House of Commons - Northern Ireland Affairs

Select Committee on Northern Ireland Affairs Seventh Report

3 Progress by the Northern Ireland Policing Board

28. Professor Sir Desmond Rea, Chairman of the Policing Board, told us that in spite of the difficult political context, the Board's achievements in its first four years had been considerable.[46] He explained that the Board had a agreed a new badge and emblem for the PSNI, delivered three annual policing plans, established "a rigorous performance management regime", appointed over 207 independent members to the DPPs, and published a code of ethics for the PSNI.[47] Mr Al Hutchinson, the Oversight Commissioner, confirmed that reaching agreement on a new name and badge for the PSNI was a "difficult and contentious" issue which the Board had dealt with effectively.[48]

Human resource strategy

29. Sir Desmond Rea also pointed out that in October 2002, the Board and the PSNI had agreed a Human Resource Planning Strategy "aimed at securing more police officers on the ground delivering policing through the district command structure".[49] He said that the strategy had delivered more than 1,000 man days than had previously been available for operational policing duties.[50] A revised human resources strategy by the PSNI was presented to the Board in November 2004. The Board's Human Resources Committee has also recently prepared a draft list of key performance indicators which the Board will use to monitor the PSNI's Training, Education and Development Strategy.[51]

Accountability

30. The Board explained the accountability mechanisms which it had put in place. Mr Hugh Orde, Chief Constable of the PSNI, provides the Board with quarterly briefings, during which he explains how the PSNI is performing against targets set out in the Annual Policing Plan. Sir Desmond Rea explained that this gives the Board the opportunity to pose questions about police performance, particularly "tackling crime, the monitoring of general crime trends and other key organisational issues".[52]

31. Mrs Nuala O'Loan, the Police Ombudsman, was concerned that Board members were having difficulties in holding the Chief Constable accountable because, in her view, members are not always "conversant with a lot of the detail of policing policy and practice, local and national matters."[53] However, Sir Desmond Rea was emphatic that the Board had "demonstrated amply its developing knowledge of policing and its awareness of the nuances".[54]Mr Paul Leighton, Deputy Chief Constable of the PSNI, told us that where the PSNI believes that Board members lack knowledge of a particular issue, the police "take steps to educate and to bring them on board".[55]

Human rights

32. We heard evidence about the Board's progress in monitoring PSNI's compliance with the Human Rights Act 1998.[56] In February 2003, the Board published a Code of Ethics for police officers, setting out standards of conduct and practice for officers, and their rights and obligations under the 1998 Act. It also appointed two human rights advisers who developed a "comprehensive framework" for monitoring PSNI's compliance with the 1998 Act.[57] The advisers are currently in the final stages of producing a report which evaluates PSNI's performance against the monitoring framework.

33. Mr Denis Bradley, Vice-Chairman of the Northern Ireland Policing Board, was confident that the advisers' report would put the Board in a "very strong position" and that it would be "very thorough, very scholarly and very transforming".[58] Mr Leighton told us that the PSNI had been "extremely happy" with the rigour of the advisers' "intrusive questioning" of PSNI officers.[59] The view of Mr Orde was that the advisers had made "good progress" in "gathering the information required to make an informed and valid assessment of the service's compliance with the [Human Rights] Act". While the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) welcomed the Board's decision to appoint human rights advisers, its view was that this would "not address the need to train all Board and DPP members in human rights",[60] and that the Board's Human Rights and Professional standards Committee would be "the obvious vehicle for advancing this agenda".[61]

Political context

34. Many respondents acknowledged the difficult political context in which the Board operates. The NIHRC acknowledged that the Board had implemented "entirely new arrangements within a relatively short period of time and during a period of considerable political instability".[62] The view of Mrs O'Loan was that despite "the uncertainties and complexities of the environment" in which the Board was established, it "was striving to fulfil the responsibilities conferred on it by Parliament".[63]

Relations with the Police Service of Northern Ireland

35. According to Sir Desmond Rea, a constructive working relationship had developed between the Board and the PSNI. He told us that the Board had regular contact with the PSNI, including monthly meetings with the Chief Constable and his senior management team, both in public and private.[64]

36. Mr Hugh Orde considered that, generally, there was a "healthy tension" between the Board and the "senior command" of the PSNI.[65] He felt that as the Board had developed a "greater knowledge, awareness and understanding of policing", there had been an increase in "the quality and level of interaction" between it and the PSNI. Mr Leighton thought that the PSNI suffered at times from "mild frustration" because of the "political to-ing and fro-ing between the various sides of the political spectrum on the Board" which he believed prevented the Board from "actually getting to the nub of the question about policing".[66] This view was shared by the Chief Constable.[67] Mrs O'Loan felt that the political members of the Board are "forceful and vociferous in articulating their party views on policing, but that, in spite of this, the Board had managed to reach agreement on some important issues.[68] Sir Desmond Rea was confident that regardless of "vicissitudes of the politics", the Board was getting "on with the business".[69]

Relations with the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland

37. Sir Desmond Rea told us that the work of the Board had "regular and informal" contact with the Ombudsman and that meetings at various levels took place, including "Board, Committee and Vice-Chairman, and official level".[70] However, Mrs O'Loan felt that there was a need for more frequent contact given the complementary nature of the accountability functions performed by the Board and her Office. Her view was that this would ensure that "the police are efficient and effective" and would be "in the interests of policing generally".[71] We have set out in our report on the Police Ombudsman the vital necessity for excellent relations between the Ombudsman and the Policing Board to exist at all times, and that action must be taken at once to resolve this difference of opinion over communication.[72]

The government's view

38. Mr Ian Pearson, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Northern Ireland Office with responsibility for security and policing, thought that the Policing Board had been "an undoubted success", that it had demonstrated its ability to "take difficult decisions, and "has continued to work well, despite the ongoing political difficulties".[73]

39. The Northern Ireland Policing Board has made solid progress in establishing and developing its role, and its achievements since 2001 in establishing a framework of accountability for policing in Northern Ireland have been significant. The Board has put in place mechanisms to monitor and assess the performance of the Chief Constable and the PSNI, including a human rights monitoring framework, human resource and training strategies, and a code of ethics for police officers. It has made difficult decisions successfully in a complex political environment.

40. We welcome the constructive relationship that has developed between the Policing Board and the senior management of the PSNI.

41. We believe that in order to be effective, the Policing Board must cooperate fully with the Office of the Police Ombudsman. We have already noted the difference of opinion between the Board and the Ombudsman over what constitutes appropriate frequency of contact.[74] We call on both organisations to put in place a structure for communication acceptable to both without delay.

42. We were told that Policing Board members were not always aware of the detail of policing policy and practice. This is of concern as a sound understanding of the police and its role is fundamental to the effective operation of the Board's oversight function. We do not doubt that most Board members are well informed and conscientious. However, the Board collectively must take full responsibility for ensuring that all its members are equipped with the information and expertise necessary to fulfil their statutory functions. We hope not to hear such complaints repeated when we next scrutinise the Board.

Structure of the Board

43. The Board's committee structure covers seven main areas: corporate policy; community involvement; press and public relations; human resources; human rights and professional standards; audit and best value; and finances and general purposes. The Chief Constable expressed concern that the structure did not reflect the current operational and departmental structure within the PSNI.[75] He told us that there is no committee to examine crime operations, or serious and organised crime generally, and that, as a result, "very sensitive issues" were being discussed at monthly public meetings. His view was that realigning the committee structure would "enhance the Board's ability to hold the service to account" and generate "clearer lines of communication and understanding between both organisations".[76] Mr Denis Bradley, Vice-Chairman, told us that the Board's corporate policy committee dealt with crime operations.

44. Mr Trevor Reaney, Chief Executive of the Policing Board, explained that both the PSNI and the Board are currently reviewing their corporate governance arrangements and that this would involve examining how the Board and PSNI organise their committees.[77] He said that once the PSNI completed its review, the Board would be advised about changes to its internal structure. If there was a better way of organising the Board's committees, Mr Reaney would present recommendations to that effect to the Board.[78] Mr Leighton, Deputy Chief Constable, told us that the PSNI's review of corporate governance would provide the Board with the opportunity to consider aligning its committee structure with the model adopted by the PSNI. Mr Ian Pearson, the Minister, acknowledged that there was "scope" for the Board to realign their committee structures, but that this was a matter for the Board.[79]

45. It is important to the effective functioning of the Board that its committee structure permits a targeted oversight of the activities of the PSNI. The existing structure does not have a committee focused solely on crime operations, a highly significant area of PSNI activity. We recommend that the Board considers its present committee system carefully in the light of the PSNI's review of its own corporate governance arrangements to ensure their structure is wholly appropriate.

Confidentiality

46. Mr Orde told us that there had been a small number of instances where sensitive information was discussed in private sessions with the Board "under a clear understanding of confidentiality" but that the information was subsequently "divulged to third parties, including members of the press".[80] He argued that "such indiscretions and inappropriate breaches of trust" were detrimental to the PSNI's relationship with the Board.[81] Mrs O'Loan told us that the risk of a breach of confidentiality affected the level of communication between her Office and the Board. She explained that there had been breaches of confidentiality on "a number of occasions" and that this had "the effect of diminishing trust" in the Board.[82] She suggested that a code of ethics for Board members might help improve confidentiality.

47. Sir Desmond Rea explained that while members have generally respected confidentiality, there have been "some unfortunate leaks", although there have been none in the recent past.[83] He thought that some Board members consider that it is their duty to place information in the public domain, but that they were learning and the "overall position" had improved".[84] He also told us that the Board had adopted a voluntary Code of Conduct for members which included provisions on confidentiality.[85]

48. Mr Ian Pearson, the Minister, told us that breaches of confidentiality were "clearly not satisfactory" and that the Board should "rightly expect that confidentiality matters should be kept confidential".[86]

49. We were pleased to learn that there have been no recent 'leaks' from the Policing Board of sensitive information. The importance of maintaining the confidentiality of sensitive information provided by the PSNI to the Board cannot be overestimated. Both the PSNI and the Police Ombudsman told us that past breaches of confidentiality have eroded their trust and confidence in the Board. We expect the Board, and its staff, to act at all times in a fully professional manner. This means that sensitive information provided to the Board in the course of its work must never be divulged to third parties. Such gross breaches of trust are entirely unacceptable and must not be repeated if the reputation of the Board is to be maintained. At present, the Board has a voluntary Code of Conduct which includes a confidentiality provision. In addition, Board members' terms of appointment letters state that members should respect the sensitivity of "some of the issues" they will be dealing with. We invite the Secretary of State to consider whether, in the light of past breaches, this is sufficient, or whether maintaining strict confidentiality about all information received by the Board should be a formal condition of appointment.

Public accountability

50. The Board is required to hold at least eight meetings in public, but, during 2003/04, held ten public meetings.[87] Sir Desmond Rea told us that during the meetings, the Chief Constable provides the Board with a report on key policing issues and the Board asks the Chief Constable and his senior management team questions about the PSNI's performance. Mr Orde explained that the meetings are conducted in an "open and transparent manner" and "allow the public to see the accountability mechanisms working".[88]

51. The NIHRC argued, however, that too few meetings were held outside of Belfast, that the public were not encouraged to participate in the meetings and pose questions, and "virtually no decisions" were being made in "public sessions".[89] The Community Relations Council (CRC) felt that there was a need for the Chief Constable to report more fully on issues of public concern and on the PSNI's progress in meeting its targets in the Annual Policing Plan.[90] Sir Desmond Rea refuted the claim that the public meetings were "Belfast centric", and argued that during 2004 the Board had held meetings in Omagh and Armagh and were planning to hold meetings in Newry and Derry during 2005.[91]

52. We commend the Board for holding more than the minimum number of public meetings in 2003/04. These are opportunities to promote public confidence in the work of the Board, facilitate greater transparency, and engender a more inclusive approach to policing, as envisaged by the Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland. More needs to be done to encourage public participation and develop a genuine exchange between the Board and the public. This is not a simple matter, and progress will be incremental. However, we are convinced of the usefulness of this aspect of the Board's operations and we expect it to take the lead in creating all reasonable opportunities for public participation.

Performance against targets

53. The Board's 2002-03 Annual Report contained explanations of the progress made by the Board in meeting its corporate objectives.[92] However, these explanations were omitted in the 2003-04 Annual Report. When we asked the reason for this inconsistency, we were told that the Board was currently revising its corporate plan and was "seeking to develop a more structured performance management regime".[93] Sir Desmond Rea also acknowledged the need for the Board to move towards "a more disciplined approach" to measuring the Board's progress against its objectives.[94]

54. Mrs O'Loan considered that the Board's Annual Report tended to focus "more on the assessment of the achievements of the PSNI and other organisations" and less on the "corporate activities of the Board".[95] She held the view that the public's understanding of the Board's role would improve if the annual report provided more information about the Board's corporate activities.[96] Mr Trevor Reaney told us that the Board places "a high value on performance management and monitoring" of the PSNI and would wish to bring the same level of discipline into monitoring the Board's own affairs.[97]

55. It is our experience of the organisations we scrutinise that the annual reporting exercise is sometimes approached as a necessary chore. While we accept that achieving excellence is time consuming and difficult, the creation of a fully comprehensive and transparent annual report is a vital part of the presentation of any organisation's activities to the public and must be taken seriously. The presentation of the Board's performance data in the annual report is insufficiently transparent and comprehensive. The annual report must set out clearly the Board's progress on key objectives in a simple, attractive and consistent format, year on year. This level of presentational excellence has yet to be achieved by the Board. We appreciate that while the Board must report on the PSNI's performance in its annual report, the major focus must rest clearly on the Board's own performance and its principal activities. We welcome the willingness of the Chief Executive to consider improvements, and we are confident that the Board will take immediate steps to improve the presentation of its annual report.

46 Ev 2 Back

47 Ev 2 Back

48 Ev 63 Back

49 Ev 4 Back

50 Ev 4 Back

51 Ev 4 Back

52 Ev 3 Back

53 Ev 65 Back

54 Q 1 Back

55 Q 66 Back

56 Ev 4 Back

57 Ev 4 Back