Race and Faith Inquiry emerging findings

The Race and Faith Inquiry (RFI) undertook to examine the way in which Race and Faith issues are managed in the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). In accordance with our Terms of Reference we examined the experiences of Black and Minority Ethnic officers and staff as they relate to recruitment, retention and career progression processes within the MPS. We heard testimony regarding the leadership of the organisation, its operating culture and a wealth of other issues. The Inquiry was also tasked with examining the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) and its oversight responsibilities as they relate to equality and diversity.

There were four key drivers for the instigation of this Inquiry:

• The new leadership of the MPA, Mayor Boris Johnson and the appointment of a new Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, Sir Paul Stephenson.
• The recognition of the need for a focused piece of work on the issues of recruitment, retention and progression with regard to Race & Faith within the MPS in the context of the post 9/11 and 7/7 atrocities. These tragic events brought a new prominence to faith issues in the policing of London’s communities and in the relationship between the MPS and its staff.
• To assess the progress which has been made in improving the culture of the organisation with regard to race and faith issues in the year of the 10th anniversary of the publication of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report.
• A number of BME officers issued Employment Tribunal proceedings against the MPS, and in 2008, the MetBPA issued a statement of no-confidence in the MPS’s treatment of BME staff and a boycott of recruitment of potential BME applicants into the MPS.

Context

The MPS’s vision is to “Make London the safest major city in the world” and its motto is ‘Working together for a safer London’. It is clear that, in order to make these aspirational statements into a tangible reality, it is essential to develop a working relationship between the MPS and the communities of London which is based on mutual respect and trust; a relationship which has to be built on the principles of equality and justice both with regard to the internal as well as the external processes of the organisation. London is one of the most diverse cities in the world and as such, an essential component of the MPS’s vision is that their officers and staff should reflect the demographic composition of the communities it serves, not just in gross numbers, but proportionately throughout the organisation’s hierarchical structure from top to bottom, and across the breadth of specialist units which cover the wide scope of operational responsibilities required of the MPS.

London presents an extraordinarily complex policing challenge; the MPS has responsibilities which range from the local to the global, from community policing strategies and practicalities to ensuring the safety and smooth running of international events such as making plans for the 2012 Olympics. Such a broad remit can only be met through specialisation, but it is essential that the organisation operate in a unified manner, a balance it achieves through holding a unified vision of the principles which unite officers and staff into a single, though multi-faceted, team.

The MPS, therefore, is responsible for the safety and protection of London and Londoners in the broadest conceptions of these terms. Each of the MPS’s functions requires the trust and respect of all of the communities of London; not always easily given, but necessarily earned, this trust and respect is based on the fact that the MPS must be seen to be representative of London’s communities, without bias or prejudice to any particular perspective or demographic characteristic representative throughout the composition and operation of the organisation; a microcosm of London. Central to this vision is the assumption that both the role and career prospects of every employee is decided exclusively by capability, suitability, experience and qualification, without the help or hindrance of demographic characteristics.
The MPS is in a very exposed position; its strengths and weaknesses are publicly visible. The increasing diversification of London has presented many challenges to it over the past decade or so; but perhaps the biggest one came in 1999 with the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry, at a time when many would have argued that the Service had dealt with the majority of the ‘skeletons in its closet’ relating to racism and prejudice. The MPS was tested, and found to be seriously wanting, in this area which it can least afford to be deficient; that of justice.

The shocking revelation of the racism which blighted the investigation of Stephen’s murder and the coining of the concept of institutional racism informed and illuminated much of the following decade’s discourse concerning race issues and led to a series of developments aimed at reducing / eliminating all forms of racism from the MPS. It is not the purpose of this current Inquiry to evaluate the relative success or failure of these initiatives, but rather to recognise that the majority of the work so far has concentrated on the ‘external’ relationship between the MPS and London’s communities whereas the subject of the RFI is to focus specifically on the ‘internal’ processes.

The panel recognises that the MPS has improved greatly in terms of its performance in the field of Equality and Diversity over the last decade since the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry; we heard evidence of many innovative solutions which have received praise and recognition and the panel acknowledges and congratulates the organisation for their successes. But we likewise heard many sad and disturbing accounts of discrimination from BME officers and staff which have led us to conclude that excellence and innovation in some areas sit uncomfortably with the differential experiences of BME officers and staff in others. The panel urges the MPS, in partnership with the MPA, to continue the progress it has made in building relationships with, and improving the service it delivers to, the diverse communities of London; but we also urge the MPS to strengthen its commitment to tackle ‘internal’ inequalities within the organisation. We believe that, in addition to the moral imperative which justifies this focus it is essential to realise that the way in which police officers and staff are treated internally has a direct impact on the level of confidence Londoners have in the organisation and their willingness to engage with the police in the fight against crime.

The Panel believes that the Inquiry process and the subsequent recommendations have the potential to deliver practical and lasting changes which we hope will improve the experiences of the MPS’s BME and multi-faith workforce. We are equally committed, however, to the improvement of policies and practices throughout the organisation in order to deliver positive outcomes for all.

Inquiry process

The Inquiry Panel has completed the evidence-gathering phase of its work; we conducted numerous evidence session and a range of focus groups, as well as having received hundreds of pieces of written evidence. As a Panel we were privileged to have heard the views and experiences of officers and staff spanning the breadth of the organisation from the Commissioner through to newly recruited PCSOs as well as having received important evidence from individuals representing relevant external organisations. As such, we have identified a range of issues and recommendations which we feel will benefit the organisation as a whole and specifically BME staff and officers of the MPS.

Emerging findings

The intention of this paper is to outline the Panel’s thinking to date and to provide the MPS and the MPA with an early indication of some of the issues which we intend to focus on in our final report. Therefore, our emerging findings are based upon the evidence we heard during our sessions, focus groups and written evidence. We do not intend to present our recommendations here, these will be set out in the context of the full Inquiry report. The emerging findings detailed below will be arranged under five headings; namely:

• Recruitment
• Retention/Progression
• Leadership
• Faith
• MPA

Recruitment

The relative lack of diversity of the MPS was brought under intense scrutiny by the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry and, consequently, the Home Office set specific recruitment targets for the proportion of police officers from BME backgrounds. Notwithstanding the problems which developed relating to the specificity of the targets themselves, it is clear that the MPS has undertaken this task with vigour and creativity which has led to significant increases in the proportion of BME police officers. The Panel’s intention is to encourage the organisation to build on this undoubted success and to concentrate its efforts into the following areas:

Multi-point entry

The Panel heard strong testimony that the current ‘single-point’ entry process for police officer recruitment is outdated, fails to attract the highest calibre individuals and is a barrier to increasing the diversity of the MPS workforce. We were also made aware, though, that strong views to the contrary prevail among some evidence givers and that, while there are opinions, there is little concrete evidence. Neither the Association of Chief Police Officers nor the Association of Police Authorities has a corporate position. Therefore, as there is no clear consensus on this issue, the Inquiry Panel is clear that further research is required and we intend to undertake this work in collaboration with the MPS and other relevant partners.

Police Community Support Officers development

The recruitment of a high proportion of BME and multi-faith PCSOs represents a significant pool of ‘diversity’. However, the Panel is of the firm view that the PCSO pool remains an untapped resource within the MPS and to this end we encourage the organisation to develop the following:

• The development of more efficient and cost effective mechanisms for PCSOs to develop into police officers.
• The creation of lateral development opportunities for PCSOs.

Retention/progression

Having made such significant progress in the area of recruitment it is clear that the MPS also needs to ensure that members of their ‘diverse’ workforce are firstly retained, and then, in due course, able to progress and develop rewarding careers in the organisation. The attainment of rank is an important part of many officers’ ambitions, and it is clearly essential that ‘diverse’ officers are able to progress through the hierarchy of the organisation; but it is equally important that specialist units and roles are equally accessible for those officers to whom promotion to a higher rank is less important or unachievable.

Promotion processes

General lack of confidence in promotion processes in the MPS - A lack of trust in promotion processes was expressed from both BME and non BME staff. We heard many testimonies describing poor practice and examples of discrimination in a range of areas, including:

• Acting and temporary promotion processes - these were viewed as being subject to the vagaries of local control rather than being an open, consistent and transparent process.
• Process for the ‘feedback’ of reasons for unsuccessful promotion applications - Inconsistencies in the quality, quantity and timeliness of ‘feedback’ to unsuccessful applicants led to suspicions of bias and concerns that ‘informal networks’ had disproportionate influence on promotion decisions within the organisation.
• Performance Development Review (PDR) process - The Panel heard from many officers and staff that their PDRs had been given scant attention by their managers which left them with the impression that the process itself lacked meaning and that their personal development and career progression were being neglected.

Specialist units

‘Closed shops’

• We were very concerned to receive evidence which points to the fact that specialist units are perceived to operate ‘closed shops,’ rendering some units effectively impenetrable to BME officers and staff.
  Examples of ‘Good Practice’ are isolated and positive lessons are inadequately disseminated.
• We were encouraged to learn of the excellent work being carried out by some specialist units within the organisation to tackle the under-representation of BME and female employees. One such example stands out, namely the innovative and successful recruitment activities being carried out by Operation Trident, which has seen a rise in BME recruitment. It was with regret that the Panel discovered that much of this good practice is not centrally collected and disseminated to other specialist units.

Faith

We state from the outset and in advance of our final report that we found ‘Faith’ a difficult area to explore. This was principally because while evidence givers highlighted ways in which they perceived they were being discriminated against they were very clear in identifying this to be as a direct consequence of their ethnicity, as opposed to their faith. Many of those who gave evidence to us represented the view that the MPS had responded positively to their needs in an understanding and practical manner; citing the establishment of prayer rooms, suitable adjustments to uniforms and the inclusion of Halal food as positive indicators of the organisation’s commitment.
However, there are still some important issues which need to be recognised and addressed, the key one being:

Perceptions of British-Muslims in the Post 9/11 context - Many officers of South Asian and Middle-Eastern origin (both Muslim and non-Muslim; prejudice being a brutal and indiscriminate weapon after all) felt unsupported and let down by the organisation’s failure to respond to the anti-Muslim reaction both from the broader society and from elements within the MPS itself. The consensus from officers and staff members was that they would like to see suitable welfare mechanisms in place:

• to support minority staff in the general post 9/11 context.
• to communicate, in the clearest and strongest terms, that the MPS will not tolerate prejudice from within its ranks.

Leadership and direction

The Panel’s vision is of an organisation which understands, embraces and reflects the principles of the equalities agenda from the top to the bottom of its hierarchical structures and across the breadth of its range of functions. We take a broad conception of the concept of leadership, recognising three separate elements:

• Each individual officer’s ‘leadership’ responsibilities in the context of the organisation and of the broader society
• The rank-based hierarchical leadership of the organisation.
• The Diversity & Citizens’ Focus Directorate, which is the department with responsibility for Equality and Diversity Issues.
• Lack of clear Equalities & Diversity vision in the ‘Post-Lawrence Era’
• It was strongly expressed by many officers and staff within the MPS that in the ‘Post Lawrence Era’ the organisation lacked a clear vision from which to develop policies. It was felt, therefore, that the organisation lacked direction and the Panel is concerned that the ‘hard-won’ victories of the past could easily be lost.
• Leadership at Senior Management Team level - There was a lot of confusion as to which member of the MPS Senior Management Team had overarching responsibility for the Equality & Diversity agenda. We were pleased to learn that the organisation has remedied this situation through the appointment of Deputy Commissioner, Tim Godwin as ACPO lead on diversity.
• Diversity and Citizens’ Focus Directorate - A wealth of evidence was received about the importance of the Diversity and Citizens’ Focus Directorate. We were delighted to hear about some of the initiatives which this unit had previously spearheaded but we were troubled by the fact that these examples were related to many years ago and that since then staff within the organisation had lost confidence in the Directorate.
• It was widely expressed by the majority of people from whom we heard that DCFD is structurally in the wrong place. The panel agrees with this opinion and we believe that such a potentially pivotal unit should be integrated into the Deputy Commissioner's Command.
• We received an abundance of evidence which pointed to a distinct lack of direction and power to influence the organisation with an overwhelming perception that the Directorate lacked “teeth.’’
• That DCFD had suffered from a lack of consistent leadership, with many DACs only remaining in post for relatively short periods of time.

The Metropolitan Police Authority

While the focus of our inquiry has primarily been on the MPS, we were also set an objective to examine the role of the MPA in the context of the organisation’s responsibility for oversight of the MPS’s Equality and Diversity performance. The Stephen Lawrence Inquiry noted that there was an accountability gap for the MPS and recommended that the newly established Metropolitan Police Authority should have its functions and power fully aligned with those of police authorities outside London, reflecting the fact that BME communities had little confidence or trust in the MPS to deliver a fair and transparent service. The MPA assumed responsibility for the oversight of the MPS and has played a pivotal role in ensuring the fulfilment of the recommendations of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. Effectively, the MPA has brought the work of the MPS into the public domain; making the service more transparent and open to the people of London.

The work of the MPA has included the routine commissioning of MPA reports on Equality and Diversity performance and the organisation has instigated a number of important initiatives which include:

• Establishing a mechanism to ensure all reports commissioned by the MPA have considered the equality and diversity implications
• Increased oversight of Stop and Search practices with the establishment of Stop and Search Monitoring Groups in the vast majority of London boroughs
• Instigation of the Virdi and Morris Inquiries
• Conducted a range of scrutinies which have led to a number of important improvements to MPS policy and practice in relation to Equality and Diversity issues, including:
  • Gun Crime Scrutiny
  • The Counter Terrorism London Debate
  • Youth Scrutiny
  • Stop and Search

It can be clearly seen that the MPA has been central to the progress made by the MPS in the Equality and Diversity agenda, and this was recognised by several of the contributors to the Inquiry. Notwithstanding these past achievements, the predominant sentiment expressed was that the MPA had taken its ‘foot off the pedal’. The MPA has, though, demonstrated its commitment to Equalities and Diversity by the decision of the leadership of the MPA, under its Chair Mayor Boris Johnson, to set up this Inquiry, which we applaud. The particular issues which were brought to the Panel’s attention included:

• MPA relationship/communication with MPS - many evidence givers argued that the MPA had not developed sufficient mechanisms to gather ‘intelligence’ about the ‘health’ of the organisation other than from the most senior MPS officers and staff. These respondents were forthright in arguing that the MPA therefore did not always get the clearest view of the internal functioning of the MPS.
• MPA scrutiny role - we received a number of representations which stated that there was insufficient ‘distance’ between the MPA and the MPS. Consequently the MPA were not always seen to have held the MPS sufficiently to account and had at times failed to challenge the organisation sufficiently.
• Lack of Equality and Diversity knowledge - There was expressed opinion that the MPA SMT lacks senior input on equalities issues and that this has lead to an impaired ability to hold the MPS rigorously to account on its Equality and Diversity performance and resulted in insufficient support being provided to MPA Members.

The Panel was pleased to learn that this lack of expertise will be addressed in the ongoing restructuring exercise.

• Commitment to Equalities & Diversity issues - many respondents were able to identify a number of MPA members whom they felt had championed Equality and Diversity issues. However, they expressed disappointment that these members were always the ‘usual suspects’, which they considered sent out a message to the MPS workforce that the MPA as a corporate body lacks commitment to the Equality and Diversity agenda.

Concluding remarks

It is clear then, that the MPS, exhorted and supported by the MPA, has made significant progress over the last ten years since the publication of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry. Particular improvements have been made in the areas of recruitment and the MPS is therefore much more representative of London than it has ever been before. The organisation has showed creativity and determination; developing innovative solutions to Equality and Diversity issues in many areas of its internal structures and operational performance.

However, the Panel recognises that the vision which inspired and directed these positive changes derived mainly from the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry and its recommendations. The challenge in the ‘post-Lawrence era’ is to identify a new vision, which can provide a comparable level of inspiration. It is imperative that we meet this challenge with urgency in order that the gains of the past are not lost.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback