Conference 2005 - Speeches

Speech by Eamon Keating Chairman of the Defence Police Federation

Opening Address to the Chief Constable

Sir I would like to welcome you to this the 34th Annual Conference of the Defence Police Federation. It is extremely disappointing that the Minister has been unable to attend our conference but we will be arranging a formal meeting with him to discuss our issues. I would like to welcome you as the new Chief Constable of the Ministry of Defence Police. I am sure you realise that the legacy you inherit is one of professionalism and recently one of co-operation, but I am sure that you will continue in the same manner as your predecessor. I would also wish to take this opportunity to thank you for your invitation to communicate with you at any time, both formally and informally as necessary. Thank you.

Main Address

Now I would like to turn to some areas we the DPF feel need to be discussed. This has been an exceptional year for the MDP. We have been deployed on operations ranging from the International Festival of the Sea to the G8 conference in Scotland and let us not fail to appreciate the outstanding efforts of our members after the bombings in London in July. Within hours, from the first reports of the incidents our members had deployed into London, even before the road closures had taken effect and this is not to be forgotten. Every time the MDP is expected to assist with major incidents, we exceed those expectations and this is solely due to the commitment of our officers.

Regarding our relationship with the Force senior management, it is encouraging that there still appears to be a genuine commitment to early consultation. That said however, this is not the case in all areas of business. Because of the disjointed way in which each department are able to approach the Staff side, or not as the case may be, it can be very late in the process before the DPF are even aware of possible remodelling. Only recently our CID department, regarding a rationalisation of divisional CID, has contacted me. This we had no knowledge of and yet I have Detective Constables and Sergeants contacting me with genuine serious concerns about their future. In fact I am led to believe that you yourself spoke to some of the officers who are currently on their foundation course for CID at Wethersfield and outlined these proposals. You must realise that this lack of consultation cannot be acceptable to us, especially in an environment when both sides are openly encouraging an atmosphere of cooperation. I am left in a position where I am unable to advise my members due to a total lack of information on our side.

The recent decision to purchase and deploy the forces single weapon system, the MP7, is another prime example of this. The project ran and as an after thought the DPF was invited into consultation. Let me take this opportunity to place on record our support for the idea of a single weapon system; however so many areas had failed to be considered, proving devices, hearing protection etc, that the project has consistently met with delays. Had we been involved from the beginning we would have raised our concerns and, more importantly, assisted in their correction. I must praise the operational support department for their efforts in relation to this project. In no way do I wish to belittle the hard work and effort from this department, however we cannot help but wonder how much better things might have progressed with our early involvement.

In addition there appears to be a growing trend where the force management feel that the only way in which to ensure that officers comply with instructions is to issue threatening orders or publications. This is not always the case but it is appearing more and more frequently .Sir there will always be times when both the official side and the staff side disagree, these are the times when compromise and discussion are most essential. There may well be times when arbitration is our only route available, but it is my duty on behalf of my membership to bring to your attention the disenfranchised environment that is being generated between the force and it officers. Recently we entered into discussion over the forces civilianisation proposals. The final position was that the force was going to do what it was going to do and the Federation would have to put up with it. In this instance we agreed, very civilly, to disagree. Also in a recent Legislation & Policy publication LP 51/04, on the use of official mobile phones, officers were threatened that failure to comply with instructions may lead to disciplinary action. The most recent example is where the force's personnel department have become immovable in their position regarding the wording of the new DV policy. In this the official side feel that it is reasonable to threaten dismissal for our officers, for failure to cooperate with the DV process, rather than simply remind officers that it is within their conditions of service to do so. Sir as you can no doubt see from these three simple examples that I have raised here today, the environment between management and the staff is changing to one of "Them and Us". One where officers feel that they are not valued but are simply seen as numbers to be pressganged and punished wherever the opportunity presents itself. This cannot be the atmosphere you aspire towards. It is definitely not one we expect or support. The good will of the officers within this force is what keeps it going. Every time there is a major incident our officers break their backs to do what is required. Recently in London after the atrocious incidents in July, we had officers who had initially been told they were being deployed for two days, they were still there after five, they didn't complain, they didn't refuse to work. It was only when one of our support officers approached me that it was realised these officers didn't even have enough underwear or clothes for their deployment. We, the DPF, not the Force, had to purchase clothing so that they could continue their deployment. Sir if this trend continues then you will not be able to rely on officers like that. Officers who will sacrifice everything for their profession. You will end up with a situation where officers will simply do the absolute minimum. We need an environment of value, one of support, one where individuals want to attend for work, not one where they look for reasons not to attend.

This Federation would also like to place on record our continuing dismay in relation to Health & Safety and the delays created by MoD Centre in our procurement of essential Personal Protection Equipment. We have raised several issues since I took up office only 18 months ago. The force recognises that there are shortfalls in its duty of care, but still we have to acquiesce to the red tape created by the MoD. This means that our members are left in a situation that could even be life threatening. I believe that should these same officers be on the front line in Iraq or some other theatre of war that their needs would be immediately catered for. Sir our members are on the front line, the front line against terrorism in Britain and as such efforts should be made to speed up the delivery of essential equipment.

In relation to the Centre we have other concerns. These are with regard to the lack of training of our managers in both personnel issues and personnel management. I appreciate the belief that any person who has risen to the dizzy heights of Sergeant, Inspector of even Chief Inspector should have management skills, but that is not necessarily the case. It is ever the case that we find our members in the middle of grievances or even employment tribunals as a result of poor management. It is, is it not, reasonable to expect that where a person is to be placed by an organisation into a position of responsibility, that we equip that person for the role? We the MDP, have historically hoped that the person is a capable manager. And on many occasions we have been correct, but on many we have not. With the move to the PPPA, there will be an even greater responsibility placed on our managers and we must insist that this be addressed, less you wish to see more and more cases of officers being unable to attend work due to stress or more and more cases of employment dispute and grievance. This also leads us nicely into the area of grievances. Sir we would like you, if you can, bring to an end the continuous delay and apparent inability of the force to comply with the time limits set out in our grievance procedures. This is yet another area of dissatisfaction that our members have raised. In some cases it has taken, not the twenty one days as laid out in the procedure, but up to and over a year to complete some of our grievances. Sir this is surely not the way that either of us would wish to do business.

Last year I told the Chief Constable of our discomfort relating to the way in which the SPP was being applied. The Home and Scottish forces were given "New Money" to the amount of 2% of their relative budgets for SPP's. We received £100.000. This is a clear erosion of our parity between our Home and Scottish Executive colleagues and us. It is also occurring in other areas and we concerned that this is becoming common practice. We are aware of what is occurring with our colleagues and the PNB and are keeping a watching brief, but would still wish to express our concerns with the internal situation. In 2002 some of our serving members and all new entrants were moved onto a new pension scheme. This involved a higher contribution to the pension, but at no time was the net pay deduction adjusted to take this into account. Sir, with the new proposals from Government it may be that even higher contributions are required. We cannot allow this erosion to continue.

Moving on to overtime, I appreciate that we have informally discussed this issue. I am being approached on an ever increasing basis about the forced working of overtime by a significant number of our members. If we can utilise exemptions for emergency situations in order to allow our members to work past the 32 hour point, and the only time we can force officers to work overtime is due to an exigency of duty, why can we not apply common sense and allow those officers who wish to work extra hours to do so and those who do not, to enjoy their time off duty? I look forward to open and meaningful dialog between your management team and ourselves on this matter but am concerned that in a significant number of cases, the monthly amount of core hours for my members has increased from 160 hours to 192 hours. Are their contracts going to be adjusted to show this increase?

Sir in closing, as you can see, although we wish to continue in a cooperative vein, it is becoming increasingly difficult to do so. I have nothing but the highest respect for all of my colleagues. They continue to prove the rule, that the MDP is a top rate police service with officers of the highest calibre and we never fail to impress when we are working in an arena that is visible to the general populous. Please do not allow, what we fear may be beginning to alter the commitment of your officers and their endearing loyalty to a force that has served the MoD for over a hundred years.

Thank you Chief Constable… I warmly invite you to address conference for the first time.