‘IOPC shrouded in secrecy’
28 January 2021
The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) is shrouded in secrecy, with its staff lacking the right depth and breadth of knowledge, failing to get the right training and being ‘absolutely unaccountable’, the Federation’s national conduct and performance chair has told MPs.
Phill Matthews made the comments when he addressed a Home Affairs Select Committee inquiry into the role and remit of the IOPC yesterday.
Criticising the long delays in investigations into officers’ conduct and outlining the damage that caused to officers, their families, colleagues and the complainants themselves, Phill repeated the Federation’s calls for a 12-month cap on police disciplinary inquiries and said there should be sanctions for the IOPC when it failed to meet these deadlines.
“A delay doesn’t serve complainants or our members at all,” he said.
Phill continued: “There must be some form of teeth because at the moment there is absolutely no incentive for the IOPC, or appropriate authority, to deal with things promptly and properly because they don’t need to. If there was an incentive, like there is for police when you must get a case in front of a hearing within a set period, you would invest the time and money to do that.”
But he said funding was not the issue since the IOPC has a budget of £72 million and 1,000 staff and that it was how the watchdog was using that funding causing the problems.
The IOPC, he explained, has failed on numerous occasions to explain why a case is over-running, but he highlighted poor disclosure as a contributing factor.
Phill explained that a case ended up dragging on for seven years because the IOPC failed to disclose an expert statement, corroborating the officer’s account, at the beginning of the case.
He was critical of some of the staff at the IOPC.
“We don’t think they have the right depth and breadth of knowledge; we don’t think they have the right training and they are absolutely unaccountable,” he explained, “You cannot get disclosure from the IOPC and I don’t think they understand it properly.”
Phill said he would have more confidence in retired officers, who work well in forces’ professional standards departments, taking on roles in the IOPC.
“There are some very good people who work for the IOPC, but there are others where we see a staggering lack of knowledge,” he added, “We just want the best possible investigators with the best possible training and knowledge to investigate members because that is best for members and the police service.”
George McDonnell, West Midlands Police Federation’s conduct and performance lead, has backed Phill’s comments.
‘’I wholeheartedly support our national lead in his efforts to try to redress some of the imbalance that historically has seen what was then the IPCC sit at opposite ends of a table with the Federation as the impact of its lengthy, often poorly thought-out investigations had a devastating impact on our colleagues and their families. Factor in the standard of service given to those members of the public who felt aggrieved at their dealings with the police and it was obvious something had to change,” says George.
“On a local level, we believe, as a Federation, we are making positive changes in our relationship with the IOPC in that it is being more accountable, more open and transparent, more professional and there is noticeably better staff retention. Our hope is this will lead to better investigators with better training that will culminate in better investigation, however, it cannot be understated, this is a work in progress.”
Phill’s comments were also echoed by Victor Marshall OBE, professional standards co-ordinator, who gave evidence on behalf of the Police Superintendents' Association and said: “The ‘justice delayed, justice denied’ exists across the whole system because we feel for everybody when these things drag on. Obviously, it has an impact on officers, their families, and careers – but absolutely it has an impact on complainants and answers need to be given. The longer these things go on the worse the situation becomes.”
Phill acknowledged the IOPC, which replaced the IPCC in 2018, had made improvements and there was a better understanding between the watchdog and the Federation.
“It’s a step in the right direction and its director general, Michael Lockwood, has done a great deal to build trust with the Federation and is trying to reform his organisation but it’s the speed of change we are not content with,” he added.
To safeguard genuinely delayed cases, the Federation is recommending a Legally Qualified Chair should then be appointed and should have the power to terminate or conduct robust case management to bring cases to swift conclusions, safeguarding both the complainant and an officer's position.
It also wants to see greater transparency at the IOPC with Phill suggesting that it should be audited in the same way as forces are.
Phill praised rank and file colleagues for the challenging and risky work they do: “They are dealing with some of the most chaotic and dangerous individuals in society - and they are put in confrontational situations with those individuals. It is inevitable that there will be complaints made against officers, but just because there is complaint doesn’t mean an officer has done something wrong.”
After the session he said: “We appreciate being given the opportunity to provide evidence to the committee and hope this will in turn make a tangible difference and establish a fairer system for all. The Federation will continue to lobby Parliament on these issues.”
