Important note: This is an archive of the website that was formerly at www.morrisinquiry.gov.uk. It is being hosted on the MPA website for archival purposes only and may contain out-of-date information.

This resource is from the Transcripts section. This section contains a transcript of the public session with Mr R Powell, Mr D McFarlane and Ms P McLeod of the National Black Police Association on 5 April 2004.

Sections available here:

• Transcript of public session: Mr R Powell, Mr D McFarlane and Ms P McLeod of the National Black Police Association
  • Questions by Sir William Morris
  • Questions by Sir Anthony Burden
  • Questions by Miss Weekes

This transcript is also available with original line and page numbering.

Transcript of public session: Mr R Powell, Mr D McFarlane and Ms P McLeod of the National Black Police Association

Monday, 5 April 2004
2pm

Sir William Morris: Mr Powell, good afternoon to you, and good afternoon, everyone. Can I start by saying how much we appreciate your acceptance of our invitation to attend the Inquiry and to give evidence, and indeed for letting us have your very full submission which we found extremely helpful.

I do appreciate that for some of our witnesses, any process of this nature may seem somewhat daunting, so I thought it would be helpful if I set out briefly how we propose to conduct the hearing this afternoon.

But first, let me introduce myself and the other members of my panel. I am Sir Bill Morris, recently retired General Secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union. As you can see, there are two other members of the panel. On my right is Sir Anthony Burden, who recently retired as Chief Constable of the South Wales Constabulary after a very long and distinguished career in the police service. On my left is Ms Anesta Weekes QC. Anesta is an eminent barrister who sits as a recorder and part-time chairperson of employment tribunals. She was also counsel to the Lawrence Inquiry.

Mr Powell, as you know, we have been tasked by the Metropolitan Police Authority to conduct an independent inquiry into professional standards and employment matters in the Metropolitan Police Service. Our focus is the MPS as an organisation and not the individuals who make up that organisation. The inquiry that we are conducting is inquisitorial and not adversarial in character or indeed in nature.

We are very keen to enquire into the issues raised by our terms of reference so that we can make appropriate recommendation for further good practice, rather than concentrating on making criticisms of the MPS as an organisation, or the individuals.

To help us in our task, we are very keen to hear from all our witnesses not just about what is wrong with the Metropolitan Police Service but what is right with it; but more importantly, your suggestions for making it better.

A transcript is being taken, so that we have a proper record of the evidence given by all our witnesses, and this will be posted on our website later today.

At the end of these introductory remarks, I will lead on the questions to you, followed by my colleague, Sir Anthony Burden, and then followed by Miss Weekes. Any supplementary questions which I might find necessary I will also put to you. At the conclusion of our questions, I will offer you a very brief opportunity to make a closing statement if you so wish.

Mr Powell, in your written submission, you have offered us evidence on a whole range of issues, but in particular, you have pointed us to the NBPA and its goals, you have talked in broad terms about the Inquiry itself, the Morris Inquiry, and you have indicated the NBPA's concern over Operation Helios. You have indicated the circumstances insofar as it affected Chief Inspector Leroy Logan, and finally, you have addressed us in the submission on the issue of proportionality.

As I mentioned when we launched our Inquiry on 21st January and when we commenced our second stage of hearing here on the 29th, I said, and I say again, that this is an inquiry into professional standards and employment matters in the Metropolitan Police Service; it is not an inquiry about race or indeed community policing. Their Lordships Scarman and MacPherson have already considered and reported on those issues. Our focus is on the Met as an organisation, and our brief is to look at a range of issues relating to professional standards and workplace practices within that organisation.

As part of our work, we are tasked with looking at some individual cases, but we shall not revisit the past, except where it informs the future, and to identify lessons to be learnt.

In your submission, you have at some length identified two high-profile cases, but for the record, and for your information, let me again put on record the following statement, as I did last week. It reads as follows: I know that you are familiar with the terms of reference for this Inquiry. As you are aware, one aspect of our task is to examine the lessons to be learnt from high-profile cases.

These cases, by definition, relate to individuals, and will be dealt with in the same way as submissions we have received from other individuals. We have not yet reached that part of our work, and therefore, today, we will not be asking any questions about any of the high-profile cases that we will consider.

We will, of course, notify all the parties concerned when we have reached this stage of the Inquiry, and may seek your assistance again at that point.

The panel has your written submission, and wishes to concentrate in its questioning today on issues that focus more generally on policies, practice and procedures, which are the key issues which we are asked to consider. Before we do so, however, for the benefit of the transcript, I wonder whether you would mind formally introducing yourself and indeed your colleagues to the Inquiry.

Mr Powell: Ray Powell, I am the president of the National Black Police Association. I have been working with the National Black Police Association now for the past four years, initially as chairman of the subcommittees, followed by a spell as the general secretary, and since September, being elected as the president for the NBPA.

To my left I have Patricia McLeod, who is a previous vice president of the National Black Police Association. She also had corporate responsibility for support cases nationally for the NBPA, and women's issues as well as gender issues as well within the NBPA.

To my rear, I have Dave McFarlane. Dave is the national co-ordinator for the NBPA. He has been with the National Black Police Association since its conception and prior to that, he has had quite a significant national overview for support cases, and also within the Metropolitan Police Service. Both my colleagues are also Met police officers.

Sir William Morris: Thank you very much indeed, Mr Powell.

Questions by Sir William Morris

Sir William Morris: My colleagues and I have heard from the Metropolitan Police Service branch of your organisation about its relationship with the Police Federation. Could you help us by just sharing with us: what is the relationship like at national level between the NBPA and the Federation?

Mr Powell: At a national level, it is a reasonable relationship. We have been working with the Federation, undertaking regular meetings with them, certainly since the launch of the National Black Police Association. This started when I was the chair of the staff association and partnerships committee. We have regular meetings in respect of diversity, regular meetings in respect of funding protocols, and we have quite a decent working relationship, I would suggest.

It does fall down, however, at the national level, where I would suggest that the relationship between the joint branch boards at the local level and the local black police associations could be better. There are areas for improvement, I would suggest, in respect of that relationship.

Sir William Morris: Apart from the issues that you have touched on where some activities are taking place, are there any joint campaigns that the two organisations are engaged in together?

Mr Powell: Yes, there are. There are a number of campaigns that we are actually looking at. One of the biggest issues with the Federation is to do with education and educating their staff at all levels within the Federation.

At this time, there is a general concern that the representation at a local level for black staff is very, very poor. We have people who have been elected as branch board members who have been there for years and years and years, and they seem to be in place, you know, no matter what actually happens.

As a result of this, there is very little skill, as we see it, in respect of dealing with issues in respect of gender, in respect of race, and in respect of diversity in general. More often than not, the position of our members is compromised as a result of this, because they seem to be, for want of a better phrase, closely aligned with the organisation.

So we have actually offered our services to the Federation on several occasions now to be involved in equality training of their local representatives. As yet, this has had a limited sort of impact, and to date, it has only resulted in minor discussions.

To build upon that, another initiative is looking at the representation of black members within the federated ranks. Right now, this is very, very poor. There have been a number of our colleagues that have put their names forward, but locally, this has been challenged; in some cases, I would suggest, inappropriately challenged as well, from the Federation's perspective.

We are looking at this, and we have had meetings with the Federation to look at a joint initiative in order to try to run familiarisation days, familiarisation courses, with our members, in order to try to sort of raise their awareness in respect of what they can do for their own force but also for their own local BPAs as well, in order to raise the awareness and to put more people forward for representation on the joint branch boards.

Right now, that representation just is not there, so we are looking at a campaign between ourselves and the Federation in order to try to improve that sort of rate, but yes, it is not there.

Sir William Morris: Clearly your organisation, in terms of its individual members and the collective body, brings a tremendous amount of expertise in the areas that you have talked about – you have talked about diversity, you have talked about race/gender issues – and the assumption is that not only would the Federation benefit, but your members would benefit as well, and indeed, the service would benefit.

Could I ask whether, in the long term – not here and now, tomorrow, but in the long term, whether there are any sort of confidence-building measures that you envisage taking place which would perhaps lead to the agreement and implementation of a joint protocol around some of the areas of common concern that you have identified?

Mr Powell: Yes, hopefully, there will be, you know, we already have a memorandum of understanding between ourselves and the Superintendents Association. We have developing memorandums of understanding between ourselves and Unison and ourselves and the other staff support associations such as BAWP and the Gay Police Association as well.

We hopefully will be making moves for a similar memorandum of understanding with the Federation, but there will be complications with the Federation, because of the hierarchical sort of structure within that organisation. It is okay us putting this to them nationally, but then this has to really be passed down amongst their members at a local level as well, for their approval. I think it is a little bit archaic, but subsequently, hopefully, that will come to fruition, as it will with ACPO as well.

Sir William Morris: I think my colleagues and myself, based on the evidence that we have had and explored, are reasonably clear about what is the NBPA's relationship with the Met BPA, how that stands and how it regulates itself.

Could you tell us, what is the relationship like in other police forces, outside of the Met, the relationship, and how does the organisation operate nationally, save for the Met, which we think we are clear about?

Mr Powell: Okay, the National Black Police Association is an umbrella association responsible for now 40 local black police associations around the country, that is 40 out of the 43 forces. These also include forces in Scotland and also Northern Ireland.

Each one of these forces elects a member to represent the views of their local force at a national level, and they form the basis of the national executive committee, which meets four times a year, approximately.

From this committee is elected the strategic head of the association, the president, vice president male, vice president female, general secretary, et cetera, the strategic head.

The relationship with the rest of the forces is governed by our support for them. We are a guardian torch for these local forces, in essence; we believe in empowering the local black police associations in developing their own aims and objectives, their own methodology of working; we encourage them to look at recruitment, retention, progression issues, and that support is given in that respect as well.

But we provide also support and advice for cases of unfairness and inequalities; we are a support network, first and foremost, and we take the support of our members very, very seriously, so we are there as an advisory – in an advisory capacity when it comes to issues of support for black staff within the police service.

Sir William Morris: I think that it is right that I just share with you one of the prompting reasons for our questions here, because the Inquiry is primarily about the Metropolitan Police Service, and of course the Met BPA has submitted evidence. We are not quite sure as to where the autonomy starts and where it ends between the Met BPA and the National BPA, because your submission is the more substantive of the two, in terms of volume, if nothing else, and the issues around which you base the submission.

What my colleagues and I just want to really understand is whose voice it is that we must listen to here, because there are qualitative and quantitative differences between the two approaches, so we really need some clarity here about which voice we listen to. Is it the Met BPA, which is the principal organisation insofar as our terms of reference are concerned, or is it the National BPA, who we would assume, wrongly or rightly, take a more strategic overview interest rather than the measures of detail; so can you help us, please?

Mr Powell: I believe you need to listen to both in detail, I would suggest. The National BPA –

Sir William Morris: Why?

Mr Powell: The National BPA became involved because the issues affecting the Metropolitan Police Service are issues that are echoed throughout the country. The methodology that is utilised in investigating black staff is again echoed nationally. You know, the only situation is that the Met is a far bigger force, therefore more high-profile, but the impact upon individuals nationally is equally as devastating as it has been upon the high-profile cases that we have alluded to within our submissions.

So therefore, what actually happens within the Met does have a significant impact on the feeling nationally amongst black staff within the police service.

Sir William Morris: I hear what you say, but you see our difficulty, do you not, insofar as we have to respond to the body that established this Inquiry, and a lot of, if you like, ownership is being claimed for it, but we will leave that aside; but our obligation, insofar as our terms of reference go, is to deliver a report to the body which commissions the Inquiry and within the constraints of the terms of reference.

We are also very mindful that the Metropolitan Police Service has a local representative body who is at the sharp end on a day-to-day basis, and have responsibility for implementing, regulating and indeed maintaining relationships about any recommendation which we may make.

It is very sort of attractive to say that we should listen to both, and of course we will listen to both, this is the essence of your presence this afternoon, but when that is said and done, we have to respond to the constraints of our terms of reference. I am assuming you see that.

Mr Powell: Yes, I understand what you are actually saying here. However – I appreciate where you are coming from, but there is value in both submissions and in both views, and as far as I am concerned, we are here to support and underpin the recommendations or the submissions that have been placed before you from the Metropolitan Police Service as well; we are there to support their views, but also to aid and assist in any further developments of any recommendations that will prove useful to both.

But I must also point out that any recommendations that actually come out of this will have an impact nationally, and that is our interest in this, as well as that of the Metropolitan Police Service and our members within the Metropolitan Police Service.

Sir William Morris: But surely that can only be so if all things are equal; for example, let me, just on the basis of political governance, point out one or two differences. The Metropolitan Police Service, yes, they have a Police Authority, it is called the MPA, but it has a Mayor, who has more than a passing interest in its activities. It has another political body called the GLA. It has, right on its very doorstep, the chief political responsibility of the Home Office, the Home Secretary, and of course, it has 32 boroughs; well, can you tell me where that is replicated anywhere in the country, in terms of political governance?

Mr Powell: No, there are demographic differences that I do allude to, and the size of the Metropolitan Police Service is one of them that is not replicated anywhere.

However, on the relationship between the Metropolitan Police Service, the Metropolitan Police Authority and the other associated bodies as well, that is replicated somewhat, I would suggest, within the local county forces.

You know, there is an issue between whether there is a relationship between, for example, the ACPO team and the police authorities; the relationship between those and the council. Some difficulties – my belief is between the police authorities and the governing mayors of some towns. There are these issues, it is all about relationships. If we can get the relationships right and correct within the Met, then hopefully, it will develop good practice for these other county forces as well. But I do allude to the fact that there are differences, significant differences, where some of the recommendations may not actually be practicably implemented due to the demographics of county forces. That is to be expected.

Sir William Morris: As part of our work, it is our intention to make a number of visits to police services outside of London. So far, we intend to visit the West Midlands, Greater Manchester and perhaps Merseyside.

Could you explain what, in your view, are the lessons which you would like us to take with us, and indicate how relevant those may be in terms of practices, procedures, process, organisation; is it a nationwide problem we are looking at here, or is it a problem peculiar to the MPS?

Mr Powell: I would suggest it is a nationwide problem that we have here. The investigation of black staff and the disproportionality is reflected – to varying degrees, I may add, but it is reflected in other forces. The style of investigation, for example, the fact that when people take out employment tribunals within county forces, as opposed to the Metropolitan Police Force, and these other metropolitan forces outside, they are subject to further victimisation, and that is again being reflected within the Metropolitan Police Service.

The relationship between the professional standards departments and the CPS, for example, again is questionable, but that again is reflected nationally. And again, the relationship between some independent advisory groups and the police forces concerned has to be, I believe, reviewed, because there are questionable practices there that really need to be addressed.

They are just a few that I can think of right now, that come to mind, that I think will significantly impact upon black staff nationally.

Sir William Morris: What hard and firm statistical evidence can you offer us to support the contention – whether it is on the basis of proportionality or on the basis of actual – that the problems in the other 42 services are more or less identical to the Met? If it is that you are to persuade us that it is a problem with national characteristics, then clearly you would want to offer some hard, firm statistical evidence, because we will not be interviewing every Chief Constable in the land, because we have no remit to do so.

We are visiting at least three services to test some of the issues for ourselves, but if you are suggesting that there is commonality on issues around tribunals, there is commonality around issues like directorates of professional standards, commonality about how the CPA, in its day, responded, then that is going to need some pretty tough, firm, clear, hard evidence, is it not, so that the comparative dimension can in fact be measured before that can be taken as intellectually sound; do you agree?

Mr Powell: I agree.

Sir William Morris: Fine. Just moving on, I said that we are not just interested about what is bad with the Met, what is good with the Met; the key to our existence is: how can we collectively, including the NBPA, the BPA and the Federation, make it better? Could you give us some suggestions as to how we can make it better?

Mr Powell: There are a number of suggestions that come to mind. The three main ones, I would suggest, are basically effective consultation at all levels and support for the BPAs and their members, and also valuing those members and the contribution that they can make to the development of policies, strategies and guidelines, et cetera, within the Metropolitan Police, and indeed within any police service.

Secondly, I would suggest that there needs to be an element of independence, an independent screening system that can be called upon at times when there appears to be a sort of disparity or disparate view in respect of how staff are being treated, for example when it comes to employment tribunals, et cetera. There should be some screening system there that can be called upon, and that may include the assistance of local BPAs, other BPAs, just to sort of facilitate that, and again, it is about valuing people, valuing their contributions.

Last but not least, there should be an element of, I would suggest, accountability at all levels within the police service with appropriate sanctions, an accountability that can be seen, that will make a difference to the attitudes of black staff. Because right now, we seem to be going through turmoil, I would suggest, nationally; however, there are very few sanctions that appear to have been taken in respect of when the organisation has actually got it wrong, and this is not seen – it certainly is not seen at chief officer level.

Sir William Morris: You have offered us a fair list of recommendations that you would like us to adopt, but like every list, there must be a priority, I suspect, somewhere there. What is your top three and why? From your own list.

Mr Powell: From my own list?

Sir William Morris: Yes.

Mr Powell: Excuse me while I refer to my list.

Sir William Morris: I thought you would know it by heart.

Mr Powell: Not quite. (Pause). As a matter of priority, I would suggest that number 6, you know, there is a perception that ACPO officers are untouchable, that would be one of my priorities in order to engage and build confidence within the police service, not only the police service, but also the communities as well, because the communities are equally as affected when there appears to be no sanctions against chief officers for their wrongdoings.

Number 12, again, you know, there is a business case to be made for the management of employment tribunal claims taken out by the directorate of legal services, and given to an outside law firm, in order to work in (inaudible). This again comes back to this screening device or screening system, whereby there is a degree of independence so as to prevent further suffering; you know, we are victims, and our members are victims, and for them to go through a lengthy employment tribunal to be postponed, to be stayed for various reasons that are usually, you know, reasons that we can actually overcome – they just remain victims.

The sooner we can get the employment tribunal resolved, or our members' wishes resolved – because a lot of the time, these issues can be resolved at a very, very early stage. So certainly number 12 would be one as well that I would put on my list of priorities.

Also the accountability aspect in respect of costs; a significant amount of costs are being made in respect of cases and investigations. There appears to be no accountability for these costs, or where these costs have been; you know, it appears that there is an open cheque book when it comes to the investigation of staff who are subject to ETs, et cetera. So I think there needs to be some limits, some form of accountability, certainly to the Police Authority, in respect of where the taxpayers' money has been spent.

Sir William Morris: The budget is £2.5 billion; why should we find attractive a proposition which says that we must have accountability for tribunals and leave the other billions unaccounted? Do you see my difficulty here?

Mr Powell: I see your difficulty, but, you know, when they are looking at, for example – not quoting one of the high-profile cases in our submission, but a substantial amount of taxpayers' money, we estimate somewhere in the region of £7 million being spent, you know, surely the public have a right to know where this money has been spent and why it has been spent, and why it has been – and also look at the outcomes as well. You know, does the spending of this money justify the outcomes in respect of the allegations concerned? That has got – I feel that has got to be asked and addressed.

Sir William Morris: But do you not think that is a question best put to the people with the political responsibility for overseeing how the money is spent, the MPA, for example?

Mr Powell: Possibly right, yes. And that is something that – it is my belief that that is possibly something that you can take forward.

Sir William Morris: Can I just take a minute and just try and understand your number two priority a little bit better, because you talk about independence in relation to industrial tribunals. I am not very clear, and I do not know whether my colleagues are any clearer, about exactly what is meant there, because if you go through a mental audit of the process for an industrial tribunal: someone has a grievance, it has not been resolved, they submit an industrial tribunal claim, there is a process of ACAS involvement for conciliation, and so the thing goes through.

At what point would the independence come in, and how would that independence – is it an independent person, an independent body? What do you mean? Can you help us?

Mr Powell: The intervention would be at the earliest opportunity, I would suggest. This intervention needs to be a person or persons who are trained, legally trained, who have the knowledge, the expertise would be helpful of the organisation concerned as well, but do not have a vested interest in either side, either party, so as to look at this objectively.

This, as well as hopefully saving time, saving money and also the suffering of the victim, would also appease, I would suggest, the victims' perceptions that they may be wrong or the organisation is wrong. It is just a degree of independence that could basically build some sort of confidence within the victims concerned, and also the organisation, to say, "Look, are we going down the right track here? Do we need to go down this track? Is there a better way, a better solution to this issue that is going to be acceptable to all parties concerned, before it even gets out of the box?", for want of a better phrase.

Sir William Morris: But is that not exactly what ACAS is supposed to be doing now? Because once an ET1 is registered, automatically, by statute, the ACAS conciliation facilities kick in, and they take the opportunity to explore with both parties – and they are independent, if any institution is. So I am not quite sure what beyond ACAS – and the role you have described is exactly what they are supposed to be doing; how another tier or duplicating that would be of any value.

Mr Powell: Right, it basically refers to the manning of employment tribunal claims to be taken out of the directorate of legal services, the hands of these – I think it is the involvement.

Sir William Morris: That is a different question.

Mr Powell: Yes, that is what I am actually – it is the involvement of the directorate of legal services that is the issue here, I would suggest.

Sir William Morris: But that is a different question, though, from talking about injecting an independent oversight who would give confidence to the victim, oversee, look at a whole raft of measures which the transcript will show you invited us would be the result; where it is located is a different question.

We understand your organisation's position on location of employment tribunals, it is in within the directorate of professional standards, and you do not think it is appropriate where it is, for all sorts of reasons that we will not rehearse now.

All I am saying at this point – I want to be absolutely clear that where it is located is one question; the degree of independence in the process is a different question, as I am understanding it, and I am saying there is a degree of independence now, through the arbitration and conciliation service ACAS, and I am anxious to know whether you are recognising that, and if you are not, are you proposing an alternative to ACAS? I am not sure.

Mr Powell: No, I do recognise that, I do recognise what ACAS can bring to the table without a doubt, and that should be positively encouraged, that degree of independence.

Sir William Morris: Thank you very much indeed for the clarity. Thanks again. Can I pass you straight over to my colleague, Sir Anthony Burden, to pick up the questions, please?

Questions by Sir Anthony Burden

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you, chairman. Can I deal with gender issues, please, and ask you firstly whether you feel that race has swamped the agenda for gender?

Mr Powell: No, I would not agree with that at all. I do not think it has swamped the gender agenda as such. There are issues in respect of gender, that is certainly acknowledged by me, and there is a degree, I would suggest, of sensitivity when you are dealing with race issues, when gender issues come to the table, to be very sensitive to those issues as well.

I know that has been said, I know that there is a concern that race has swamped the gender agenda, but I feel that is certainly still alive, alive and kicking.

Sir Anthony Burden: Can I perhaps bring your colleague, Ms McLeod, in here and see what her views are.

Ms McLeod: I have to say, I slightly disagree. I was a vice president for the National BPA for two years and part of my portfolio was to deal with gender in the first contact support. I was also first contact support co-ordinator for the Metropolitan Police Black Police Association. There was a conference, "Women in the shade", a couple of years ago that talked about a lot of issues that some of us black female officers and support staff were having, and as a result of that, I formed a National Black Police Association women's group, which had representation from females from all the BPAs round the country.

We had our first meeting last October – sorry, the year before, and out of that meeting, there was a common thread of problems that females were having, not only from their respective forces, but also from some of the BPAs.

I think gender is not addressed as much as it should be, and, you know, there are a lot more things that can be done to make things better.

Sir Anthony Burden: Can I just put up a profile which you would have seen last week? This actually relates to the Metropolitan Police, so if I could ask you firstly – that shows the rank profile within the Metropolitan Police, and also shows black and visible ethnic minority female police staff by pay band. Now that does not tell us anything, but I think what it does tell us is that black female staff do not seem to be breaking through the rank structure, either in police or in police staff terms; would that be an accurate reflection?

Ms McLeod: I think so, yes.

Sir Anthony Burden: Could I ask you whether that is mirrored across the whole of the service, do you think?

Ms McLeod: I think so, yes.

Sir Anthony Burden: So there is a definite issue across the whole of the UK in relation to female black staff.

We have been told about some positive schemes which are going on, I think particularly in relation to CID within the Met, female representation within CID, and black female representation within CID. Are any of the current initiatives, do you think, likely to have any massive impact on furthering the cause of black women in the Metropolitan Police?

Ms McLeod: I cannot really answer for the CID aspect, because I am a police constable for the diplomatic protection group, but it appears that we will offer training – there is lack of training within a lot of areas. As police constables, you are not given the encouragement to go for promotion, especially if you are seen to challenge certain things.

On the other side of it, you can be trained, but you are not utilised. You will get other officers that are lesser skilled that will be selected when it comes to certain operations. That is how it appears, in my personal opinion – in my experience, and also the dealings I have had as first contact support advisor, and also chairing the National BPA women's group.

Sir Anthony Burden: Your initiative "in the shade"; did that come up with any positive recommendations as to what could and should be done to improve the situation?

Ms McLeod: A lot of issues were brought up about childcare, training needs, being empowered to be selected to go up for promotion, being encouraged, have some self-worth, of which the next step was us setting up this National BPA women's group which we are finalising, you know, our issues of where we want to go forward.

Sir Anthony Burden: And in the Metropolitan Police specifically? I mean, it is your organisation. What do you feel ought to be done to promote the gender agenda more positively?

Ms McLeod: I think – there just appears to be a lot of black female officers as well as support staff that are having problems within the Metropolitan Police. They need to listen to us. It just appears that, you know, if you challenge, you are overlooked for certain things, you are not – some are trained, some are not trained, there is not enough encouragement. To be treated fairly; when you go through a certain period in your work and you are treated unfairly, it is really hard to sort of – you do not get selected as you should do, as other people get selected when certain postings come about.

It is quite difficult, because it just – with the people that I come into contact with as first contact support, they seem to have the same problems. We are not being encouraged to go ahead, you know, into promotion.

There is the facility there, but there are some supervisors that just do not like it when you challenge certain things, and you just do not get selected, or, you know, you will be trained and better skilled than some people, and you just do not get selected because you are too loud, you know, you put your head above everybody else, challenging certain things to make things better.

You know, we have got the Metropolitan Police BPA – we have set up a women's forum, we have got – there is quite a lot of support staff who have degrees within the Metropolitan Police who are not in the higher ranks. What is part of our women's forum group – what we did was went round to a couple of police stations and had a thing for two hours or so, embracing support staff and female officers, it was mainly support staff, just kind of embracing – giving them some ideas on how we can move forward to challenge things in the workplace, because a lot of people are still suffering in silence, and to encourage them to apply for promotion when it comes up.

Because they have had other white support staff that have come into the office, have not been there very long, not so skilled, but they are in the next rank. Whereas a black support staff is in the office, got a degree, and got certain skills, but they do not get promotion, and when they apply, they get turned down.

Sir Anthony Burden: And is that challenged?

Ms McLeod: It is challenged, but you will have a lot of people – some support staff, I cannot answer for everybody, you get low esteem, they do not have the confidence, because they have applied over a certain amount of time, you know, they just do not go through. But the other side of it – within the BPA women's forum, we have a DCAF which is like training needs for men and women, and we would encourage – you know, help your applications, give you mock exams, and people that have actually failed on a few occasions getting through have actually got through once we have helped them through.

Sir Anthony Burden: And that is the BPA doing that?

Ms McLeod: That is the BPA women's forum; they have a DCAF which is like another subpart to the BPA in the Metropolitan Police.

Sir Anthony Burden: So the BPA is very much attempting to support and take care of those officers, but there is nothing within the Metropolitan Police as far as you are aware that replicates that or would reinforce it?

Ms McLeod: I am sorry, what do you mean?

Sir Anthony Burden: Well, there is nothing formal that the Metropolitan Police is producing – I mean, the BPA have put this programme in place, and is obviously doing good work to support officers and police staff, but there is nothing formal, from the Metropolitan Police viewpoint, that is actually doing that for you.

Ms McLeod: No.

Sir Anthony Burden: Forgive me, but you are the first black female officer we have seen since we have been sitting.

Ms McLeod: Yes.

Sir Anthony Burden: If I could just ask you a few questions, if I may? You have already alluded to it, but is there anything else that you would want to say to us that would give us an insight into what it is like to be a female black member of staff in the Metropolitan Police in terms of the culture in which you have to live?

Ms McLeod: I have been in the police service for ten years. It has not been easy. I have done a lot of work with the BPA, and with the Metropolitan Police. The first couple of years in my probation I was actually the victim of sexual discrimination which I did not complain about, I sort of – did not sort of know who to go to, because I thought if I complained, they would not support me very much. I ended up moving from where I was, eventually.

I have kind of then gone on within my career, I have worked in various locations, Orpington, Peckham. As a woman, it is a lot harder, and being black is really hard, in terms of you have to work harder to get where you want to get to. You know, it is like sometimes you get – instead of the blow of being black, you get the blow of obviously being a woman, it is like being punched in the stomach twice sometimes with the way you are treated sometimes by your colleagues.

There has been quite a few black officers, females, that have left the organisation, because, you know, there comes a time that you think – sometimes you try, when you are in a particular role, and other people are selected when they have not got that experience, you think, "Well, why am I going to bother?" When you have challenged it, certain parties who you are not happy with have not been spoken to.

I cannot explain it; I think it is not an easy role to be in, within the Metropolitan Police, as a female. You know, I was a family liaison officer to Doreen and Neville Lawrence for two years, very loyal to the job. The September 11th disaster came about, and a female officer, a white officer, had not even had a family, just come out of training school, it is like a couple of weeks' course – it is a week's course for an FLO – she got selected to go to New York to assist the British families and I and another couple in the office who were all black, had the skills and experience, were overlooked, they did not select us.

So it is kind of, as you keep going on through the job – that is why I keep emphasising about how you get trained and skilled to do the work, but if you are seen to challenge certain things they just do not select you, and sometimes there comes a time when you think: I might as well leave, because I have given my time and effort to the job, and you do not get appreciated or you do not feel valued.

Sir Anthony Burden: We heard in another submission, I will not bother to put up the quote, but a submission from the Met trade unions, that referred to the Metropolitan Police not wholly but partly as being a very macho organisation. Is that an accurate description?

Ms McLeod: I think so. I have been in diplomatic protection group for three years this November, and it was quite known by some of the officers up there, who are predominantly mainly white – there is currently about 700-odd officers. I am currently the only female black officer within DPG. When I started, they actually said, "You know, some of the officers are a bit dubious about you, because you are with the BPA", and it was like all very secret service, but a lot of the DPG are Masons. Nothing is actually said about what goes on with the Masons, but it is okay to make me out to be like I am doing something wrong.

You know, it is very much a culture in that one thing is okay but other things are not okay, and it is a dominantly white culture, unfortunately, and male-orientated in certain areas, and a lot more room for improvement.

Sir Anthony Burden: I am very grateful to you for quoting your own experiences very honestly. If a young member of female staff in the Metropolitan Police suffers sexual harassment today, are there support networks to help her?

Ms McLeod: Yes, there is.

Sir Anthony Burden: Where would she go?

Ms McLeod: One, they can go to supervisors, and if it is a supervisor who they are not happy about, we have the BPA support network, they can give us a call, say they are not happy. You know, I have got an example: there was a female who was having sexual and racial problems within her workplace, and she did not feel strong enough to talk about it, so – because it was her supervisor. So she called and we dealt with it, basically, went up and spoke to the supervisor about it, and he was punished in a particular way, you know, it was dealt with.

Sir Anthony Burden: Would those sort of networks be well-known amongst the staff?

Ms McLeod: Yes.

Sir Anthony Burden: Certainly in the BPA, you make sure it is, I guess?

Ms McLeod: Yes.

Sir Anthony Burden: But for your white colleagues?

Ms McLeod: Well, you have obviously got your supervisors, you have got your Federation if you want advice, your Unison. We sometimes, if there is support needed, will support white officers as well, if they need the support. You can give advice, sometimes you can, it is not all – a majority is supporting black officers and support staff, but you can on occasions support white officers as well, and white support staff.

Sir Anthony Burden: And finally on this particular topic, if you can help us, because you are a first contact advisor, and therefore you are receiving issues of complaint and problems, could you help us at all with Hendon? I think you were present last week when your colleagues from the Metropolitan Police Black Police Association were referring to this, and I made the comment then that we are getting conflicting reports about Hendon, and it is the gateway to the culture of this organisation, so it is vitally important that the culture at Hendon reflects the values that the Commissioner has stipulated.

Are you or have you recently received any evidence which would cause you to be concerned about the culture at Hendon, either in relation to any racist behaviour, sexist behaviour, or any bullying?

Ms McLeod: I personally cannot comment on that.

Sir Anthony Burden: That is fair enough. If you have not –

Ms McLeod: I can pass you on to Dave McFarlane.

Sir Anthony Burden: Yes, if Mr McFarlane wants to come in. Thank you very much indeed.

Mr McFarlane: As well as being the national co-ordinator, my colleague had mentioned last week that I was support co-ordinator for the Met BPA as well, and on a couple of occasions I have been to Hendon, also receiving a lot of phone calls via the Black Police Association office about cases of racism.

We seem to be getting quite a few cases coming through with regards to the religious aspect, Muslim members of staff, obviously references after September 11th. But certainly, a lot of staff felt like they did not feel very comfortable at all about being at Hendon, and the difficulties going through. Some have resigned – even though we are encouraging them not to, but obviously finding it difficult, they have done so.

But speaking to the staff – the other difficulty we had too is that invitations were given to them that they could meet with us, and they were very reluctant to do so. Privately, they would contact us at the office, and say the reason why is that they did not want to upset their white colleagues, and they felt they would be marginalised when they get back after having a meeting with us, for some of the reasons my colleague mentioned earlier on, that some people might see us as a private or secret service, or too radical a group, and, of course, being young in service, they would have their concerns about that.

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you very much indeed. Can I move on to another issue, and this is one that was raised by the Metropolitan Black Police Association, and that is in respect of legislation in Northern Ireland, if I can just wait for it to come up; it relates to this provision in Northern Ireland which actually is aiming to ensure that the workforce reflects the communities of Northern Ireland.

Please, if I am not putting the right interpretation on this, perhaps you will correct me, but it is, in all other terms, positive action, I think, a quota system, as some would say.

Is this a piece of legislation that the National Black Police Association would support in relation to introduction across the UK?

Mr Powell: We have concerns in respect of it, and these concerns would obviously have to be addressed. First of all, we have got the management of such a system; the management of a system, managing the backlash, the backlash from white colleagues, also the management of perceptions as well, and also that of the thinking of our white colleagues within the service. You know, all these will have to be managed in some way, shape or form.

So you have got to really ask the question: are we actually ready for this sort of legislation in this country, considering the demographics that we have here? When you look at places such as the States, I would suggest that the demographics are such that it does actually benefit certain states within the United States; and where you have got a black to white population of 70:30, you can see why.

But I would like to see everything else try to be exhausted first before going down this path, but also you have got the question around standards as well, the maintenance of standards within that. You know, and also if you do it for black people, are you going to do it for female staff as well? There are a lot of concerns around this. I am not saying for any minute that it is not workable, possibly it is, but it has to be very, very carefully thought out.

Like I say, you know, looking at the sort of demographics of the service, and particularly that of the Met, possibly there are some places within the Met whereby that would be of benefit, I would suggest, and it may be plausible – if you look at implementing this within any sort of police service, then the Met would be, I would suggest, the prime sort of candidate to look at. But when you look at the county forces, I can see there being some difficulties in implementing something like this there.

I think Dave actually has had dealings with Northern Ireland, with the Northern Ireland BPA, and he may have an additional perspective to put to you on that.

Sir Anthony Burden: Please.

Mr McFarlane: Yes, I was working with BPA colleagues, black colleagues in Northern Ireland. One concern for them is that with this particular practice, they have sort of been put into the Protestant section of things rather than the Catholic, so if you like, the issues for black staff have been slightly skewed in that direction.

As I said, it was mainly set up because of that particular factor, not for black stuff, but because of the religious background, so if you like, there is a slight disadvantage for black staff.

However, I did ask: if we were to implement that programme over here, do you see it as beneficial? And in their view, they said, yes, it would. But as my colleague said previously, we have to look at issues of managing it carefully, so as not to isolate, if you like, our colleagues who would have to give some way on this matter.

They are saying obviously, on the Protestant side, it is a big concern, and obviously criticise this form of programme; however, the Catholics are ambivalent, some are for it, some are not, but on the whole are positive about it. So their advice to us is if we can get such a programme implemented here, then we should go for it.

Sir Anthony Burden: In terms of the aims of the legislation, it is producing the results, as far as they are concerned?

Mr McFarlane: They did not say as far as the results, but things are getting better, and certainly if we are going to redress 175 years of affirmative action which was, if you like, the gift of all Caucasian colleagues, then we are going to have to do something drastic, I would suggest. But as my colleague says, it would have to be managed properly.

Sir Anthony Burden: Can I just deal finally with one other issue from me, and that is in relation to your comments over the Lancet Inquiry and the Taylor report, and the endorsement you have given to the Taylor report. You really do see benefits coming from that in terms of the way that high-profile cases are managed, in relation to proportionality and better monitoring of the proceedings of that Inquiry through such a process.

Mr McFarlane: Absolutely right, yes. If the monitoring is right, then we believe everything else will actually follow, in respect of outcomes, not only for the organisation but for the victim as well.

Sir Anthony Burden: Can I ask you, from a national viewpoint, whether you are getting any feedback as to whether forces are embracing the recommendations of the Taylor report?

Mr McFarlane: I cannot really answer that one, I am not quite sure.

Sir Anthony Burden: Thank you very much indeed.

Sir William Morris: The next group of questions will come from Miss Weekes, but it is our practice to afford a rest to our stenographers round about this time, they have been going just over an hour and a quarter, so I am proposing that we adjourn for five to ten minutes.

3.15 pm 
(A short break)
3.30 pm

Sir William Morris: Mr Powell, just on the point where we adjourned, I was at that moment about to ask Miss Weekes to lead the questions to you. I will do so now, Miss Weekes.

Questions by Miss Weekes

Miss Weekes: Thank you very much, good afternoon to you all. Can I go back to one of the most important elements of our terms of reference, which is essentially how the Metropolitan Police treat their own, particularly in terms of complaints, discipline or otherwise, and I would like to start with the Fairness at Work new procedure which has been introduced into the Met, and may well have been introduced internationally – I say internationally, but outside of the Met.

I wondered what is the extent of the new Fairness at Work procedure? Is it adopted elsewhere?

Mr Powell: I would say it is patchy, in respect of – nationally, in respect of how and when it has been adopted, and also, the degree at which it has been actually adopted in various forces.

How it is working is a different matter. I think it is a little bit too early to actually say yet the effectiveness of the system. It is promising; we have yet still to really assess it. I do not know whether Pat has had any dealings with it?

Ms McLeod: No, not nationally.

Miss Weekes: Just for our information, where at least have you seen it patchy, which areas, so we can at least make some enquiries, if we need to?

Mr Powell: Off the top of my head, I cannot really say, but I will get back to you on that one.

Miss Weekes: That is fair. What arises out of the ability to resolve a dispute informally is the personality of the person who is dealing with the dispute; do you agree?

Mr Powell: Yes.

Miss Weekes: A very helpful discussion was had with an officer from ACAS this morning, who very kindly outlined to the panel what he considered to be the most important characteristics of someone who is successful at resolving disputes. It includes judgment, integrity, independence, an ability to stand back from the baggage.

Line managers within the Met are often accused of just failing completely to resolve disputes, not having any ability to resolve disputes; is that mirrored nationally?

Mr Powell: Yes, I would certainly agree with that. There is an element within first and certainly second line supervisors whereby they feel they are incapable of managing the staff. You know, I have heard this fear of dealing with black staff mentioned, but I think in reality, it is poor management.

Miss Weekes: Can I ask this: some people are good operationally, and that is mirrored in every other walk of life; some people simply are no good at personnel issues, do you agree?

Mr Powell: Yes, absolutely.

Miss Weekes: Why is it then that one expects officers of a particular rank to line manage regardless of their baggage, personality and inability?

Mr Powell: Absolutely right. You know, one day, you are a police constable; the next day, you are a police sergeant, and you are supposed to be a manager. It does not work like that. People take with them, like you say, their baggage, their values, their thinking processes, and they try to deal with issues carrying those values and making assumptions about people, about people of colour, in particular, about female staff; they make assumptions based upon their own past experiences.

Now this is a problem within the police service, but it does not only stop there as well, because we get to this higher tier whereby there is an element of denial by senior officers in respect of the performance of their subordinates, because it does not affect them. You know, the behaviour of an inspector or a sergeant does not affect the superintendent. So when we go and make a complaint or a complaint is made, the assumption is, "Well, it does not really affect me, so I am going to stand by my subordinates, no matter what".

And this is a real problem within the police service, I think, this element of denial until it directly affects them personally, and then they seem to sit up within the service.

Miss Weekes: Well, I am going to come to challenging the hierarchy in a moment, because that is an aspect of your very detailed submission that you have presented, and I want to come back to that in particular. But just sticking for a moment with line management, and I do so because it affects a very large number of police staff, as well as police officers – there is a very large number of visible ethnic minorities who are police staff, but it affects white police staff as well, so this is a general question.

Some would say it is not appropriate to withdraw someone from line managing if he or she proves it abundantly clear that they cannot do it, with or without training; would you agree with that?

Mr Powell: Absolutely not.

Miss Weekes: Is it too radical a suggestion to say that an option available within the Met is that when line managers demonstrate they cannot do it, take away their role of line management; is that too radical?

Mr Powell: No, I agree. That is obviously following development protocols and areas for improvement, and if after all that, that has failed to address the issue, then rightly so. It is a fundamental ability that first and second line managers should have the ability to manage people, and if they cannot do that, then they should not be in the role that they are in.

Miss Weekes: Has that ever been suggested as a possible reform, and is it likely to be taken up? I am allowed the luxury of being radical, but I do not have to put the thing into practice.

Mr Powell: I think it is workable. I have never known of anybody being demoted or removed from a particular role purely because they cannot manage people. If within that, their lack of management, they show discriminatory behaviour, then yes, it happens very rarely, but I do know of instances whereby, as a result of their lack of management and their inability to work with people and to supervise people on a personal level, they have shown discriminatory tendencies, racist tendencies in some cases, then rightly so, they should be removed; if not, dismissed from the service.

Miss Weekes: That is a very good example which might be right to attract removal from the role, but is it not equally important that if a line manager consistently fails or refuses to promote an eligible candidate, that is just as bad as discrimination, is it not?

Mr Powell: Absolutely right, yes. But what we have, unfortunately, in the organisation is a self-perpetuating culture whereby we have managers – you have just got to look at the police in general, and it is seen as a white, heterosexual, male-dominated organisation. You know, the people who are more likely to get on are going to be white, heterosexual and male; unless you make, as an individual, a value shift, go to that place that really does not suit you; why then should you have to do that?

Is it not down to the organisation to move their goalposts to embrace other values of the multi-cultural society that we are supposed to be policing?

Miss Weekes: That was my suggestion of an option available if line management does not operate because the fault is the line manager. What are your suggestions, having looked at various areas around the country, of how one can improve, in general, the ability of line managers to deal with personnel issues? Nothing to do with operational, they may be brilliant operationally, but to deal with a dispute to stop it going to an ET.

Mr Powell: I believe at first and second line supervisors there is a reluctance to accept feedback; without accepting this feedback, because of the organisation and the way we are an autocratic organisation in many respects, there is an inbuilt reluctance for managers to openly welcome 360 degree feedback. How can they be expected to develop as individuals if they cannot accept and receive this feedback?

Now in that respect, what I am going to suggest is that why do not the first and second line supervisors – like I have seen some really good practices in some forces, whereby if they have an issue with a female member of staff, a black member of staff, and they are not sure that they are actually addressing this issue correctly, then they consult somebody, possibly somebody within the BPA, to say, "Well, am I being really unfair in dealing with this person in this particular way? You know, am I really building upon my inbuilt beliefs and assumptions about people of that particular race or sex?"

And that has proved to be – that is one example where it has proved to be really successful –

Miss Weekes: Where has it proved to be successful?

Mr Powell: Certainly within my own force, which is South Yorkshire, whereby we get first and second line supervisors possibly ringing myself up or other members of the BPA and saying, "Look, I have got this black colleague of yours on my shift, I do not feel like he is performing or she is performing particularly well, would you like to have a look at this, just to see that I am not going down the wrong path?"

But the person consulting has got to be of the right sort of calibre as well, obviously, to ensure that it is not just a person who is going to rubber stamp the issues concerned, but genuinely has to be open, has to be honest, and have integrity when it comes to dealing with that.

That is one way possibly of steering first and second line supervisors, and saying, "Look, you can be confident in dealing with a person in this way", or, "No, you are going down the wrong path there, because what is your thinking process behind dealing with that particular sort of person?" But that is just one possible example.

More black supervisors would also help as well within the police service, you know, more black Federation reps; all these issues would actually help in sort of facilitating the management of people at that level, first and second line level, within the organisation, and of course –

Miss Weekes: That, of course, anticipates that the black supervisors themselves will be good at people management.

Mr Powell: Absolutely.

Miss Weekes: So just having more black supervisors may not solve the problem, if they are equally as bad as the white counterparts.

Mr Powell: Absolutely, yes, I agree with that.

Miss Weekes: But in any event, I take on board the goodwill behind your suggestion of more black supervisors; how? How are we going to get more black supervisors?

Mr Powell: That is a question that has been echoing throughout the police service for an awful long time. Again, I believe there are people who have got qualities within the police service to be better than what they are. There is an inherent resistance, cultural resistance by managers, and like I mentioned previously, if you do not speak like them, if you do not look like them or play in the same golf club as them, then you are not going to get on within this particular service. That has to be worked upon, and that has to be changed in some way, shape or form.

You know, we are looking at getting, for example, an independent member on promotion boards to look at the high potential development scheme, for example. I think there are two or three, if that – and I am sure David can actually articulate that a little bit more than what I can – in respect of assessors upon that particular board.

So there are some serious issues, cultural issues, I would suggest, in respect of how the police service manages both recruitment, promotion and retention issues within the service.

Miss Weekes: Well, let us deal with – moving away from Fairness at Work, perhaps, and deal with promotion. It certainly has been identified by the female member of your panel today, and it is generally a trend in employment law cases that has been identified in terms of race cases, and indeed gender; unfair decisions on promotion.

What are your suggestions to us in terms of how we might assist by way of recommendations to improve the ability of the Met to seek out and find those, on merit, who should be promoted? Because you cannot necessarily always wait for a very junior rank to put themselves forward. I mean, I shall come to self-help in a moment, but what at the moment is being done, and what have you done in your organisation, to improve the promotion aspects for officers and staff?

Mr Powell: Within the NBPA, we sit on a large number of panels, boards and forums, and this is an issue that is absolutely dear to our hearts. Like I say, we, for example, on the high potential development scheme, we are looking at that right now. On the last intake, we had three or four members, I believe, go through this particular scheme, and I think all of them, bar from one, failed at stage three; I will just check that. Yes, all of them, bar one, failed at stage three, and we are now asking why. We are demanding to know, you know, why is this happening?

In fact, on this one, I will let David come in.

Miss Weekes: Absolutely, thank you.

Mr McFarlane: I was given the opportunity recently to see some documents regarding the high potential development scheme, as well as it has been observed by one of my colleagues from the Metropolitan Police BPA, Gareth Reid, who was here last week, and what we have discovered is there are three stages to this particular scheme; parts one and two are mainly a paper exercise, and part three is where the practical issues – where the actual assessors meet with the candidates. And we noticed that at part three, that is where they failed, as mentioned earlier by my colleague.

We then looked at who was actually doing the assessing, and we noticed that in a majority of the cases, if not all, it is normally led by a white male, rather than any person of colour, whether male or female, and to me that suggests a situation that needs to be addressed.

What we have done so far as an association is to recommend to the HPD scheme members of the public who we think will be very good assessors. We have also recommended senior black members of staff within the police service to do so. But the unfortunate situation we have – we do not have many ACPO rank black staff, so there are very few to choose from, and the ones who we have asked, who kindly volunteered, I understand have now been trained, and hopefully will get through the system.

Having spoken with the staff who have failed themselves, we have had very angry telephone calls and correspondences, because they have worked very hard to get on to this scheme, and think they have done pretty well to get through, but, of course, when they face a panel which is totally no reflection of themselves, and trying to explain some of the things that they have done to help for leadership which could not be understood, if you like, by the panel, then that seemed to create another problem in itself.

So there are some matters in that respect that we need to address and to look at.

Mr Powell: I will just come back on that as well: as an association, we instigated what is called the personal leadership programme for the development of black staff nationally as well. This is a programme about empowerment, recognising that there are issues in respect of a glass ceiling/sticky floor within the association; you know, we decided to go out and look at a programme that will help our people realise their own potential and get through – you know, help them through these particular issues, which is proving to be reasonably successful. They are empowered and they are making moves, if not hierarchically, then certainly laterally as well within the organisation.

Miss Weekes: Just one final point on the important matters you flagged up on the high potential development scheme and the assessment and type of forms. I know that Superintendent Ali Dizaei did some work on analysing forms and the way assessments are carried out for various ranks.

Across the board, are you content and happy that the sorts of assessments and performance criteria that are adopted by the Met are fair in diversity terms across the board, ie that they are not acting disproportionately against women and/or visible ethnic minorities?

Mr Powell: I cannot really speak for the Met, but I am assuming that they are going to be similar elsewhere in the country. I think as a service, we need to review that particular criteria. Certainly looking at the national recruitment centres, for example, and I know people who actually sit on these panels, and they ask questions in a particular way; the same question to everybody who walks through that door. How fair is this – you know, they are assuming a level of understanding here about people walking through that door, which is not necessarily correct.

As a result of that, I have known people who have struggled, who have had to – who have asked for people to rephrase the questions, and they have not been rephrased in a way that caters for their understanding or level of the English language.

So therefore, these people fail instantly, when in reality, they could make very, very good police officers or police staff, so this is a national issue, and this is of national concern, but it does not only stop at national recruitment centres. I would suggest that this is sort of endemic throughout most of the police service.

Miss Weekes: How important a criteria is the English language in policing? Most people, no doubt, can make themselves understood in an operational arrest type situation, but I have not myself studied the forms as yet; how important is it?

Mr Powell: I do not think it is critically important. Again, it is part of development. I have known people who have been born in this particular country who have not got a great command of the English language. You know, it is about communication, it is about effective communication. If you can communicate effectively, I think the use of the language can be acceptable.

I have known instances and cases where our colleagues have received bad appraisals, poor appraisals, because they speak with an accent, believe it or not. You know, that does happen, "Sorry, this person cannot communicate well, purely because he speaks with an accent".

Miss Weekes: Well, I am sure you would have challenged that sort of decision. Have you challenged it, and what is the result?

Mr Powell: Yes, I would challenge that, but when you look at the people that it is aimed at, possibly probationers, who want to get on within the police service, who feel that if they were to challenge everything that the supervisors were to say, then, you know, what is going to be the likelihood of them succeeding to get through their probation? So there is an added pressure.

What a lot of our people do is to basically accept that and live with it, just for a quiet life, just to get on. But the point I am making to the board is the fact that that sort of thing does actually happen within the police service, but it also goes undetected, and often, when that sort of issue does arise, people fight back. We have had colleagues that fight back. They try everything, everything possible to try to resolve these issues at first and second line supervisory level.

They may go years – I know of cases where people have gone four or five years challenging issues, they have had apologies, they have had everything, and it is not until it gets to breaking point that they actually decide that they are going to run an ET.

We have had people crying on the phone, people phone up in tears, wanting to commit suicide, we had a phone call today from somebody saying that they are actually going to commit suicide. They are outside the police station now, they are going to cut their wrists. There are issues out there that really do need addressing.

Miss Weekes: Someone, I am not sure which of you, mentioned sanctions; there is a degree of feeling, we gather, that certain actions go unchallenged, go unsorted. Sanctions often carry with it a confrontational aspect and not resolution. When you say "sanctions", what do you mean, and for what type of conduct would you recommend sanctions?

Mr Powell: I think "sanctions" is a word that I see as being inclusive of a resolution to some respects. However, I agree with the point, you can have a resolution without sanctions, but what we have to look at is how impactive is that resolution going to be if there are not sanctions in place for wrongdoings?

When I mentioned sanctions, you know, I mean visible sanctions; all too often within the police service, as has happened within certain high-profile cases, where people have been responsible for the overt persistent investigation of black staff to a degree that it has actually ground them to a halt, relentlessly, and there has been no sanctions; on the contrary, the majority of the examples that I can quote, people have actually been promoted, people have actually gone on to better things.

What message does this send out to the poor victim who is still suspended, and still has a pending employment tribunal there? What message does this send out, when you see people rising through the ranks who have actually started or initiated these proceedings, and made life hell?

Miss Weekes: We know that in your submissions you mentioned quite extensively Operation Helios, which we are not dealing with today, but I just wonder nationally round the country – we are rather clouded living in London, we know only of our high-profile cases, but what is the extent of that kind of behaviour nationally?

Mr Powell: I would suggest very extensive, more so – you are more likely to see that sort of behaviour in your county forces, because of the fact that there is a lack of support, lack of visible minority ethnic people, so we see this on a regular basis, we have phone calls into the office on a regular basis describing this. I can quote you cases from quite a few of the forces in the country. But in line with that, there is also a resistance, a reluctance, and I can quote to you a letter I received today, to actually try to get these issues resolved.

You know, we put our hand out to say: look, we realise that this is happening, we disagree with it, you know, but however, having said that, we would like to try to actually resolve this issue between ourselves, look at the learning that can come from this, and try to come to a resolution before it goes to ET.

The letter I got back today from a particular force was, "I am sorry, I have taken legal advice and this is going to a full ET and I am not prepared to discuss this case with you". You know, it begs the question: well, why? Why is this happening? I know for a fact that this particular person had had no involvement at all with the issues. It just gets very, very frustrating for our people.

So when Helios raised its head, just for its profile, this echoed around the country. People realised, "Wow, it is not just happening to me, but it is happening in London, and this is a high-profile case", and that is why people actually got behind Superintendent Ali Dizaei, because they were also feeling the pain of being persistently hounded, persistently investigated, having their time cards pulled as soon as they lodge an employment tribunal, having – you know, being followed in some instances. The list actually goes on, it really does.

Miss Weekes: But I think as my colleague Sir Anthony said, you have agreed that the Taylor Review and recommendations should go some way to remedy some of those wrongs.

Mr Powell: It should, but I am not holding my breath, for want of a better phrase.

Miss Weekes: This leads me conveniently to challenging the hierarchy: what is clear to me, and undoubtedly to my colleagues on the panel, is that when you complain or when you constructively present criticism, you might be marked, and you may be sidelined, whether it be promotion or otherwise; is that a trend nationally?

Mr Powell: Yes, absolutely. Certainly if you declare yourself to be a member of the BPA, very similar to the issues that Pat actually outlined earlier, as soon as you raise your head above that parapet, then you are a target. You are looked upon differently, you are treated differently. You know, people make assumptions about you. And in reality, what we want is to develop and build the organisation.

So there is an element of misperceptions and communication here, but the organisation is reluctant to sort of facilitate – it is usually down to the individuals to actually work on that themselves, but by the time they actually get round to working on it, it is usually too late, and promotion has gone by the board.

Miss Weekes: In legal terms, of course, that is a subtle form of victimisation.

Mr Powell: Absolutely.

Miss Weekes: Can I ask you this: what are the practical ways forward for allowing those who wish to raise complaints that they can continue to do so? Because one cannot have such a large public organisation who is accountable to the public with very many unhappy people within it who are not allowed an outlet to speak; so what is the way forward about allowing people to speak without fear of reprisals or a negative approach?

Mr Powell: I feel it is about, again, valuing people, valuing their contributions, being proactive at all levels, at all ranks, in promoting race and diversity issues. It is more than just being there, it is actually being seen to be doing something, and this goes through all the ranks. It is encouraging an environment that sends the message out, "Look, we are inclusive, and we value this person and their contribution".

Right now, this does not happen everywhere. There are still forces around the country that do not have – where the black police associations do not have a voice, do not have a say. It may be one person that they pluck to rubber stamp certain issues, but it is not genuine consultation.

If that can be seen to be done, if that can be seen to be done right up to the level of Chief Constable, and the staff are aware of this, then possibly, it may give people the confidence to come forward. But it is not only about the confidence of black staff, it is about the confidence of everybody to come forward and to develop the organisation so that it can be a fair and equitable one.

Miss Weekes: I just have three other smallish points. The hierarchy: it is clear to anyone within about a week of reading this material that rank is extremely important within the Met, and whilst it is clearly helpful and important for operational reasons, it has its disadvantages in terms of personnel and HR issues.

Mr Powell: Yes.

Miss Weekes: I would like your help on how one can break down the ranks when it comes to dealing with personnel issues that affect everybody, including the superintendent ranks.

Mr Powell: That is very difficult. I think the perception that rank is important, and in some circumstances it is, can only be excluded if the person concerned acknowledges that, and behaves accordingly. You know, we can all sit round the table and take our epaulettes off, but the subsequent behaviour, if that is consistent with rank, then what is the point? So it is down to behaviour, and also education; how do they behave? It is down to them taking responsibility as well, and I do not mean taking blame, it is down to how they actually respond accordingly. That does not happen right now.

Miss Weekes: Some may say that your organisation, who are clearly taking a number of initiatives to help yourselves, could do with a little help from the senior ranks. Do you have good people in the senior ranks that you can turn to?

Mr Powell: We have some very good people in the senior ranks, yes, without a doubt.

Miss Weekes: Do you have visible ethnic minorities in these senior ranks that you can turn to?

Mr Powell: Yes.

Miss Weekes: Are they sufficient in number to deal with those in the senior ranks who clearly do not assist your programme?

Mr Powell: Simply, I would suggest, no.

Miss Weekes: Is that the root of the problem?

Mr Powell: That may be the root of the problem, in the sense that we have people – we have some very, very good people at senior ranks that we can turn to and call upon. Do not get me wrong, we also have people whom – and I am talking in the wider perspective here, not only police officers but police staff as well, who are high up the ranks, who, for want of a better phrase, pull the ladder up as well, and are reluctant to be involved for fear of being tarnished with the NBPA, because the focus may be on progression, and we acknowledge that.

However, we do have some very, very good people out there, but when you look at the people at the ACPO rank, for example, we have got a handful – well, not even a handful of officers there. You know, how effective and how impactive are these people going to be in changing the assumptions and views of people of that sort of rank? I do not know whether David wants to come in on this.

Miss Weekes: I will just ask this question, as it is in my head: does the Commissioner know and understand that whilst he drives forward a very high-profile diversity programme, people shy away from ringing up the Black Police Association because it might taint their chances of promotion? Does the Commissioner know about that dilemma, and what has been done about it?

Mr McFarlane: I certainly cannot speak on behalf of the Commissioner, I would not attempt to. But sort of linking your previous question with this one, it is not unusual for senior black staff, as I said, not to get in touch or not to work with us overtly on some of the issues that we are addressing; as was said before, in case of fear.

It is almost that they are given an option, "Either you want to be black or you want to get promoted". I do not think that is fair, and I do not think it is right, and this is something that needs to be addressed.

The other situation in terms of talking about the diversity programmes, a lot of some of these programmes that have been developed by forces have not, if you like, had the tacit agreement of some of the associations. It is like a group gone out there and seek consultation and developed it, and staff do not recognise what they are saying.

Many times, we are saying, if you want to have success in terms of diversity, you have to speak to the people who it affects. We are the ones who are talking about the changes that we want. If you are not prepared to listen to us but you develop your own programme, do not expect that we are going to go along with it; so that is where difficulties are.

But certainly I feel that if people are not given the option of whether you want to remain black, or a person of colour, or get promoted, I think we would have a lot more people going through the ranks and be very proud of being associated with their colleagues. Thank you.

Miss Weekes: We know again from a number of the high-profile cases, and this goes back to how the Met treats its own, that the press and press reporting can be even more damaging than the actual allegations or complaints themselves; Virdi is an example of that, how he was treated in relation to the press, and there are a number of others.

Has that now improved nationally? Is there a proper protocol in place to protect any officer, black or white, who may have a complaint or allegation against them?

Mr Powell: My experience suggests not, that still is not in place, you know, the press will seek to use the best line possible in order to get the papers sold.

Miss Weekes: Of course, they are allowed to do that, are they not?

Mr Powell: Absolutely.

Miss Weekes: But who feeds them the information?

Mr Powell: I am just coming to that very question, but you also need to look at who feeds them this information; as in the Ali Dizaei issue, it was quite clear that that information was released from a number of departments within the Metropolitan Police Service to the press, you know, the same day that he was served papers, before he even knew about this, there were press people outside his home address; how did they get that particular information?

So I think we must examine the relationship between the police service, their individual press departments, and also the media as well, in order to – because what they try to do is to maximise the impact, and also justify their actions against black staff, by pre-empting and pre-warning the media, so as to have the upper hand.

Miss Weekes: But how much, as it were, effect would an organisation like yours have with press departments of forces? Because that is really what we are concerned about. One cannot control broadsheets and newspapers.

Mr Powell: No, that is right, you have to look at where the control is. The bottom line is that the organisation has control of their own press departments. If they are intent on doing something, then they will do it.

Miss Weekes: One final question from me: if there was one burning recommendation or consideration that you would like us to bear in mind when dealing with line managers and personnel issues, and dealing with all sorts of people, what would it be?

Mr Powell: I would like to see more involvement from a local BPA level in decisions involving staff, when appropriate and if appropriate, and by the right people, so that we can get a measure of the sort of balance there, the proportionality involved, and identify that before it gets out of hand.

Miss Weekes: Thank you very much.

Sir William Morris: Thank you. Mr Powell, that brings us to the end of the questions which my colleagues and I wanted to put to you. But before I move to my closing words, I think I just wanted to emphasise again a point I made earlier about the importance of an evidence-based approach, because that is the basis, and the only basis, on which this panel can operate. So the more hard, firm, clear evidence you are able to offer us, the easier you make our task.

You will recall I made some reference to issues around employment tribunals, the concept of the directorate of professional standards and the CPA, when it existed, in relation to proportionality of treatment, because the picture that you were offering was that it is a national picture, which more or less mirrors the Met.

I take no issue there; we are very neutral on the point until we can see some very hard and clear evidence. We have also just heard that black staff have a choice, "Be black or be promoted"; again, I do not make a comment, or take an issue, except that we need to see some evidence. The perception might even be greater than the reality, but in the end, it is the reality that gets measured and not the perception.

That said, let me thank you and your colleagues very much indeed for offering us the contribution that you have this afternoon. We have finished the questions that we wanted to ask you, but you will recall that in my opening statement, I said that at the end of our questions, we would offer you the opportunity to make a closing statement, a short one, if you wanted to take advantage of that. If you do, now is your time.

Mr Powell: I would just like to say that to get to this stage has taken a lot of pain from a lot of people. A lot of people have suffered in order to get to this stage within the hearings; myself, certainly Ali Dizaei, and others as well, and it has taken a lot of time. We really do want to see this process work, and we will assist in any way, shape or form in order to sort of advise you, if necessary, in the future, in respect of any recommendations that you may deem fit to actually publish.

So, you know, we do want to make a difference, and we want to have an impact, a shared destiny, and also a common purpose and a common sense of mission.

Just for the record, our aim as an association is not to defeat or humiliate the police service, but to win its friendship and understanding. We want to see a service and a community at peace with themselves, and a society that can live with its conscience, in essence. So it is about fairness and about integrity; no matter what colour you are, it is about doing the right thing. Thank you.

Sir William Morris: Thank you very much. Let me offer you my final formal words, and that is to say that as with all our witnesses, it may be that when we have heard from others, we may well want to ask you some more questions, either in writing, or ask you to come back to a similar type of oral hearing such as we have experienced this afternoon.

If we do decide to do so, then naturally we will want to do it in a way which affords the least possible degree of inconvenience to you, your colleagues and your organisation.

That said, all that I wish to do on behalf of my colleagues and myself is to thank you for your response this afternoon, thank you for your written submissions, and thank you for the overall contribution that you and your organisation is making to our Inquiry. Thank you all very much.

Mr Powell: Thank you very much.

Sir William Morris: We will adjourn for about five minutes or so.

4.20 pm
(A short break)
4.25 pm

On this website:

• Evidence:  BPA
  Evidence provided by and documents referred to by Mr R Powell, Mr D McFarlane and Ms P McLeod of the National Black Police Association in their appearance at the Inquiry.
• Transcript: National Black Police Association (9 June 2004)
  The full transcript of the second public session with Mr R Powell of the National Black Police Association, held at 3.30pm on 9 June 2004.