Select Committee on Home Affairs First Special Report

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Training and the "occupational culture"

  9.   We recognise that the occupational culture in the police service can be a positive force. However, we also note the problems of racist, sexist and homophobic behaviour that can be perpetuated by it. We believe that such behaviour is the exception rather than the norm, and every tendency to exaggerate it is both wrong and counterproductive. We nevertheless welcome the insistence of senior police officers that they would always tackle such behaviour. We would encourage the use of disciplinary action being taken in such cases but we do not agree that disciplinary action alone will solve the problem. Training in the police service, as well as equipping police officers to carry out all their functions, must also be used as a force for eliminating the negative aspects of the occupational culture (paragraph 14).

  10.  The Government agrees with the Committee's conclusion. The Government recognises the importance of ensuring that all members of the police service are treated with fairness and respect and are free from harassment, victimisation or discrimination. Training has a role to play in shaping attitudes and in making clear what is unacceptable. The training programme for probationers (new entrants to the service) specifically addresses equal opportunity issues and the theme of equal opportunities is threaded into other areas such as harassment and handling disputes. In addition, each probationer is assessed against a range of core skills including "professional and ethical standards". This covers such areas as being sensitive to the needs and feelings of others, being tactful and supportive in dealing with colleagues and the need to maintain impartiality and fairness regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, disability or any other factor. The way officers treat each other is addressed not only through the training of probationers but also through the discipline processes in training centres.

  11.  The 15-week NPT course for probationers is crowded and there are many competing priorities for inclusion or expansion. The Government nevertheless accepts that there may be scope for more time and greater attention to be given to equal opportunity issues in the probationer training programme.

  12.  A Conference in Southampton in April 1999 led to a 25-point Action Plan for the recruitment, retention and progression of ethnic minority officers. The Action Plan makes specific reference to changing the image of the police to encourage more ethnic minority applicants. This image should help to deter those who do not subscribe to a diverse police force from applying to join.

  13.  Greater use of the grievance procedures could have a positive impact in this area, in addition to the use of the disciplinary process. The Government accepts, however, that ethnic minority officers rarely raise grievances under current procedures. It would appear that the guidelines on the procedures are adequate but that implementation is much less so. The Government understands that the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has set up a working party to consider how to improve the current situation.

  14.  The process for selecting officers for promotion also has a part to play in changing attitudes. The Police Promotion Examinations Board will shortly consider proposals for a system of penalising unacceptable language or behaviour in the qualifying examinations for promotion to sergeant or inspector. "Unacceptable" is to be defined for these purposes as anything which falls short of the Code of Conduct in the Police (Conduct) Regulations 1999. Such a system will demonstrate clearly—and help to ensure—that there is no place in the service for officers with racist, sexist or homophobic attitudes.

The national and local delivery of police training

  15.   We recognise the points raised with us concerning the independence of chief constables to hold their own budgets and to determine the appropriate amount of resources to be expended on training alongside all the other needs of forces. We also recognise the benefits of "bespoke" training which is relevant to individual forces and set in an appropriate local context. Therefore, we think it is correct in principle that a significant proportion of training should be delivered by individual forces, or consortia of forces (paragraph 20).

  16.   We also recognise that it makes sense—both in terms of cost-effectiveness and of the maintenance of consistent standards—that some training is designed and delivered on a national basis (paragraph 21).

  17.   In principle, therefore, we support the continuation of a split between local and national delivery of training (paragraph 22).

  18.  The Government agrees with the Committee's conclusion that there should continue to be a split between local and national delivery of training. There is also a place for regional training. But the way in which training is currently divided between the three levels is not necessarily the most efficient or effective.

  19.  The Government sees a need for a central police college to act as the focus for the development and promotion of professional excellence across the police service and perform a leadership role on behalf of the policing profession in England and Wales. The college would be accountable to a service authority, modelled on police authorities, with membership including people with relevant expertise drawn from inside and outside policing circles.

  20.  A central college would play an important role in fostering the corporate identity of the police service. The college would deliver or procure leadership training on behalf of police forces in England and Wales. It would encourage and develop international understanding of policing issues, for example through lectures, seminars and publications. The college would provide the Strategic Command Course, as well as joint training for senior officers involving other leaders in the criminal justice sector and the private sector. It is also envisaged that the college would deliver the Accelerated Promotion Courses and corporate training for BCU (Basic Command Unit) Commanders. Beyond these course, the Home Secretary would specify, on advice from the Police Training Council (PTC), what training the central college should deliver.

  21.  As the HMIC thematic inspection demonstrated, there is at present duplication between forces, and between forces and NPT, in the delivery of training. There is scope to rationalise training facilities and utilise resources more effectively. Sir William Stubbs described in his report the establishment of "cluster colleges": forces would set up jointly owned colleges in order to share expensive training facilities. In principle, the Government welcomes this proposal, but agrees that a cost/benefit analysis should be carried out in order to determine whether cluster colleges are the optimum means of achieving best value in training provision.

  22.  Establishing cluster colleges would lead to a better use of skills, knowledge and resources than force-specific provision. The cluster colleges would act as a best practice network, spreading innovation and good practice quickly and allowing everyone to benefit quickly. Subject to the outcome of the cost/benefit analysis, the Home Secretary would establish cluster colleges and set out the training to be delivered through them. For example, the delivery of probationer training in accordance with the core curriculum could be devolved from NPT to the cluster colleges.

  23.  The majority of training that is currently force-delivered would in future be carried out through the cluster colleges. Where the Home Secretary had not prescribed that training should take place in the cluster colleges or through the new central college, forces would be free to carry out the training in force, or to use outside bodies, such as further education colleges, provided that this met the requirements of Best Value; and the courses met the training standards set by the NTO (covered in paragraphs 88-89 below).

Core competencies and common minimum standards

  24.   The police service needs to make it a priority to draw up a competency framework outlining the core skills required in all posts. Once such a framework is in place it will allow better appraisal of officers, assist officers in their personal development and help identify individual training needs more clearly. Furthermore, it will mean that all training can be designed and delivered specifically to help officers to attain the necessary competencies (paragraph 28).

  25.   Once training is designed to help officers attain core competencies it will be much easier to ensure that training is delivered to common minimum standards. The emphasis should be on the minimum: if chief officers want to add on extra training which they think is necessary for officers in their forces, they should have the freedom to do so. However, we do not believe that individual forces should have the freedom to dilute or not to deliver training designed to common minimum standards to assist officers acquire core competencies. What will matter then is not who delivers the training—NPT, individual forces, or anyone else—but that the training reaches the minimum common standard. The Home Office and the police staff associations should make every effort to assist the drawing up of the competency framework and common minimum standards (paragraph 29).

  26.  The Government agrees that a competency framework for all ranks and common minimum standards for training are essential. The Government supports the national competency framework project which is being undertaken by ACPO. The development of minimum training standards would be a key task of the proposed new National Training Organisation (NTO) for the police service (see below at paragraph 88).

  27.  The Government accepts that the introduction of common minimum standards will make it less important than at present who delivers the training. Standards are not, however, the only consideration and their introduction does not necessarily imply the creation of a completely free market in training. There are other factors, such as best value and what Sir William Stubbs in his report (referred to in paragraph 2 above) calls "ethos". There is inherent value in officers from different forces being trained together, at either a regional or national level. Such factors may point to delivery by a central college or by a collaborative venture such as the cluster colleges considered in paragraphs 21-23 above.

  28.  The Government is also considering the introduction of a core curriculum for the police service in England and Wales. Such a curriculum would provide a framework within which training would take place. Within the overall curriculum framework there would be core curricula for personnel at various ranks, including probationers, together with core curricula for basic training which is essential for particular responsibilities. The curriculum would be comprehensive; but would not seek to set out every conceivable aspect of police training.

  29.  Qualifications can play a useful role in raising standards and helping personnel to build up a portfolio of skills which are clearly demonstrated and recognised. The Government proposes that in general the standards which are set should be measured through compulsory qualifications. The Home Secretary would stipulate these on advice from the PTC. This would show clearly that individuals discharging key roles, such as custody care and public order, had achieved the required minimum level of competence. A recognised external qualification or a certificate of competence from a recognised training course could demonstrate this. The requirement would be phased in over a period of time.

Evaluation and inspection of training

  30.   We agree with HMIC that forces need to adopt a more stringent approach to evaluation and make better use of officers trained in evaluation skills (paragraph 31).

  31.   We recommend that all forces and the Home Office examine the findings and recommendations of HMIC's thematic inspection of training, give serious consideration to proposals within it and learn from the best practice identified (paragraph 33).

  32.   There is a need for more detailed inspection of forces' training. We agree with the Home Secretary that there should be a dedicated inspectorate team focussed specifically on training. Such a team would be able to make detailed proposals to forces on their training provision and would provide an effective way of disseminating good practice. We encourage the Home Office to set up such a team, based within HMIC, or as a separate small inspectorate (paragraph 36).

  33.   The new training inspectorate would be particularly effective if implemented alongside the introduction of comprehensive competencies and common minimum standards. Without the new inspectorate we are concerned that even if minimum standards in training are introduced there might not be sufficient inspection of forces to ensure that they are being met (paragraph 37).

  34.   We would encourage all police authorities to take a close interest in the training and recruitment policies of their forces. We agree that police authorities should be persistent and robust in their scrutiny of forces. We encourage them to demonstrate these qualities in relation to training and recruitment. Specifically, all authorities should give consideration to having regular meetings with forces' heads of training. The implementation of national standards in training would provide one of a number of suitable topics for scrutiny (paragraph 39).

  35.  The Government agrees with the Committee's recommendations. The thematic inspection by HM Inspectorate was the most comprehensive examination of police training ever undertaken in England and Wales. The Government has taken careful note of the twenty-one recommendations in the report in formulating its proposals for the future of police training and will continue to do so as those proposals are developed.

  36.  The Government proposes to establish a dedicated inspectorate of training within HM Inspectorate of Constabulary. The new inspectorate will be headed by a new Lay Inspector who will report to HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary and will be supported by officers seconded from forces. The inspectorate could buy in outside expertise. The new training inspectorate will therefore combine both police and lay expertise: the Government sees it as essential that police training is subject to a measure of outside scrutiny.

  37.  The Government agrees that police authorities should take a close interest in the training and recruitment policies of their forces. This is particularly important given the Best Value responsibilities placed on authorities under the Local Government Act 1999. Police authorities should also play an important role in scrutinising annual costed human resources plans produced by chief officers (see paragraphs 63-65 below).

Costs

  38.   It is not acceptable that there is such paucity of information available about the cost of police training. Without better information about costs it is not possible to achieve effective value for money and it cannot be satisfactory that approximately half a billion pounds is being spent without such value for money being sought. We welcome the appointment of Sir William Stubbs as an adviser to the Home Office on these issues and we also note the Home Secretary's optimism about the role of a service authority in these matters. We believe action needs to be taken now. Police forces should collect and publish accurate information about their training costs broken down by types of training and detailing the numbers of officers receiving such training. Police authorities should pursue these matters and ask searching questions about their forces' performance in comparison to others. The training inspectorate we want to see established should also routinely examine and comment on value for money issues (paragraph 43).

  39.   Nationally, the Home Office and the police service should draw up a standardised costing model to ensure that accurate information is kept, so that training costs can be compared and efficiency achieved (paragraph 44).

  40.  The Government agrees that there is a lack of reliable data about training and training costs in a standard format and that this is a significant impediment to making informed decisions about the comparative costs of training and about value for money. The Home Office, in consultation with the service and with police authorities, will develop a national costing model as a matter of urgency. The Government also agrees that police authorities have a role to play in ensuring best value in the provision of training, as in other matters.

  41.  To avoid any misunderstanding, the Government would wish to make it clear that Sir William Stubbs has not been appointed as an adviser to the Home Office. As explained in paragraph 2 above, he was asked by the Home Secretary to carry out a specific study of the organisation and funding of police training and to make recommendations.

The local element of probationer training

  42.   We are pleased to note that satisfaction with tutor constables seems to be much higher amongst recently recruited officers than with more experienced officers recalling the arrangements which were in place for them years earlier. However, it must still be a cause for concern that one in five recent recruits did not think this important relationship had been satisfactory. Forces must take care to ensure that tutor constables are carefully selected and that all of them receive relevant training in how to be an effective tutor before they take on that role (paragraph 54).

  43.   We are also concerned that barely a quarter of officers surveyed agreed that a career development portfolio was an influential document, especially given that this was a method identified by which probationers could draw attention to any shortcomings in their training. We urge all forces to encourage their officers to treat portfolios as an important tool through which they can influence their career for the better. As for the forces' responsibilities, they must ensure that, wherever possible, the appropriate structures and resources are in place to ensure that needs identified in portfolios can be acted upon. The Home Office and/or NPT should review the use of portfolios to see how effective they are at present and how they can be made more so (paragraph 55).

  44.  The Government notes the recommendations. Both NPT and HM Inspectorate recommend dedicated tutor units as best practice for the delivery of Stage 4 of the probationer training programme. NPT has produced tutor selection criteria and a tutor training programme. However, under current arrangements neither the use of tutor units nor the use of the material produced by NPT is mandatory. The selection and training of tutor constables is the responsibility of individual chief officers and forces may use all, part or none of the selection criteria and the programme.

  45.  NPT recently published a Service Level Agreement (SLA) for the delivery of probationer training, which the Chairman of the ACPO Personnel Management Committee signed on behalf of the service. NPT is currently measuring the ability of forces to deliver probationer training in accordance with the SLA and is in discussion with HM Inspectorate as to how to make best use of the data. Analysis of how the SLA is being put into effect in forces will provide valuable information.

  46.  The introduction of mandatory national standards and a more rigorous inspection procedure, as is proposed, will help to ensure consistent high standards with regard to tutor constables.

  47.  NPT ensures that the Professional Development Portfolio (PDP) for probationers is used during Stage 2 of the probationer training programme (the 15 weeks spent at one of NPT's training centres). However, there are at present no means whereby forces can be required to use the PDP during the remainder of the two years of an officer's probationary period. There is evidence that some forces use their own competency frameworks and portfolios following completion of stage 2, but the practice is not widespread. A national competency framework will provide obvious benefits in this area, providing chief officers use or are required to use a single national system. NPT is currently validating the PDP.

---

---

Prepared 7 December 1999