Misconduct reform must be bold if we are to succeed on standards

A version of the below was published in The Times on 10 August 2023.

As Commissioner I’m leading the strongest doubling down on standards in 50 years, but to deliver the far-reaching reform the public rightly expect to see I need others to do more.

I have been consistent in calling on Government to reform police misconduct processes so that police chiefs can be more decisive in dismissing rogue officers and restoring public confidence.

The honest majority of our officers share my determination to give relentless focus to identifying and removing those who let us all down and cause untold damage to public trust.

Many people will not realise that the final say in the removal of many of those who shouldn’t be in policing doesn’t sit with me or with other chief officers, but with external panels led by lawyers known as Legally Qualified Chairs (LQCs).

Their introduction was done with the best of intentions, aimed at making the process fairer and more transparent. Many assumed it would lead to more officers being dismissed.

But the statistics show the process is actually slower, more biased and most importantly, softer on standards.

Hearings chaired by senior Met officers before the introduction of the panels were 38 per cent more likely to result in dismissal than those chaired by LQCs, while officers from a black or other minority ethnic heritage background are 115 per cent more likely than a white officer to be dismissed at an LQC-chaired hearing compared to 15 per cent more likely at a hearing chaired by a senior officer.

National data also shows that where cases against officers are proven, senior officers on average dismiss at a far higher rate than LQCs. The effect of that is that over the past few years there will be hundreds of officers who would have been sacked by officer-chaired panels but who are now still serving across the country.

The system is also too slow, with regulations that in their current form create a protracted process beset with frustrating delays. There is also has no ability for me as Commissioner to appeal the decisions of the panels, even when I am concerned they have been unduly lenient.

There are currently 209 Met officers awaiting misconduct hearings, many are suspended but all are on full pay using taxpayers’ money. More are being added to that list each day as our tougher approach on standards sees results.

In only 49 of those 209 cases have dates been set for the hearings to take place.

A further 43 former officers await hearings having already resigned.

On average, nearly four out of five of those officers awaiting hearings will be dismissed. The public expect that to happen swiftly but the system is holding us back.

Just as importantly, more than one in five of those officers will be cleared and it is absolutely in their interest that the system works efficiently for them because each day waiting brings with it a significant strain professionally and personally.?

My own frustrations are shared by police chiefs across the country. We are accountable for our forces and we should be able to decide who is fit to serve in them.

No one running a business would accept that they had to carry on employing people who had breached their standards. Leaders in health and education are also able to dismiss those who work for them, so why should police chiefs be any different?

The system also has other flaws that hold us back. For example, our ability to manage poor performance is frustrated by a process that involves no fewer than six stages and officers convicted of the most serious criminal offences are not automatically dismissed.

I welcomed the Government’s review, which was due to conclude in May, and I am still hopeful that we will see the action we’ve called for.

But I worry that if the outcome is just a watered down version of the necessary reform rather than bold change, the message will be sent that the system as a whole is weak on standards.

There will be those, including the Police Federation, who want the Government to protect the status quo or make only minimal changes. They will, I’m sure, suggest that doing otherwise goes against the interests of officers.

I would disagree. Restoring trust and confidence in policing matters just as much to the tens of thousands of honest, hardworking, brave officers who have been repeatedly let down by a minority as it does to the public.

I have made a commitment that we will deliver more trust, less crime and high standards so that London can have the police service it deserves.

I urge the Government to stay the course and bring forward the changes that will help me deliver on that mission.