Which Side Are You On?

I came across this letter from the Chairman of the Police Federation (police trade union) for England and Wales - a chap named Steve Williams - who seems to believe that attack is the best form of defence.

To my mind the attitude of the Police and Police Federation is wrong on so many levels - these two male dominated organisations seem outraged that they have been called to account by an external, independent body - which has the job of looking at policing issues from a 'public interest' standpoint. 

So, a few points are worth making:

1 Deborah Glass was not speaking in a personal capacity but as the Deputy Chair of the Independent Police Complaints Commission 

2 Deborah Glass disagreed with the final conclusion not to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the three police officers involved in the October 2012 meeting with Andrew Mitchell MP - because she believed that disciplinary action was fully justified and, indeed, was the only reasonable decision to make based on the evidence contained in the investigation report.

3 The original report of the Investigating Officer actually recommended disciplinary proceedings and this was only overturned once the matter had been referred to the three chief constables in the three police forces which employed the these officers.

4 Now it seems remarkable that all three chief constables agreed to overturn the original report's recommendations and they have yet to explain when and how they all came (independently?) to reach this strange decision which reversed the conclusions of the Investigating Officer's report. 

So, I take my hat off to Deborah Glass for standing up to this make, uniformed culture which clearly resents the IPCC sticking its nose in where it doesn't belong - and I hope that if and when the Home Secretary - Theresa May - next meets the Police Federation, that she gives them a well deserved 'kicking'. 

Rt Hon Theresa May MP Home Secretary
Home Office
Peel Building

2 Marsham Street London
SW1P 4DF

Email Chairman@polfed.org www.polfed.org

Dear Home Secretary,

FROM THE CHAIRMANS OFFICE

I’m writing to express my deep concern regarding the comments made today by IPCC Deputy Chair Deborah Glass.

My concern is that by releasing her personal view that she disagrees with the findings of the West Mercia investigation she displays a lack of independence. This threatens to undermine the considered findings of the investigation in the eyes of the public, whereas in fact those investigating and deciding the case are the proper arbiters in this matter.

I would very much appreciate an urgent meeting to discuss this issue in more detail. 

Yours sincerely,

Steve Williams


Chairman — Police Federation of England and Wales

Police Federation - Responding to the statement by IPCC Deputy Chair Deborah Glass:

“The Police Federation of England and Wales welcome the conclusions of the IPCC-supervised investigation into the actions of three Police Federation representatives, which found no evidence of misconduct. The IPCC had the choice at the outset of this investigation either to conduct an independent, managed or supervised investigation, and it chose to supervise. The investigation team has reached its conclusion and in accordance with statutory regulations, a decision has been made by the appropriate authority that there is no case to answer.

“Against this factual background, we are therefore shocked that the IPCC Commissioner, Deborah Glass, would then appoint herself judge and jury by releasing her personal view that she disagrees with the findings and asks the public to decide. This is done with the full knowledge that her status and title will naturally undermine the considered findings of the investigation in the eyes of the public, whereas in fact those investigating and deciding the case are the proper arbiters in this matter.

“Either the IPCC are capable of supervising investigations or they are not. If they feel that they are capable of doing so, having had the opportunity to monitor and provide input into the process, the proper and responsible course must be to accept the investigation findings . The public are seeing more of this type of personal outburst from an individual within a supposedly regulated and process driven body. This cannot be seen as acting in the public interest or being ‘independent’ - it is the action of someone who feels that their personal view should carry more weight than a full investigation which their own organisation supervised throughout.”


ENDS