Arrangements for Members to monitor complaints and discipline

Report: 7
Date: 12 December 2000
By: Clerk

Summary

This paper suggests options for Members of the Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee to monitor the investigation of complaints, internal investigations and discipline procedures.

A. Supporting information

Monitoring complaints and internal investigations and disciplinary procedures

1. Training of Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee members is ongoing, several Members attended an initial training session on 20 November. Further training is being arranged, including the detailed examination of case files.

2. The next stage is to determine the way in which the ongoing monitoring investigation and disciplinary processes will be undertaken. Two options are presented below for consideration.

Option 1

3. It is proposed that members undertake a series of visits, at bimonthly intervals, to each of the five DPS Borough Support Units (BSUs) and the Internal Investigations Branch (IIB). BSUs are responsible for the investigation of the majority of public complaints against police officers while the IIB investigates allegations that are more serious.

4. Visits will last between two and three hours and, if Members agree, could begin in March 2001. The suggested programme is:

March 2001	North West BSU
May	North East BSU
July	Central BSU
September	South East BSU
November	South West BSU
January 2002	Internal Investigations Branch (IIB)

Option 2

5. A second option would be for one or two PSPM members to be ‘linked’ to one or more of each of the five BSUs and the IIB and for visits to be undertaken on that basis. This would allow for each BSU to be visited more frequently - perhaps at three monthly intervals.

Monitoring process

6. At each visit, members will be addressed by the Head of the Unit who will provide an update of the following areas:

• Performance review;
• Update on specific medium and high risk cases.

7. Members will then review a number of completed case files. These will need to have been ordered in advance from Registry to be available on the day of the visit. Which files are selected will be a matter for PSPM members. The batch could be selected at random from a list supplied to members in advance or they may be files selected on specific criteria, for example, cases submitted to the PCA or the CPS, or files relating to one or more specific allegations.

8. The visit to the IIB will include an update on a wider range of issues, including, for example, Operations, Misconduct Hearings, Civil Actions and DPS Support Services.

B. Recommendations

1. That members consider the options outlined in paragraphs 3 to 5 above and determine how they would wish to undertake DPS visits.
2. Members consider and agree the monitoring process as outlined in paragraphs 6 to 7 above.

C. Financial implications

There are no direct financial costs associated with this report.

D. Review arrangements

The programme of visits will be reviewed at a future PSPM meeting, once a series of visits have been undertaken.

E. Background papers

The following is a statutory list of background papers (under the Local Government Act 1972 S.100 D) which disclose facts or matters on which the report is based and which have been relied on to a material extent in preparing this report. They are available on request either to the contact officer listed above or to the Clerk to the Police Authority at the address indicated on the agenda.

• Report 23 considered by the Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee on 14 November 2000.

F. Contact details

The author of this report is Peter Richardson, MPS Government Affairs Office.

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback