Enhanced Whistleblower Protection
Leveson Inquiry · An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · Issued 29 November 2012 · Addressed to: National Police Chiefs Council, Police
Government responseUK Government: Accepted (Mar 2018)
DeliveryNo statement from National Police Chiefs Council or Police found
Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
An enhanced system for protection of whistleblowers and for providing assistance for the Police Service on general ethical issues should at least comprise the following: (a) greater prominence should be given to the Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) telephone line operated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC); (b) there should be an 'ethics line' to the IPCC, available for all serving Police Officers, providing general ethical guidance; (c) to avail those at rank of Chief Constable (Assistant Commissioner level within the Metropolitan Police Service), Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary should identify one of its members, a former Chief Constable, as the designated point of contact for confidential ethics guidance. The Chief Officer seeking and obtaining that advice would be able to refer to it should any issue subsequently arise on a complaint to a Professional Standards Department, a Police and Crime Commissioner, or indeed the IPCC itself. The advice would not be determinative of the complaint, but the fact that it was sought and received, as well as its content, would be a matter to be taken into account; (d) within the IPCC itself, there is a need for an enhanced 'filter system' whereby the nature of complaints are appropriately addressed at an early stage so that (a) they can be investigated at the right level, and (b) sufficient structures are put in place to maintain confidentiality of the complaint, and differentiate as soon as is appropriate between genuine whistleblowers and those who are merely ventilating a personal grievance; (e) the former Chief Constable referred to under sub-paragraph (c) above should also be the recipient of complaints about Chief Constables made to the IPCC. In the event that he or she may already have given informal advice in relation to the subject-matter of the complaint, as per sub-paragraph (c) above, a substitute HMI would be deputed to act; and (f) Chief Officers should also be the subject of regular independent scrutiny by HMIC, including through unannounced inspections.
Leveson Inquiry, An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · 29 Nov 2012 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
AI-generated evidence summary
The Inquiry recommended an enhanced system to protect police whistleblowers and provide ethical guidance. In May 2024, Lord Sharpe of Epsom, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office, stated that the recommendations were accepted by the then Association of Chief Police Officers, superseded by the National Police Chiefs' Council, and that "all the recommendations have been addressed" (Lord Sharpe of Epsom, May 2024). In March 2018, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport reported that the Metropolitan Police Service, the College of Policing, and Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services were implementing all law enforcement recommendations, noting that the Policing and Crime Act 2017 strengthened whistleblower protections (Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport response, Mar 2018).
Sources
AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 2 Oct 2026.
About this summary
Report-level response context
Government response
●UK Government · Accepted · 1 Mar 2018
The Metropolitan Police Service, Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services and the College of Policing have implemented or are implementing all of the Inquiry’s recommendations in relation to law enforcement. For example, the College of Policing have published a code of ethics and developed national guidance for police officers on how to engage with the press. Reforms in the Policing and Crime Act 2017 also strengthened protections for whistleblowers.
Delivery
No statement on delivery from National Police Chiefs Council or Police has been found in the sources searched. This is separate from the response above.
What other bodies have found
●Home Office · 23 May 2024
The Leveson Inquiry made eight recommendations (68 and 75-81) concerning the press and the police, focused on providing greater transparency and openness. These were accepted by the Government, the College of Policing and the then Association of Chief Police Officers (superseded by the National Police Chiefs’ Council). All the recommendations have been addressed.
Earlier findings (2)
●Home Office · 15 Jul 2013
The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) currently operates a Public Interest Disclosure Act (PIDA) telephone line and email address for the use of whistleblowers. Lord Justice Leveson in his report recommended that protection for whistleblowers should be enhanced, so the Government is working with both the IPCC and with the College of Policing to promote use of the PIDA line and build the confidence of those serving in police forces to raise concerns about individuals and practices.
From: Police: Whistle-blowers (Lords written answer), Lord Taylor of Holbeach, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department
●Home Office · 12 Feb 2013
The Home Office accepts the purpose and intent of this recommendation. It is however important to note that Leveson LJ recognised that the changing policing landscape may impact on the direct implementation of these proposals. We, for example, agree with the notion that there should be a designated independent point for receiving ethical advice – however we feel that this would be more sensibly located within the College of Policing. The issue of having an independent external capability to lead investigations against Chief Constables, which also forms part of this recommendation, is the subject of our intention to transfer resources from individual force PSDs to the IPCC so that that body can assume responsibility for investigating all serious allegations. Finally, this recommendation suggests unannounced inspections by HMIC – again we agree that this is sensible and HMIC have agreed to take this forward as part of their normal inspection programme. ACPO have also indicated their support for this recommendation and have committed to its implementation.
From: Leveson Inquiry Report Recommendations - Home Office Response
How this page is built
The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.