Home Affairs CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by the Forensic Science Society Submission [LSP 13]
Executive Summary
The Forensic Science Society as a professional body representing forensic scientists and associated specialties within the Justice system. It takes the view that utmost clarity is required when proposing a professional body for policing. The fundamentals of what it is to be a professional body provide a template and the landscape as a whole must be clearly scoped to avoid tensions and confusion.
1. Introduction
The Forensic Science Society (FSSoc) was founded in 1959 as a Learned Society to provide a forum for communication and collaboration in the developing field of forensic science both at home and overseas. Its membership encompasses the USA, Canada, the Caribbean, Far East, Middle East, Africa, and many countries across Europe as well as the UK and the Republic of Ireland. It is multi-disciplinary covering police, firearms officers, scenes of crime officers, fire investigators, document examiners, forensic scientists, digital forensic examiners and many specialties within forensic science.
In 2004 The Forensic Science Society became a professional body and now has several distinct categories of membership including Student, Associate, Affiliate, Member, Fellow and Accredited Forensic Practitioner.
The aim of the Society is to promote quality standards, support members’ continuing professional development and further research and development within forensic science. There is a Code of Conduct to which members must adhere and disciplinary procedures to underpin it. Our overall objective is to support the Justice system and our members and to benefit the Public interest. We do not receive government grants but rely upon member subscriptions and sponsors to supplement income from our educational activities.
2. Terms of Reference—Bullet Point 2
What lessons can be learnt from other professional bodies within the UK and from police professional bodies in other countries?
Within the UK there are a variety of professional bodies, some regulatory and others not. There is a need for absolute clarity on the framework within which the proposed new College of Policing is to sit. For example, is the new body to examine trainees and decide upon their eligibility to become members? Or is it to admit those qualified through other means to enrol as members? Alternatively, are all police officers to become part of the new body by virtue of the fact that they are police officers?
Most professional bodies have a membership structure (and associated criteria) to allow for use of the terms Associate, Affiliate, Member and Fellow to describe levels of distinction. Will this be true for the new College?
In raising these questions we posit that the information hitherto gleaned in connection with the new College of Policing suggests some blurring of boundaries between usual expectations of what a professional body is and that proposed.
A professional body, by definition, represents a particular profession. Is there a need to unravel the issues/threads involved in professionalising the police in order to proceed with clarity of purpose?
3. Terms of Reference—Bullet Point 3
Is it possible for one institution to balance responsibilities for: representing police services; setting and upholding standards; testing and rewarding; training; and guarding public interests?
Most professional bodies have to deal with the inherent tension of supporting their members while at the same time, safeguarding the public interest. This is a difficult task at the best of times, however, in the current climate when public confidence in policing is not what one would wish it to be, it might be worthwhile considering various options. For example, the Royal College of Surgeons carries forward certain functions while the General Medical Council deals with other issues. Independence is key in critical domains.
4. Terms of Reference—Bullet Point 4
Would it be preferable to create two separate institutions to provide delivery functions and professional representation?
Members of a professional body are involved in delivery functions. However, the professional body is not usually directly responsible for these delivery functions which are carried out by members for their employers. Some of our members work for private forensic providers and deliver forensic services to the customers of those private facilities. The professional body is not directly responsible for these services.
We would suggest that following the usual model of a professional body as promoting quality standards and representing the profession would invoke clarity.
5. Terms of Reference—Bullet Point 5
How will the professional body interact with HMIC; the IPCC; ACPO; and other institutions in providing leadership and setting standards for police forces?
The modus operandi is normally that professional bodies engage with governments and institutions to offer advice and support. However, a professional body reserves the right to voice opposition to policies which it believes might be detrimental to the profession. In light of these points we could foresee various tensions arising unless clarity of direction involving all interested parties is vigorously pursued. Scoping of the whole landscape is crucial.
6. Terms of Reference—Bullet Point 6
What role should the College of Policing have in recruitment and training?
This completely depends on the issue of whether the new College is a professional body or not. Strategic oversight of policing numbers and rank for any country, in our view, would not normally be the remit of a professional body. However, a professional body may encourage its members to aim for higher levels of distinction and will encourage new members to join. It will be a voice for the profession to encourage uptake to that profession and in that sense could impact recruitment and subsequently training. Professional bodies often have a qualifications framework and strategic partnerships to support this framework through training.
7. Terms of Reference—Bullet Point 7
What role could the College have in recruiting non-police officers to senior roles within the police service?
A professional body with various categories of membership including that of Affiliate could conceivably provide a pool of potential recruits as well as providing highly experienced personnel to sit on recruitment/selection panels. However, does this question stem from a blurring of the boundaries between what a professional body could do and what another body should do?
8. Terms of Reference—Bullet Point 11
Should the professional body be responsible for civilian police employees?
We take issue with the term “responsible for”. A professional body for policing could represent civilian police employees through its membership structure. Such employees could be considered to form part of or at least to assist the profession and would therefore be entitled to have membership of the professional body.
9. Terms of Reference—Bullet Point 12
How should the professional body be funded?
The usual model of funding for professional bodies is through membership subscriptions, legacies, trusts, individual donations and sponsorships. Our view of professional bodies is that these are often (usually) charitable and not government funded.
The Forensic Science Society
October 2012