Home Affairs CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by the Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales [LSP 12]

1. Executive Summary

1.1 The Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales (PSAEW) welcomes the Home Affairs Select Committee’s inquiry into Leadership and Standards in the Police Service at a time when the Service is undergoing an unprecedented period and pace of reform.

1.2 Policing in the United Kingdom already has an enviably high worldwide reputation. Our policing is regarded as ethical, professional and overwhelmingly free of corruption. The principles of protecting the public, tackling crime and serving local communities must remain paramount, and whatever the consequences of the current reform programme, we all have a responsibility to ensure that our Police Service remains, as the Prime Minister has said “…the finest force in the world.”

1.3 We do recognise, however, that improvements can be made and believe that effective leadership of the police service at all levels will be critical to maintaining, and hopefully continuing to improve the standard of policing in this country. This will become more important over coming years as the service faces fewer resources reduce and potentially increasing demand.

1.4 The Association strongly supports the development of a College of Policing that will encompass the whole of the service and ensure that all future developments in relation to leadership and standards in the service are undertaken in the public interest.

1.5 There are some key issues that the College will need to consider and agree before significant progress can be made. This will include a clear understanding of the type of leadership that the police service will require in the new policing landscape, and the environment that will enable such leadership to flourish in order that everyone involved in policing has the opportunity to maximise their potential in order to provide the best possible service to the public.

1.6 This written submission focuses on the areas which the PSAEW feels are most pertinent to our role and which can be expanded upon during oral evidence if required.

2. What powers, responsibilities and resources should be given to the College of Policing?

2.1 In the PSAEW response to the consultation on the Review of Police Leadership and Training in June 2011, we agreed with the principle of a new body for policing responsible for setting standards and overseeing the development and commissioning of training, with the purpose of seeking to further professionalise the Police Service.

2.2 Consequently the Association supports the introduction of a College of Policing and agrees with the proposed objectives of the College. We are currently in consultation with the Home Office regarding the potential powers that the College should have and believe that the powers given to the College should directly support the delivery of its objectives.

2.3 The Association sees the setting of national standards for policing as a key responsibility of the College. These standards should include entry standards for recruitment into the service, standards for promotion (at all ranks) and standards for training and development.

2.4 The College’s responsibilities should also include developing national policing policy, such as that currently undertaken by the ACPO business areas and NPIA, including the development of operational standards leading to Authorised Professional Practice. This work should be led by the most appropriate individuals, irrespective of rank, with greater involvement of both the federated and superintending ranks and police staff.

2.5 As part of the development of policy and standards the College should also play a key role in identifying what works on policing and sharing good practice. Associated with this is the need to develop strong links between the College and higher and further educational institutions that may be in a position to support the development of a more evidence-based approach in policing.

2.6 Consideration should also be given as to whether the College should oversee a national talent management process for the service.

2.7 The Association strongly believes that there is role for the College in relation to equality and diversity issues—not only in developing policy or standards, but also an oversight role to ensure that the service continues to work towards becoming more representative of the communities we serve, and that our operational practices are effectively monitored to ensure that they instill confidence in those communities.

2.8 Finally the College should have a responsibility to develop, and where appropriate to deliver or otherwise commission leadership and development training for the Service.

2.9 The Association agrees that the College of Policing should not have the power to “licence” officers to use their general warranted powers or to exercise control over conduct matters relating to police officers. In view of this it is our view that the College of Policing is different to most other professional bodies which do have these powers, and so should not be described as a “professional body” in its truest sense. We have received assurances that the College is not intended to replace staff associations and so the role of the PSAEW should not be altered as a consequence of the introduction of the College. We do, however, wish to play a key role in the development and governance of the College.

3. What role should the College of Policing have in recruitment and training?

3.1 The College of Policing, through the Board of Governers, should be the body that identifies and sets appropriate standards in relation to recruitment into the Police Service. The Association believes that it is time to review the current processes to ensure that the service is attracting the best possible recruits to carry out policing for the next 30–40 years. If there is a desire to have a mandatory pre-entry qualification prior to recruitment, then there must be sufficient safeguards in place to ensure that this doesn’t exclude individuals who, for a variety of reasons, find difficulty in obtaining this qualification. This would include a variety of ways of accessing the qualification and financial support, for example by the provision of bursaries.

3.2 We also feel strongly that the College of Policing should have a role in setting national standards in relation to promotion examinations and qualifications. Whilst acknowledging the need for some flexibility for local Chief Constables in final promotion selection, the Association would like to see standard national qualifications to achieve all ranks in the service, not just Sergeant, Inspector and Assistant Chief Constable. Such qualifications should be linked to an appropriate training and development framework, and officers of every rank should understand that they have a personal responsibility to engage in personal development throughout their career, with appropriate support from the service. Furthermore we need to be clear that “training and development” is far broader than classroom based study and can consist of a variety of learning and development methods.

3.3 There are certain aspects of police training that the Association believes should continue to be delivered from within the service, particularly where there is a need for a national approach (for interoperability purposes), for cost effectiveness and in the case of some specialist operational training.

3.4 We recognise, however, that there are numerous public and private sector institutions that already offer training to police officers, and these are likely to increase in the future. In view of this, one of the important roles for the College of Policing will be to oversee this market and to provide accreditation and quality assurance to ensure that the appropriate standards of training are being met, and continue to be met.

4. What role should the College of Policing have in recruiting non-police officers into senior roles within the police service?

4.1 The PSAEW does not support the principle of direct entry to the rank of Superintendent, however we acknowledge that this was one of the recommendations in the final report of Tom Winsor and we will be contributing to the forthcoming Home Office consultation on this issue.

4.2 If the outcome of the consultation is that non-police officers will be recruited as Superintendents, then the College should play a major role and should be responsible for setting the recruitment criteria and developing an appropriate training package in consultation with PSAEW and other key stakeholders. We would expect any such recruitment and training process to be fully costed and impact assessed prior to implementation.

5. Are police recruitment processes fair and open and how could they be improved?

5.1 The Association is not aware of any particular concerns about the fairness or openness of the SEARCH assessment process for recruits, however we have some concerns about the mixed picture that is developing in relation to entry routes into the service.

5.2 Due to the fact that there are very few forces recruiting at the present time, and those that are tend to be recruiting small numbers, there appears to be a development of restricted approaches to recruitment. Some forces, for example are restricting recruitment to those who are already employed by the force either as police staff, PCSOs or are Special Constables. Whilst we acknowledge that this enables forces to manage their recruitment processes better, it does potentially exclude good candidates who for a variety of reasons may not already work for the force or have the ability at that time to become a Special Constable.

5.3 The view of the Association is that restrictive routes such as these are acceptable as long as they are offered alongside other routes which enable people in different circumstances to apply to join the service. There is a similar argument with the pre-entry qualification as discussed above.

6. How should the College of Policing be funded?

6.1 The funding arrangements for the College of Policing are currently uncertain and lacking in clarity. The College Board will need to develop an appropriate commercial strategy which will identify potential future sources of income which could include charging forces and others for the provision of goods and services and a quality assurance regime as part of the accreditation process for universities and colleges.

6.2 The College will also contribute to national security by undertaking responsibilities previously undertaken by the National Policing Improvement Agency and therefore we believe that a level of grant in aid funding should be available for this purpose.

6.3 At the present time the PSAEW does not support the requirement for officers and staff to pay membership fees for the College of Policing due to the fact that, as discussed above, it is our view that the College is not a professional body in its truest sense and thus there is no clarity about what member benefits might be. There is a risk that if this option were to be undertaken, then there would be a perception that the income from membership fees for the College were being used to close the significant funding gap that is facing the NPIA and ACPO and this is clearly not acceptable to the police workforce.

7. Conclusion

7.1 It is the view of the PSAEW that the leadership and standards of the police service will benefit from the introduction of a College of Policing. The College presents the opportunity to enhance the professionalism of the service and to radically change the service’s approach to key issues such as recruitment and selection.

7.2 We have by common consent a police service admired and respected internationally and some of the most accessible and internationally renowned universities. The creation of a College of Policing provides us with a one-off opportunity to combine these two world class institutions together. It will also progress the development and implementation of policing policy and tactics to a situation where it is based on evidence of what works rather than opinion and ideology.

7.3 These opportunities will need to be supported by a level of cultural change within the service and it is the current and future leaders of the service who will be able to translate these opportunities into reality.

The Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales

October 2012