Conference / Speeches

CIVIL NUCLEAR POLICE FEDERATION

ANNUAL CONFERENCE (7th and 8th September in Liverpool)

ADDRESS TO MEMBERS BY PETER STOREY CHAIRMAN OF THE FEDERATION

Baroness Smith, Chief Constable, guests and delegates welcome to conference.

We meet at a time when policing has been in turmoil. The riots in August were not confined to London but were also copycatted in such major cities as Birmingham, Manchester, and Leicester. The shock to society of seeing millions of pounds of wanton destruction to property and the theft of goods by rioters and opportunists was compounded by the murders of four decent people trying to protect their own livelihood or that of their communities.

The police chiefs, the social commentators and the politicians can argue the bit out as to who was at fault but I think it is safer to conclude that all parties were to blame in some measure as to the deeply seated and complex causes of the violence and as to how quickly and effectively the police service reacted. The important lesson that we should all learn is: never waste a good crisis. We need to improve how we police the community and we need to ensure we are maximising community consent if we are to be effective in the job that we do and respected for it.

The Civil Nuclear Constabulary is an integral part of the wider police family. We derive our culture from the overall ethos of British policing and, perhaps more importantly, our pay and terms and conditions of service from the agreements arrived at by the Police Negotiating Board. As bystanders to PNB we can only cheer on the best efforts of our vicarious representatives from the Home Department Federations. They have shown their determination to maintain the police service as an excellent and rewarding career attracting the best possible standards of recruit. The big picture for policing as a career is not looking good for recruits or serving officers. And this Federation is facing its own local difficulties which will be set out today.

But first I want to refer to the chairman of the Civil Nuclear Police Authority, Sir Philip Trousdell. Sir Philip took over the chair only in May when Sir Chris Fox unexpectedly resigned for reasons of commitments on his time. His resignation was regrettable from the Federation's perspective. He had been with us for just two years and we were developing a good working relationship.

You will be aware that Sir Philip joined us as interim chairman of the Authority. There is a possibility that his position might become more permanent and if so, he would certainly enjoy the support of this Federation. He has been clearly focussed on the organisational needs of the CNC and has fully engaged with the general secretary.

Perhaps uniquely in the present policing climate, the future of the Civil Nuclear Constabulary as a police service is bright. Over the past few years we have grown to a force of around 1,000 warranted officers and civilian support staff. We would expect, on present plans, to grow at least half as much again over the coming years.

The engine of growth is of course the recognition being given by the Government to the role that the nuclear industry should play in meeting the energy requirements of the United Kingdom. The Government has shown its commitment in the changes Parliament has recently made to speed the planning process and with the creation of new financial support for nuclear generators.

Although the first two nuclear stations are not scheduled to be built until 2018 in Somerset and by 2020 in Suffolk such is the lead time the CNC has already been gearing up operationally, with training and recruitment.

Evidence that the future of the CNC is relatively assured comes not only in recruitment prospects but the success of the Authority and the Chief Constable in delivering a significant budget increase of 27 per cent which is almost four times the increase of last year. The Chief Constable deserves our congratulations in securing such a major improvement in the budget. Apart from the understandable wobble caused by the tragic events at the Fukushima power station in Japan, a station incidentally with which some of our officers are familiar, the members of this Federation should be feeling relaxed about their careers and job security.

I am sorry to say Chief Constable that my members are in fact concerned about a number of issues. These issues come under three main categories: how we are treated as employees, or more accurately as office holders; how secure are the terms and conditions offered by CNC and thirdly the destabilising activity of the Home Office and its hostile attitude toward the overall British Policing Service. As our numbers grow the CNC will soon be one of the larger police forces in the UK and whatever happens at PNB directly affects our members.

When you operate in an age of uncertainty caused by anxiety about your personal career then the best way for management to address this problem is through consultation. The reputation of the CNC for meaningful engagement with this Federation has become woeful. It is not for want of a plethora of documents full of management speak with catchy phrases such as information architecture, cross-skilling, intelligent customer capability; I could go on but I see the eyes of my Federation members beginning to glaze over. It seems to me that what is needed is not just clear and simple language which does not obscure the messages the Force wants to communicate but evidence that the Force wants rank and file officers to feedback a useful contribution as to how the CNC might develop. Remember, the Federation represents a very healthy 95 per cent membership of CNC police officers. The General Secretary and I are absolutely confident that we speak authoritatively and accurately when we portray the views of the membership.

In any organisation the importance of consultation should not be underestimated. It is the key to higher productivity, maximum flexibility and willing cooperation from a contented work-force. I fully understand that consultation does not mean veto. The Federation will always carry out a lawful order and will always co-operate as necessary to ensure that we meet our obligations as a police service.

We do not have any statutory right of recourse to industrial action. But that should not mean that we should be treated as if management have us over a barrel.

One area which is crying out for meaningful engagement is the situation at Sellafield, Chapelcross, Capenhurst and Springfield where, because of reconfiguration, a few officers whose future is uncertain are likely to face a potential loss of earnings. The specific approach of Sellafield Sites Ltd is purely commercial but they and this Force need to remember that they are dealing with public servants, officers of the law, who have years of dedicated service behind them. How they are dealt with will be a precedent for how the rest of CNC officers might fare. So far the indications are not promising.

Consultation should be neither a perfunctory nor a token process. It should be genuine, exhaustive, meaningful and timely. Our views should be heard and where they don't find favour we should be apprised accordingly.

That is not what happens at the moment.

Our biggest upset was the decision by our management to abandon the requirement that the findings of arbitration should be binding on both parties. This curious decision was taken on the basis that the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change could not be bound by arbitration so what was the point of our management even offering arbitration as a route to agreement between parties. The decision by the then Home Secretary Jacqui Smyth was obviously in the minds of our command team and the Department of Energy when she set aside the police arbitration tribunal decision in 2009 on police pay. But it is a very big jump for our Command team, even if egged on by DECC, to decide that no arbitration process is worthwhile in any circumstances. Without access to a fair, impartial and objective forum then our negotiations process is open to abuse and bullying.

The one-sided nature of consultation is also compounded by the resistance of the Police Authority to giving Federation representatives proper attendance at their plenary meetings. Too much of the agenda is being discussed and decided at meetings of the Authority Management Board. At the regular once-a-year full Authority meeting further discussion is deemed unnecessary or discouraged because of this approach. It may be an efficient way of conducting business but it hardly meets any serious standards of corporate governance on stakeholder engagement. We are almost certainly the only police federation in the United Kingdom that is not permitted reasonable access to the meetings of its police authority. That should be a cause for embarrassment and is a matter I intend to pursue with the Secretary of State.

We are also the only police force that has at its head, an ex-army officer as Chief Constable and an even more senior ex-army officer as Chairman of the Police Authority. What I say now is nothing to do with their qualifications or experience for the positions they hold. Under their stewardship the CNC has made magnificent strides in its focus and professionalism. But perhaps as a service we are being commanded rather than managed.

My concern is the balance that a mix of military and police cultures must achieve if the CNC is to derive maximum benefit from such a unique and even necessary combination.

There are similarities between the police and the army: we are both disciplined bodies, dependent upon the readiness of members to respond to lawful orders. But there is also a vital enduring difference. The army is not renowned for its consultation ethos. The police service by contrast is characterised by regular consultation with its staff associations, the largest of which are the Federations. These are statutory bodies set up by Acts of Parliament with clearly defined remits of welfare and efficiency. There are no comparable military equivalents.

I believe we are in danger of diminishing the police culture which should guide and, in the view of the Federation, dominate our management's thinking. Like the rest of our members here I joined the Civil Nuclear Constabulary because I wanted to be a police officer. To date I have been delighted with my choice of career but that will only be true as long as we remain a comfortable part of the wider police service.

The police service is not a particularly happy place at the moment. Two names spring to mind as the immediate cause of our anxiety. Lord Hutton and Tom WInsor.

Hutton's proposals on public sector pensions are out for consultation and the Federation will soon be consulted on additional employee contributions to the UK Atomic Energy Authority Pension Scheme. The only sure thing that we can see is that we will all be paying more into our pensions, in the clear knowledge that we will need to work longer to earn it and to live longer to enjoy a lesser retirement package than we had signed up to.

Under Winsor Part One's recommendations around 40 per cent of police officers will lose around 20 per cent of their pay as a result of the two year pay freeze, the abolition of Special Priority Payments, Competency Related Threshold Payments and reduced overtime rates. The slashing of the overall police budget will mean fewer officers on frontline duties also being paid less. This is commonly known as producing more for less or even more fatuously, as "working smarter". The current debate between the Home Department staff associations and the Home Office which has now gone to arbitration fully occupies this Federation's attention. The outcome of PNB has always had ramifications for our Federation. That is why we were only too glad to stand shoulder to shoulder with our colleagues at the protest rally of 15th July in London. It remains a key objective of this Federation that the Civil Nuclear Constabulary officers should enjoy equality of salary with the rest of the Home Department police services.

I have already mentioned the recent riots and the lessons we should learn from them. One lesson that I won't dwell on but I must mention is: just how motivated will officers be to routinely risk life and limb especially in future major public order confrontations if the Government cannot show it values police officers' professional and personal commitment to the job.

Our credentials as a police service should not be in doubt. Each officer is a fully attested law officer exercising duties and responsibilities of the office of constable. As a police force we are routinely armed in order to fulfil our role as guardians of national assets.

However, the benefit of being a sizeable force, well trained in firearms, is that we can provide mutual aid as we did last year when called upon by the Cumbrian Police to assist in the search for Derrick Bird.

As a result of that otherwise horrific episode I am pleased to hear that our skills are leading to the development of a collaborative and interoperability partnership with other forces.

And as part of peer acceptance of the legitimacy of the CNC to be recognised as a police service I am pleased to confirm that last week, after 18 months of observer status, the Federation has been admitted as a full member of Eurocop, a body which represents over 600,000 police officers throughout Europe. Admission to its membership is by no means automatic and is offered only to a civilian based police service.

We may be a police force like no other but I know that our members take pride in that. We have skills and training which complement the capability of the everyday police officer. And like other police officers our terms and conditions, our careers will all be seriously undermined to the detriment of the police service and inevitably the public if Winsor Parts One and Two are implemented as set out in Part One and as strongly hinted at in Part two.

Specifically I note from Part Two that Winsor would like the police federations to consider the attractions of short term contracts or commissions as they more grandly describe them. The CNC is already pioneering the idea that policing should not be a life-long career. This short-termism is, apparently, the modern way. In the private sector it is widely promoted that far from a life time of service in a particular job or industry that employees should have a series of jobs, some with common skills and others, perhaps requiring complete retraining.

My members do not see policing as a fill-in job for transients. We see it as a life-long career for dedicated public servants. It's not just that we join the police in order to be a power for good; policing does not actually equip you or train you for any other form of civilian employment. Put simply, the opportunities for developing transferable civilian employment skills are few and far between. And none of us joined the police service expected to find ourselves forced to leave, possibly with the only option being to work for a private security company.

The idea of short term contracts first surfaced in the 1994 Sheehy Report. It was lambasted then for failing to recognise that although people do and often should move between companies and between industry sectors they can only do so because of the relevance and transferable application of their qualifications, skills and experience.

The idea that the CNC officers should be given contracts which require them to leave policing once they fail to meet the required firearms proficiency standards is short-sighted and inhumane. The application of such rigid standards to officers - only to constables and sergeants of course -means that officers will be regularly discarded to the unemployment scrapheap by their early 50s. That is hardly the best age to look for an alternative career. Neither should an economic recession be used as a recruitment agent.

When we eventually emerge from this sorry job market we cannot expect the CNC to be the obvious career choice for the best young men and women if they know that they will be unemployed again by possibly early middle age.

The experience elsewhere, for instance with our colleagues in the former Royal Ulster Constabulary GC and the PSNI where thousands of officers have left through voluntary severance and redundancy is that special, well funded schemes are needed to support and equip officers for civilian employment. Officers should not be terminated after many years of dedicated service because they fail a particular skills test. I said earlier that more could be achieved if the Federation were to be properly and sincerely consulted. The long-term future security of employment of officers is number one on that agenda.

The members of this Federation share the vision of CNC. We see our members as the keystone of a professional police service tasked with ensuring that we are acknowledged as providers of a world class service for the protection of nuclear materials and facilities. I am just not sure that we looking at that vision through the same prism. The vision needs to be shared and seen from the same perspective if we are to enjoy fully the confidence of our sponsoring Department, of Parliament and of the general public.

We could make great strides here through the development of our own leadership training programme starting with bronze commanders as an essential route to career fulfilment and to maximising the operational effectiveness of the CNC.

If we look ahead and as attention grows on the role of the nuclear energy industry it should be apparent that not all the noise will be welcoming. Resistance to a revitalised and enhanced nuclear energy profile will be vocal if unrepresentative. It is an organisational imperative that the CNC and this Federation are fully aligned on objectives - and working in harmony.

Thank you.

Chief Constable... I now invite you to address conference.