Transparency data

PABEW meeting minutes, 26 July 2023

Updated 4 September 2024

Applies to England and Wales

Members present via video conference:

Independent Chair

Julia Mulligan  

PABEW Secretariat

Chris Moore

Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW)

Calum Macleod

Gemma Fox 

Gemma Lofts

Police Superintendents’ Association (PSA)

Dan Murphy

Paul Griffiths

Duncan Slade

Chief Police Officers’ Staff Association (CPOSA)

Gareth Wilson 

Shabir Hussein

National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC)  

Jeremy Vaughan

Clair Alcock  

Stella Brooks 

Home Office (HO)

Alex Platts

Emma Plummer

Carly Fry     

College of Policing (CoP) 

Sandy Purewal

His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS)

Deborah Yeates

Met Police

Mark Pomroy

Welcome and Apologies

1. The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and noted apologies from Valerie Harris (Met Trade Union).

Minutes of the Meeting 9 May 2023

2. Minutes were agreed from the 9 May 2023 meeting.

Action Point 1: Secretariat to finalise minutes of 9 May 2023 meeting and publish on the webpage.

Action Log of 9 May 2023

3. The Chair noted there was one outstanding on PABEW secondment guidance, which was on the agenda.

Matters Arising (none raised)

NPCC Update: PABEW Secondment Guidance 

4. Sandy Purewal (CoP) said the HO and Deborah Yeates (HMICFRS) and herself had fed their views to Stella Brooks (NPCC) on what needed to happen to bring the guidance together.

5. CoP and HMICFRS provided clarity on secondments, whether attachments apply, that territorial scope was clarified and agreement on what content should be included within the draft policy guidance and the annex. They highlighted the benefits of going on secondment and described why the central service allowance was in place.

6. There was reference made to the impact on officers and staff and what agreements should be in place. The high level of vetting that would be needed. HO, CoP and HMICFRS also discussed with Stella Brooks (NPCC) the importance of promoting allowances consistently across all the different organisations.

7\ Stella Brooks (NPCC) confirmed that while there was no draft to share, there was now a firm understanding, with each party knowing what was required. Stella Brooks (NPCC) and Andy Fittes (NPCC) were going to look at restructuring the draft to all parties’ satisfaction. The aim was to have the draft ready by the end of August, and once the draft was agreed, it could then be circulated to other committee members.

8. One outstanding point was that all parties thought the central service allowance needed to be reviewed. Stella Brooks (NPCC) said she would consider how that might occur.

9. Calum Macleod (PFEW) asked if there would be a circulation before the next meeting of PAB so the staff associations could comment on the document.

10. Stella Brooks (NPCC) said most of the wording would stay the same as the draft focused on ordering and presentation but was happy to meet with committee members on wording concerns during August. Once fed in, the NPCC would meet with the HO and CoP.

11. Gemma Fox (PFEW) noted that in previous working groups where a prior version of the draft had been worked on PFEW and other stakeholders had submitted various comments and submissions, so it was vital that it was all being pulled together.

12. Emma Plummer (HO) and Sandy Purewal (CoP) said that the version had been sent to Stella Brooks (NPCC). HO said the process was now to incorporate the comments into the current draft or at least have an explanation for any omissions.

13. Dan Murphy (PSA) expressed concern over the lack of staff association engagement.

14. Stella Brooks (NPCC) said the plan was to combine all comments with a paper confirming what had been done, what had changed and what was outstanding. She would also ask Andy Fittes (NPCC) to contact staff associations to review what’s been done before a collective draft was circulated. It would be an agenda item for the next meeting in October. PAB members agreed with the course of action.

Action Point 2: Stella Brooks (NPCC) will write a paper confirming what changes have been made to the PABEW Secondment Guidance draft, hold meetings with Staff associations and circulate a collective draft before the next PABEW meeting on 28 October.  

Police Pensions: UK Police Pensions Consultative Forum & Scheme Advisory Board Update.

Remedy Preparation, XPS

15. The Chair opened the recap of the 29th June SAB meeting by noting that Graeme Hall (XPS), The Head of Public Sector Relations for XPS, was in attendance to present to the SAB regarding the implementation progress for remedy for XPS.

16. The Chair said that at the meeting, Dan Murphy (PSA) had raised concern about the issue of honorariums and its impact on pension calculations for retiring members.

17. Clair Alcock (NPCC) noted it was the employer’s responsibility to make contingent decisions regarding honorariums and pensionable pay. The police forces have been informed to identify individuals with temporary promotions or pensionable pay related to honorariums. They have been provided with a self-assessment tool to help with this process.

18. An action arose from the Sab that Clair Alcock (NPCC) would work with PSA regarding comms to retiring members on honorariums and pensionable pay. Both PSA and NPCC agreed with the summarisation.

Scheme Specific Assumptions, GAD

19. The Chair informed the PABEW committee that there was a presentation from the Fire and Police team at GAD on Scheme Specific Assumptions. The presentation summarised the key points from the GAD Draft Assumptions Report circulated to SAB members on 26 June 2023.

20. Clair Alcock (NPCC) added that the SAB agreed to get independent actuarial advice regarding the assumptions. That advice had since been received along with the draft letter and once assessed, would be shared with SAB members.

Round table with Minister Philp 

21. The Chair explained that the Minister had proposed a round table on pensions-related matters. It was hopeful that it would take place before the conference recess.

22. A subgroup would be set up to agree on what matters the SAB would like to raise with the Minister. The Chair would also meet with individual stakeholders in the lead-up to the meeting. The Chair said it was important not to discount any issues on remedy. The meeting with the Minister would be focused on what would be needed in the future.

23. Jeremy Vaughan (NPCC) said he was trying to get chiefs to agree to a single scheme management infrastructure for policing. NPCC had pushed hard on the legislation that gave less autonomy to scheme managers in certain circumstances to address inconsistencies. 

24. He noted it would be to convince chiefs to agree on a future structure if they were left with a £40 million bill to deal with the remedy issues with nothing to meet the cost.

25. The forward look would be getting the right technical competence in the right place to enable sound decision-making and an adequately resourced and functioning scheme Advisory Board.

26. Gemma Lofts (PFEW) raised Shabir Hussein’s (CPOSA) previous suggestion on SAB circulars and the new remit SAB in providing advice without request and queried whether there was an opportunity for the Minister to endorse the SAB if members were to create any future circulars explaining what practice was expected.

27. Shabir Hussein (CPOSA) felt there was no harm in reminding the Minister that there was once a working system in place, and certain officials chose not to perpetuate it. If the Minister was not going to issue a HO circular, the only solution was to endorse the SAB circular.

28. Shabir Hussein (CPOSA) requested NPCC to confirm if they would issue a members’ guide to the remedy regs. He also raised the issue of partial opt-outs, first mentioned by the Treasury late last year. He said the remedy was deemed out of scope, so he remitted it to the SAB as a separate standalone matter.

29. Shabir Hussein (CPOSA) said partial opt-outs were only mentioned in the consultation to piggyback on the remedy’s regs to save time. Given that they have been excluded from the remedy, he wished to know what the HO planned to give effect to the convention, that the police were afforded the same developments elsewhere, without having to argue for them, in recognition of restrictions on their rights. He suggested that Alex Platts (HO) write with an update before the next SAB.

30. Dan Murphy (PSA) said that due to the discrimination in McCloud sargeant, financial loss was linked to discrimination that needed to be dealt with by way of a compensation scheme as mentioned in the recent regulations.

31. Clair Alcock (NPCC) explained that NPCC had requested a conference with the Chief’s Council regarding creating a mechanism and understanding the compensation scheme.

32. She said the funding structure sat with HO, who were actively looking into what their funding processes would look like, and likewise, NPCC was moving as quickly as they could to get legal advice to form the mechanism that sits on top of the funding structure.

Discipline Sub-Committee 

Terms of Appointments – LQC’s 

33. The Chair said there was little new to report on LQCs, given the impending reports still with the Minister. Members had no comments on the matter.

HO circular 10/2017

34. The Chair said the DSC had arrived at a position where members felt that the circular was not fit for purpose. It was agreed that CPOSA and the PSA would write to the Chair jointly outlining the aspects of the circular that they felt needed to change, excluding the Hillsborough example.

35. The Chair would then take that information and try and engage with the head of the police and fire funding strategy, Charlotte Bryant (HO), to see if the deadlock could be unpicked. PSA and COPSA agreed with the Chair’s summarisation.

Code of Ethics - Implementation   

36. The Chair explained that Sarah Fotheringham, the new implementation lead for the Code of Ethics, attended the meeting. She went through the three products that the CoP had produced and approved.

37. An update was provided to Sarah Fotheringham on the staff association’s view of the consultation process. PSA pointed out an impasse between the PFEW and PSA on specific aspects, such as the introductory paragraph in the code of practice and that Staff associations voted against the progression through the college committees.

38. The Chair noted that NPCC had taken an action point to examine the concerns the PSA and the PFEW had raised.

39. Paul Griffiths (PSA) agreed with the summary and added it was unclear whether the roadblocks on the code of practice could be impacting the wider framework and said there was a lack of clarity about how the implementation would land with the officers and staff.

40. Dan Murphy (PSA) added that vetting code changes were also discussed; his impression from DSC was that there needed to be more data on implementing the vetting code and how it could impact officers. PSA was concerned that dealing with officers was a pseudo mechanism outside of discipline. PSA also had issues about disproportionality and the effect that would have on certain communities.

41. Stella Brooks (NPCC) said she would speak to Janette McCormick (CoP) about the issue and determine what must be done.

Action Point 3: Stella Brooks (NPCC) to speak to Janette McCormick (CoP) on PSA’s concern over the lack of data collected on the implementation of the vetting code and how it could impact officers.

Home Office Legislation Update

42. Emma Plummer (HO) said there was no legislation update for PABEW. But as previously mentioned at the last PCF meeting. HO was focusing on tackling the backlog and setting up a meeting with their lawyers to develop a more definitive plan and timeline for what needs to be done, which would be circulated to PCF once it had been finalised.