ÐÇ¿Õ´«Ã½

SIR – In one of my last contributions to your worthy magazine before I retire from the Lincolnshire Constabulary – and speaking as the ACPO lead on the security industry – I'd like to respond briefly to a couple of points made by Nick van der Bijl ('Security needs its own culture', Opinion, SMT, June 2003, pp13-14).

I do agree that the police service should look to the security industry to be its "equal, firmest and most reliable ally". Before the hard-earned police 'brand' is shared, though, communities are entitled to know that any new partners in the security equation are up to the task. That is what regulation is all about.

As much as Nick denies it, members of the police service do know a little about 'public policing', and often pick up the pieces when no-one else can. If the industry wishes to become involved in the extended police family, common sense would suggest that the police should have some role. That is why they are consulted and involved.

If it were the case (and for ACPO it is not) that the Security Industry Authority (SIA) and ACPO receive instructions from the Government, it must be remembered that the Government has been elected to do its job and thus enjoys a mandate from the people. This is a far greater privilege than either myself or Nick enjoy. We do not have a mandate from the masses. In light of this, perhaps the Government ought to dictate where the industry should be heading in terms of the public policing context. A sensible vehicle for doing so is the SIA, which is – after all – a public body accountable to a minister. Following that direction is, of course, optional.

Nick is right when he states that security is not about "law enforcement" but "protection". The point he doesn't acknowledge is that the end game for 'security' is not the same as that for the 'wider police family'. That end game is much more to do with community safety. For this reason, the police service wants to manage the evolution of security industry involvement rather than just throw open the door.

While I do agree with Nick that there's a wealth of experience in the private security industry, and that this should indeed be mined, I am somewhat less convinced that some of its current employees (witness the 30% of security officers who are predicted to fail the integrity test necessary for gaining an SIA licence) should be sold to the public by either the Government, the police or the SIA as being worthy of respect and trust just yet. In time certainly, but not just at the moment.

Nick also recycles his old chestnut about senior police officers stealing good jobs in the security industry. Have I missed something? Are employers and others obliged to hire them by law, or is it a free market based upon who is seen to be right for a particular job?

Some jobs will be opportune for a security industry professional or an accountant, while others will suit an ex-policemen or former member of the Armed Forces.

The Government clearly desires this kind of diversity within the senior ranks of the police service. The very first head of the Police Standards Unit came from a water company, and an Inspector of Constabulary from the Audit Commission. I see no problem with this in the police service, so why should the private security industry be any different?

As a final thought, given Nick's contempt for the existing band of chief officers, the Government's desire to improve the calibre of chief constables and elicit a more varied background for applicants could well see him presented with the opportunity to become one himself. Given his vast self-proclaimed experience, academic achievements and competence, I'm sure Nick would feel such a post well within his grasp.

The poor salaries might put him off, but the post of Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis is available in a year or so, and that pays the best. Would he like a referee, I wonder?

'Trust and respect' are crucial for the future. However, both must be earned. And, in terms of the wider police family, to a very large extent they must be earned by those without them from those who have them.

Richard Childs QPM, Chief Constable, Lincolnshire Police