA was carried out for the Inquiry, further assessments will have to be completed as the recommendations are agreed and rolled out by both the MPA and the MPS. This will be monitored by the Authority as part of its audit and assurance processes.

Met Forward

2. There are two specific work streams within Met Forward – “ensuring a representative workforce” and “the Race and Faith Inquiry” – which are directly related, but undoubtedly others, e.g. around engagement and partnerships, will become more explicitly concerned with the Inquiry recommendations over the coming months.

Financial Implications

3. At this stage there is a £40k budget for equalities in the MPA budget for 2010-11, excluding staff costs. There are no immediate financial implications arising from this report as the recommendations have not been agreed by the Authority. In any event, it is unlikely any additional funding will be available given the likely impact of the CSR.

Legal Implications

4. There are legal implications arising from the proposal around multi-point entry which will be considered in more detail as part of the national symposium. However, the current Home Office review of terms and conditions does provide a further opportunity to change entry requirements as part of a wider package of measures.

Environmental Implications

5. There are no environmental implications at this stage.

Risk Implications

6. There are no risk implications at this stage

D. Background papers

• Race and Faith Inquiry report, Full Authority (22 July 2010)

E. Contact details

Report author(s): Catherine Crawford, Chief Executive, MPA

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback