Impact assessment

Equality impact assessment

Published 27 June 2022

This was published under the 2019 to 2022 Johnson Conservative government

Demonstrating Compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED).

Due regard must be shown:

• Decision-makers must be made aware of their duty to have ‘due regard’ to the aims of the duty
• Due regard is fulfilled before and at the time a particular policy or operational activity, that will or might affect people with protected characteristics is under consideration, as well as at the time a decision is taken. It is not a box ticking exercise.
• Due regard involves a conscious approach and state of mind. The duty must be exercised with rigour and an open mind.
• The duty cannot be delegated to another body and will always remain on the body subject to it.
• The duty is a continuing one.
• It is good practice for the public body to keep an adequate record showing that they have considered their equality duties and considered relevant questions.

1. Name and outline of policy proposal, guidance or operational activity

To allow Chief Constables to equip Special Constables (specials) in their forces with Conducting Energy Devices (CEDs) (commonly referred to as the brand name ‘Taser’). This EIA refers to two options, one to allow specials to carry Taser and two, to not allow them to and to retain the status quo.

Taser is an important tactical option for specially trained officers in potentially violent situations and, like other less-lethal weapons, provides firearms officers with an alternative to lethal force.

Specials receive the same training as regular officers and, in volunteering to serve their communities, can face the same situations as regular officers. Incidents that might require the use of a Taser can evolve without prior intelligence and not deploying specials with Taser operationally would deny them the opportunity to respond to threats and risks in the same way as regular officers, potentially putting the public, officers and some offenders themselves at greater risk.

The safeguards in place for regular officers will also apply to specials, mainly:

• training and deployment decisions will be based on each force’s strategic threat and risk assessment;
• the number of officers in a force who are specially trained and equipped with Taser will remain a decision for individual Chief Officers;
• Specials will have to meet the same standards as regular officers to pass assessments and be authorised to carry Taser;
• the same guidance and requirements which apply to regular officers to report their Taser use will apply to specials;
• National Police Chiefs Council (NPCC) recently recommended to all forces that officers deploying with Taser should deploy with body worn video wherever possible;
• Specials are accountable through the law for any unlawful use of powers and equipment as other police officers are;
• any serious incidents must be referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC);
• HMICFRS will continue to inspect forces through the PEEL programme; and
• Home Office and NPCC are working on plans to improve community scrutiny and engagement relating to police use of powers including Taser, in line with Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities recommendations.

2. Summary of the evidence considered in demonstrating due regard to the Public-Sector Equality Duty

This document reflects the main equalities considerations for the impact of specials being equipped with Taser. In line with the on-going public sector equality duty, we will continue to consider the impact of the policy as it develops.

The Home Office Annual Data Requirement provides the latest and most accurate data that the government has on the police’s use of force. These statistics are presented throughout this EIA.

While considering whether to make this change, officials have listened to the opinions of the National Taser Stakeholder Advisory Group (NTSAG) which provide a forum where policies on Taser use can be shared and debated with community and civil community groups. Officials attend regular meetings attended by the NTSAG.

The Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities 2021 report has also been considered. The report highlighted several recommendations across crime and policing, including on improving public trust and confidence in policing by strengthening the systems of scrutiny, accountability and transparency for police use of powers.

As part of this work, the Government will be looking carefully at strengthening the system of local community scrutiny and the value and use of body-worn video for police use of powers which were specific recommendations for Home Office among those. Updates on work relating to this area can be found in the government’s response to the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities, including:

• Action 10: The Home Office, with policing partners including Police and Crime Commissioners, will develop by summer 2023 a new, national framework for how the use of police powers – including stop and search and use of force – are scrutinised at a local level. This framework will ensure that local scrutiny panels are independently led, reflect the diversity of the areas they represent and give police officers the confidence to use their powers with the backing of local communities.
• Action 11: To tackle serious violent crime, which disproportionately affects some ethnic minority groups, the Home Office is bringing into force the Serious Violence Duty which will require local authorities, the police, criminal justice agencies, health authorities and others to work together to understand why violent crime is taking place in their area, and then to formulate and implement a strategy for tackling these drivers of serious violence.
• Action 12: To protect the public and police officers and to give communities confidence that they are being policed fairly, the Home Office will support the College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council by autumn 2024 to review and deliver any necessary improvements to police officer training in de-escalation skills and conflict management in everyday police-citizen encounters, such as use of stop and search and use of force powers.
• Action 13: To improve transparency and promote uptake, the Home Office will identify and seek to remove unnecessary barriers that prevent increased use of Body Worn Video (BWV) and will encourage policing bodies to share guidance and best practice on the use of BWV. The Home Office, with policing partners, will also explore how best to facilitate the sharing of BWV footage with local scrutiny panels, in order to improve the scrutiny of police decision-making and improve the understanding of legitimate police use of powers such as stop and search. This will feed into the new framework for scrutinising use of police powers that will be developed by summer 2023.
• Action 14: To give greater clarity and context to stop and search data, and reassure the public about its use, the RDU will work with the Home Office, Office for Statistics Regulation and ONS to improve the way this data is reported and to enable more accurate comparisons to be made between different police force areas.
• Action 15: The Home Office and Government Race Disparity Unit will work with policing partners and the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners to consider a range of metrics for stop and search rates in order to identify and, where necessary, challenge disparities at police force area level. To be clear, a higher rate should not automatically be regarded as a problem, but the reasons should be transparent and explicable to local communities.

3a. Consideration of limb 1 of the duty: Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited by the Equality Act.

Specials receive the same training as regular officers and, in volunteering to serve their communities, can face the same dangerous situations as regular officers. If you agree to this change, the total amount of Taser uses may or may not rise, depending on the number of additional officers equipped with Taser, but there is no evidence to suggest that the proportion of those uses on people from groups with protected characteristics would change. We have no evidence to suggest that equipping specials will increase rates of disparity or disproportionality. All rates of disproportionality can go up and down depending on the circumstances and sample size and are not specific to specials carrying Taser.

The National Taser Stakeholder Advisory Group suggested that the lower number of hours that specials work could lead to higher risks of serious injuries or deaths from Taser use. However, there is no evidence to suggest this and all the existing safeguards that are in place mitigate risks for any officer carrying Taser. Specials will be eligible to carry Taser only if they have achieved directed patrol status (deployed in a supervised or managed environment), completed 12 months’ service since achieving directed patrol status and completed 200 hours duty since achieving directed patrol status. Some Specials work the same number of hours, if not more than their regular counterparts.

We will keep this policy under review so that if any issues are identified, we can investigate them and, if necessary, make you (Home Secretary) aware.

Age

Direct Discrimination

There is no evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of age.

Indirect Discrimination

We have no evidence to suggest that younger people will be impacted more by Tasers, as a result of specials being authorised to carry Taser or not.

In the year ending March 2021, Tasers were ‘used^{[footnote 1]}’ more often on people under the age of 35 than on the overall population. In the year ending March 2021, Tasers were used in 34,429 incidents. Although numbers are low, Tasers are sometimes used on children where it is proportionate and necessary to do so based on the officers’ assessment of threat and risk. Of the 34,429 Taser incidents, 6 were perceived to involve someone aged under 11; 2,585 aged 11-17 years; 19,458 aged 18-34 years, 8,728 aged 35-49 years, 2,385 aged 50 to 64 years and 224 aged 65 and over. Age was not reported in 1,043 incidents.

There were 3,284 incidents where Taser was discharged (fired) in year ending March 2021. Of the 3,284 Taser discharge incidents, one was perceived to involve someone aged under 11 years; 122 aged 11-17 years; 1,884 aged 18-34 years, 977 aged 35-49 years, 247 aged 50 to 64 years and 17 aged 65 and over. Age was not reported in 36 incidents.

White people accounted for over three quarters (77%) of homicide victims in both the 0-14 and 21+ age groups in the three-year period 2017/18 to 2019/20. However, almost half (49%) of homicide victims aged 15-17 and 37% of those aged 18-20 were from the black ethnic group. Around a third (34%) of all black homicide victims were aged between 15 and 20. In comparison, these age groups accounted for 6% of victims from white, 17% from Asian and 27% from other ethnic groups.

All officers receive comprehensive training in assessing the potential vulnerabilities of a person including factors such as age and stature when assessing each situation.

In the case of either option, Taser use is likely to continue to disproportionately impact people under the age of 35, however Taser has been assessed as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public, and police officers, safe so it does not indirectly discriminate.

Disability

Direct Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of disability.

Indirect Discrimination

We have no evidence to suggest that proportional numbers of Taser use will change for those suffering from disability or from mental ill health, should specials be authorised to carry Taser or not. In the case of either option, the level of Taser use could continue or go up or down based on a number of factors, however we think that allowing police and specials to carry Taser is a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public, offenders and police officers, safe.

In the year ending March 2021, Home Office published data shows that in 29% (9,849) of Taser incidents, mental health was an impact factor, 3% (923) of Taser incidents had acute behavioural disturbance as an impact factor and 18% (6,120) of Taser incidents involved someone perceived as having a mental health condition by the officer.

To note: data on factors that impacted on the use of force incident are collected. These are called ‘impact factors’ and include possession of a weapon, alcohol, drugs, mental health, prior knowledge, size/gender/build, acute behavioural disturbance, crowd and other. Officers can record multiple impact factors for each incident but do not have to record an impact factor for every incident if none apply.

In the year ending March 2021, Home Office published data shows that in 38% (1,253) of Taser discharged incidents, mental health was an impact factor, 7% (217) had acute behavioural disturbance as an impact factor and 24% (772) of Taser discharge incidents involved someone perceived as having a mental health condition by the officer.

To mitigate against the risk of indirect discrimination, all officers receive comprehensive training in assessing the potential vulnerabilities of a person including training on awareness of mental health issues, skills for managing at the point of contact, de-escalation and understanding the dangers of using Tasers with vulnerable people. In addition to this the COP are currently reviewing and seeking to further develop its de-escalation training for officers, we anticipate that this will further support officers to only use force as a final resort.

In the case of either option, disparities are likely to continue, however, Taser has been assessed as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public, and police officers, safe so it does not indirectly discriminate.

Gender Reassignment

Direct Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment.

Indirect Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in indirect discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment.

Marriage and Civil Partnership

Direct Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of marriage and civil partnership.

Indirect Discrimination

This information is not collected but there is no evidence to show that Tasers are used more often for this protected characteristic.

Pregnancy and Maternity

Direct Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of pregnancy and maternity.

Indirect Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in indirect discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment.

Race

Direct Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of race.

Indirect Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that those from ethnic minority communities who experience Taser use at a proportionately higher rate (compared to census data) than white people would experience proportionately higher levels of Taser use if Taser were or were not carried by specials. As detailed in the statistics below for either option, some disparities are likely to continue, however, we think that the Taser use by police and specials can be justified as Taser is a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public, and police officers, safe.

In the year ending March 2021, Taser use involved someone perceived as being from a black ethnic group at a rate 6.3 times higher than someone perceived as being from a white ethnic group in English and Welsh police force areas (excluding the Metropolitan police), and at a rate 5.1 times higher in the Metropolitan police force area, when compared with [2011 census data](2011 Census: Key Statistics for Local Authorities in England and Wales - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk) in the annual Home Office data release. This ten-year-old census data means that the population distributions will have changed.

Work is being carried out in the area of race and disparities in police use of powers, including the NPCC’s Race and Inclusion Plan of Action. As part of this, NPCC has developed an Outcomes Framework to ensure all actions it undertakes as part of the Action Plan contribute to creating an anti-racist police service.

CED use, by type of use and perceived ethnicity, England and Wales, year ending March 2021

CED use type	White	Black (or Black British)	Asian (or Asian British)	Mixed	Other	Not reported	Total
Times CED used	23,569 (68%)	6,361 (18%)	2,290 (7%)	836 (2%)	810 (2%)	563 (2%)	34,429 (100%)
Non-discharge	19,238 (82%)	5,548 (87%)	2,028 (89%)	734 (88%)	701 (87%)	464 (82%)	28,713 (83%)
Discharge	2,258 (10%)	654 (10%)	180 (8%)	71 (8%)	85 (10%)	36 (6%)	3,284 (10%)
Not stated	2,073 (9%)	159 (2%)	82 (4%)	31 (4%)	24 (3%)	63 (11%)	2,432 (7%)

Table 7: Rate of CED use, by type of use and perceived ethnicity, England and Wales, year ending March 2021

All CED use

Force area	White	Black (or Black British)	Asian (or Asian British)	Mixed	Other
England and Wales	1.00	6.98	1.11	1.40	2.94
England and Wales exc. Metropolitan Police	1.00	6.29	1.02	1.46	2.81
Metropolitan Police	1.00	5.07	0.91	0.95	2.12

CED discharges

Force area	White	Black (or Black British)	Asian (or Asian British)	Mixed	Other
England and Wales	1.00	7.49	0.91	1.24	3.22
England and Wales exc. Metropolitan Police	1.00	6.59	0.78	1.32	2.53
Metropolitan Police	1.00	5.13	0.75	0.77	2.48

CED non-discharges

Force area	White	Black (or Black British)	Asian (or Asian British)	Mixed	Other
England and Wales	1.00	7.46	1.21	1.50	3.12
England and Wales exc. Metropolitan Police	1.00	6.51	1.09	1.56	2.98
Metropolitan Police	1.00	5.07	0.93	0.97	2.08

The causes of disproportionality are complex, and it is generally acknowledged that they exist across the criminal justice system and in wider society, but we have no information to suggest that specials would behave any differently to regular officers when using Taser. We also know that serious violence levels, particularly in London, are often concentrated in the most deprived wards with a higher resident population of minority ethnic groups. Therefore, we expect the same or a similar level of disparity for minority ethnic groups in use of Taser whether specials are permitted to carry Taser or not. However, as explained above we think that Taser use by police and specials is a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public, and police officers, safe.

The latest Home Office data suggests that once drawn, Tasers were discharged in 10% of incidents involving people perceived to be of white ethnicity, 10% of incidents involving people perceived to be of black ethnicity and 10% of incidents involving people believed to be from the group classified as other ethnicity within the data collection. For those perceived to be of Asian ethnicity the discharge rate was 8%, as well as for those perceived to be of mixed ethnicity, as classified within the data collection. There is no evidence to suggest that there will be differences in proportional rates whether or not specials are permitted to carry Taser. In the case of either option, disparities are likely to continue, however, Taser has been assessed as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public and police officers safe so it does not indirectly discriminate.

Religion or Belief

Direct Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of religion or belief.

Indirect Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in indirect discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment.

Sex

Direct Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of sex

Indirect Discrimination

We have no evidence to suggest that the trend of men being more impacted by Tasers will change, as detailed in the statistics below, should specials be authorised to carry Taser or not. In the case of either option, disparities are likely to continue, however, Taser has been assessed as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public, and police officers, safe.

Tasers are used significantly more on men than on women. Of the 34,429 Taser incidents, 31,186 involved males (as perceived by the police officer), 2,624 involved females, 94 involved those recorded as other gender and 525 had no gender reported. We expect this ratio to continue if specials are equipped with Tasers.

The majority of arrests in the latest year (year ending March 2021) were of males (85% of total arrests), a percentage that has remained at a similar level for more than ten years. This compares with 82% in the police use of force data, 91% for stop & search and 92% for stop & search that results in an arrest. See Police powers and procedures: Stop and search and arrests, England and Wales, year ending 31 March 2021 second edition.

Sexual Orientation

Direct Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in direct discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation.

Indirect Discrimination

We have not identified any evidence to suggest that specials carrying or not carrying Taser could result in indirect discrimination on grounds of gender reassignment.

3b. Consideration of limb 2: Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it.

[Please consider if there is evidence that different groups have different needs which are relevant to the policy/service/decision? Does the proposal meet those needs?]

Age

Research indicates that younger people are more likely to be the victims and perpetrators of serious violence^{[footnote 2]}. Making Taser available to specials will mean that they are better able to protect the public, including young people.

Disability

All officers receive comprehensive training in assessing the potential vulnerabilities of a person including training on awareness of mental health issues, skills for managing at the point of contact, de-escalation and understanding the dangers of using Tasers with vulnerable people.

Home Office officials are engaging with mental health and disability charities in order to understand the biggest issues that people with this protected characteristic face in terms of the police’s use of force. These discussions will help to determine the next steps for work going forward.

Gender Reassignment

We do not have any evidence that gender reassignment makes an individual more likely to be impacted by the use of Taser.

Maternity and Pregnancy

We do not have any evidence that maternity and pregnancy make an individual more likely to be impacted by the use of Taser.

Race

Over-representation of black and minority ethnic communities as victims of violence is evident at a national level. In the three year period 2017/18 to 2019/20 there was a greater number of male than female homicide victims in all ethnic groups. The proportion of male homicides was highest in the black ethnic group (89%), followed by the other ethnic group (77%), and the Asian ethnic group (68%) as classified within the data collection. The lowest proportion of male homicides was in the white ethnic group (65%) (see the Ethnicity and the Criminal Justice System, 2020. The intention of this policy is to allow specials to be able to deal with dangerous incidents more effectively and safely, with the aim of increasing the equality of opportunity to be safe in public spaces.

As at 31 March 2021,12.7% of all specials who have declared their ethnicity, identify as being part of a black, Asian, mixed or other minority ethnic group. This represents the highest proportion since recording began in March 2007. Whilst 12.7% falls below levels reported in the general population (14.0%), this is a greater proportion than seen among other police officers (7.6%).

In the latest year, the number of specials from both the mixed and other ethnic groups, as classified within the data collection, exceeded levels seen in the general population, however black and Asian ethnic representation remained below the general population.

Allowing specials, a more ethnically diverse group than regular police officers, to carry Taser, may encourage people who share a protected characteristic of race to participate in policing, especially as it puts them on a par with other officers in terms of being equipped to meet threats and risks to the public and themselves.

Religion or Belief

We do not have any evidence religion or belief makes an individual more likely to be impacted by the use of Taser.

Sex

Research indicates that males are more likely than females to be involved in recent increases in homicide^{[footnote 3]}. As in previous years, most homicide victims in the year ending March 2020 were male (73%)^{[footnote 4]}. Taser has been assessed as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public and police officers safe.

Sexual Orientation

We do not have any evidence that sexual orientation makes an individual more likely to be impacted by the use of Taser.

3c. Consideration of limb 3: Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and persons who do not share it

[Consider how is this policy/service/decision going to be received by people who do not benefit from it? Is it likely to be perceived as favouritism/ discrimination even if it is not? Will the policy /service/decision cause people to “blame” another group for causing a problem/benefiting unfairly?]

Age

Younger people and people from ethnically diverse communities are more often victims of crime than the regular population (see: Ethnicity and the Criminal Justice System, 2020). If effectively utilised, we expect better equipped specials could contribute to better outcomes for the police and the communities that they serve. This could increase young people’s confidence in policing. In the case of either option, disparities are likely to continue, however, Taser has been assessed as a proportionate means of achieving the legitimate aims of keeping the public, and police officers, safe.

Disability

The Home Office engages with disability, including mental health, charities in order to enhance understanding of the issues that disabled people experience with the police’s use of force. However, Taser is used relatively less often on physically disabled people than the population as a whole, as a percentage of Use of Force incidents. Taser was used as a tactic in 3% of tactics recorded involving people with a perceived physical disability and 4% of tactics recorded involving people with no perceived mental or physical health condition in the year ending March 2021.

Gender Reassignment

We do not have evidence to suggest the impact of specials carrying, or not carrying, Tasers would impact gender reassignment.

Maternity and Pregnancy

We do not have evidence to suggest the impact of specials carrying, or not carrying, Taser would impact on maternity and pregnancy under either option.

Race

The Home Office participates in the NPCC chaired National Taser Stakeholder Advisory Group which provides a forum where police use of Taser can be shared and debated with civil community groups. The Home Office and police use this forum to take account of concerns when developing initiatives and policy.

Some civil community groups and representative organisations view the general rise in the reported use of Tasers over the years negatively and allowing or not allowing specials to carry Taser will not change this. This is also the case for people with protected characteristics who as a group experience proportionately a higher number of Taser uses. Government regularly communicates that all police use of force must be lawful, proportionate and necessary; we are clear that specials are subject to the same assurance processes and scrutiny as regular officers and are accountable for their actions when they choose to use force.

The Government is looking carefully at strengthening the system of local community scrutiny and the value and use of body-worn video to increase trust in policing.

The Home Office publication of Use of Force data since 2018 brings unprecedented transparency and delivers a commitment to respond to public concerns in relation to this complex area of modern-day policing. Individual forces are encouraged to conduct their own analysis to identify patterns and trends in data, develop ways of improving practice, and test the impact of local initiatives.

The College of Policing in conjunction with the NPCC are designing and developing National Personal Safety Training, including mandated curriculum (for both initial and annual CPD training), mandated refresher contact time and specified refresher periods (every 365 days), standards (including trainer standards) and governance (including a quality assurance of the training).

Religion or Belief

We do not have evidence specifically considering the impact of specials carrying, or not carrying, Taser on religion or belief under either option.

Sex

Black and minority ethnic men in particular are more impacted by Taser use than the average but are also more represented in the criminal justice system. The majority of arrests in the latest year (YE March 2021) were of males (85% of total arrests), a percentage that has been stable for more than ten years. This compares with 82% in the use of force stats, 91% for stop & search and 92% for stop & search that results in an arrest. However, we have no evidence to suggest that special’s carrying, or not carrying, Taser will change proportionate rates.

Sexual Orientation

We do not have evidence specifically considering the impact of specials carrying, or not carrying, Taser on sexual orientation under either option.

4. Summary of foreseeable impacts of policy proposal, guidance or operational activity on people who share protected characteristics

Protected characteristic group	Potential for positive or negative Impact?	Explanation	Action to address negative impact
Age	Negative	Tasers are used more on young people than older people.	We collect this data as part of our national-level annual data collection. We will investigate if any issues arise.
Disability	Negative	Tasers are used on people with mental health issues more often than the general population.	We are collecting this data as part of our national-level annual data collection. we will monitor disparities to see whether additional mitigations or safeguards are required. All officers receive comprehensive training in assessing the potential vulnerabilities of a person including training on awareness of mental health issues, skills for managing at the point of contact, de-escalation and understanding the dangers of using restraint techniques with vulnerable people.
Gender reassignment	n/a	We are not aware of data which suggests equipping specials with Taser will affect this protected characteristic.	None as no negative impact expected.
Marriage and civil partnership	n/a	We are not aware of data which suggests equipping Special Constables with Taser will affect this protected characteristic.	None as no negative impact expected.
Pregnancy and maternity	n/a	We are not aware of data which suggests equipping Special Constables with Taser will affect this protected characteristic.	None as no negative impact expected.
Race	Negative	Tasers are used on black and minority ethnic people more often than the average of the general population.	We collect this data as part of our national-level annual data collection. The Government is looking carefully at strengthening the system of local community scrutiny and the value and use of body-worn video in order to increase confidence in policing.
Religion or belief	n/a	We are not aware of data which suggests equipping specials with Taser will affect this protected characteristic.	None as no negative impact expected.
Sex	Negative	Tasers are used on men more often than women.	We are collecting this data as part of our national-level annual data collection. Once available, we will monitor disparities to see whether additional mitigations or safeguards are required.
Sexual orientation	n/a	We are not aware of data which suggests equipping specials with Taser will affect this protected characteristic.	None as no negative impact expected.

5. In light of the overall policy objective, are there any ways to avoid or mitigate any of the negative impacts that you have identified above?

[Use this section provide further information on mitigations as required]

The Government is looking carefully at strengthening the system of local community scrutiny and the value and use of body-worn video in order to increase confidence in policing. This work will help to both eliminate unlawful discrimination and to foster good relations between the government and across affected communities.

The College of Policing is responsible for setting the standards and training to which police operate. Guidance on the use of force and restraint by the police is set out in the College of Policing Authorised Professional Practice (APP), which includes guidance on how to interact with vulnerable people.

Equality and diversity are an essential part of the professional behaviour expected of everyone working in policing as set out in the Code of Ethics published by the College of Policing. The Code of Ethics supports those working in policing to deliver the highest professional standards in their service to the public.
Decisions around use of force are guided by the National Decision Model, which has been adopted by police as a framework for decision making and ensures any decisions can be effectively evaluated and challenged where necessary.

Where the difficult and often time critical decision to use force is taken, police officers are accountable for their actions.

Police are required to refer serious incidents to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC), including those involving the use of Taser. All IOPC investigations are done so independently of the Home Office. The IOPC also has power to investigate without need to wait for a referral and to present cases at disciplinary hearings in cases where it is in the public interest that they do so. The Director General of the IOPC also has powers to issue guidance to police forces arising from its investigations.

HMICFRS inspect all forces on the legitimacy with which they treat the public and their workforces through the Police Efficiency, Effectiveness and Legitimacy programme.

The College of Policing in conjunction with the NPCC are designing and developing National Personal Safety Training, including a mandated curriculum (for both initial and annual training), mandated refresher contact time and specified annual refresher periods, standards (including trainer standards) and more governance (including a quality assurance of the training).

The training is being developed in collaboration with Loughborough University focusing on a new system of learning and pedagogy to challenge officers and staff decision making in response to common policing and risk situations. It contains learning from coroners, IOPC and other stakeholders as detailed above.

The new national Personal Safety Training curriculum and associated training product will provide nationally consistent standards of training and delivery. It will also provide clear mandated requirements, such as course content, contact time for training delivery, annual refresher requirements, that all UK Police Forces must adopt. The CoP will, in conjunction with the Self Defence and Restraint Board and NPCC where appropriate, continue to provide updates, developments and lessons learnt to Forces.

6. Review date

7. Declaration

I have read the available evidence and I am satisfied that this demonstrates compliance, where relevant, with Section 149 of the Equality Act and that due regard has been made to the need to: eliminate unlawful discrimination; advance equality of opportunity; and foster good relations.

SCS sign off

Date: 10th May 2022

For monitoring purposes all completed EIA documents must be sent to PSED@homeoffice.gov.uk

Date sent to PSED Team: 17 November 2021

EIA enquires must also be sent to PSED@homeoffice.gov.uk

1. To note that a Taser is ‘used’ whenever it is drawn. This includes all higher levels of force including when a taser is fired. When fired it can be referred to as being ‘discharged’. ↩

2. GOV.UK(2018) Serious Violence Strategy. Available at: Serious Violence Strategy - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk). (Date accessed: 03/12/2021) ↩

3. Home Office (2018). Serious Violence Strategy. ↩

4. Office for National Statistics (2021) Homicide in England and Wales: year ending March 2020. Available at: Homicide in England and Wales - Office for National Statistics (ons.gov.uk) (Accessed: 03/12/2021) ↩