Select committee: Home Affairs Committee

Conclusion 31

Sixth Report - Police Conduct and Complaints Published 1 Mar 2022 Paragraph 153 Addressed to Home Office
Conclusion (the committee's words)
The IOPC has made concerted efforts in its first three years to build public trust in the police complaints system by actively listening to policing bodies and communities about their concerns and by providing greater transparency in the publication of the outcome of its investigations.

From: Home Affairs Committee, Sixth Report - Police Conduct and Complaints (HC 140), paragraph 153, 1 March 2022

Government response

The government responded to the whole report on 28 April 2022 (deadline 1 May 2022).

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The Government welcomes the Committee's recognition of progress and agrees that improving the police complaints and discipline systems is ongoing, but it declines the Committee's call for an early assessment of PCC involvement and says it will look at the IOPC's governance as part of a periodic review.

  • On appointing an independent IOPC chair, the Government does not commit to the change. It agrees the governance structure "should be looked at" in the first periodic review of the IOPC, which it expects "to start early in 2022/23".
  • On an early assessment of PCC involvement in complaints, it says "we cannot now agree" because the PCC review concluded before the report. It will "in due course" assess the impact of the February 2020 complaints reforms.
  • On bi-annual monitoring of how local policing bodies hold forces to account for implementing IOPC recommendations, and on joined-up reporting of IOPC, HMICFRS and Coroners' recommendations, it says it "will consider" with the IOPC how to go further.
  • It commits to update the police super-complaints website to say designated bodies should collaborate with non-designated organisations. It says it will respond to the Macpherson report in May.

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error