Morris Inquiry

Report: 09
Date: 10 March 2005
By: Clerk

Summary

This report provides EODB with an update on the MPA’s agreed approach to responding to the recommendations made by the Morris Inquiry published on 14 December and outlines areas of EODB responsibility.

A. Recommendations

That the Board considers how these recommendations are taken forward in the context of its work programme.

B. Supporting information

1. The MPA commissioned the inquiry, chaired by Sir Bill Morris, to conduct an independent and impartial investigation into professional standards and employment practice in the Metropolitan Police Service examining the way complaints, grievances, allegations against individuals and conflict within the workplace is handled by the organisation.

2. The inquiry was formally launched on 21 January 2004 and published its report on Tuesday 14 December making 37 recommendations. An executive summary of the report is attached together with its recommendations.

3. A Steering Group made up of MPA Deputy Chairs and Chairs of Professional Standards, HR Committee and Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board will be responsible for leading the oversight of implementation of the Morris Inquiry recommendations. This Steering Group will report to Co-ordination and Policing Committee.

4. On 3 February 2005 members were invited to a dedicated session to explore the MPS’ approach to the 37 recommendations, and for an opportunity to discuss the recommendations from their perspective.

5. Full Authority, held on 24 February, discussed the Morris Inquiry for the first time since its publication. The MPA agreed to accept the recommendations made by the Inquiry and emphasised the importance of approaching the response to the recommendations in the context of all the report as a whole, and the outcome of both the Taylor Review and the Commission for Racial Equality Formal Investigation, both expected to report very shortly.

6. The MPA also agreed a proposed allocation of sets of recommendations to each of the three ‘lead’ committees – EODB, HR and Professional Standards Committee. Outlined below are the recommendations for which EODB has a lead responsibility. However, given the importance of the authority maintaining an overview of the inquiry as a whole, also listed are the areas where EODB was felt to have a clear interest.

7. The majority of the recommendations assigned for EODB’s attention fall within the outline of EODB’s work programme which focus on ensuring that MPS performance, from an equalities perspective, is consistent across the six equality strands and that the MPS approach to mainstreaming equality and diversity links its employment practice with the quality of its service delivery, engages with all sections of its staff communities and takes clear learning from its past experience.

8. The other key challenge from the recommendations allocated for EODB’s attention is in relation to a potentially new relationship between the MPA and the Independent Advisory Group(s) possibly affecting how IAGs are established, how they are resourced and how members are appointed.

Morris Inquiry Recommendations where EODB has Lead Responsibility

Recommendation 7 a (Managing Difference) That the MPS takes immediate action to engage black, minority ethnic and white officers and staff at all levels in the important practical steps required to ensure that black and minority ethnic officers and staff are not discriminated against on grounds of race.

• Recommendation 8 (Managing Difference) That the MPS gives adequate priority to all aspects of diversity, particularly in light of the Framework Equal Treatment Directive 2000.
• Recommendation 8 a (Managing Difference) That the MPS refreshes and revitalises its work in managing difference and devises a way of truly engaging all officers and staff on this important issue.
• Recommendation 8 b (Managing Difference) That consideration is given to extending the Diversity Excellence Model to other Operational Command Units and directorates. However, we would recommend that its implementation be kept under review to guard against it becoming another ‘tick box’ exercise.
• Recommendation 14 (Governance, Accountability and Scrutiny) That the ‘Nolan Principles’ for public appointments should apply to the appointment of members of the Independent Advisory Group and that:
• Recommendation 14 i (Governance, Accountability and Scrutiny) their appointment should be by the Metropolitan Police Authority;
• Recommendation 14 ii (Governance, Accountability and Scrutiny) they should be appointed in a transparent way following open competition by public advertisement;
• Recommendation 14 iii (Governance, Accountability and Scrutiny) the terms of their appointment, including tenure of office and any remuneration, should be made public; and
• Recommendation 14 iv (Governance, Accountability and Scrutiny) candidates should be assessed for their suitability against a formal specification which should also be made public by the Metropolitan Police Authority.
• Recommendation 15. (Governance, Accountability and Scrutiny) That the Independent Advisory Group is properly resourced and that this should include a budget for expenditure on items such as independent professional advice (this includes legal advice), where the Independent Advisory Group believes this is necessary.
• Recommendation 16 (Governance, Accountability and Scrutiny) That the Independent Advisory Group and the MPS agree a protocol in relation to disclosure of documentation and the rationale for decisions to Independent Advisory Group members. This must be based on the presumption that Independent Advisory Group members see everything that is available to the investigating officers. Where possible, this should be before decisions are taken.

Morris Inquiry Recommendations where EODB has a clear interest

• Recommendation 2 d (Enhancing the role of constable) That a provision dealing with unlawful discrimination should be included in the new Code of Conduct. Additional provisions may also be appropriate.
• Recommendation 3 a (People Issues) That, in addition to relocating the Employment Tribunals Unit from the Directorate of Professional Standards to the Human Resources Directorate, the people management aspects of the work of the Diversity Directorate are also moved to the Human Resources Directorate.
• Recommendation 17 e (Professional Standards) That the MPS takes steps to ensure that the future profile of the Directorate of Professional Standards reflects the diversity of the MPS as a whole.
• Recommendation 26 (Building Capacity) That the MPS takes active steps to remain vigilant and to monitor the culture at Hendon, and to ensure that all staff and recruits are aware of what constitutes inappropriate behaviour (such as that which is bullying and / or discriminatory) and that any incidents which do occur are treated with the seriousness they deserve.
• Recommendation 27 (Building Capacity) That the MPS ensures that there are effective, formal support mechanisms in place for all recruits. These should cover the period after acceptance and before they arrive at Hendon, as well as their time spent there.
• Recommendation 33 (Building Capacity) That the MPS sets up a central resource to match officers and staff with disabilities to suitable vacancies and to ensure that any necessary adjustments are made speedily.

9. Appendix 1 contains a full list of the Morris Inquiry recommendations with the appropriate committee designated with lead responsibility.

C. Race and equality impact

1. The terms of reference of the Morris Inquiry and the associated notes set out by the MPA, requested the inquiry panel:

“To inquire into the conduct by the MPS of the following matters in relation to police officers and police staff – policies, procedures and practices for and resolution of Employment Tribunal claims, in particular those claims involving allegations of race or other discrimination against the MPS.”

To establish whether the policies, practices, procedures and structures of the MPS in relation to those matters represent food effective practice in line with key strategies and the statutory obligations of the MPS and MPS under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and other relevant legislation.

To identify lessons to be learnt from the outcome of recent high profile cases (including recommendations made by the Gurpal Virdi Inquiry, and the outcome of the case involving Supt. Dizaei).

To consider whether there are disparities in the treatment of black and other minority po0lice officers in relation to grievance, complaint and disciplinary proceedings and hearings.”

2. It is crucial that the MPS and the MPA learn from the areas of improvement highlighted by the Morris Inquiry, in order to secure improvement in confidence levels within black and minority ethnic communities, identified in the government’s Public Service Agreements with criminal justice agencies as being disproportionately low.

D. Financial implications

There are no specific financial implications that arise from this report.

E. Background papers

• The Case for Change: People in the Metropolitan Police Service
• The Report of the Morris Inquiry: An independent inquiry into professional standard and employment matters in the Metropolitan Police Service (Executive Summary and Recommendations)
• Notes of a Race and Diversity Unit presentation to a member session on the Morris Inquiry
• Report to Full Authority, 24 February 2005.

F. Contact details

Report author: Hamida Ali

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback