Memorandum
from ACPO (PVE 60)
1. Executive
Summary
The ACPO submission makes the following recommendations:
1. The need for greater coordination of
research relating to Prevent.
2. The need for a process to ensure that
research routinely assists in the development of policy.
3. The need for a central depository for
Prevent learning and emerging practice.
4. The Prevent programme to remain dynamic in
response to violent extremism from wherever it emerges.
5. That, once operational, the ACPO NPDU
internet referral unit undergoes a process of evaluation to assess
effectiveness and determine the need for future funding.
6. The need for a national assessment of
community engagement, looking at mechanisms and outcomes. This needs to be wider than Neighbourhood
Policing and should seek to identify outcomes of engagement specifically
addressing the Prevent strategy.
7. The need to exploit learning from Channel
referrals to inform our understanding of the drivers of radicalisation and help
identify those most vulnerable.
8. Further refresh of the joint Police and
Audit Commission learning and development exercise. This should complement the Comprehensive Area
Assessment process.
9. To consider a process of regularly reviewing
those we engage to offer advice, the quality of the advice and the cost.
10. That we develop a better understanding of the
Prevent activity occurring abroad enabling comparisons and joint learning
11. That Government voices and policies make it
clear that preventing violent extremism is more than building cohesive
communities.
2. About
the author
2.1. Sir Norman Bettison has had a 37 year career in policing
encompassing three major police forces and a number of national
responsibilities.
2.2. He joined South Yorkshire Police in 1972 as a police cadet where he
remained until his appointment as Assistant Chief Constable of West Yorkshire
Police in 1993. In 1998 he was appointed
Chief Constable of Merseyside Police until his
appointment as Chief Executive of Centrex in January 2005.
He rejoined the police service in January 2007 as Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police.
2.3. He received the Queen's
Police Medal for distinguished service in the Millennium Honour's List and a Knighthood
for services to policing in 2006.
2.4. In addition to his role as Chief Constable, he is a Vice President
of ACPO and leads the Prevent programme for the police service.
2.5. He is currently:
i. A member of ACPO
(Terrorism and Allied Matters),
ii. The ACPO lead
on Protective Services,
iii. The ACPO lead
on Prevention of Violent Extremism,
iv. A member of the
Police Counter Terrorism Board (PCTB) and
v. Chairs ACPO
Prevent Programme Board
3.
Introduction
3.1. Policing in England,
Wales and Northern Ireland
is led by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO). This is an independent, professionally led
strategic body which works in the public interest to coordinate the direction
and development of the police service.
3.2. Preventing Violent Extremism is managed
through the Terrorism and Allied Matters (TAM) business area. Sir Norman Bettison QPM (ACPO Vice President)
leads the strategic Prevent programme supported by Assistant Chief Constable
John Wright as Senior Responsible Officer (SRO).
3.3. The police response is set out in the ACPO
Strategy and Delivery Plan and the Prevent Implementation plan.[1],[2]
3.4. The ACPO National Prevent Delivery Unit
(NPDU) incorporates the National Community Tension Team (NCTT) and consists of
centrally seconded officers and police staff.
The role of the unit is to manage the delivery of various projects key
to the successful delivery of Prevent and to act as a focal point for policy,
support and guidance. Whilst the police
service is an active partner in supporting all of the objectives of the Government's
Prevent strategy, it has a particular contribution to make
in relation to objectives 2, 3 and 6 namely to:
(2) Disrupt
those who promote violent extremism and strengthen vulnerable institutions,
(3) Support
individuals vulnerable to recruitment by violent extremists and
(6) Develop
Prevent related intelligence, analysis and research.
3.5.
The policing response to Preventing Violent Extremism has been developed to
respond to threats from all areas of extremism wherever they may occur and can
be summarised as:
3.6. Protecting
vulnerable people, communities and establishments from harm.
3.7. This approach supports the core function of
the police service which is to prevent and detect crime and protect people and
reassure the community.[3]
3.8. It recognises that Community Cohesion is
necessary in preventing violent extremism and terrorism, but it is not
sufficient by itself.
3.9. The Prevent strategy provides the focus to
support those who are perceived as being vulnerable to radicalisation and violent
extremism. This requires long term
engagement with communities, seeking to gain their support to counter
radicalisation.
3.10. Although early in the implementation of Prevent
within the police service, the aspiration is to embed Prevent within Neighbourhood
Policing through:
i. Accurately
understanding the communities we serve through the development of Neighbourhood
profiles,
ii. effectively
engaging with those communities through, Neighbourhood Policing teams,
iii. listening and
acting upon their concerns through adoption of the Policing Pledge,[4]
iv. working in
partnership with the community to achieve sustainable solutions; and thereby
v. contributing to
the single police indicator of increasing trust and confidence.
3.11. This ensures that the policing response to
Prevent is complementary and supports other core areas of police business.
3.12. Whilst the
police service has made significant progress as outlined within the HMIC
report, 'Prevent: Progress and Prospects,' it continues to develop its approach and has set the
following priorities for 2009/10:
i. Embedding Prevent - Ensuring that Prevent is
mainstreamed within everyday policing,
ii. Partnership Interventions - Developing
effective activities to support those who are vulnerable to violent extremism,
iii. 'Prevent'/'Pursue' Overlap - Developing a
range of proportionate tactical options to support or deter those either
involved in or supporting violent extremism,
iv. Information Sharing; - ensuring that partners
have the information they need to develop effective plans and activities,
v. 'Prevent' Capability and Capacity Building
- ensuring that we have the resources to successfully deliver the ACPO Prevent
strategy and that they represent value for money.
Question 1
4.1. How robust is the Government's analysis of the factors,
which lead people to become involved in violent extremism?
4.2. It is recognised
that there is no single cause of radicalisation or way in which people are
drawn or encouraged towards violent extremism.
As a result, the police response to Prevent has been developed to be
flexible and adaptable to changes in threat.
The threat from 'home grown terrorists' and 'lone wolves' is very
apparent, as is that from extreme right wing and or single-issue extremism.
4.3. A number of
research projects and academic studies have been commissioned through the 'Prevent Research Oversight Board'
supported by the 'Prevent Research
Working Group'. Such projects are
prioritised against areas of vulnerability or threat.
4.4. Many of these
projects are still in their infancy and have yet to be made available to
practitioners. The demand for such
products has inevitably led to some forces and regional Counter Terrorist Units
commissioning their own research. This
has impacted on the level of coordination and possible duplication of effort
and expense.
4.5. Whilst a process
exists to analyse the factors leading to involvement in violent extremism,
there is little evidence to suggest that this process is encompassing and
robust. More needs to be done to ensure
that learning is efficiently disseminated to practitioners and to ensure that
it informs policy development.
4.6. There are a number
of current processes in existence to disseminate learning although there does
not appear to be a single repository for such information making it difficult
for practitioners to access.
4.7. Recommendations
1. The need for greater coordination of
research relating to Prevent.
2. The need for a process to ensure that
research routinely assists in the development of policy.
3. The need for a central depository for
Prevent learning and emerging practice.
4.8. Is
the 'Prevent' programme appropriately targeted to address the most important of
those factors?
4.9. The Government's
Counter Terrorism strategy (CONTEST) focuses on international terrorism. The current threat has been assessed as
coming from those who claim to act in the name of Islam. As a consequence, Muslim communities are
assessed as being the most vulnerable to this strand of radicalisation and
incitement to violence. The Police
strategy acknowledges that a single focus could lead to the perception of
targeting a particular community and is careful to ensure that the Prevent
agenda retains community support. The Police
response to Preventing Violent Extremism is wider, encompassing all forms of violent
extremist threat.
4.10. However, any 'threat
based' approach must be flexible enough to adapt to change. The Police response to Prevent is
intelligence led, based upon the National Intelligence Model (NIM) which has
been adopted by the Police Service.
4.11. An example being the
transition from 'home grown terrorists' to those secreted into the UK from
abroad to undertake attacks who have not previously come to the attention of
law enforcement or intelligence agencies.
Our engagement with communities and partner agencies needs to be able to
identify 'normality' so that abnormal situations can be identified.
4.12. The internet has
been shown to be a source of material which can either contribute to self
radicalisation or used by those intent on radicalising others. Work is currently underway within the NPDU to
develop an internet referral unit, the intention being to deny the internet as
a vehicle to distribute such material.
4.13. Recommendations
4. The Prevent programme to remain dynamic in
response to violent extremism from wherever it emerges.
5. That once operational, the ACPO NPDU
internet referral unit undergoes a process of evaluation to assess
effectiveness and determine the need for future funding.
Question 2
5.1. How appropriate, and how effective, is the Government's
strategy for engaging with communities?
5.2. The Government's CONTEST
strategy, the ACPO Prevent strategy and the ACPO Prevent Implementation plan are
clear that engagement with communities is at the heart of the Prevent agenda.
5.3. The now established
counter-terrorism maxim 'communities defeat terrorism' is at the centre of the
ACPO approach to Prevent[5]. Whilst
there is no overall Government community engagement strategy, the Home Office
has placed community engagement at the forefront of policing as highlighted by
the single confidence indicator. The
police service undertakes a wide range of engagement activities at a variety of
levels both independently and in partnership.
Nationally through the NCTT, regionally through Counter Terrorist Units
and Government Offices and locally through the 'Policing Pledge', Neighbourhood
Policing programme, Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) and Crime and Disorder
Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs).
5.4. Existing engagement
activity is the bedrock of successful Prevent delivery and the NPDU drives
focused engagement through:
i. Schools and colleges,
ii. Muslim women's groups,
iii. Young people and
iv. Muslim communities via
activities such as Operation Nicole and Act Now.
5.5. Consultation at the
national level is primarily through strategic bodies such as the Muslim Safety
Forum, the National Association of Muslim Police and various Muslim community
organisations. For specific
work-streams the NPDU will work with other organisations such as the Young
Muslim Advisory Group and UK Youth Parliament.
At Force and Basic Command Unit (BCU) level, consultation will be done
with local groups and organisations.
5.6. Has the Government been speaking to the right
people?
5.7. In response to this
question the phrase 'the right people' is difficult to quantify and can be
segmented into numerous subgroups. For
example, there are those who can assist in speaking out against the 'single
narrative' often used by those wishing to inspire others towards embracing
violent extremism. There is a drive to
identify and support these 'credible voices' within communities that can rally
against this narrative.
5.8. Additionally,
engagement with those that hold unpalatable views to our own shared values can
offer a valuable insight in countering terrorism. There is an acceptance within community
engagement that such engagement is rarely 'comfortable' and is often extremely
challenging.
5.9. However, there has
often been criticism from the wider Muslim community of a perception of
engaging with those on the 'fringe' or previously involved in violent extremism
at the exclusion of their views. There
are many pitfalls in blanket engagement as outlined within a recent Policy
Exchange document.[6]
5.10. The police service
adoption of the 'Policing Pledge' focuses on engagement with all communities
and listening to their concerns, which is a cornerstone of effective
Neighbourhood Policing.
5.11. Has its programme reached those at whom it
is-or should be-aimed?
5.12. The initial stream
of Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) Prevent funding was based on perceived
threat and vulnerability and that methodology continues. The funding was intended to increase
capacity within the 23 police forces identified as having 'Priority Areas'
within their boundaries. The
Metropolitan Police Service received separate funding. In addition to this, further funding was made
available via the NPDU to build Prevent capacity within the remaining forces
and regional CT structures.
5.13. The NPDU also led
on the development and introduction of new Counter Terrorism Local Profiles
(CTLPs), which has assisted in the local assessment of threat and
vulnerability. Additional funding was
allocated through the NPDU to analytical resources to ensure the timely
production of these local profiles. CTLPs
are shared with local partners to ensure joint ownership and a coordinated
response.
5.14. Although the
initial phase of CTLPs are still being delivered, a review is already planned
to refine the process including an Ipsos MORI poll to ensure that they
effectively contribute to informing local debate around Preventing Violent
Extremism[7].
5.15. The Channel project is a
multi agency referral scheme developed to support those who are viewed as vulnerable to
radicalisation. The NPDU is working with
the Office for Security and Counter Terrorism (OSCT) to develop a practitioner's
guide in relation to Channel which is due to be published shortly.
5.16. Channel was
initially piloted in 11 areas and has now been expanded to 28, covering 12
Police Forces across 63 Local Authority areas.
To date 228 referrals have been made, the majority being males under 25 years who are inspired
by the AQ ideology. Although, the
process has received referrals from those attracted to right wing
extremism. An evaluation of Channel was carried out by OSCT on the 11 original
sites. A redacted report on the key
findings is due to be published shortly.
The NPDU have produced guidance to both BCU commanders and Local
Authority partners on the Channel referral scheme. This is due to be published imminently.
5.17. Recommendations / Managing Learning
6. The need for a national assessment of
community engagement, looking at mechanisms and outcomes. This needs to be wider than Neighbourhood
Policing and should seek to identify outcomes of engagement specifically
addressing the Prevent strategy.
7. The need to exploit learning from Channel
referrals to inform our understanding of the drivers of radicalisation and help
identify those most vulnerable.
Question 3
6.1. Is the necessary advice and expertise
available to local authorities on how to implement and evaluate the programme?
6.2. The primary role of the ACPO NPDU is to
develop policy and provide support and guidance to police forces on the
implementation of Prevent. In addition,
the NPDU offers guidance and support to partners, publishing a 'partner's
guide' in October 2008[8].
6.3. The NPDU have hosted a number of events
catered for partners to outline the police approach to Prevent and develop
partnership engagement and support. The
last event being held in Bristol
on 1 September 2009.
6.4. Activity against the Police Implementation
plan is monitored through the ACPO Prevent Regional Coordinators meeting where
emerging practice is discussed and disseminated.
6.5. The issue of 'understanding what works' in
relation to Prevent activity and sharing best or emerging practice was
highlighted within both the Learning and Development Exercise[9], and HMIC Inspection.[10]
6.6. Only very recently, August 2009, CLG
published guidance on how to evaluate Prevent projects and programmes.[11] Whilst the report does
not specifically mention the ACPO NPDU, it does refer Local Authorities to a
wide range of peer and mentor support including the IDeA website.
6.7. The NPDU is currently exploring
opportunities to accredit a number of police officers and staff involved in the
delivery of Prevent to become peer mentors in support of the above CLG
initiative and the NPIA peer mentoring scheme.
6.8. Recommendations
8. Further refresh of the joint Police and
Audit Commission learning and development exercise. This should complement the Comprehensive Area
Assessment process.
Question
4
7.1. Are the objectives of the 'Prevent' agenda
being communicated effectively to those at whom it is aimed?
7.2. To ensure effective internal and stakeholder
communication of the implementation of Prevent, the NPDU published the ACPO Prevent
Communications Strategy April 2009[12]. This is supported by a detailed delivery
plan.
7.3. Externally, the National Community Tension
Team (NCTT) had already gained considerable experience in engaging with a wide
range of communities and leads on engagement at a national level with Faith
Communities, Education, Young People and Muslim Women.
7.4. In addition NPDU delivers 'Operation
Nicole', an exercise, which brings communities and CT specialists
together. They work through a scenario
designed to highlight the challenges and perceptions of CT operations. This exercise has received supportive
feedback and helps to promote openness and honesty in CT policing.
7.5. To date 21 events have been held, the
majority within priority areas an a further 14 events are planned. These events are independently evaluated and
90% of participants felt that the event was either; good, very good or
excellent. In addition, the unit
regularly seeks new projects to ensure that the objectives of the Prevent
agenda are effectively communicated to those at which the programme is
aimed. An example is the Act Now
project.
7.6. Such engagement activity is focused on those
communities facing the highest level of risk using currently available
assessments.
7.7. The ACPO NPDU also works closely with the
Government's Research Information and Communications Unit (RICU) to develop its
communication strategy and audience segmentation activity, developing a more
sophisticated and focused means of communication with key audiences.
Question 5
8.1. Is the Government seeking, and obtaining, appropriate
advice on how to achieve the goals of the Prevent programme?
8.2. The Prevent sub-board, report to the
overarching CONTEST board, and is responsible for overseeing delivery of
Prevent. Membership includes representatives from across Government, the Police
and other agencies and ensures that the government is given advice on how to
achieve the goals of Prevent.
8.3. Outside of this 'professional network' it is
often difficult to assess who can give 'appropriate' advice, or indeed what the
term 'appropriate' means. As previously
stated, it is often those that do not share our values that have the most to
teach us about our approach to countering radicalisation and terrorism.
8.4. As with many new initiatives there is often
a desire for quick answers and a deeper understanding of the issues. This often leads to the demand for advice
outstripping supply. There is also a
perception that some organisations see Prevent as a 'growth industry' and are
looking to fully exploit the available funding.
Care should be taken to regularly review those with whom we seek to
engage and the quality of advice they offer against its cost.
8.5. Due to the emerging nature of Prevent and
the quest for knowledge it has been difficult to coordinate the search for
advice and to identify credible organisations.
This has led to some sweeping generalisations and engagement with
organisations mistrusted by the wider Muslim community.
8.6. The NPDU has encouraged Police forces and
basic command units to engage with existing local organisations and groups with
which a mature relationship has already been formed. Examples being local community groups and faith
and diversity groups. As part of this mature engagement, the NPDU has seconded
an officer from the National Association of Muslim Police (NAMP) to obtain
independent and timely advice and assess the impact of policy and tactics.
8.7. Recommendation
9. To
consider a process of regularly reviewing those we engage to offer advice, the
quality of the advice and the cost.
Question 6
9.1. How effectively has the Government evaluated
the effectiveness of the programme and the value for money, which is being
obtained from it?
9.2. It
is accepted within ACPO that Prevent is a long-term engagement strategy. In October 2008 the Audit Commission and Her
Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) published the findings of the
learning and development exercise (LDE) to draw out the learning from the first
year of Prevent.[13] Further work on the progress and prospects of
Prevent within the Police Service was published by HMIC in June 2009[14].
9.3. The latter report identified that Prevent as
a strategy is still in the early stages of delivery but stating; "both police and partners
are progressing on trajectory to full delivery"[15].
9.4. Both of these
reports recognised that the 'Assessment of Success' within Prevent was
underdeveloped. This, coupled with the
apparent lack of evaluation of Prevent initiatives has made the 'Value For
Money' assessment of Prevent difficult.
9.5. During the research
for both these reports, practitioners voiced frustration as to the perceived
lack of coordination and clarity around the projects available, funding
opportunities and visibility of emerging best practice.
9.6. In response to
these reports, the ACPO NPDU is currently progressing work in relation to effective
performance measures for Police Prevent activity and a value for money exercise
in relation to the CSR funded intelligence and community engagement posts.
9.7. As previously
stated, the recently published CLG guidance on the evaluation of Prevent
projects will undoubtedly contribute to this area.
9.8. Have reactions to the programme been
adequately gauged?
9.9. The NCTT, within
the NPDU, has been monitoring tensions within communities for a number of
years. The analytical product of this
monitoring is circulated to forces via the 'Element' report.
9.10. This mature process
is being refined to provide a more focused and timely method of monitoring the
changes in community tensions as a result of Prevent activity.
9.11. ACPO, local forces
and BCUs also undertake a Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) which involves
consultation with a wide variety of stakeholder groups to assess the likely
impact of proposed policies and practices.
This is supplemented at the tactical level by the completion of a Community
Impact Assessment (CIA) following operational activity, which helps inform the
impact of such Prevent activity.
9.12. In addition to the above there have been a
number of surveys conducted by independent companies that can be used to gauge
public opinion in relation to the police response to countering terrorism. One such survey was conducted by CELLO MRUK
concerning the Anti Terrorist hotline.
This showed that an overwhelming majority of the public thought that the
police were working hard to prevent terrorism.
9.13. In learning to understand communities within
the UK,
we often have to look at the links with families and communities abroad. To do this the ACPO NPDU has funded a post
within the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), International Liaison Section
(ILS). The aim being to better understand
these international networks and to enable Prevent activity abroad to be
harnessed to support the domestic effort.
It will also allow us to compare Prevent activity within the UK with other
countries and to increase our knowledge of what works.
9.14. Recommendation
10. That we
develop a better understanding of the Prevent activity occurring abroad
enabling comparisons and joint learning.
Question 7
10.1. Is there adequate differentiation between what
should be achieved through the Prevent programme and the priorities that
concern related, but distinct, policy frameworks such as cohesion and
integration?
10.2. In October 2007, HMG
announced a new cross-Government Public Service Agreement (PSA 21) for building
cohesive, empowered and active communities.
The CLG vision for community cohesion was based on: people from different backgrounds having
similar life opportunities, people knowing their rights and responsibilities
and people trusting one another and trusting local institutions to act fairly. In addition it emphasises; a shared future
vision and sense of belonging, a focus on what new and existing communities
have in common, alongside a recognition of the value of diversity and strong
and positive relationships between people from different backgrounds. Integration aims to bring people from
different backgrounds together around shared interests and issues to increase
understanding.
10.3. Community cohesion
is a necessary strategy in Preventing Violent Extremism and terrorism, but it
is not sufficient in itself. This is reflected in the police service response
to Prevent, which complements and builds upon effective community
cohesion.
10.4. This is demonstrated
by the fact that the four suicide bombers in 2005 were nurtured in cohesive
communities. They had not previously
come to the notice of the Police in any significant way and so something
additional to the community cohesion strategy is required.
10.5. Prevent is focused
on those individuals and communities that are perceived as being 'vulnerable'
to radicalisation and violent extremism. A failure to recognise this
vulnerability and deliver the necessary support may fail to prevent further
attacks. This will have a detrimental
effect on both community cohesion and integration.
10.6. The community
engagement element of Prevent is delivered through Neighbourhood Policing and
the associated neighbourhood profiles. The promotion of problem solving and
partnership working with all communities through the Policing Pledge will
contribute to building safe, secure and cohesive communities.
10.7. Historically, some
Local Authority areas have had concerns about how Prevent may be viewed by
their communities. At the heart of this
perception is the belief that community cohesion may be damaged as a result of
acknowledging the threat to radicalisation and violent extremism and the
implemention of overt Prevent activity.
10.8. On 28 August 2009, Communities Secretary John
Denham highlighted the need to avoid 'crude labels' which discourage wider
participation. There is the potential
that Local Authorities who feel uncertain about their support for Prevent could
interpret this message as an opportunity to minimise their focus.
10.9. The ACPO NPDU is conscious of the overlap of these two
programmes and potential benefits afforded from running them in parallel. The unit is currently considering the
secondment of a senior officer from a Local Authority to ensure a complementary
planning approach is adopted.
10.10. Recommendation
11. That
Government voices and policies make it clear that preventing violent extremism
is more than building cohesive communities.
September 2009
[1] The
police Response to the Prevention of Terrorism and Violent Extremism - A
strategy and Delivery Plan - April 2008
[2] PREVENT - The Policing Response to the Prevention
of Terrorism and Violent Extremism - Implementation Plan V1.2 -
RESTRICTED --September 2008
[3] National Community Safety Plan 2008-2011
[4] Policing Pledge
[5]
Briggs et al. 2006
[6] Choosing our friends wisely - Criteria for
engagement with Muslim groups
[7]
National Guidance on Counter Terrorism
Local profiles for BCU Commanders and Local Authority Chief Executives
[8] PREVENT - The Policing Response to the Prevention
of Terrorism and Violent Extremism - Implementation Plan - A Summary for
Partners - V1.0
[9] Preventing Violent Extremism - Learning and
Development Exercise - Report to the Home Office and Communities and Local
Government - October 2008
[10] HMIC - Prevent Progress and Prospects - June 2009
[11] Evaluating local PREVENT projects and programmes
Guidelines for local authorities and their partners and Resource pack for local
authorities and their partners.
[12] ACPO (TAM) National Prevent - Communications
Strategy - April 2009
[13] Preventing Violent Extremism - Learning and
Development Exercise - Report to the Home Office and Communities and Local Government
[14] HMIC - 'PREVENT': Progress and Prospects
[15] HMIC - Prevent Progress and Prospects - June 2009 -
Section 1.2.1
