Annual report of the Professional Standards Cases Sub Committee

Report: 8
Date: 5 September 2011
By: Professional Standards Unit on behalf of the Chief Executive

Summary

This report provides an update on activity within the Professional Standards Cases Sub Committee over the previous committee year, highlighting the performance of members and officers against the standing orders.

A. Recommendations

That members note the report

B. Supporting information

Introduction

1. This report provides an update on activity within the Professional Standards Cases Sub Committee over the previous committee year, highlighting the performance of members and officers against the standing orders. It also outlines the Sub Committee’s ambitions for improvement over the coming year and provides information about future governance arrangements for professional standards.

Meetings and membership

2. The Committee has met ten times during the year. There are six members of the Committee. Reshard Auladin has been the Chair and James Cleverly the Vice-Chair. Other members have been Tony Arbour, Chris Boothman, Valerie Brasse, and Joanne McCartney.

Responsibilities

3. The Standing Orders for the Sub Committee are as follows:

Police Pensions Forfeiture

1. To determine whether forfeiture of a police officer’s pension should be considered because he or she has been convicted of an offence committed in connection with his/her service as a member of the police force which the Home Secretary may certify as either having been gravely injurious to the interests of the State or liable to lead to serious loss of confidence in the public service.

2. In the event of the Home Secretary issuing a certificate of forfeiture, to determine the proportion, if any, of the pension which may be forfeited permanently or temporarily.

Senior Officer Conduct

3. To investigate and deal with any allegations, report and complaints about the conduct of officers of ACPO rank in accordance with appropriate regulations.

4. To consider all matters relating to discipline against ACPO rank officers, within police regulations.

Business Interests

5. To exercise the Authority’s function in relation to business interests, including applications and requests for reconsideration from senior officers, and appeals from officers.

Dip Sampling

6. To exercise the functions of the Authority in relation to reviewing the quality assurance processes of the MPS complaint and conduct process in relation to officers, including all matters around dip sampling of MPS closed complaint and conduct files.

Equality and diversity

7. To have due regard in exercising the Sub-Committee’s responsibilities to equal opportunities generally, and the general duty of the Equality Act 2010.

Police Pensions Forfeiture

4. The Sub Committee has considered a total of 11 cases over the previous year. Seven cases are now considered closed, whereas four are ongoing.

5. The court in the case of Jones v The MPA (A/2010/89) resolved that K5 pension forfeiture should be applied only where the following conditions are met: that the offence was committed in connection with his/her service; and that the Secretary of State has certified that any conviction was injurious or liable to lead to serious loss of confidence. The court considered that the actual level of publicity given to the offence would be of ‘little or no weight’ and that the key factor is the potential for loss of confidence. They considered a front loading of any penalty (in this case an additional 15% for the first five years) to be arbitrary and ‘possibly oppressive’ and argued instead for a consistent approach to levels of forfeiture.

Senior Officer Conduct

6. The Sub Committee has considered a total of 13 allegations over the previous year. Eight cases are now considered closed, whereas five remain ongoing. A report is also submitted to the Sub Committee at each meeting as to decisions taken under delegated authority.

7. The court in the case of Jordan [2010] EWHC 1690 (Admin) resolved that for an allegation to relate to ‘conduct’ for the purposes of the PRA did not require it to allege personal misconduct or ‘behaviour of a particular quality, whether good or bad’. It also resolved that a decision by a chief officer which was confined to a particular subject fell outside the scope of the exemption for direction and control (which protects the legitimate operational discretion and responsibility of a chief officer). Both of these findings support a broad view of what may constitute a complaint or conduct matter.

Business Interests Appeals

8. The Sub Committee has considered a total of 5 appeals over the previous year. Three cases are now considered closed, whereas two remain ongoing.

Business Interest Applications

9. The Sub-Committee has considered 1 application this year, which is considered closed.

Dip-sampling

10. The MPA has been dip-sampling closed complaints made against MPS officers since November 2010. This process is in accordance with the statutory duty of police authorities to maintain an efficient and effective police force, which includes the requirement for them to keep themselves informed about the handling of complaints and misconduct matters by the force.

11. The dip-sampling process is not intended to act as a review of the decisions made in individual cases but rather to consider general issues of procedural compliance, to identify learning, and to reassure the public that MPS complaints handling is subject to independent oversight.

12. The Professional Standards Sub Committee has considered two tranches of ten cases. The first tranche was drawn from across the MPS, and the second from the borough of Enfield. The third tranche to be considered will be drawn thematically – from complaints regarding sexual offending.

13. Recent debate in the House of Lords regarding the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill alighted on the usefulness of the dip-sampling process, with a number of Lords emphasising the requirement for those responsible for oversight of the police to be made aware of the nature of complaints being made and how these are dealt with.

Equality and diversity

14. The Sub Committee has sought to establish equality and diversity at the heart of its considerations, and its standing orders have this year been amended to make this objective explicit.

15. It was previously reported to the Sub Committee that the recorded ethnicity of complainants (2009-2010) included: 15% black, 7% Asian; and 49% unknown. These figures raised an issue of disproportionately and of under-recording of ethnicity in relation to non-senior officer complaints. The Sub Committee has since been given assurances by the MPS that there is now a mandatory ‘diversity monitoring’ field in online complaints, and customer service officers have been given a ‘script’ to aid their collection of this information at front counters and over phones.

Other activity

16. This year saw the publication of revised Statutory Guidance by the IPCC. This guidance included a chapter on the monitoring and development of the complaints system, which mandated that police authorities focus on five key areas: monitoring through performance indicators; the recording of allegations; lessons learnt; ensuring quality; and measuring satisfaction.

17. These areas of work have been fully integrated into MPA business plans via the SOP Committee. This Committee has been proactive in monitoring systems in place to capture and disseminate learning and actions taken to implement the recommendations of the IPCC.

Next year

18. With the likely passage of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill in 2011, the policing governance landscape is facing dramatic change. Areas of potential change include in relation to the business of the Sub Committee include:

• The consideration of ACPO level complaints by the Commissioner;
• The right of appeal to the IPCC in all complaints to be replaced by right of appeal to Commissioner in relation to ‘less serious’ allegations; and
• The streamlining of the dispensation process.

19. In the interim, the Sub Committee will continue to build upon the development of its dip sampling process and will continue to deliver business as usual.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equalities Impact

1. Equalities impacts are considered as part of all reports received to the Sub Committee.

Met Forward

2. The Sub Committee contributes across the Met Forward programme, and specifically to Met Standards, by informing debates around performance measurement and force discipline.

Financial Implications

4. Financial impacts are considered as part of all reports received to the Sub Committee.

Legal Implications

5. Legal impacts are considered as part of all reports received to the Sub Committee.

Environmental Implications

6. Environmental impacts are considered as part of all reports received to the Sub Committee.

Risk Implications

7. Risk impacts are considered as part of all reports received to the Sub Committee.

D. Background papers

• Exempt item 10: list of cases considered 2010/11

E. Contact details

Report authors: Thomas Foot

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback