Guidance

Letter from Lady Elish to the Home Secretary: part 2 terms of reference consultation findings

Published 11 May 2023

Dear Home Secretary

The Angiolini inquiry - update

1. This letter provides analysis of the responses to the consultation on the draft Terms of Reference for Part 2 of the Inquiry, as well as my recommendations on what adjustments may be needed to the Terms of Reference to reflect the views of those who responded. This letter also provides an update on our work to finalise the report on Part 1 of the Inquiry and our estimation of how long it will take us to conclude the work on former PC and convicted serial rapist David Carrick. I intend to publish this letter on the Angiolini Inquiry website.

Part 2 terms of reference consultation responses and recommendations

2. As you will recall, the draft Terms of Reference for Part 2 of the Angiolini Inquiry were published on 18 January. A four-week consultation period opened on 27 January and closed on 24 February.

3. The consultation, which took the form of a survey, sought stakeholders’ views on the importance of each of the three areas of focus (“pillars”) for Part 2, as well as their respective sub-areas. It also offered the opportunity for stakeholders to identify anything they felt was missing from the draft Terms of Reference. Lastly, we asked about how those affected by the issues covered by Part 2 could best be engaged to ensure that I am able to hear evidence from as broad a range of stakeholders as possible to inform my report(s).

4. Overall, the response rate to the consultation was very positive. We received 852 responses to the survey. We heard from 780 individuals and 60 organisations/charities. I am extremely grateful to all those who took the time to contribute. I should note at this stage that, in addition to the survey responses discussed below, we received a small number of letters containing narrative reflections on the consultation. Those responses are not, for methodological reasons, considered in the analysis that follows, but in the main they reflect the views expressed by those who responded to the survey.

Analysis of consultation responses: overview

5. Demographic data from the survey shows that 60% of the individual respondents were female. More than half of the individual respondents stated that they were a member of a police force (54%), while just over a quarter stated that they were a member of the public with an interest (28%). Just over half of the organisations responding described themselves as an NGO/charity (57%), while around a fifth were police organisations (21%). 24% of the organisations responding had over 1000 employees.

6. The overwhelming majority of respondents think that it is ‘very/quite important’ that the Inquiry should examine each of the three pillars set out in the draft Terms of Reference (99% for pillar 1 (police recruitment, vetting and transfers), 96% for pillar 2 (police culture) and 93% for pillar 3 (protection of women in public)). This was consistent across individuals and organisations/charities.

7. The largest proportion of respondents think that the Inquiry should look at pillar 1 first (47%). Pillar 2 was the next most common response (35%), followed by pillar 3 (12%). Almost half (48%) of those who responded as individuals said that the Inquiry should look first at pillar 1, followed by pillar 2 (35%), while, of those that responded on behalf of an organisation, almost half (47%) said that the Inquiry should be looking at pillar 2 first, followed by pillar 1 (35%).

8. In contrast, when asked which pillar they would be interested in answering further questions about, the majority of respondents (81%) chose pillar 2. Pillar 1 was almost as common a choice (77%). More than half the respondents (58%) said that they would be interested in further questions about pillar 3.

Analysis on pillar 1

9. A slightly higher proportion of male respondents than female respondents said they would be interested in answering further questions about pillar 1 (81% vs 77%).

10. The vast majority of both individuals and organisations think it is ‘very/quite important’ to explore each of the areas within pillar 1. The most important areas for respondents are ‘adequacy of recruitment, selection and vetting process’ (99%) and ‘information-sharing and record keeping’ (97%). Overall, ‘attractiveness of policing careers for women’ (81%) and ‘development of perpetrator profiles’ (84%) are perceived as slightly less important relative to the other areas, although a greater proportion of female respondents than male respondents think that it is ‘very/quite important’ that the Inquiry explores both of these areas (86% vs 78% for ‘attractiveness of policing careers for women’ and 91% vs 77% for ‘development of perpetrator profiles’).

11. The themes emerging from the qualitative responses on pillar 1 largely echo the current areas outlined in the draft Terms of Reference. Some respondents (8%) believe that explicit reference should be made to the frequency of vetting within the Terms of Reference.

Analysis on pillar 2

12. A slightly higher proportion of female respondents than male respondents said they would be interested in answering further questions about pillar 2 (83% vs 78%).

13. The majority of both individuals and organisations think it is ‘very/quite important’ to explore each of the areas within pillar 2. The most important areas for respondents are ‘effectiveness of whistleblowing and complaints process’ (98%) and ‘role of supervision and leadership (98%)’. ‘Role/effectiveness of police initiatives’ (89%) and ‘role of group dynamics and microcultures’ (87%) are perceived as slightly less important.

14. A higher proportion of female respondents than male respondents think that it is ‘very/quite important’ that the Inquiry explores ‘the role/effectiveness of police initiatives to make women feel safer when interacting with them’ (94% vs 83%) and the ‘adequacy of measures to identify VAWG misconduct’ (97% vs 86%).

15. Most themes emerging from the qualitative responses on Pillar 2 are already reflected in the draft Terms of Reference. Some respondents believe that explicit reference should be made to the views of female police officers (7%) and to the use and effects of messaging apps (5%).

Analysis on pillar 3

16. A higher proportion of female than male respondents said that they were interested in answering further questions on pillar 3 (64% vs 51%).

17. The vast majority of individuals and organisations (92%) think it is ‘very/quite important’ to produce a summary of existing measures to prevent sexually motivated violence against women in public spaces. A greater proportion of female respondents feel it is ‘very/quite important’ to explore this area compared to male respondents (96% vs 89%).

18. The qualitative responses on pillar 3 suggest that the Inquiry should focus on training and awareness-raising for police officers and the public. 6% of respondents suggest expanding the pillar to consider both public and private spaces.

Missing pillars

19. The top suggestions for missing pillars were ‘adequacy of recruitment processes and vetting including follow-up vetting at intervals/transfers’ (12%); ‘effectiveness of misconduct investigations’ (10%); ‘adequacy of disciplinary processes’ (10%); ‘effectiveness of complaints/ whistleblowing processes, including the culture in police of reporting concerns’ (10%); ‘adequacy of leadership/supervision/line management’ (9%); ‘domestic abuse/violence perpetrated by police officers’ (5%); and ‘macho/misogynistic culture in police’ (5%).

20. Almost all of these echo issues and themes already addressed, explicitly or implicitly, by sub-areas of the existing pillars in the draft Terms of Reference.

Engagement methods

21. Interviews are the most common method identified by respondents for engagement with the Inquiry. This is closely followed by focus groups and surveys. Respondents who felt that ‘other’ methods should be used expressed the view that flexible engagement methods should be employed, tailored to the individual, and evidence given anonymously if desired.

Conclusions and recommendations

22. I am pleased to see that the responses to the consultation, as summarised above, confirm that the draft Terms of Reference are largely fit for purpose and meet stakeholders’ expectations. In my view, the majority of the issues flagged as missing from the draft are already covered by it, although perhaps in some cases only implicitly. For the avoidance of doubt, therefore, I can confirm that it is my intention to examine questions relating to the frequency of vetting checks, the adequacy of disciplinary processes, protection for whistle-blowers, the views/experiences of female officers and the use of social media/messaging apps by police officers during the course of Part 2.

23. I am recommending, however, that subparagraph (f) of pillar 2 be amended to make it clear that Violence Against Women and Girls-related misconduct includes police-perpetrated domestic abuse (see enclosure). As indicated by HMICFRS’ response to the super-complaint submitted by the Centre for Women’s Justice, this particular type of abhorrent behaviour poses a serious risk to police integrity and imperils public trust and confidence. Accordingly, it is my intention to enquire specifically into the adequacy of measures to identify perpetrators and manage risk, including the measures taken in response to the HMICFRS recommendations.

24. Lastly, while I acknowledge that some stakeholders would like to see the scope of pillar 3 expanded to cover private spaces, and understand the reasons for this, I am not recommending that this change be made to the draft Terms of Reference. This is because when we met to discuss the terms of reference for Part 2, you were clear that the need for contemporaneous recommendations to help the police to improve is the priority for you. The scope of Part 2 is already significant and will be a challenge to complete within 24 months. My recommended amendment to paragraph 2(f) of the Terms of Reference will bring some crimes committed against women in private spaces, specifically domestic abuse perpetrated by police officers, definitively into scope but, in order to do justice to the wider issue of violence against women and girls in private spaces, I would need significantly more time and budget than is currently available. I am aware that other work is already under way across government on this issue; you may wish to satisfy yourself that the action being taken is sufficient.

25. I hope that you will accept my recommendation on paragraph 2(f), and that the Terms of Reference will be finalised as soon as possible so that the Inquiry team can begin the important work of delivering against them. I will continue to seek views from stakeholders as we do so.

Part 1

26. My letter on 27 June 2022 advised that I had been prevented from finalising and submitting the Part 1 report until ongoing criminal proceedings against Wayne Couzens, and other relevant criminal and misconduct proceedings, had concluded. As you will be aware, Wayne Couzens’ legal proceedings have now concluded, with the sentencing for his exposure offences handed down by Lady Justice May on 6 March. There remain two outstanding misconduct proceedings relevant to the Inquiry, for which the dates have not yet been set. When those have concluded, and when I have subsequently completed a process (known as Maxwellisation and common to all public inquiry reports) to alert those who will be criticised in the report prior to publication, I will be able to finalise it. This means that I expect to be able to present the Part 1 report to you as soon as possible after summer recess.

The Carrick case

28. The Terms of Reference for the Carrick case were published on 7 February 2023, and we have already begun analysing the materials we have received. I am keen to complete this work as soon as possible and estimate it will take approximately 12 months to provide my findings to you. However, as in the case of Couzens, it is possible that further criminal charges or relevant misconduct proceedings may be brought against David Carrick which may delay our ability to finalise the report. I will provide a further update on timing to you when all of the disclosure has been provided to the Inquiry.

Yours sincerely

Rt Hon Lady Elish Angiolini LT DBE PC KC Chair of the Angiolini Inquiry