Suffolk Police Federation chair Darren Harris has criticised proposals to change regulations covering police conduct and dismissal, describing them as “political point scoring”. 

Darren said the reforms proposed by Labour MP Harriet Harman and London Mayor Sadiq Khan would diminish officers’ rights. 

He said: “Our members will be angry at these suggested reforms and we’ll fight against them. 

“We know policing is under the microscope and we’ve work to do to restore full confidence but these proposals are political point-scoring. 

“Officers don’t have the same employment rights as other public servants and these proposals diminish them still further. 

“Police forces already have powers and processes to deal with the issues raised in these proposals, but these reforms fail to recognise them. 

“And if these new rules are good enough for policing, shouldn’t they be applied to all public service roles, including our political leaders?” 

Darren’s comments came after Ms Harman and Mr Khan drafted a Bill for police performance and discipline. 

Proposals in the Police Reform (Performance and Disciplinary) Bill introduce reforms to:   

• Automatically dismiss a serving officer convicted of a serious criminal offence  
• Automatically suspend an officer charged with a serious criminal offence 
• Automatically dismiss a serving officer who fails vetting
• Give chief constables the power to reopen misconduct investigations 
• Provide that Regulation 13 should be used to dismiss an officer while in their probation period (including for misconduct)
• Introduce a Duty of Candour, which would require an officer to proactively report any wrongdoing by themselves or others 
• Provide chief constables the right of appeal to a police appeals tribunal following a misconduct hearing when the sanction is inadequate  
• Reduce the performance process to a two-stage process, from the current three stage 
• Strengthen the pension forfeiture rules so that a criminal offence does not have to be committed ‘in connection’ with their service in order for an officer to lose their pension   
• Create a ‘duty to handover’ to obtain relevant information from an officer’s personal phone during a misconduct investigation.

She added: “The Bill stands ready to be made into law, to give police chiefs in England and Wales the powers they need and have explicitly asked for, so that they can start to build public trust in the police.” 

The Police Federation for England and Wales expressed its dismay at the intervention and said it was “actively engaging” in the ongoing Home Office review into the process of police officer dismissals, which is examining various aspects of the decision-making. 

In February, it submitted detailed evidence to the review to ensure it “reflects the correct state of affairs” and suggests “robust reforms”. 

It warned that cultural reform and service-wide change must not be brought in by giving sweeping, uncontrolled powers which would allow police chiefs to dismiss officers without following due legal process. 

It accepted the need for change in police recruitment, vetting, training, standards and leadership but insisted any reform must be fair, considered and backed by proper evidence rather than conjecture. 

The Police Federation has also been demanding a Royal Commission on policing to evaluate and define the role, purpose and responsibility of the police by engaging members of the public.