|
UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE To be published as HC 495-i House of COMMONS MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE HOME AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
THE WORK OF THE SECURITY INDUSTRY AUTHORITY
MR BILL BUTLER and MR NICK SMITH Evidence heard in Public Questions 1 - 28
USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT
Oral Evidence Taken before the Home Affairs Committee on Members present Keith Vaz, in the Chair Mrs Ann Cryer David T C Davies Mrs Janet Dean Gwyn Prosser Bob Russell Mr David Winnick ________________ Witnesses: Mr Bill Butler, Chief Executive, and Mr Nick Smith, Assistant Director of Policy and Legal, Security Industry Authority, gave evidence. Q1 Chair: Mr Butler, Mr Smith, thank you very much for coming to give evidence. This is, in a sense, a wash-up session where we have been taking evidence from the chief executive and chairs of a number of organisations that the Home Affairs Select Committee deal with on a regular basis. We have not seen anyone from the SIA for some time and thought we would give you a moment to get your feet under the table after a recent turbulent history. How have you been settling in? Mr Butler: Very well, thank you. Thank you for the invitation to be here. Q2 Chair: At the moment there are still growing concerns amongst the public about issues such as wheel clampers, the employment by the SIA of illegal immigrants and issues of that kind that brought to a rapid end your predecessor's term of office. Are you now on top of the situation? Is everything now sorted out and we cannot expect to see any more these great stories coming out of the SIC? Mr Butler: It is my sincere hope that will be the case, Chair. If I touch on where we have got to on right to work and vehicle immobilisers - wheel clampers - perhaps that would help the Committee to know where we currently are. On the issue of right to work, since July 2007 all non-EEA applicants have been subject to checks on their right to work. In addition, as the Committee will be aware, a major exercise was carried out to check all of those who are currently in the industry. The numbers involved in that have been subject to answers from Home Office ministers in both Houses. I will not dwell on that, but the backlog has been cleared. We now have in place a process which automatically flags the need for checks both in cases where people do not have a right to work or where people's right to work is time limited, for example students. In the case of the former we work very closely with UKBA and have improved those processes to ensure that people without a right to work do not get an SIA licence. In the case of those who have a time bound right to work we flag on our system the extent of that time and arrange to go back to UKBA and check. Q3 Chair: Obviously we are all constituency MPs and write to the UKBA, but we do not get the kind of rapid responses we would like. Do you find that you have got a good link which will give you information about the people? Mr Butler: We have a very good link. We have a shared team within UKBA and very close links at all levels. The problems of the past are something that neither organisation wants to be repeated and we work very closely to ensure that does not happen. Q4 David Davies: What would you say the general priorities for the SIA are now? Mr Butler: Our priority is always protection of the public and making sure initially that only the right people get a licence. As we move out of what I might loosely describe as our "start-up" phase, I think our priority is increasingly public safety through the support of the standards that operate within industry. For that reason our ability, should the legislation pass to be able to license companies in the vehicle immobilisation sector, will help us to develop that relationship and that standard. Q5 David Davies: To what extent would you take a pragmatic view of somebody with a criminal record looking to get licensed? For example, in a completely different field I was involved in a case where a bus driver 20 years previously had had a minor conviction, I think for shoplifting or something, but a one-off when he was in his teens, and was suddenly told he could not drive a bus with schoolchildren on. I know it is very important to stop thugs from getting jobs as nightclub bouncers but I also think it is important that people are forgiven for making mistakes and that somebody in their forties who did something silly at 18 need not necessarily be prevented from having a job. Can you take a slightly benevolent view than the idiots I was dealing with previously perhaps? Mr Butler: Without wishing to jump into the idiot camp, my discretion is limited. The standards that apply on criminality are determined after consultation by the Home Secretary and are published in our booklet, Get Licensed. In answer to your particular question, that does mean there are time limits on types of conviction and the seriousness which apply and after a period of time people are either able to have the slate wiped clean effectively or make representations to us as to why they should be allowed to have a licence. I am not allowed to be pragmatic. Q6 David Davies: No, but there is room for a little bit of commonsense, shall we say? Mr Butler: We try to apply commonsense but, as I say, the rules are fairly strictly defined and if somebody has an offence which is within the criminality criteria and is sufficiently recent then they will not be able to have a licence, I have no discretion. Q7 Mr Winnick: Mr Butler, you know that in November 2007 there was much in the media that immigration status checks were not being carried out on various people who were applying to work in the private security industry. One of the results was people were working illegally within that industry. Since then checks have taken place on a more effective basis. Are you confident that the changes that have emerged as a result of what some would describe as a scandalous state of affairs means that is not likely to happen again? Mr Butler: On the scale in 2007 it is virtually impossible. In number terms, on average we get about 440/450 non-EEA applicants per week. That is about 20% of the total volume of applications. About 1.5% of those we find have no right to work, but all of them are automatically flagged as a risk within our system, all of them are checked with UKBA and if we find that they cannot demonstrate a right to work they do not get a licence. I do not think that problem will reoccur. Q8 Mr Winnick: You realise, of course, what the position would be if it did emerge again and how your organisation would be adversely affected, you have no illusions on that score? Mr Butler: I have no illusions on that score and no wish to follow my predecessor. I can tell the Committee right down through the organisation one of the things I found when I arrived and was talking to my relatively junior staff who actually process licensing was they were deeply affected by the failures and how people perceived the organisation and determined to do things properly. Q9 Mr Winnick: I can understand that. Mr Butler: That commitment and understanding of the seriousness runs throughout the organisation, I am pleased to tell you. Q10 David Davies: Does the SIA have the skills and incentives to reinforce good behaviour when it comes to wheel clamping? Mr Butler: We license individuals who work in vehicle immobilisation - wheel clamping - which means that quite often there is a gap between the expectation of what members of the public believe we can do and otherwise. Obviously we have been in discussion with the Home Office about the legislation which is currently before Parliament on the licensing of businesses associated with wheel clampers. It is rather difficult for me to say what we will or will not do on the back of that unless it becomes legislation, but it does tie in with our broad view that licensing companies would help us in that regime. Obviously that is subject to a lot of secondary legislation as to how that would operate. Q11 David Davies: How many extra people do you think you would have to employ if the legislation is not changed too much from its current position? Mr Butler: If it is not changed we do not expect to employ huge numbers of others, we believe we can adapt more or less within business as usual. There are issues which until the legislation comes through it is impossible to work through. There will be issues around making sure that corporate structures are working properly and working with those who are helping us to assess things. Q12 Bob Russell: Following on the wheel clamp question from Mr Davies, it conjures up pictures of the wheelclamping sector, "Wheel clamper of the year" and things like that. Is there any liaison between the Security Industry Authority and the DVLA when it comes to the wheel clamping sector? Mr Butler: I think it is probably right that I point out there is a legitimate right for people to protect against illegal parking on their land and ministers in the Home Office have been at pains to stress that this right does exist but must be policed responsibly, and that is where we fit in. We are in contact with DVLA on the development of both the proposed legislation and on a day-to-day basis around identification, numbers, et cetera. Q13 Bob Russell: The reason for that question is I was grateful for your earlier answer to Mr Davies that the protection of the public is the number one priority, but in response to Parliamentary Questions I have established that in this financial year DVLA is coining in more than £9 million from owners of private land. I am just trying to work out where you feel the public body that you represent, the Security Industry Autohrity, should be in league with private wheel clamping firms to extract money from motorists in what is clearly a civil offence, not a criminal offence, for parking where they should not on private land. Mr Butler: I hate to appear unhelpful but that is definitely a matter for DVLA. I am responsible for licensing the individuals. Q14 Bob Russell: The National Audit Office report on the SIA, of which you will be aware, raised concerns about cost overruns. Are costs now under control? Mr Butler: One of the reasons I was appointed was because I have a background as an accountant. It would be arrogant of me to say after seven or eight months that costs are under control but we have, however, done an enormous amount of work to identify our cost patterns and the underlying shape of the business. What is quite interesting from a cost point of view is our costs do not vary over-much from year to year, but because of the way we commence licensing our licensing income has a very pronounced three year cycle, so I end up £7 million less income with the same costs next year as I have for the current year. Q15 Bob Russell: Is movement in the right direction? Mr Butler: I believe it is. As I mentioned on the standard of licensing, there is a growing and significant awareness of the importance of cost control amongst all the staff, which I think is at the root of cost control. Q16 Bob Russell: Are your computer systems adequate for your licensing role? Mr Butler: I believe that they are. I am pleased to say that the problems we had in issuing licences in 2007-08 are well delivered. Our target of issuing licences within 40 days is 85% and that is become some of them just take longer than that. We have exceeded that target significantly every month for the last 12 months. Our call centre is handling calls in as efficient a way as possible and the average waiting time is less than two or three seconds. Q17 Mrs Dean: Turning to penalties, are the proposed penalties for operating without a licence a sufficient disincentive given the large sums of money that can be made by unscrupulous operators? Mr Butler: Are we referring to vehicle immobilisers, the wheel clampers? Q18 Mrs Dean: Yes. Mr Butler: I am afraid I cannot really comment at the moment because what those penalties will be and what we will be penalising will not be clear until the legislation is through and I understand a lot of that will require secondary legislation consultation. Q19 Mrs Dean: So we do not know yet what the penalties are going to be? Mr Butler: I am afraid I cannot help you yet. Q20 Mrs Dean: Going on to registration bodies, many registration bodies in practice do little to ensure that their members meet appropriate standards of professionalism and care for the public. How will you ensure that the registration bodies for wheel clamping firms set high standards, ensure that operators are properly trained and companies are reputable, and enforce disciplinary action where necessary? Mr Butler: We have some considerable experience in licensing and company standards through our approved contractor scheme, which is currently voluntary, but that is basically a standards scheme. We set those standards, we have an annual review to make sure that people are keeping to those standards and where people fail to do so we remove their membership. I think nearly 30 companies have had their approved contractor status revoked since we first set it up. We do monitor the standards and we do act when people fail to comply with them. I would expect to do that in any regime. Q21 Mrs Cryer: How can members of the public obtain redress if wheel clampers impose excessive penalties, threaten them or generally behave badly? Can I just say I have a constituency interest here and am looking forward to your response. Mr Butler: I think I may have seen some of the correspondence. Q22 Mrs
Cryer: Changegate car park in Mr Butler: Under my current regime the redress is limited to whether an individual is in breach of their individual licence or whether the company is using individuals who are not properly licensed with me. I appreciate from the volume of correspondence that I have from Members here on wheel clamping that it is a sensitive issue and my ability to act within the current framework does not match the expectations of where people would like it to be. As I have said, everybody hopes the new legislation will help with that but it is very difficult for me to comment on what may be. Q23 Mrs
Cryer: At the moment do you think it is a growing
problem? What I have just talked about
is at Mr Butler: I do not know whether it is growing but it is a significant issue. I recognise that because I see the correspondence and some of it comes to us directly. There is a limit in terms of what licensing individuals can do. I also hear and feel the frustration around that and it is my hope that a new framework might help with that. As I say, the details of that framework are some way off yet. Q24 Gwyn Prosser: Mr Butler, I know you are in a difficult position in terms of legislation which is not fully formed, but what anticipation do you have that we will get to the position eventually where if some poor old soul finds himself or herself clamped, sometimes in really distressing conditions, that person can challenge the individual clamper with regards to registration? If we get to that stage will it be as easy as that, that the clamper will say, "Here's my licence, here's my badge, my number" and he or she could phone your office or someone similar? Mr Butler: There are two legs to that question, if I may. One is what happens - I hypothesise - if under the new arrangements a company fails to comply with the standards that are set and whether somebody has a right of appeal against the clamping. The right of appeal is obviously a matter which I do not think it is appropriate for the regulator to be involved in, that is not where my remit would lie. On the other hand, if somebody came to us and said a company had failed to comply with the standards required by legislation or by the licensing conditions imposed then we would look at that in the context of the company. As I mentioned earlier, if a company fails to comply with the standards that are required, either under our voluntary scheme or under a statutory framework, we would eventually withdraw their licence to operate. Revoking is a significant step and short of that we would seek to ensure that people's behaviour improved and they were compliant with the rules in the legislation. Q25 Gwyn
Prosser: In the area where I live in Mr Butler: I am disappointed to hear that. There are a number of clamping companies who are members of our approved contractor scheme who have demonstrated their commitment to comply. We were at a network meeting where they were present and one of the things that concern them is the reputation of the industry. I think I would urge your landlord to check our list of approved contractors and I hope he finds a better result. Gwyn Prosser: I will give him your telephone number. Q26 Bob Russell: Mr Butler, can I follow up Gwyn Prosser's question because the response to one of the 11 Parliamentary Questions I have tabled on the issue of DVLA is that the income from private companies has doubled in the last five years and is now standing at more than £9 million a year. Does that not indicate that this is a growth industry and, therefore, the evidence is wheel clamping and other matters are growing and not levelling off or declining? Mr Butler: I am not aware of the figures. I suspect that those figures include people who are ticketing, which is not covered by my regime, as well as clamping. The essence of clamping is you do not need to contact DVLA because you have immobilised somebody's car and they have to pay before they can move it. I suspect that might be the issue. Ticketing on private land is not covered by my regime. Q27 Gwyn Prosser: On the issue of DVLA, we have heard evidence that supervisors of private car parks will buy details of a motorist in order to pursue him or her over breaches of parking rules. Do you think that is an appropriate action? Mr Butler: I only have a private view on that because ticketing is not part of my regime. Essentially this is a matter for DVLA and DVLA officials and I would not be thanked for taking that on. Q28 David Davies: Presumably your approved scheme would not support contractors who will only accept cash, because that is another issue. I think there is widespread evasion of tax here because clampers are demanding cash payments and not giving out proper receipts afterwards. Mr Butler: Two things. One is that obviously it is likely that insisting on cash is not something that will be possible. The other is we work very closely across the industry with HMRC and other partners to try and ensure that our regulatory regime is joined up with exactly those sorts of risks. Chair: As this is the last session, can I formally thank our Committee staff, Elizabeth Flood and members of the Committee staff, for all the work they have done. Can I thank those Members who are retiring - Ann Cryer, Janet Dean and Martin Salter - for the excellent work they have given to this Committee. Can I say to our final witnesses, thank you very much for coming and being so open and transparent. I am sure our successors will see you in the future. |