The following Answer to an Urgent Question was given in the House
of Commons on Wednesday 20 October. “Abuse of position for sexual
purpose by a police officer is abhorrent, betraying the trust of
victims from a position of power. The Government are working
closely with the National Police Chiefs Council and other policing
stakeholders as part of a new national working group to implement
the right strategies, policies and products to help forces to
tackle those officers...Request free
trial
The following Answer to an Urgent Question was given in the House
of Commons on Wednesday 20 October.
“Abuse of position for sexual purpose by a police officer is
abhorrent, betraying the trust of victims from a position of
power. The Government are working closely with the National
Police Chiefs Council and other policing stakeholders as part of
a new national working group to implement the right strategies,
policies and products to help forces to tackle those officers
abusing their positions for sexual purposes. In February last
year, the Government strengthened the powers of the independent
police watchdog, the Independent Office of Police Conduct. Now
all allegations of abuse of position for sexual purpose must, by
law, be referred to the IOPC. For the first time, the Home Office
will also now be able to collect and publish data on issues of
internal sexual misconduct by officers, and we aim to publish the
first tranche of data in the new year.
But we are determined to go further. The heinous murder of Sarah
Everard by a serving police officer shook our country to the
core. I know that the thoughts of everyone in this House will
remain with Sarah’s family. The public are in urgent need of
reassurance; so too are the vast majority of police officers who
serve with courage and professionalism and who rely on all their
colleagues to uphold their values. This is why the Government are
launching a two-part independent inquiry. The first part will
examine the recruitment and employment of Sarah’s killer and
whether there were opportunities to have intercepted him along
the way. I would expect the second part to look at a range of
relevant issues, from policing culture to whether enough is being
done to identify and report patterns of behaviour of those
individuals who could go on to abuse their policing powers. We
will appoint the chair of the inquiry shortly and then agree
terms of reference. The Home Secretary will, at that point,
provide the House with an update. We have also asked Her
Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary to undertake an urgent
inspection of forces to look at their vetting and
countercorruption arrangements, as well as focusing on how well
forces can identify unacceptable behaviour.
We recognise that sexual violence is a broader issue in society
and we must leave no stone unturned in confronting it. The Prime
Minister will therefore launch a taskforce to drive
cross-government action and to help maintain public confidence in
policing and our many thousands of outstanding police officers.
The police have a unique and vital role in our society and we
rightly expect them to meet high standards of behaviour and
professionalism. Across government and policing, we must continue
working ceaselessly to protect the precious bond of trust between
officers and the public.”
15:37:00
(Lab)
Since the dreadful murder of Sarah Everard and the appalling
revelations of the abuse of police powers by her killer, there
have been many other shocking allegations of the failure of the
police to deal with misogyny and sexism in their own ranks.
Today, we learned from the Independent Office for Police Conduct
that, in the last three years, 66 officers and members of staff
have faced disciplinary proceedings for alleged abuse of position
for a sexual purpose; let alone those not reported, that is a big
rise in the last year. The trust we rightly have in the police is
everything. What, as well as the inquiries, are the Government
doing now to change a culture where there are too many examples
of totally inappropriate behaviour, which, at its worst, allowed
a serving police officer nicknamed “The Rapist” to continue in
post?
The Minister of State, Home Office () (Con)
I must join the noble Lord in expressing my disgust. Every one of
those numbers represents a person who has been the victim of
sexual misconduct by a serving police officer. On the one hand,
any number is too many but, on the other hand, we should look to
the legislation that we introduced last year to give additional
powers to the IOPC. That includes the power of initiative, which
allows it to bring forward and investigate allegations without
requiring referral from the police. In addition, forces must
refer all allegations of serious sexual offences or of police
officers abusing their position for a sexual purpose to the IOPC.
For the first time now, the Home Office will be able to collect
and publish data on internal sexual misconduct by officers, and
we aim to publish the first tranche in the new year.
(LD)
My Lords, I was a police officer for over 30 years, and I want to
be proud of that fact. We do not need working groups, inquiries,
inspections and a task force to reassure the public. When will
the Home Secretary give the Independent Office for Police Conduct
the additional resources that it needs to effectively investigate
sexual abuse by police officers? As a former Home Secretary did
with racism after the tragic death of Stephen Lawrence, when will
she tell police chiefs: “Misogyny is a problem and you must
address it now”? That is not just what we want. It is what every
decent, honest, hard-working police officer wants.
(Con)
I repeat my response to the noble Lord, , that every report or
allegation of police misconduct for a sexual purpose must be
referred to the IOPC. It will be up to individual force chiefs to
decide but if it is sexual misconduct it must be referred to the
IOPC. We have that additional layer in that the IOPC now has the
power of initiative. Decisions on whether officers have committed
sexual misconduct, and, if so, what sanctions there ought to be,
are for misconduct panels led by the independent, legally
qualified chairs.
Additionally, following the recommendations of the Zoë Billingham
report, we will be working closely with the new national police
lead for tackling VAWG, DCC Maggie Blyth, who took up the post
recently to address the report’s findings and drive forward
improvements in policing’s response to VAWG.
(Lab)
The Minister appreciates that trust in the police has taken a
real hit, particularly among young women. Given the problems that
the noble Baroness, Lady O’Loan, had with non-co-operation from
the Metropolitan Police—including, I am sorry to say, the
commissioner—with her Home Office review of the Daniel Morgan
case, will the Government please consider putting the new inquiry
announced by the Home Secretary on a full statutory footing, with
powers of compulsion?
(Con)
I thank the noble Baroness for that question and for the
conversation that we had the other day on this matter. On whether
the inquiry could be on a statutory footing, one change since
February 2020, when we amended the law, is that police officers
are now under a duty to co-operate as witnesses with
investigations, inquiries and formal proceedings under the
revised standards of professional behaviour. They are guilty of a
disciplinary offence if they fail to do so. On the fundamental
question, should we assess it necessary, the inquiry can be
converted into a statutory inquiry where witnesses can be
compelled to give evidence.
(CB)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that a practical measure which
would enhance the confidence that women have in the police force
would be for any officer against whom a credible complaint of
sexual misconduct is made to be immediately suspended, and that
it is not good enough for this matter to be left, as it currently
is, to the discretion of chief constables?
(Con)
Officers can be and are suspended for allegations of misconduct.
Every case is different, so it is left to the discretion of
police chiefs to decide on a case-by-case basis. I would not want
to make a blanket determination because there may be spurious
allegations. It would be up to the police chief in question to
determine whether a suspension was relevant or appropriate.
(LD)
My Lords, following the terrible, tragic murder of Sarah Everard
and all the revelations that followed after the conviction of
Wayne Couzens, it became very clear that there needs to be a
serious culture change within sections of the police force. In
order for that to happen root and branch, there needs to be
change in the atmosphere where women and other police officers—we
have heard particularly from female police officers—have
witnessed this kind of toxic behaviour but felt unable to do
anything about it, or, if they complained, felt that they were
ostracised or demoted. What is being done about that specifically
to enable whistleblowers or serving police officers to come
forward to report such behaviour and to ensure that it will be
dealt with properly?
Also, Commissioner Cressida Dick has announced that when
plain-clothes police officers stop a lone woman, they will now
have to video call into a police station for an identity check to
prove that they are actually a serving police officer—something
called Safe Connection. How would that have helped in the case of
Sarah Everard? Wayne Couzens was a serving police officer, so it
would not have helped.
(Con)
I have the utmost sympathy with the second part of the noble
Baroness’s question, because, were I to have been stopped by that
killer, I would have complied. Something that is at the forefront
of the Home Secretary’s mind, and must be on the Metropolitan
Police Commissioner’s mind, is trust in the police. Such events
are, mercifully, rare—in fact, I do not know of one that is the
same in my lifetime—but the noble Baroness absolutely hits on the
point: had the same thing been repeated under what the
Metropolitan Police has suggested, would it have happened again?
That gives both the Metropolitan Police and the Home Secretary
something that they need to—and will—reflect on.
On culture, again, I totally concur with the noble Baroness’s
point, and the second part of the inquiry will look at a range of
relevant issues, from policing culture to whether enough is being
done to join up, identify and report patterns of behaviour of
those individuals who could go on to abuse their policing
powers.
(CB)
My Lords, the police are in the middle of a recruiting drive
which will recruit about 45,000 officers in the next two years.
One of the issues raised by the terrible murder of Sarah Everard
was whether the appropriate vetting was carried out on Wayne
Couzens, both in his transfer and, obviously, for new officers.
First, can the Minister say something about how vetting standards
have changed since 4 March this year—since when I would hope that
things have moved on? Secondly, what action is being taken about
information coming from within the forces—such as the comment
that this officer had been known as “the rapist”? If that
intelligence is around, what has changed to do something about
it?
(Con)
On the noble Lord’s latter question about “the rapist”, it is
pretty disgusting, if indeed it is true. On what the Home Office
is doing now about vetting, new recruits are subject to a
rigorous vetting and assessment process to assess suitability for
the role of police officer, and, although decisions about police
recruitment are made within a national framework, they are
locally managed by the police. On the inquiry, the first part
will of course examine the recruitment and employment of Sarah’s
killer and whether there had been opportunities to intercept him
along the way.
|
