Minutes

Minutes of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee of the Metropolitan Police Authority held on 14 December 2006 at 10 Dean Farrar Street, London SW1H 0NY.

Present

Members

• Reshard Auladin (Chair)
• Tony Arbour
• Richard Barnes
• Elizabeth Howlett
• Karim Murji
• Richard Sumray
• Rachel Whittaker

MPA officers

• Hamida Ali (Policy Development Officer, Race and Diversity Unit)
• Claire Lister (Professional Standards Officer)
• David Riddle (Deputy Chief Executive, Deputy Clerk and Solicitor to the Authority)
• Ruth Hasting Iqball (Committee Services)

MPS officers

• Claire Appleby (Director, HR Services)
• Sue Akers (Commander, DPS)
• Esme Crowther (Head, HR ET Unit)
• Gordon Briggs (T/Det Chief Superintendent, Investigations Command, DPS)
• Andy Campbell (T/Det Chief Superintendent, Prevention and Organisation Learning, DPS)
• Liz Haddon, (Practice Manager, HR FAWP Unit)
• John Yates (T/Assistant Commissioner, DPS)

Also in attendance: Mehmuda Mian Pritchard (Commissioner, IPCC)

40. Apologies

(Agenda item 1)

Apologies for absence were received from Jenny Jones, Damian Hockney and Aneeta Prem (members). The Chair welcomed the T/Assistant Commissioner, DPS, John Yates to the Committee.

41. Declarations of interests from members of the committee

(Agenda item 2)

No declarations of interests were received from members.

42. Minutes of Professional Standards and Complaints Committee (Part 1): 12 October 2006

(Agenda item 3)

Resolved – That the minutes of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee (Part 1) meeting held on 12 October 2006 be agreed.

43. Minutes of Professional Standards Cases Sub Committee (Part 1): 12 October 2006 and 9 November 2006 - to note

(Agenda item 4)

Resolved – That the minutes of Professional Standards Cases Sub Committee (part 1): 12 October 2006 and 9 November 2006 be noted.

44. Update on the programme for the fundamental review of the Directorate of Professional Standards

(Agenda item 5)

Members received the final progress report in respect of the Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) Review Implementation Programme that had formally concluded on 30 November 2006. The report also set out the DPS’s strategic programme of work for the next 12 months. Members were informed that one of the objectives of the programme was to make dealing with complaints more timely. The Chair suggested that when the structures were in place, members should be given a presentation on the Programme.

Resolved – That

1. the progress made since the last meeting and the proposed DPS strategic programme of work for the next 12 months be noted; and
2. when the structures were in place, members be given a presentation on the Programme.

45. Response to HMIC baseline inspection of MPS professional standards

(Agenda item 6)

The DPS was graded as good in the 2005/6 HMIC Inspection, with the Anti-Corruption Command being described as a ‘beacon of excellence’. The HMIC report acknowledged that the inspection was conducted against a backdrop of the DPS Review, the MPS Service Review, the development of the MPS Professional Standards Strategy and the changes to the misconduct procedure resulting from the Morris Inquiry and the Taylor Report. As a result, a significant number of recommendations and possible areas for improvement were being actioned and had been classified as ongoing.

The Chair stated that allegations of internal fraud must be reported to Internal Audit. The Commander, DPS, had reservations about creating further layers of bureaucracy.

Resolved – That the report be noted.

46. Complaints management information

(Agenda item 7)

This report included data for the 12 months to October 2006 and focused on key changes or exceptions within the data, as trends were slow to change. The Commander, DPS, noted that since November 2005, the average number of days taken to submit a dispensation or discontinuance request to the IPCC had fallen from 83 to 70 days. Although the trend was positive, this still remained above the 60-day target. She added that the average percentage of local resolutions had reduced from 36% in October 2005 to 32% in October 2006 and remained considerably below the target of 50%. She added that it was likely to remain low until BOCUs took on more responsibility for the resolution of complaints. It was noted that the reluctance to make local decisions was bourn out by the Cambridge research. It was also noted that information about why complaints were not locally resolved was only kept in a paper form so could not be readily analysed.

The Commissioner, Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), stated that IPCC was trying to explain to the public why local resolution should be used. A member suggested that the citizen focus response to local resolution was missing and that the MPS should undertake a public attitude survey. The Commissioner, IPCC, said the IPCC had undertaken surveys and MORI polls and undertook to provide the results to the Committee.

In answer to questions about why managers were reluctant to manage, members were informed of the management training now provided to officers by the Leadership Academy and of the enthusiastic response the courses had received.

The Policy Development Officer, Race and Diversity Unit asked if the MPS had any qualitative performance measures on the quality of service provided. The Commander, DPS, undertook to consider this further, especially now that DPS had a review team.

Members then considered appendices 1 and 2 which focused on the professional standards performance of TP non borough based units and non-TP Operational Command Units. Members commented that the number of complaints were high, for example 39 allegations per 100 officers in Central Operations. It was explained that because the officers worked together, one incident would trigger a complaint against all officers involved. The Chair suggested that work should be commissioned as to why TSG officers received so many complaints against them. He cited an incident in Barnet involving TSG officers, which he feared could damage the reputation of Barnet’s BOCU and schools liaison officers. The Commander, DPS, said such work was in hand and offered to share it with the committee when finished.

Resolved – That

1. the report and the illustration of trends in the report, and the Borough performance information contained in Appendices 1 and 2 be noted.
2. members receive a briefing note on the results of the public attitude surveys and MORI polls undertaken by the IPCC; and
3. members receive a report to a future meeting on the study being made into why TSG officers received so many complaints.

47. Report on progress of strand 3 of the MPS Professional Standards Strategy

(Agenda item 8)

Members received a report stating that strand 3 of the MPS Professional Standards Strategy (Enforcement) was progressing successfully. The timeliness of DPS investigations had shown a consistent improvement, and that the more demanding recently introduced 90 day target for the average number of days to complete public complaints was being met. The report also outlined details of the Project Board formed to drive forward the Taylor Recommendations. An interim assessment of the implementation of the DPS review and restructuring had been conducted in November 2006. The broad strategy had been fully endorsed, whilst some tactical areas would be further assessed. A fuller review would take place in April 2007.

Members asked how the introduction of the Taylor recommendations would affect timeliness. They were informed that DPS expected an interim stage where timeliness dropped before picking up again.

Questions were asked about the DPS Review Unit and dip sampling. The issues raised would be discussed further outside the meeting.

Resolved – That the progress made under Strand 3 be noted.

48. Assistant Commissioner misconduct reviews

(Agenda item 9)

On 9 March, the Committee was presented with a report on the training delivered to Assistant Commissioners (ACs) who undertook appeal hearings. This report provided an update on the monitoring of the effects of the training, which had now been in place for six months.

Members asked if all the ACs had received training and how and when new ACs would be trained. They were told that no more training events were planned but the T/Det Chief Superintendent, Prevention and Organisation Learning, DPS, had offered to brief personally any of those who had not attended.

Members asked to see a copy of the guidance provided to ACs when undertaking reviews, offered in paragraph 3 of the report.

In answer to questions, members were informed that if an officer was dismissed for an offence that had nothing to do with his/her service as an officer and that there was no question of misconduct, if the conviction was overturned, the officer would be reinstated because there was no longer any matter for DPS to consider. The Commissioner, IPCC, stated that issue of double jeopardy was a subject of discussion between police services and the IPCC as opinions differed. The IPCC was trying to get the Home Office to accept its view as definitive for the sake of clarity.

In the case of the reduction of sanction for an officer convicted of drink driving, the Chair requested sight of written determination when received by DPS. The Committee maintained its view that conviction for drink driving should lead to dismissed unless there were very exceptional circumstances.

Resolved – That

1. the summary of information contained in the report be noted;
2. members be provided with the guidance provided to ACs when undertaking reviews, as offered in paragraph 3 of the report; and
3. the Chair be given sight of written determination, when received by DPS, in the case of the reduction in sanction for an officer convicted of drink driving.

49. Dip sampling

(Agenda item 10)

At the last meeting, members had received a report stating that the Head of Professional Standards review of a further selection of complaints files would be presented at this meeting. The subsequent report had been circulated to members with less than five clear working days’ notice. The Chair, having expressed his regret at its lateness, agreed to receive it as an urgent item under the provisions of section 100B (4b) of the Local Government Act 1972 because it related to matters outstanding from the previous meeting and because dip sampling was part of the MPA’s scrutinising function.

Resolved – That

1. the report be noted and that a report be received at the next Committee detailing the outcome of the MPA’s review of a further selection of public complaints files; and
2. the progress made in respect of the local resolution project being undertaken in partnership with the IPCC be noted and that members receive a further progress report at the next Committee.

50. Case management protocol update

(Agenda item 11)

This report provided members with an update on the application of the Case Management Protocol, which applied to ‘live’ investigations undertaken by the DPS into complaints or other allegations of misconduct against police officers. Its purpose was to enable the Committee to scrutinise cases that had exceeded the target time frame for completion, place a requirement on the DPS to justify the time taken to conduct an investigation and, if appropriate, to give reasons for the need for a continued investigation.

The cases being reviewed had an age profile of 208 days. The Commander, DPS, asked if this should be reduced to 90 days in line with the revised target. It was agreed to discuss this further outside the Committee.

Resolved – That

1. the report be received and the finding noted; and
2. the reduction of the age profile, in line with the revised target, be discussed further outside the Committee.

51. MPS direction and control guidance

(Agenda item 12)

This report introduced members to the MPS’s Guidance on Direction and Control and sought the agreement of the MPA, as suggested in paragraphs 10 and 21 of Home Office Circular (HOC) 19 of 2005, for the implementation of the guidance and establishment of the MPA’s oversight role.

In answer to questions, members were informed that the guidance was first drafted in 2005, and that the document appeared long because there was complicated matter to communicate.

Resolved – That

1. the Direction and Control Guidance be approved; and
2. the arrangements for monitoring and oversight of MPS Direction and Control complaints be agreed.

52. Fairness at work policy

(Agenda item 13)

Members received a report containing management information and performance analysis in respect of the Fairness at Work Policy (FAWP) and providing statistical data and analysis in respect of matters raised through the FAWP concentrating on cases submitted from April to September 2006.

Members noted that the number of cases had dropped from 159 to 95 as a result of intervention. It was noted that police staff had to use the FAWP before going to an Employment Tribunal (ET). Police officers did not have to. The Policy Development Officer, Race and Diversity Unit, suggested that it was good practice to collect information on the whole range of equality strands.

Resolved – That the report be noted

53. Employment tribunals

(Agenda item 14)

This report contained management information and performance analysis on ET claims brought against the Commissioner between April 2005 and September 2006.

With regard to the proposed analysis of disproportionality, the Policy Development Officer, Race and Diversity Unit asked if this would be conducted with other parts of the MPS. She was assured the Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate would be involved. Members requested that the next report contain information on internal communication on the lessons learnt for ETs and how external media interest was managed.

Resolved – That

1. the report be noted; and
2. the next report contain information on internal communication on the lessons learnt for ETs and how external media interest was managed.

54. Cambridge University research report into disproportionality

(Agenda item 15)

The DPS commissioned independent research by Cambridge University in September 2004 as a consequence of internal MPS consultancy work that had identified over-representation of BME officers in professional standards databases. The DPS, the Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate and the Directorate of Human Resources had undertaken a considerable programme of work since 2004, which had gone a long way in addressing the issues raised by the research.

Members agreed that the report was a disappointing outcome. They felt that it had been poorly commissioned and managed, and had taken far too long to complete. They agreed with the Assistant commissioner that it was a missed opportunity to get a better understanding of the factors underlying disproportionality. In answer to questions, members were informed that the Commander, DPS, would be consulting with staff associations about the report and reminding them of the work programmes undertaken since it was commissioned.

Resolved – That

1. the content of this report be noted and the progress made acknowledged;
2. it be confirmed that no further specific action be required in respect of the Cambridge research; and
3. disproportionality be monitored through the established MPA performance framework and the submission of other MPA reports relating to DPS activity.

55. Exclusion of press and public

(Agenda item 16)

A resolution was put to exclude the press and public from the meeting during remaining items on the agenda as it was likely to disclose exempt information as described in Schedule 12(a) of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

Resolved - That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during discussion of the remaining items on the agenda.

Part 2

56. Minutes of Professional Standards and Complaints Committee (part 2): 12 October 2006

(Agenda item 17)

Resolved – That the minutes of the Professional Standards and Complaints Committee (Part 1) meeting held on 12 October 2006 be agreed.

57. Minutes of Professional Standards Cases Sub Committee (part 2): 12 October 2006 and 9 November 2006 - to note

(Agenda item 18)

Resolved – That the minutes of Professional Standards Cases Sub Committee (part 2): 12 October 2006 and 9 November 2006 be noted.

58. Quarterly summary of exceptional and significant results

(Agenda item 19)

Members received a summary of exceptional and significant case results containing details and outcomes of 22 civil trials, judicial review applications, employment tribunals, misconduct cases, settlements and selected inquests concluded in the period September 2006 – November 2006.

Members asked about the ruling by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, resulting from Operation Helios. The Solicitor to the Authority explained the background to the ruling and its implications in relation to internal and external phone calls to police services, including 999 calls. He added that the MPS was still considering whether to challenge the ruling. The Chair requested that all members be briefed on this subject as soon as possible, and that there should be a report to the full Authority or the Coordination and Policing Committee in due course.

Resolved – That

1. members note the report and
2. that a briefing be provided to members on the implications of the ruling by the Investigatory Powers Tribunal as soon as possible, followed by a report to the full Authority or the Coordination and Policing Committee in due course.

59. Summary of suspended police officers as at 25 November 2006

(Agenda item 20)

This summary contains details on the officers suspended from duty as at 24 November 2006. It was noted that the figure was very low.

Resolved – That summary of information contained in the report be noted.

60. Employment tribunals appendix 11 and 12

(Agenda item 21)

The exempt appendices to report 14 were received.

61. Case management model update appendix 1

(Agenda item 22)

The exempt appendix to report 11 was received. It was noted that dealing with the complaint had been delayed because the complainant refused to be seen.

62. Application for funding for legal representation (if any)

(Agenda item 23)

No applications for legal funding were received.

The meeting ended at 4.35 pm

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback