Handling of major sensitive issues

Report: 10
Date: 8 February 2001
By: Clerk

Summary

On the evening of Monday 29 January the Metropolitan Police published on its website its report Inquiry into the Concerns of the Lindo family. As a result, the MPA Chair, accompanied by AC Michael Todd and Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring (PSPM) Chair Richard Sumray, held a briefing for the media the following day to explain how the Met would respond to the Lindo report recommendations via an action plan overseen by the MPA. This report analyses the process and attempts to draw on the lessons learnt for future high profile briefings.

A. Recommendation

That Members agree the proposed new contact systems outlined in section C of this report and authorise the Communications Group to put the new arrangements into immediate effect.

B. Background

The substantive issues arising from the report into the concerns raised by the Lindo family will be considered in detail by the Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee (PSPM) on 13 February. This report is confined to making a series of proposals on ways in which Members can be kept better informed as to the progress of inquiries and as high profile news breaks.

It had been the intention of the MPA to publish the Lindo report by bringing it before the full Authority or one of its committees, the PSPM, during February.

The MPS informed the MPA on Monday that they had information to suggest a third party was planning to publish the report on the world wide web on Tuesday 30 January.

The MPS took the view that they, not the third party, should publish the report themselves.

At a meeting between the MPA Chair, Clerk, Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner late Monday afternoon 29 January at New Scotland Yard, it was decided that the report would be published by the MPS the same day on its website.

The decision was also taken at the meeting that the MPA should arrange a press briefing the next day at Romney House to set out the process for implementing the report's recommendations.

As soon as this decision was relayed to the MPA Communications Group, immediately following the meeting, Members were e-mailed at 5.27pm on Monday 29 January with the information regarding the publication and the press briefing.

On Monday evening, PSPM's Chair Richard Sumray met with Reshard Auladin to discuss the MPA's lines for the press briefing.

At 9.30am on Tuesday 30 January, these lines were faxed to Communications Group to enable a statement to be written for the Chair to deliver at the press briefing. This was cleared, following amendments, at 10.55 am, five minutes before the press briefing commenced.

Copies of the report, in its revised version, had only been produced in very limited numbers, for circulation on a need to know basis. Not all Members therefore had seen the report at this stage.

C. Proposed new systems for communication

1. To avoid the possibility of Members not accessing their e-mails for whatever reason, a ring-round system, which also operates out of office hours, should be put in place to alert Members to matters of major importance or consequence.

2. Members should be given the opportunity to express their views to the Chair and Clerk wherever possible when matters of major concern are being dealt with, subject to time constraints. Unless they receive the relevant information speedily, this will not be possible in fast-moving events (see 1 above).

3. The MPS gives the MPA reasonable notice, where possible, of major decisions which have a bearing on the role of the MPA, or is deemed to be of some considerable public concern or interest. In the case of the Lindo report, this started life as an internal MPS report, and it was the Commissioner's decision whether or not to publish. In the case of an MPA commissioned report, the timing of publication would be a matter for Members to decide. This is much more likely to be the position in the case of future reports of this type.

4. As soon as practicable, Members must receive copies of reports for their information and consideration. It will not always be appropriate for all Members to see all reports if they are not to be published. The need to know principle applies to Authority Members as it does within the MPS. Members have been concerned that in the case of the Lindo report most were neither given copies of the report, nor had an opportunity to study the report before its publication. Sufficient copies of reports must be made available for Members, or permission given to photocopy them for distribution to Members. Despite a number of requests to the MPS over several weeks for sufficient copies for Members, only six extra copies were sent to the MPA, arriving on the afternoon of 30 January. These problems should not occur in the case of an MPA commissioned report.

5. At the commissioning stage of a report or the setting up of an inquiry, which will eventually produce a report of its proceedings, consideration must be given to how the report or its findings are to be presented or published at the conclusion of the process.

6. During an inquiry, Members should be kept in touch with developments via regular bulletins and through reports to the PSPM committee.

D. Financial implications

None.

E. Review arrangements

A report to the full Authority's April meeting to assess how the new arrangements are working.

F. Background papers

• MPA press release MPA 09/2001, Met must move quickly on Lindo report recommendations to rebuild trust, says MPA.
• MPA press release MPA 42/00, Statement by Toby Harris, Chair of the MPA, on the Delroy and Sonia Lindo Metropolitan Police report.
• MPA press release MPA 03/00, MPA statement on the case of Mr Delroy Lindo.

F. Contact details

The author of this report is Philip Powell.

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback