Government response
The government responded to the review on 12 March 2015.
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.
The Home Office response (Cm 9031, March 2015) says many of the consultation's disciplinary proposals followed the Chapman Review, and sets out where the Government will seek legislation, including a Chapman-linked move to have the IPCC investigate all disciplinary cases involving Chief Officers.
- On Chapman's recommendation, the Government "intends to seek to legislate" so that all investigations into disciplinary cases involving Chief Officers are undertaken by the IPCC, making them independent of the police.
- It proposed allowing the IPCC to present misconduct cases at disciplinary hearings, in line with Chapman's recommendation, and will "seek to legislate for this as soon as practicable".
- On the Chapman-linked emphasis on independence, it will "work with policing partners" to ensure disciplinary appeal hearings are held regionally, and will remove the sanction of dismissal with notice.
- It will not mandate regional disciplinary hearings "at this stage"; it will seek legislation to give forces discretion, and the College of Policing benchmarking of sanctions will begin "in the next Parliament".
About this review
Summary written by this siteIndependent review of police disciplinary arrangements examining efficiency, fairness and public confidence. Made 23 recommendations for reforming how misconduct hearings are run.
Recommendations 39
Recommendation 1
A body (ideally the College of Policing) to take on the role of overseeing the police disciplinary system. It should ensure consistency across all police forces, taking responsibility for setting and reviewing standards, and issuing appropriate guidance to forces.
Recommendation 2
A benchmarking exercise is undertaken to determine the level of sanctions for both internal misconduct and performance standards, and for sanctions consequent upon civil convictions, to be universally applied across all forces.
Recommendation 3
A values based-assessment is undertaken to measure the values of police forces against those in the Code of Ethics, and that further assessments be undertaken to help the police leadership manage cultural change.
Recommendation 4
The police institute psychometric and ethics scenario testing in the recruitment and the selection process to remove those who may exhibit potential future behaviours inimical to decision making and service as a police officer.
Recommendation 5
Provide training to all officers, PSDs and hearing panel members in the disciplinary system to ensure consistency and increase effectiveness across all forces.
Recommendation 6
All management interventions short of dismissal are focused on transformation, clearly defined, reviewed, taught and reinforced across all police forces.
Recommendation 7
Conduct further work around the concept of voluntary exit windows and future manning models.
Recommendation 8
A 'police test' is defined, to guide intervention for all disciplinary issues, including performance and conduct. The 'test' would have applicability for cases that might also arise from complaints.
Recommendation 9
All police training courses are reviewed for their 'people skills' content.
Recommendation 10
A register of police officers and staff members is established. Any officer or police staff member that is dismissed is struck off and disbarred from service in any police force, and from working in bodies such as the IPCC and HMIC. Any police officer or staff member who resigns or retires prior to misconduct hearings is similarly struck-off.
Recommendation 11
Investigations for chief officers must be carried out by an independent body such as the IPCC.
Recommendation 12
The provision in PRA 2002 Schedule 3 should be amended to include a provision to tackle vexatious complainers.
Recommendation 13
Data on dismissal, resignation and retirement cases linked to disciplinary action is published yearly to ensure transparency and accountability.
Recommendation 14
To guide future training, a Training Needs Analysis is conducted to identify the competencies required in: leadership and management (to the core gearing level of the police at Sergeant and Inspector level, and for the DE scheme); and PSDs to investigate disciplinary cases effectively.
Recommendation 15
Future IT upgrades should integrate databases on complaints, discipline, HR and alerts necessary to manage personnel holistically.
Recommendation 16
Further work is commissioned that clearly defines why the office of constable is unique and why its interpretation resists change to either: Set the future context for harmonisation, or Finally determine whether harmonisation of the police family in employment terms is not an achievable or necessary goal.
Recommendation 17
A common set of fair attendance triggers must be defined and applied across all police forces.
Recommendation 18
A 'dismissal test' is applied to disciplinary issues as a second stage to the 'police test', replacing severity assessments, making clear through benchmarking (cf. with recommendation 2) what would lead to dismissal. Anything that is below the dismissal threshold is rehabilitative. The terms gross misconduct and gross incompetence are abandoned.
Recommendation 19
All hearings are chaired by a legally qualified person.
Recommendation 20
All hearings and Police Appeals Tribunals are held in public.
Recommendation 21
All hearings are regionalised (see Annex E for map of regions).
Recommendation 22
The police officer membership on hearing panels includes Superintendents and above (at least one rank above any persons subject to the proceedings).
Recommendation 23
The police officer member on hearing panels is not from the same force (or district in the case of the MPS) as any individuals who are subject to proceedings.
Recommendation 24
Where the IPCC directs a dismissal hearing in cases where the force does not accept their recommendation, the IPCC should present the case to the hearing panel.
Recommendation 25
Remove the sanction of 'dismissal with notice'.
Recommendation 26
Remove the sanction 'extension of a final written warning' from possible outcomes.
Recommendation 27
'Reduction in rank' becomes a sanction available in misconduct cases.
Recommendation 28
'Memo of Correction' replaces management advice as a sanction in one common set of sanctions.
Recommendation 29
'Written warning' is replaced by 'written corrective warning' in one common set of sanctions.
Recommendation 30
'Final corrective reprimand' replaces 'final written improvement notice/final written warning' with time spent on officers' reports and mark time to be increased from its current level to a newly assessed (higher) level.
Recommendation 31
Mitigations that have not been previously mentioned that involved welfare or might have lead to positive early interventions should be disregarded in most cases. Non-disclosure will tell against the mitigation.
Recommendation 32
There should be an obligation to have previously declared mitigations where appropriate.
Recommendation 33
All stages as currently defined in performance regulations are removed.
Recommendation 34
Conduct and performance processes are aligned and regulations are combined in a single document.
Recommendation 35
Consider lowering the level to which the 'appropriate authority' can be delegated to inspector or equivalent for matters that do not lead to dismissal.
Recommendation 36
All terminology and language is changed to reflect what the system is designed to do - that is to say it should be 'corrective' or 'rehabilitative' for all infringements short of dismissal.
Recommendation 37
That consideration is given to the third member of the PDAT being a lay member, and that a pool of lay members be established.
Recommendation 38
All Police Appeals Tribunals are centralised.
Recommendation 39
A chief officer is identified to act as the principle agent of change in the police for the implementation of these recommendations.
All text above is the review's.
No recommendations have this response.