29 Accepted in Part

Improve Professional Standards Unit investigation procedures and training

Brook House Inquiry · The Brook House Inquiry Report · Issued 19 September 2023 · Addressed to: Home Office

Source — verbatim from the inquiry

Inquiry recommendation

The Home Office must update Detention Services Order 03/2015: Handling of Complaints to clarify that, in investigations carried out by the Professional Standards Unit into allegations of serious misconduct against contractor staff: Professional Standards Unit investigators must carry out interviews themselves and not rely on contractors to do so. All staff against whom allegations are made must be invited to interview. Where there are inconsistencies between any accounts given of events, any evidence relating to those accounts (including footage and documentation) obtained by an investigating officer must be shown to the complainant and to the subject of the complaint, prior to reaching a conclusion. The Professional Standards Unit must be given information about previous complaints made against alleged perpetrators, including unsubstantiated complaints. Previous disciplinary action against alleged perpetrators must be taken into account. Investigators must look for evidence that is both supportive and undermining of the complaint. Full reports must be sent to complainants (and their solicitors if applicable). Investigation reports and/or outcome letters must be sent directly from the PSU to complainants (and their solicitors if applicable). The Home Office Professional Standards Unit must ensure that training about the updated guidance takes place on a regular (at least annual) basis for staff dealing with investigations, as well as those responsible for managing them. The training must be subject to an assessment. The Professional Standards Unit must also review the training provided to investigators and ensure that investigators receive regular and adequate training, from a variety of perspectives, on issues including: the nature of immigration removal centres and issues that may arise; obstacles that detained people may face in making complaints; interviewing vulnerable witnesses; and use of force and assessing reasonableness of force.

Brook House Inquiry, The Brook House Inquiry Report · 19 Sep 2023 Source PDF →

Published evidence summary

Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:

- In March 2024, the Home Office stated that the PSU had updated its training to reflect Brook House Inquiry findings, including training in interviewing vulnerable witnesses, and that an embedded use of force expert had been added to the PSU (Government Response to the Brook House Inquiry, Home Office, March 2024).
- No independently published assessment of PSU investigation quality or outcomes since the March 2024 response has been identified to March 2026.

Response — verbatim from government

Home Office

The Professional Standards Unit has updated its training to reflect Brook House Inquiry findings, including training in interviewing vulnerable witnesses. An embedded use of force expert has been added.

Home Office · 19 Mar 2024 Written response →

Evidence trail — what's actually happened since

  • 14 Jan 2025 Angela Eagle, Written PQ 23170 (15 January 2025): 'Due for closure by end of January 2025.' Source →
  • 19 Sep 2024 · Brook House Inquiry Chair Inquiry Chair Kate Eves described government response as "inadequate" and called for a "reset" with the new government. Warned abuse "becomes a question of when, not if" it happens again. Insufficient Progress

Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.

How this page is built

Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.

This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.