Minutes

Minutes of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on 8 September 2005 at 10 Dean Farrar Street, London SW1H 0NY.

Present

Members

• Reshard Auladin (Chair)
• Karim Murji (Deputy Chair)
• Richard Sumray

MPA officers

• David Riddle (Deputy Chief Executive and Clerk)
• Claire Lister (Professional Standards Officer)
• Nick Baker (Head of Committee Services)

MPS officers

• AC Sue Akers
• Carl Bussey (DPS)

Also present: Deborah Glass (IPCC Commissioner) (items 1-12).

1. Apologies

(Agenda item 1)

Apologies for absence were received from Tony Arbour, Damian Hockney, Elizabeth Howlett and Jenny Jones.

The Chair informed the Committee that the meeting was inquorate and that no resolution could be passed. However, it was agreed to continue the meeting making recommendations where necessary.

2. Declarations of interests

(Agenda item 2)

No declarations of interests were given by members.

3. Minutes

(Agenda item 3)

The Committee received the minutes of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee meeting held on 9 June 2005 (Part 1).

The Committee also noted the minutes (Part 1) of the Senior Officers Conduct Sub-Committee meetings held on 9 June and 14 July 2005.

Recommended – That the minutes of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee meeting held on 9 June 2005 (Part 1) be agreed and signed as a correct record and that the minutes (Part 1) of the Senior Officers Conduct Sub-Committee meetings held on 9 June and 14 July 2005 be noted.

4. Chair’s and members’ update (Oral report)

(Agenda item 4)

No updates given

Recommended – That the report be noted.

5. Complaints management information

(Agenda item 5)

The Committee received a report that gave data for the 12 months to July 2005, which focused on the key changes or exceptions within the data as trends are slow to change.

It was reported that there had been an 18% increase in the number of public complaint allegations being recorded over the past 12-month period. For the same period, there had been a 6% increase in the number of conduct matter allegations recorded from 77 to 82. In relation to timeliness, the average number of days to complete a full public complaint investigation remained below the target of 120 days. For the period August 2004 to July 2005, the reduction was 22% (127 days to 99 days). It was reported that the number of days to complete an investigation into conduct matters had also fallen below the 120 days target. The reduction was by 44% from 202 days (August 2004) to 113 days (July 2005. For misconduct hearings, there was a 44% reduction from 146 days (August 2004) to 82 days (July 2005).

Members were informed that ‘Operation Theseus’ might have an impact on public complaints, although early data indicated that there had been a reduction in complaints made in July 2005. However, caution was expressed, as it might be some months before all the figures have been collated and the full impact on complaints’ figures as a consequence of public perceptions of the police following the fatal shooting at Stockwell Underground Station, is fully known.

Members welcomed the improvements made in the reduction in the time taken to resolve complaints and noted that this was within the overall target of 120 days. However, it was suggested that at an appropriate time in the near future, the target of 120 days should be reviewed.

It was also agreed that in future reports, members should receive further details and information relating to investigation outcomes of public complaints and concern was expressed at what appeared to be an increase in the number of complaints that were ‘not recorded’, as shown at Appendix 2 to the report.

Deborah Glass, IPCC Commissioner reported that there was disappointment that the increase in complaints, as reported by the MPA, was perceived in some areas of the media as a ‘bad news’ story. It was suggested that this information, when provided in the public domain, should be accompanied by a proper explanation for the increase, which could include an explanation that the increase was due to greater public awareness about the complaints system and a growing public confidence in making a formal complaint.

Members supported this view, with the caveat that there had to be a time when increases in complaints was seen as unacceptable and the Deputy Chief Executive and Clerk confirmed that the Association of Police Authorities are working with police authorities on this matter.

Members also welcomed the view from the IPCC of joined up working between the MPA/MPS/IPCC in relation to the reporting of complaints figures as appeared in the report as presented to Members of the PSCC. It was also agreed that external data should be properly sourced.

The Chair of the Committee suggested that the diversity information outlined in Appendix 3 of the report should be presented for consideration to the MPA’s Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board (EODB), with the same information being provided to the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee, as a stand alone item, at six monthly intervals. In addition, the Deputy Chief Executive and Clerk informed members that regarding diversity issues the matter of recording diversity origin as ‘unknown’ would be considered at the next meeting of the EODB.

Members briefly discussed service confidence levels and procedures. It was agreed that, at a future meeting, the Committee receive a presentation on this matter in closed session.

Recommended – That

1. members note the report and the illustration of trends given at Appendix 1 of the report;
2. following the review of the Directorate of Professional Standards, the Committee receive a report on reducing the complaints target of 120 days;
3. at the next meeting the complaints management information report include further details and information regarding ‘not recorded complaints;
4. diversity information outlined in Appendix 3 of the report be presented to future meetings of the EODB, with the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee receiving diversity information twice a year; and
5. at a future meeting of the Committee, members receive a presentation on the service confidence procedure.

6. Update on the programme of the review of the Directorate of Professional Standards

(Agenda item 6)

The Committee received a report on the current review of the MPS Directorate of Professional Standards.

Members were informed that the review was currently at a consultation stage and that by mid September command teams would meet to discuss emerging options. The Committee were informed that early indications favour a significant reallocation of roles utilising police officers only in duties requiring warranted powers.

The report also outlined a timetable for the review process.

In welcoming the report, members requested, where possible, representative on the challenge panel should include an academic and representation from the health service.

Recommended – That members note the progress in respect of the fundamental review of the DPS.

7. Report from the Institute of Criminology at Cambridge University

(Agenda item 7)

Following an update to the Committee at its meeting on 9 June 2005, members received a report which included an interim report as provided by the Institute of Criminology at Cambridge University on research into disproportionality.

Members, in receiving the interim report, requested that a further report be provided to the next meeting of the Committee and strongly recommended that that report should include a detailed timescale for conclusion of this work.

Recommended – That the interim report from Cambridge University and the report be noted.

8. Complaints review process (dip sampling)

(Agenda item 8a)

This agenda item had been circulated after the despatch of the agenda and not within the statutory timescale. The Chair agreed to consider this item on the grounds of urgency, in that the Authority is required to have in place mechanisms to monitor the MPS’ complaints procedures.

Members received a report that outlined three options in order for the MPA to undertake its responsibility to monitor the way in which the MPS deals with public complaints about the conduct of police officers.

In addition to the options outlined in the report, the Deputy Chief Executive and Clerk proposed that the review process be undertaken by a panel of MPA officers, as opposed to Members, and further proposed that exceptional cases be referred to the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee.

Members, in supporting this option, noted that the Chief Executive and Clerk would circulate to members the methodology for the process of the officer panel undertaking this function.

It was also suggested that in order for members to have a better understanding of the processing of complaints, they receive a presentation on this issue.

Recommended – That

1. the complaints review process be undertaken by a panel of officers; and
2. the Chief Executive and Clerk circulate the methodology for the officer panel to undertake this function to members of the Committee.

Case management model

(Agenda item 8b)

Members considered a report that outlined a case management protocol in order to allow the MPA to exercise its oversight role of the MPS’s complaints handling, investigation and discipline functions.

Recommended – That the Case Management Protocol as outlined in the report be approved.

9. Lead member role

(Agenda item 9)

A report was considered that asked members to review and appoint lead members they required to address particular areas of the Committee’s work.

In doing so, the report reminded members of the approved lead members roles and the statement of what that role should involve.

Recommended – That the Committee made no nominations for lead member positions.

10. Professional Standards and Complaints Committee – work programme

(Agenda item 10)

As this report had not been circulated within the statutory timescales, the Chair of the Committee agreed to receive the report on the grounds of urgency as the Committee required a work plan for the forthcoming year to ensure continuity of business.

Members considered a report that outlined a proposed work plan for the Committee for the forth-coming year.

In supporting the proposals of the work plan, members agreed that future complaints management information should include joint information with the MPA and IPCC. It was suggested that the latter’s input to the report should result in the presentation of more analytical information.

The work plan should also include a joint meeting with IPCC.

Recommended – That work plan, subject to members additional comments, be approved.

11. Membership of the Senior Officers Conduct Sub-Committee

(Agenda item 11)

Nominations and appointments for the position of Chair and Deputy Chair and membership of the Senior Officers Conduct Sub-Committee were made.

Recommended – That

1. Reshard Auladin be appointed Chair and Elizabeth Howlett be appointed Deputy Chair of the Senior Officers Conduct Sub-Committee; and
2. the membership of the Sub-Committee be the membership of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee with the exception of Jenny Jones.

12. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

(Agenda item 12)

A resolution was put to exclude the press and public from the meeting during items 13 to 16 and an additional item as it was likely to disclose exempt information as described in Schedule 12(a) (1 and 14) of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

RECOMMENDATION – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during discussion of agenda items 13-16.

Summary of exempt items

13. Summary of suspended police officers

(Agenda item 13)

The Committee considered a report that summarised details relating to suspended officers.

14. Additional information in relation to three Assistant Commissioner review cases

(Agenda item 14)

A report was received that provided members with additional information in relation to three Assistant Commissioner review cases.

15. Summary of exceptional and significant case results

(Agenda item 15)

A report was received that summarised exceptional and significant results.

16. Minutes (Part 2)

(Agenda item 16)

Members received the minutes (Part 2) of the Committee meeting held on 9 June 2005 and noted the Senior Officers Conduct Sub-Committee minutes (Part 2) of the meeting held on 9 June and 14 July 2005.

17. Application for funding for legal representation

The Chair agreed on the grounds of urgency, that the Committee should consider an application for funding for legal representation.

The Committee closed at 3.50 pm

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback