Conference / Speeches

Civil Nuclear Police Federation Conference 2007.

Chief Constable (Director of Policing), guests and delegates, welcome to conference - a particular welcome to Mr. Melvin Smith chairman of the Civil Nuclear Police Authority.

For more years than I care to remember I have addressed conference and during the course of those addresses I have welcomed five Chief Constables, and I had hoped that I would be welcoming Mr. Smith as the sixth. This was however not to be, and I can honestly say that this federation was bitterly disappointed by the decision to appoint a non police person to the post. We sincerely hope that that you sir, Mr. Coupland and Mr. Driver will remain with the CNC as we feel it would be a great loss if you were to go.

The decision to advertise for a director of policing was taken so we were informed as a consequence of not being allowed for legal reasons to advertise for a Chief Constable this seems somewhat strange as chapter 3 of the Energy Act states "The Police Authority must appoint a Chief Constable of the constabulary and a Deputy Chief Constable of the constabulary" there is no mention in the act of a Director of Policing. Further more the Police Act 1996 states that No person shall be appointed as chief constable of a police force unless for a period of not less than two year he holds or has held the rank of assistant chief constable or commander in the metropolitan police or City of London police or above.

However this federation was assured that because of the criteria laid down the position would almost certainly be filled by a police officer. In his letter to Police Review Fraser Sampson the executive director of the PA states that "the decision to appoint a new chief constable has attracted a lot of interest from the wider policing world, why because the authority has appointed someone who has not previously served as a police officer and is the first UK police authority to do so. SO WHAT.

It's that so what that bothers this federation and our colleagues in the Superintendents association, what is it saying to young officers with ambition aspiring to become chief constable, is not in this force! and while we continue not to have any form of reciprocal agreement not in any police force either.

All that being said we are a professional organisation and we will continue to work with the new chief and give our support to him and the rest of the ACPO team.

They will need that support as the coming year is again not going to be an easy one, Black Friday as 26 January 2007 has come to be known by officers at Springfields and Capenhurst dealt another blow to the CNC. The announcement by OCNS that these two establishments no longer required armed policing came out of the blue, and once again it appears that no consultation was taken around this decision. This Federation is given to believe that OCNS did not consult with the Chief Constable, the Chairman of the PA, the Operators concerned, the county police in whose areas these plants are located, the local MPs and is probably to be expected this Federation.

We feel that the latter is direct conflict with the provisions of the Energy Act.

Schedule 13 paragraph 3 states that the Secretary of State must consult the Federation if a direction is given which is the subject of regulation under section 50 of the 1996 Police act. Section 50 Para 2e makes reference to the conduct efficiency and effectiveness of members of police forces and the maintenance of discipline.

Section 50 Para 2h makes reference to the duties which are or are not to be performed by members of police forces. It is our contention that the decision to withdraw firearms from these two units affects the efficiency and effectiveness of our members and that the decision also changes the duties that are or are not to be performed.

The Energy Act further states in Chapter 3 section 52 (3)

The police authority may allocate to the constabulary the function of carrying on such other activities relating to or connected with the security of :

1. nuclear material
2. sites where such material is being, has been or is to used, processed or stored as the police authority thinks fit.

We have to ask who is running this organisation certainly the director of OCNS is having a large say. The complete lack of consultation begs the question does he wish to emulate the Prime Minister and appear on the Catherine Tate show because he could say with some conviction "I am not bovvered".

Surely these establishment remain a target for terrorism regardless of the type of holdings.

The UK has faced a variety of terrorist threats in the past. The unique combination of factors such as global reach, capacity, resilience, sophistication, ambition and lack of restraint of Al Qaida and other associated groups places the current threat on a scale not previously encountered. Speaking in August DAC Peter Clarke described the threat to the UK from Al Qaida related terrorism as 'real, here, deadly and enduring'.

In November 2006 the Home Secretary said the threat from Al Qaida will be 'enduring - the struggle will be long and wide and deep'.

As CNC Officers we are charged with protection of nuclear sites, and as police officers we are also charged with protecting the public it is the view of this federation that the two go together and by policing Capenhurst and Springfields we are doing just that.

This Federation also finds it difficult to come to terms with the idea that replacing police officers with security guards or police support officers is a better option.

Whilst this may look a cheaper option to the people paying the bill, will it work out to be cost effective? Certainly if any of us walk down any street in any town or city community support officers always appear in groups, why should it by any different on a nuclear site the idea of replacing with a police officers with two guards does not seem to be a cheaper option to me.

Further more what powers are these people going to have, are they going to have a power of detention if so who is turning up to make the arrest, if they are not to have any powers then how are they going to stop anyone gaining entry to these sites.

We already have the have and have nots in this force let us not go down the road of total two tier policing, we must always keep a option to have a capability to employ non AFOs, because if we don't what are going to do with who are over 55 and for a variety of reasons can no longer carry firearms.

Unless of course the Chairman of the Police Authority is considering bringing the retirement age down to 55 and enhancing pensions accordingly.

There is talk of CNC expanding its role to provide protection to the national infrastructure, indeed our colleagues from the Ministry of Defence are currently engaged on such policing roles.

If CNC is to be the preferred option then we see this as a natural progression for the TRG, surely it is not beyond the scope of government to introduce whatever changes in legislation are necessary and utilise the experience and expertise that these officers have already gained. Indeed if we are talking about value for money, why waste all that training and equipment costs when there is a tailor made role waiting to be filled.

Not only are we faced all of that, but this Federation noted with regret and disappointment that once again the Government are currently reviewing police pay. After almost 30 years of tried and tested pay arrangements the ongoing review headed by Sir Clive Booth is to consider the options for replacing the current system based on the Edmund-Davies report, and although this force was not included in the original report the subsequent Wright report which mirrored Edmund-Davies but was geared towards Non Home Department forces granted this force similar benefits regarding pay increases.

Obliviously government have wanted the process changed for some years. In 1992 Sir Patrick Sheehy was given the task of reviewing the pay arrangements, and it was only after pressure applied by the strong united front showed by all Federations including this one that forced the government to shelve those proposals.

The Federations anger towards the government is further fuelled by the lack of consultation on the terms of reference of this new review of Police Officer pay determination and of Police Negotiating machinery.

Over the past years the police service has embraced change more than any other public service, new and numerous changes to criminal law, advances in technology increased public and governmental scrutiny.

Whilst we in the CNC are not part of the negotiating machinery of police pay, we know that any national arrangements will be carried over to our officers, and if we lose our current fair and tested arrangements and have imposed on us an unfair pay arrangement then the consequences will have far reaching effects and that federation ranks will be questioning the obligation not to take industrial action. I am sure that no one in this room wants to go down that particular road.

Finally I would again raise the issue of pay parity, as I said last year the times are a changing and this force's role has changed accordingly. The world is a very difference place from the 1970's when the Wright report was published. An extract from the reports findings says "The duties carried out by officers of the Atomic Energy police are mainly static duties checking passes and searching people and vehicles, and patrols within the confines of the premises. Problems of public order rarely occur and anti nuclear demonstrations have generally been peaceful.

The sensitivity of certain materials does however place an added responsibility on the force. There can be no doubt of the grave damage to national and international security which could be done if materials of a certain nature fell into the wrong hands this danger is taken seriously. We therefore accept that the Atomic Energy police has additional responsibilities in protecting the interests of national security and this is an important consideration in establishing their pay relativity with the Home departments forces". As I said that was in 1979 the duties of our officers have changed considerably since, the majority of patrolling is now carried off site, CNC officers routinely carry out duties armed, and as we have all seen demonstrations whether anti nuclear or other are rarely peaceful. The threat to national security has without a doubt increased, today's terrorists have no scruples and a hit against a nuclear establishment would be seen by them as a great victory.

We would therefore again urge you Mr. Smith as chairman of the Police Authority to pursue with vigour a full parity agreement for members of the Civil Nuclear Constabulary.

Notes: Melvin Smith Chair of the Civil Nuclear Police Authority unable to attend, he was represented by Mr. Fraser Sampson Executive Director Civil Nuclear Police Authority.

Conference condolences were passed on to the family of PC Don Brown who died in service and to the family of ex C/Supt Montgomery who recently passed away.