Examination of Witnesses (Questions 100-114)
21 JULY 2004
MR PAUL
LEIGHTON, PROFESSOR
DESMOND REA,
MR TREVOR
REANEY AND
MS SINEAD
SIMPSON
Q100 Mr Tami: The same
point again, you are happy with the way that that practice works?
Professor Rea:
We believe that, so far in terms of our experience, this is very
beneficial; it demonstrates the importance of the Ombudsman's
Office as part of the architecture of policing in Northern Ireland.
Q101 Mr Beggs: The Ombudsman's
survey of police officers indicated that almost half, that is
48%, of those police officers who had been in contact with the
Office of the Police Ombudsman said that they were dissatisfied
with the way in which the Office had dealt with them during the
investigation. What do you understand to be the main reasons for
this dissatisfaction and what steps have you taken to address
it with officers and the Ombudsman?
Mr Leighton: We
met with the Ombudsman's Office along with the Federation, the
Superintendents' Association and the (inaudible) reps to discuss
the outcome of the survey. It is fair to say that the survey results
have lessons in them for both the Ombudsman's Office and the Police
Service of Northern Ireland and we agree that those lessons need
to be picked up and learned. With regard to that particular result,
48% of police officers who had been in contact with the Police
Ombudsman's Office said they were dissatisfied with the way the
Office had dealt with them during the investigation, it is somewhat
at odds with other results in the survey where 74% of police officers
who had been in contact with the Police Ombudsman's Office said
they were satisfied with the overall time it had taken; 64% were
satisfied with the outcome of the investigation; 61% were satisfied
with the way they had been received; and 58% thought the explanation
of the complaints process given to them was clear. So, there are
a number of things in this survey and what we agreed was that
we would look very closely at this survey and try and learn the
lessons from it because it needs interpretation in the light of
those different responses.
Q102 Mr Beggs: Thirty-six%
of your police officers said that they had a good knowledge of
the role, responsibilities and powers of the Police Ombudsman
and 36% said they had not. Are you concerned that over a third
of police officers who responded to the survey indicated that
they did not have a good knowledge of the role, responsibilities
and powers of the Police Ombudsman and what are you doing about
that?
Mr Leighton: That
was one of the clear lessons from the survey. What we have done
is that we have instigated a series of meetings in conjunction
with the Ombudsman's Office. The people who are most likely to
receive complaints are our first concern and those are people
who are in the frontline units or detectives. So, we have focused
on those as the first number of people who would need to receive
training about the Ombudsman's Office and information about the
Ombudsman's Office. Information is available to all police officers
about the Ombudsman's Office firstly and that is clear: there
are leaflets; there is information that they can find about the
Ombudsman's Office very easily within our system; there is access
to their website on our system. There are a number of ways in
which they can find out the information. To proactively go to
officers and give them information about the Ombudsman's Office,
we targeted those groups that are mostly likely to be complained
about: the TSGs, the Tactical Support Groups/Units who go into
frontline riot situations and who would be the first line in any
public order situations or who would do searches and arrests in
difficult circumstances and CID officers who may be the subject
of investigation because they are involved in major investigations
such as murders and other serious investigations. That is what
we have done about that. The Ombudsman's Office have cooperated
with us, they have attended various training sessions and they
attend every year the briefings before Dumcrie and the briefings
before other major events in order that they capture large numbers
of police at one time and explain the role of the Ombudsman's
Office and what they will do if a complaint is made. So, we have
proactively approached that along with the Ombudsman's Office.
Q103 Mr Beggs: At present,
we understand that police officers cannot make a complaint to
the Ombudsman about fellow police officers. Should members of
the PSNI be able to complain to the Police Ombudsman about the
conduct of other members rather than to their line manager?
Mr Leighton: No,
I do not think they should. I think that would create a rather
complicated system. We already have a grievance procedure and
we already have managers and we are currently training our managers
to deal more effectively with internal grievances and complaints
and we feel that any external methodology might actually duplicate
and make it more complicated and actually make it longer before
the complaint gets resolved. I think that the time for complaints
being resolved is crucial within our organisation because, when
it is not resolved, there is a festering, there is a fermenting
of dissatisfaction. So, we try to resolve things as quickly as
we possibly can.
Q104 Mr Beggs: Are complaints
an inevitable part of policing? What do you consider a normal
level of complaint to be?
Mr Leighton: There
is a leading question!
Q105 Chairman: When did
you stop beating your wife, Mr Leighton?
Mr Leighton: Are
complaints a normal part of policing? I have now been a police
officer for 24 years and I have had several complaints made against
me during my 24 years, none of which has been substantiated let
me quickly add. I do not think that complaints are an automatic
function of policing but I think it is almost inevitable that
some sections of the community, when we are dealing with a divided
community, will feel aggrieved at the way the police act, deal
or some decision that the police make. So, I think it is highly
unlikely that for some time we will get to a situation where there
are no complaints in the policing, if it is ever possible. It
does suit some people with allegations made against them when
they are facing serious charges of course to make complaints against
the police as an avenue of mitigation or even to have charges
withdrawn before a court. So, I do not think it is possible that
we will ever get to a time where we do not have complaints. What
was the second part of the question?
Q106 Mr Beggs: What do
you consider a normal level of complaints to be?
Mr Leighton: A
lot less than we have now. An acceptable level of complaints would
be a lot less than we have now.
Q107 Mr Beggs: In the
Belfast Newsletter of 6 July, a senior member of the Police Ombudsman's
staff was quoted as saying that the PSNI was "years behind
in training". Do you think that that officer had a point
of view and, if so, is there a relationship between lack of training
and the level of complaints?
Mr Leighton: I
do not think we are years behind in terms of police training.
I have had the advantage of working on secondment with HMIC looking
at many English police forces including the Metropolitan Police
and I have also had the advantage of serving in Northumbria Police
which is widely regarded as one of the best police forces in the
UK and I know that one of the members around the table will support
that.
Q108 Chairman: And 11
who will not!
Mr Leighton: Looking
at training in the PNSI, we have suffered from perhaps having
to train more in certain circumstances than others. All our officers
receive public order training and all our officers receive firearms
training. That is not the case in other police services. I think
to say that we are behind in training is an oversimplification
of the issue. Training is a huge issue for us. We are trying to
develop police training that is way in advance of things that
have been done in other parts of the world partly because we must.
I had a meeting this morning with people from Central Training
in the Home Office, Centrex, about some of our leadership training.
It is clear that the relationships we have with academic institutions
and the accreditation which we have achieved for some of our training
in our leadership training and our foundation training is way
in advance—and I state that categorically—of much
of the training that goes on in England and Wales. That is not
to say that all of our training is in advance of England and Wales.
You have already heard Mr Wood refer to our firearms training
in which we do lag behind the ACPO standards. There are mitigating
circumstances in the sense that our officers over the years have
lived with their weapons. It is not the case of an English police
officer who picks up a gun when he goes for training on the various
training events. Our officers actually live with their firearm
and therefore their familiarity with the firearm is actually much
greater. You can argue that that obviates the need for some training
but it obviously increases the need for other types of training
and Mrs O'Loan herself did allude to that in her evidence as I
heard. So, I would say that it is an oversimplification of the
case. What we aim to be—and I know in designing the new
police college which we are currently engaged in—is to have
facilities that will be as good as anywhere in the world to train
in all matters.
Q109 Chairman: I have
just been told that there is going to be a vote at 6.04, so I
want to wrap this up because I do not think we are able to continue
after we have been to vote. Can I ask two very quick questions.
Can I take it that you both agreed with what Mrs O'Loan said about
the mediation procedures? I gather you have been in discussion
and you have both agreed that it would be better if you can mediate
the less serious complaints before a formal investigation process
starts.
Mr Leighton: If
I may make just a brief comment on that. I had a meeting with
Mrs O'Loan recently on this and we have had some reservations
about this, but we have now agreed a way forward and the premise
on which we have agreed a way forward is that it is not a duplication
of other processes. In other words, our officers do not have to
go through consecutive processes. So, one fails, try another,
try another, try another. Rather, it is a concurrent process and,
on that basis, we are happy that Mrs O'Loan proceeds and we await
further information.
Q110 Chairman: I think
the Committee would be very grateful if you would let us have
a note of that view which you have just expressed in order that
we can see it quite clearly.
Professor Rea:
Can I say that we have not debated it but, in principle, we would
be for it. The only question I personally would have is, could
there be use of independent outsiders who could assist in that
process? In terms of the principle, I would imagine that our response
would be "yes".
Q111 Chairman: Again,
once your Board has considered it, perhaps you would let us have
a note because we want to make absolutely certain that we reflect
your views correctly. We had Mrs O'Loan obviously very fully give
hers. Do either of you or both of you think it would be desirable
for officers from PNSI to be seconded to the Police Ombudsman's
Office?
Professor Rea:
In principle, I think that is a proposition that is worth considering.
I can see positive arguments and I can see negative arguments
but it seems to me that it is something that is worth considering.
Mr Leighton: The
only comment I would make is that I need more detectives, I do
not need to lose any!
Q112 Chairman: Everyone
would say that, but in principle.
Mr Leighton: In
principle, I do not object to the possibility.
Q113 Chairman: It is just
a question of manpower and I understand that. Mr Leighton, you
said in your submission to us that, should amnesty be contemplated
in these historic inquiries, that the Ombudsman's remit should
be considered.
Mr Leighton: It
was a brief comment. Should amnesty or any other judicial or non-judicial
solution to a way of trying to move the past forward and this
is a debate which has been ongoing in Northern Ireland for some
time, if that is the case, then I would find it unacceptable if
someone could walk before a tribunal, hold their hands up and
say they did something, get a technical conviction and walk away.
I would find it unacceptable that my officers would then be subject
to ongoing investigation about not filling in a form or not doing
some particular act in the investigation that was leading to that
several years previously. The principle that I work to is that
we need to learn. I am quite happy that we can learn from mistakes
and, where someone has done something wrong or done something
by mistake, that we learn from that and move on. What I do not
want is those officers jeopardised.
Q114 Chairman: Do you
have a view on that Professor Rea?
Professor Rea:
I have nothing to add.
Chairman: Thank you all
very much indeed for coming and I am sorry that I have brought
this to a rather abrupt conclusion but I know that we are wanted
downstairs in two minutes. Thank you very much indeed.
| 
