Official Report: Minutes of Evidence

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): I welcome Maura Campbell, deputy director of policing policy and strategy division in the Department of Justice; William Dukelow, head of police powers and HR policy branch in the policing policy and strategy division; and temporary Assistant Chief Constable Tim Mairs, who is from operational support in the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI). The session will be recorded by Hansard and published on the Committee's web page.

Maura and Tim are at the table to provide an overview of the proposed statutory rule and its operational implications, and William is available to answer questions on the detail of the statutory rule, if that is necessary.

Ms Maura Campbell (Department of Justice): Thank you very much, Chair. I plan to keep the opening comments brief to afford members the maximum time for questions.

The background to the statutory rule is that the Chief Constable has asked the Department to amend the existing Police Trainee Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2001 in order to disapply on a temporary basis the current requirement for a trainee to have completed 145 days' training before being attested as a constable. We have consulted the Northern Ireland Policing Board and the police staff associations, all of which have been content, in principle, to support the Chief Constable's proposal. The Minister of Justice has, therefore, agreed to the request in order to maximise the PSNI's operational capacity during the exceptional circumstances in which we find ourselves as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The change is a contingency measure and will be used only if the Chief Constable considers it necessary and proportionate to do so.

Alongside the legislative change, the PSNI is actively considering what the basic level requirements should be for an officer to be able to undertake their duties. That is being informed by recent College of Policing guidance on minimum standards and will take account of requirements that are specific to this jurisdiction.

It is the PSNI's intention that, if is this option were to be used, the newly attested officers would be deployed alongside experienced officers and would have mentoring support. In addition, the officers would remain in development during their full probationary period of two years, during which time any remaining training requirements would be completed. They would be subject to ongoing assessment to ensure no diminution in standards.

PSNI colleagues have undertaken to keep the Northern Ireland Policing Board fully briefed on how they plan to use the flexibility and how they do so in practice, consistent with the existing accountability arrangements. The PSNI and the Department have also engaged with the Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, and the PSNI has undertaken to revert to the office, should it decide to reduce the training time, and to provide specific details of the areas of training that would be impacted.

The Department will also, of course, keep the need for the facility under review and will continue to maintain close contact with the PSNI so that the Minister can make a properly informed decision on how long it should remain in place. When it is no longer required, it is our intention to bring forward fresh regulations rather than include a sunset clause in these regulations, given the uncertainty around how long the pandemic may last [Interruption.]

I conclude by thanking the Committee for arranging this session so swiftly. We have asked you to work with us on a significantly compressed timetable, and we appreciate your willingness to do so. Ideally, we would make the change in advance of the Easter break if that is possible. We are happy, as ever, to take any questions that you may have.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): Thank you, Maura. There is a little bit of feedback on the teleconferencing system.

I have a couple of questions. This is a contingency measure that is part of the resilience modelling plan that the PSNI is putting together for potential scenarios as part of the COVID-19 response that it needs to put in place. At what point will the measure be triggered? If it becomes necessary for student officers to be involved in those duties, when is that likely to have to happen? Will you elaborate a little on the overall PSNI resilience model in respect of COVID-19?

Mr Tim Mairs (PSNI): First, I echo the thanks for the very short notice response to this. We welcome the opportunity to discuss the regulations. We have worked hard to model how we would retain our core services in a range of scenarios where we would see a reduction in staff availability through absence. As you are aware, there were projections of up to 30% of front-line staff being unavailable. Clearly, depending on how an infection spread and the geographical impacts, that may impact on certain areas of the business more than others.

My colleagues in the service executive team and I have worked hard to set out a comprehensive business continuity plan about how we would support specialist functions — for example, what our resilience looks like for our firearms officers — but also how we would start to choose to reduce the services that we deliver in line with threat, harm and risk to the public. In doing both of those and trying to protect our front-line capabilities as long as possible, the assessment is that, if the Police Service could no longer deliver our core duties — emergency response to 999 calls and supporting agencies in article 2 or life-at-risk issues — that would be the point at which the Chief Constable may consider that that is a significant enough risk to take the very dramatic step of reducing training time to allow us to move, say, one of our courses into an operational environment, which would give us access to, potentially, an additional 50 police officers. It is part of that thought-through model that was to stack up against potentially significant impacts on our operational capability.

I trust that it is reassuring to make a couple of points. As we stand today, the Police Service of Northern Ireland is operating with approximately 11% of our staff unavailable. That sits quite favourably in relation to comparable police services across the UK and Ireland. This is not an option that we see as being required right now. It is also not a desirable option for us. Police training was a critical theme in the original independent review of policing, and the Policing Board, which holds us to account on police training, was provided with an extensive review of our student officer training programme a number of years ago, which then saw significant investment.

We are aware that we ask our officers to do a difficult job, and we value the quality of the training that we provide. This step is not a desirable one for us to take, nor is it one that we would take lightly. However, if the Chief Constable found that lives could be at risk because we did not have enough police officers to deliver a service, it would be a prudent option to create a capability in the regulations that the Minister could use.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): I appreciate that, and it is important that you have elaborated on your modelling. This is a significant change in the law and would be a significant departure from the current procedures for the training of your student officers. We need to have transparency as to why this is needed in order to justify the change. I welcome the information that you are giving to us.

You said that around 11% of staff were unavailable. Is that a ballpark 600 or 700 officers?

Mr Mairs: Approximately, yes. Obviously, that is a changing figure as the situation unfolds, but it is in that region.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): Is that trajectory increasing, or has it remained static for the past number of weeks?

Mr Mairs: At present, certainly over the last week, it is consistently around the 10% to 11% mark. As you will be aware, the people who understand these things have a range of modelling scenarios available to them, and it is our responsibility to plan to respond effectively to all those scenarios. One of those scenarios is that we would see a significant increase in absence. We know that there are police services in England and Wales that have experienced in excess of 30% absence at times. I am confident that we could probably still maintain our services at that stage with what we have, but it would certainly get difficult at that point. The last thing that we want to do is be unable to fulfil our responsibility to protect our communities.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): I understand that the Minister wants the change in the law to take effect from tomorrow, Friday, which would indicate a concern that we will see an acceleration in staff absence. This may just be a more prudent step to provide for a worst-case scenario. That is why I ask whether the trajectory is accelerating all of a sudden to require the setting aside of the normal 21-day procedure whereby the Assembly would have to vote on the matter. That gives me some reassurance.

Is the call-in of student officers to carry out those duties the ultimate fallback, or is modelling taking place for a situation where numbers deteriorate further, requiring you to go beyond the use of student officers? Is there modelling being done for that contingency?

Mr Mairs: Our business continuity plan allows us to take steps to push resource to the most critical functions. We have done some of that already. Our local policing resources have moved on to a new shift pattern, which means that they are more resilient and there is more cover. My resources in the operational support department have been taken off non-urgent tasks and put on to front-line work. A number of those measures can be implemented over time, as numbers reduce. I suggest that, should we have to deploy officers from the college early, we are pretty much getting to the point where our options have narrowed considerably. That is some way down the road, so I can offer reassurance to the Committee that that is not a decision that we would take lightly. However, on a daily basis, being able to release 50 additional officers at a critical moment is a useful option for us.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): OK. Thank you for those answers.

Ms Dillon: Did you say, Tim, that this option would allow for 50 additional officers?

Mr Mairs: As a ballpark figure. Generally, the courses that come through are in the region of 50 per course. Numbers vary from course to course, depending on numbers and on how many withdraw, but, in general terms, it is around that figure.

Ms Dillon: The Chair has covered much of what I was thinking of. You mentioned specialisms. Obviously, somebody would not be carrying a firearm unless they had had firearms training. All that stuff is covered. I am content that the Policing Board has looked at this and is content with it and will oversee it. If this had to kick in, would the Chief Constable contact the Policing Board to make it aware of that? I am content that the Policing Board should have oversight of this; that is where it lies. I have no real issues with this. Obviously, you would have concerns about anybody not being able to complete their training, but we are in very different times.

I am happy to hear those figures, but you are right: that could change on any given day. However, the fact that your absence rate sits at 11% when some other forces have absences of 30% is a positive thing. I said to Alan Todd last week that the PSNI was carrying out its duties, including the social distancing stuff, in the right way. However, that will become more difficult, and you probably will need more officers on that kind of duty. As we go into the good weather, it will become more difficult to make people stay at home. That will depend on what happens in the grander scheme of things. If people see the number of deaths going down, they are more likely to think, "Everything is OK. Let's get out there". That may put a bit more pressure on you.

It is a fair enough ask, and I appreciate that you have come to us at this point, when it is a contingency, rather than waiting until it was required and a decision having to be made very quickly. Although this meeting had to be called quickly, it has given us an opportunity to ask questions and, if we had to, knock it back. That would not be my recommendation, but it has given us that opportunity. I appreciate that you brought it to us in such a timely manner.

Mr Mairs: Thank you.

Mr Dunne: Thank you very much, everyone, for addressing the Committee at such short notice. Will you clarify the full period of training for the officers who do come through?

Mr Mairs: The regulations require a minimum of 145 days' training. My mental maths is not great, so I cannot translate that into weeks off the top of my head. We provided 23 weeks, but, in March, we reduced it to 21 weeks as part of our social distancing measures to allow us to reduce the time of our most senior courses and, overall, start to reduce the number of officers in training. At the moment, it is a 21-week course. If you compare that with Police Scotland's initial training course, which is 12 weeks, and the period authorised by the College of Policing for England and Wales, which is 13 weeks, you see that we provide a longer package. In normal times, we think that that is the right thing to do. Clearly, there is Northern Ireland-specific training that has to be delivered, including firearms training. On top of that, it gives us the time and space to reinforce a lot of the key lessons through content provided by external speakers. For example, we will train our officers about vulnerability and get really good input from external speakers from the likes of Women's Aid and other organisations.

In all truth, at the moment, because of the issues around social distancing and other matters, many of those external speakers are just not able to come right now, and those are inputs that we can provide at later stages in an officer's probationary training, when they come back for further training. By looking at those, we are able to reduce some of the requirements, but, certainly, for us, on a standard day, that 21 weeks allows us to train people in the basics and get them through their assessments and helps them to reinforce some of that learning in a simulated training environment, which we find really helpful, before they are sent out to the local station, where an awful lot of further training and learning occurs already. As it stands, a probationary officer will be assessed for two years once they go out on the ground and has to demonstrate operational competence on the ground. That will continue. That will still be required, and that is still there for now.

Hopefully, there is some reassurance around that. Our objective is that, if we are required to curtail the training, all the core assessments and qualifications that an officer must complete to be competent would still be completed. We would maybe look to curtail some of the additional reinforcing measures. Some of those can be delivered remotely online, and some of those can be delivered at a later stage. We can provide training on areas such as awareness of internal police units by access to the website and things like that.

Mr Dunne: Do you see them being spread out across the Province to various stations, or would they work in the greater Belfast area or whatever?

Mr Mairs: In basic terms, when those officers join the police college, they are allocated to a district at that point and would go to those districts. That allocation at that time is done against our HR model: "Where do we require those officers?". The fact that they would complete their training in a constrained period would not influence where they are deployed. If an officer is attested as a constable in the Police Service of Northern Ireland, we are saying that they are competent to perform that role and will send them to the district to which they have been allocated.

Mr Dunne: The other issue has already been touched on. The big issue for all of us, as elected representatives, is police on the ground trying to tell people to go home and trying to disperse crowds. In the north Down area, we get a lot of that. A lot of concern is being raised about this weekend along the coastal path from, I suppose, Seapark to Portaferry. We have such a coastal area. I have been in touch with the police today about that very issue. They tell me that they will do their best and are monitoring the situation, but, I suppose, it comes back to resources. If this goes some way to addressing that or, let us be fair, may go towards it, that is a positive thing.

All of us should stress the need for people not to congregate in large groups in open spaces in public areas. It really is a very negative thing to do. People see the positivity of being out and about in the fresh air, but the negativity of it is when it goes against social distancing. People are blatantly not observing the rules, and I think that would we fully support the police in taking whatever measures they can to reinforce it this weekend.

Mr McGlone: Sorry, in advance, if people cannot hear me properly. I am having a lot of difficulty hearing the discourse, but I hope that people can bear with me. I am way out in the country.

I have two or three questions for the PSNI on the attestation of police trainees. Everybody, in principle, supports what is happening in the difficult times that we are going through. The documentation mentions practical scenario training that trainees may not do, and it would be interesting to get an insight into that. Probably as important if not more important for them is that they have adequate amounts of personal protective equipment (PPE) for the circumstances that they are in and that they have training in the use of PPE. Those are my questions. I hope that they have come across clearly enough, Chair.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): Yes, they have. We can hear you very clearly, Patsy. I am sorry that you cannot hear us just as clearly.

Mr Mairs: On the first issue, as I mentioned, we put a lot of emphasis on exercising the learning that the officers have achieved in practical scenarios in the college. That allows us to reinforce that in a safe learning environment.

We are keen to maintain and continue that, but we are also aware that it is not a core element of the course. Once an officer has passed, for example, their assessment on how to deliver first aid, on how to protect themselves and others safely or on their knowledge of the law, they are competent to deploy to a local station. We are also aware that, no matter how many simulated experiences you have of arresting an individual, the first time you arrest someone in real life is a daunting experience — I still remember the first time that I had to do it — and you need a lot of support to go through that. That experience will remain. Our view is that, if the Chief Constable has to decide between having sufficient officers to attend emergency calls and protect life and curtailing some of that experiential learning for an officer, it is right and proper that he is able to make that decision. Therefore, we are thankful that the Department has considered that amendment.

My colleague Alan Todd, gold commander for our response to COVID-19, has been working exceptionally hard within the organisation and with our colleagues in Health to ensure that we have sufficient personal protective equipment for our front-line officers and staff, and we are seeing more of that become available. Training around PPE is being delivered through online learning, videos and other such content. Again, we are grateful to colleagues in Health and others who have been able to educate us in how to doff and don a lot of this stuff. It is not something that we are naturally aware of. It is not part of the Police Service's initial curriculum for its student officers, and it will remain something on which we would provide training in the district setting. That seems to work well for us, and I think that we would continue to provide that once an officer is in the district and against need. It is not a skill set that you require all the time, but, when you require it, you need to know what you are doing. At the moment, we are working hard to ensure that our officers are equipped and knowledgeable in how to use that equipment.

Mr McGlone: Thanks for that response. I listened carefully to what Mr Mairs said about Mr Todd working to ensure that there was sufficient PPE. Do you, in fact, have sufficient PPE?

Mr Mairs: We are working hard to maintain the supply. Last night, I was with one of our teams that is dedicated to our specialist response to COVID-19. They were able to show me the equipment that they have. The reality, however, is that the current rate of usage is significant, as it is in Health, so it is important that, at all stages, we collectively have access to reliable supply chains that can continue to supply that material. It is also important to be clear that the whole of NI has a requirement for PPE, and it is important that accessing that material does not become a competition between Departments. The civil contingencies group, chaired by the head of the Civil Service, is working hard, and we know that, along with the UK Government and others, we are working hard to get access to that. At this stage, we are able to provide that equipment to our folks, but you will all be aware of the pressures on that market and on supply chains globally. My colleagues who are working on that are working exceptionally hard to maintain the supply.

Miss Woods: Thank you for coming to the Committee at such short notice. I have a couple of questions about shortening the 145-day period. What is the lowest number of days that you will consider?

Mr Mairs: Any decision to reduce will be at a moment in time, so it will depend on the number of officers that we require and the stages that courses are at. The Scottish Police College's course is 12 or 13 weeks: I am keen not to go that far. I think that we will look at a curtailment in the region of weeks rather than months to allow us to accelerate people out. I am hesitant to give a specific date, because we did not stipulate a new figure and it is important that we are able to make that judgement call when we get to that. As I said, we feel that we can truncate the course and still get a lot of the qualifications completed. It would still take longer than 13 weeks, because there are additional functions, but somewhere in the region of 16 to 19 weeks feels like something that could be done.

Again, a lot of that will be down to the conditions at the time, the pressures on the Chief Constable and the priorities that we have.

Miss Woods: Thank you. I appreciate that it is a moving picture as to when and what you need.

Have there been any conversations with the student officers to whom this might apply? Are they comfortable being deployed?

Mr Mairs: The student officers who are currently in Garnerville have been through significant change in the last couple of weeks from the conditions that they joined in. I will write to you with the specific communications that we have given them. I do not have that to hand right now. A lot of this is, obviously, preparatory work. A lot of information is flowing to our officers, particularly student officers, and we are trying to ensure that they know what they need to know, when they need to know it. The preparatory work does not directly influence them right now, but, clearly, if we were getting to a position where we had to reduce that, we would communicate fully with them, so that they understand the support that they will have and to make that clear to them.

Miss Woods: Finally, the Minister's letter stated that new constables would, in certain circumstances, support senior officers in a range of duties, including monitoring and enforcing social distancing and the closure of certain businesses. Last week, I raised that with Assistant Chief Constable Todd, who told the Committee that, as he saw it, the PSNI involvement had been conversational and that the role should be done in a partnership, with the police at the back end. Is that still the case, and will the officers get training on how to enforce social distancing before being deployed?

Mr Mairs: I will pick up on the comments from Mr Dunne as well on this. Undoubtedly, the most successful route to seeing ourselves through the pandemic is that we all commit to doing what we can to protect the NHS and to minimise the spread of the virus. If it becomes exclusively a policing matter, we will not succeed. We have been given powers under the coronavirus legislation. Alan has talked, far better than I can, about how we will take a graduated response to that. We still believe that the most important way to do that is to educate people and to encourage them to stay at home. The enforcement powers are there, and, if it is required and is in the public interest, we will use those, but I reflect on what was said. This is a societal commitment. This is something that we need to do to protect the most vulnerable in our society and the NHS. It is really encouraging that, when we are out, we see a majority of people complying with that. I am keen that we continue, as leaders in the community, to encourage people to do that. Sadly, where people choose not to do that, we have the enforcement powers, but I do not believe that the enforcement powers will get us out of this issue. The societal commitment that we see will get us through.

Mr Frew: I will tackle that thorny issue first, Chair, because it is a massive issue. Over the last number of weeks, the content of my mailbag has all been about economics, employees and employers, furlough systems, the job retention scheme and £10,000 and £20,000 grants. There are wee spikes in calls when people are seen to behave inappropriately, for example, congregating in one area or in beauty spots. That changed dramatically today, because of the sensitive issue of Francie McNally's paramilitary-style funeral. That, in itself, is bad enough, but there were 200 people gathering, roads closed and no police about. My mailbag went through the roof today on a number of issues with that. People are angry about the paramilitary garb but also because, at the minute, so many people die alone and are then buried alone. With your current operational sense, how can a gathering like that take place? I heard everything that you said about conditioning and persuading people, as opposed to enforcing — I get that and am 100% behind you — but, when people act inappropriately like this, it really gets the population angry, which could have a massive effect on how other people behave. How do you counter that?

Mr Mairs: I apologise in advance, for not being across the detail of that incident.

Mr Frew: I apologise for blindsiding you.

Mr Mairs: No, that is what I am here for. I can certainly look into it.

I go back to my previous answer, which is that, much as we in this part of the world can, at times, be a divided community, we are very clear and united around the fact that there is a job of work to be done to protect our most vulnerable and to protect the NHS and people need to bear that in mind. Where incidents occur, the police will engage. We will take an encouraging and engaging approach at the outset, and we will consider enforcement as part of that. I cannot comment on the specifics of the incident, but I appreciate that, at the heart of this, there are massive cultural and personal sensitivities about how the regulations set restrictions on probably one of the most sacred acts and sacraments that we have: the burial of a loved one. It is something that, as a human being, I have had to reflect on; it is something that we all do. How that is managed will be the most challenging area, and that is where we welcome the support of Church and community leaders in having dialogue with people about how we do what is right for society and the most vulnerable and balance that with the very sacred and precious opportunities that we have to say, "Goodbye" to our loved ones. That applies to all people, regardless of whether the cause of death has been COVID-19 or something else. That is the challenge, and it will remain the challenge.

Mr Frew: Of course, such incidents are hard to police at the best of times, but imagine some of the individuals we have been talking about being in among that. They will not be the most experienced officers dealing with it, but they could be on the periphery. That could be exploited by some people, especially criminal and paramilitary gangs. Has a risk management of that taken place?

Mr Mairs: We have worked hard as part of our operation to ask, "What types of crime will be impacted by this?". You will be aware that we have worked very hard with Women's Aid and others to raise awareness of the services available to those experiencing domestic abuse, because there is a concern that it will increase with people remaining at home. We are working hard to support issues around that. However, to give you reassurance, we are working hard to understand the changes in society that result from these unprecedented times and how people with a criminal mindset will seek to exploit them and then reposition our resources in a way that protects the community at this time. We continue to do that and work hard to deploy our resources. We are also working hard to support the NHS and the Executive on social distancing and all the other public health advice.

Mr Frew: On the regulations, I see risks that can be managed, but I also see positives. I see positives with people — I was going to say "young people", but it is not necessarily young people who apply to join the police — joining the police getting hands-on, experienced training with experienced personnel beside them. That can be very valuable.

Do the police have to do a two-year probationary period?

Mr Mairs: That is right.

Mr Frew: If they are now removed from their training setting and put into an operational setting, will they have to leave that operational environment to go back into a training cadre? What are the dynamics of that, as you are nearly going backwards as opposed to forwards? What psychological effect might that have on recruits or constables?

Mr Mairs: That is exactly why it is not an attractive option to us. Whilst we have them as a captive audience in the college, we really want to give them all the support and training in one go. There are two additional phases of training that occur during the probationary period in which they come back to their original course and we do some reinforcement and additional training. A lot of that is just to check in on people and make sure that they develop as they should.

I will give some reassurance. From our perspective, we are keen that the constables whom we attest at the point when they are sent to the college are fully attested and have all the skills and qualifications that they require. There is no difference with that. Their probationary period will remain at two years and will be broadly the same, but they will have dedicated senior constable support throughout. In that sense, there is no change at the surface. What it means is that there may be some content that we have to find an alternative way of delivering.

Mr Frew: If you remove a recruit from a training cadre a month early, will that calendar month have to be accounted for at some point? Does the two-year probation period start from when they leave Garnerville and go straight into an operational setting?

Mr Mairs: We look at the contents of those four weeks — the people in the college are better at this than I am, so I will give you the Tim version, which is a bit simpler — for stuff that we have to do. If we can do it in another way, we will do it: online content, for example. We train our officers in a lot of police computer systems, some of which are straightforward, but it can take two to three days. There is no reason why that cannot be completed remotely over a period in a station or completed prior to entering the college.

We have talked about other reinforcing content, which, I guess, private companies would call "onboarding": "Here is what the organisation is. Here are some of the cultural things that you want to know", some of the leadership skills, things that, we think, are really important for development. At a point where we did not have enough police officers to go to 999 calls, we could deliver that at the two checkpoints later on and build it into that content. It is not the case that we will send somebody out and then have to bring them back for that full four weeks. We are thinking creatively about how we can deliver the training in different ways. Bear it in mind that all of this is building up to the introduction of a university qualification with the University of Ulster next year, so we are working hard to continue to professionalise all of that training.

Mr Frew: This is my final point. As you have said, I suspect that your programmes — "depleted" is probably the wrong word — have changed. I am sure that people are still trying to go at a furious speed to see exactly what they can do and when they can do it, so it would have changed remarkably. How many recruit courses are going at the one time?

Mr Mairs: You will recall, if you think back to what I struggle to remember — a world before all this — that the Police Service was working hard to increase our numbers and was recruiting at a rate that was in excess of the peak of the Patten period. We were building up to training around, I think, 600 officers this year. That would have seen five to six courses operating in and around Garnerville at any one time, which could be around 250 people. When social distancing was introduced, we were aware that that was too many. Therefore we have taken steps to pause the entry of the next two courses that were to join. We have reduced the senior courses' tenure from 23 to 21 weeks, and we are looking at using all our training sites in a more agile way. By doing that, we can reduce the number of student officers and staff significantly in the college. That allows us to have better spacing in the classrooms, better spacing in the canteens, and, in the various other training facilities, we are able to observe the social-distancing advice provided by the Public Health Agency. In broad terms, that means that we have reduced to about three courses.

Mr Frew: I do not know, because I have not been through it — I respect everyone who has — but there are bound to be physical manifestations of training that may not be able to be conducted because of social distancing. Are there any concerns at the primitive stage of training for people who have just started their course that their training could be impaired because of that?

Mr Mairs: There are undoubtedly elements of operational training that are difficult to deliver in a social-distancing space. I commend the work going on in the college, because it is important to point out that the Police Service sees about 350 retirements a year. Just to stand still, we have to get 350 people through, so the training that goes on in the college is vocational training; it is to prepare young men and women who have asked to serve our community to do that. It is important that we keep that moving as best we can. We have had to reduce that, and that means that, in some of those environments, we cannot continue doing some of that training, but the commitment is that nobody will leave the college without having demonstrated the full range of skills required. Some of that just requires a different approach. We have to reassess almost daily the training that we deliver and look at new ways of delivering it. It is a very dynamic space, and it is challenging, but we are not dropping our standards. The standards remain, but we are having to reduce the numbers. When you have fewer people, you can do more dedicated work and space out more.

Mr Frew: I wish you all the best in the coming weeks and months.

Mr Mairs: Thank you very much.

Mr Beattie: Maura, this is a fast-moving situation; we all get that. Just last week, I spoke to ACC Todd, and he said that officers who finished training early would not be public-facing. They clearly will be public-facing. That is a change in a week; we all know that that has changed. I want to get a sense of what consultation there has been with the Policing Board and the Police Federation on this.

Ms Campbell: When we started having a conversation with the Police College, they gave us a heads-up that a request was on its way. I made initial contact with the chief executive of the Policing Board and the staff associations — the Police Federation, the Police Superintendents' Association and the Association of Chief Police Officers — to touch base and quickly get a view from them on whether, pending further detail, they thought that this was a sensible idea in principle. At that point, we also made contact with the Office of the Police Ombudsman to give people the opportunity to indicate whether there were any specific concerns with going down that route.

We then got a more formal request from the police, so we undertook a slightly more detailed consultation setting out what we proposed to do and what change we planned to make. It was similar to the information that we have provided to the Committee, although there was, perhaps, not as much detail on how it would work in practice as we have now, because that has been developing and we have been discussing it as we go. The Policing Board has come back to give its support in principle. It has asked for some points of clarification, and we are working with it on those. However, I talked with the chief executive as recently as yesterday, and none of those points is anything that they see as an impediment to us moving ahead with this. I have to say that the staff associations have been very supportive, because they understand the rationale for doing it.

The Chair asked whether this is because we have an immediate concern: no, it is not. A pattern that we see across Justice is that the levels of self-isolation of front-line staff have actually dipped slightly in the last week. Some people are now coming back from self-isolation, so it is not that there is an immediate crisis here. It is more the general uncertainty that you referred to, plus the fact that we are advised that, between now and 20 April, there could be an increase in cases and an impact on capacity. Although we would normally like to take a lot more time over something like this, we felt that it was prudent to take the steps now to have the facility in place but with the undertaking to the Policing Board, the Police Ombudsman and others that we would keep them closely apprised of how this is intended to work and how we intend to do it. As I said at the outset, the usual accountability and oversight arrangements will still apply.

Mr Beattie: Was that put to the full Policing Board or just to the previous chair of the Policing Board or the new chair of the Policing Board?

Ms Campbell: The letter that we have received is from the current chair of the Policing Board. I am not sighted of precisely what consultation took place in the board. Our contact was through the chief executive of the board.

Mr Beattie: So, at the moment, we do not know if the full Policing Board has scrutinised this in any way, do we?

Ms Campbell: I could not say for certain that that has happened.

Mr Beattie: OK. I agree with Linda on this: it is really the Policing Board that should scrutinise this. I have a slight concern if this has gone just to the new chair of the Policing Board and other members are not fully read into it. However, I will leave it and see how it works out in the next couple of days.

The problem is, of course, that we, as a Justice Committee, are being asked to agree something that will come into being tomorrow. That is one day for us to sign off on this. To be honest — this is probably my failing — I did not know that we reduced from 23 weeks to 21 weeks in March. I am not saying that I should have known it, but I did not know it. It is a fact. Before I came here, I checked on the police website to see what their training programme was. They have already reduced from 23 weeks to 21 weeks, but we do not have a sense of what that could reduce to. We are going to sign off on something here — I get the reason why; I am not saying that I am not going to — without having a full understanding of what you could reduce it to.

In effect, training could be reduced to 16 weeks as of tomorrow, which would be a seven-week reduction. I know that huge changes are taking place, but trainees do their firearms training in week 18. Will they still do their judgemental training for firearms use? If they do, who holds the risk if there is an accident when they go onto the streets with a firearm?

Mr Mairs: I will cover those elements. That is why we were keen to have this discussion: to bring transparency to the debate. In the regulations, it is within the Chief Constable's remit to reduce the training period from 23 weeks to 21 weeks. That decision was felt necessary to create a safe environment for our trainers and for our staff and officers in the college. We have obligations to do that under health and safety legislation. We did not take the decision lightly, but we felt that we were able to do that. If, generally speaking, we were to curtail training by somewhere in the region of a month, that would still allow for full firearms training and all those elements to be provided and for officers to be accredited as they currently are to carry a firearm. They would still then be required to undergo their operational refresher training, just like everybody else.

We have engaged with the Office of the Police Ombudsman on this as well to make it absolutely clear that we will not put out, if you will, Yellow Pack police officers. They will still be attested, qualified and trained officers, so the clarity for them will be that they will still be expected to act in line with the code of ethics. The expectations of them will be the same as those of their peers who went before them. We are providing them with dedicated support from a senior constable to assist them in what is a very difficult environment for all new officers when they move into the operational arena. Our standards and expectations have not been reduced.

On the point about the Policing Board, we will still report to the board overall on our training. Were this decision to be made, I imagine that it would be a source of significant interest to the board. We already report daily to the Department and others on our rates of absence. Clearly, there would have to be evidence that the rate of absence had reached a significant point to justify such a decision by a Chief Constable. I imagine that there would be commitments made to the board that that would be for as short a time as possible. As we have said, although we believe that we can still accredit our officers to the professional level of competence to allow them to deploy to stations, it is not a desirable position. If it were, our course would be 17 weeks now and we would have been here years ago saying that we wanted it to be shorter. We accept that it comes with some loss of the value-added piece, but, from my perspective, I am confident that the college will still be able to produce well-trained, professionally qualified officers who understand the responsibility and the technical skills that are necessary to carry out their job.

Mr Beattie: I am in no doubt of that, Tim. You do a fantastic job.

I have one more question to ask. There is one course going on at the moment for which an awful lot of the work is being done online. As it stands, it is not residential in any way. Surely, those students will not be considered for an early end to their course if most of what they do is online-based training.

Mr Mairs: Yes. The decision that was made about the course that you refer to was down to a social-distancing issue. Those people had applied to join the police, had been successful and had handed in their notice. They had become employees of the Police Service, and we have provided them with material that they can study at home. However, their course duration will commence when they join us at Garnerville. They will have some more pre-training done, but we are not curtailing their training period. If they are at home for an additional five weeks, we are not taking those five weeks off the other end. Once they are in, they will still do either 21 weeks or whatever the new figure is. They will maybe have read a little bit more online.

Mr Beattie: I have got you now. It is my understanding that there are two courses running at the moment, each with 50 students.

Mr Mairs: Yes.

Mr Beattie: What stage are they at? Do we know what training week they are in at the minute?

Mr Mairs: I would need to confirm the exact figures. We had a new course about to commence, and it is one of the courses that have been delayed. There is a third course that has had its time reduced, so they are probably into their last week now, and we have moved them to another facility. There are two courses in, which means that the senior one of those probably has another five or six weeks to go. The one before that has another four or five weeks on top of that. They are midway through their course, and, frankly, the priority for us is to support them through it and get them deployed.

We have thought through some of the alternatives, and we do not want to get into a position in which we have to furlough courses and send student officers who are halfway through home for four or five weeks, when we could get them through and then deployed. This gives us the flexibility to try to keep the pipeline open without dropping standards.

Mr Beattie: Alan did say that, and I fully understand. I guess that my issue, Tim, is about who holds the risk.

Mr Mairs: Sure.

Mr Beattie: Who holds the risk if, after 16 weeks, an officer goes out and is involved in a car accident or discharges his weapon negligently or something like that? Does it go as high as the Chief Constable? Where does the risk sit?

Mr Mairs: I do not have specific legal advice on exactly where the risk sits. The decision to reduce the duration of the course would be made by the Chief Constable under the regulations. The Chief Constable is also responsible under health and safety regulations, so I imagine that he would want to satisfy himself that he could balance the two obligations. As I have said, we believe that we can fulfil all the accreditations within a curtailed period and therefore would not be taking shortcuts around any of the critical skills required around firearms or driving. That training will still be provided. What we would do is look to curtail or do off-site some of the stuff that can be done by other means.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): Linda, you wanted to come in there.

Ms Dillon: I have a small point to make. Doug asked whether this had come before the full Policing Board: it did.

Mr Beattie: Did it?

Ms Dillon: Yes. It was not just the chairperson; it was the full Policing Board. I contacted our members to find out what discussion there had been. The full Policing Board was involved in the conversation. It might have been done by Zoom, conference call or something like that, but the board in its entirety certainly was involved.

I have a quick point about social distancing. You are right, Tim: it is a societal thing. The greatest impact is being made in the community. I know that I can speak for
my area. I am delighted to be able to say that the bars in the town where I live closed before they were told to do so. I will not lie: I was surprised. Bar maybe one of them, they were closed a week before any direction was given. The instant reaction from those businesses was to say, "We have to protect ourselves, our families and the community. It is the right thing to do. We will be remembered for that", and they will be remembered for doing the right thing. Whether we are talking about businesses or people out and about, they know that they will be remembered for doing the right thing. The people who do not do the right thing will also be remembered. It will not be forgotten. When people in those areas die, it will not be forgotten that some people did not do the right thing. It is a societal issue. If there are occasions when something is going on that causes concern, the right thing for the PSNI to do is to reach out to me, as an elected representative, or to local community leaders. Massive work is being done by communities. Absolutely brilliant work is being done to look after people in their own community. They see that as being part of their role. Look at all the sportspeople from boxing, soccer, rugby, the GAA and right across the board who have made videos asking people to stay at home and maintain social distancing. That has had a massive impact.

You are 100% right: we need to get the balance right. Communities should take the lead. The PSNI will have to enforce when everything else has been tried, but we should not ask the PSNI to go in and enforce as the first port of call. That does not make sense, because, in many cases, you will be talking about people who are the most vulnerable and on the very edge of society. They are most likely not to comply. In many cases, those people will need to be looked after. Do not get me wrong: there will be those who will just not comply. There will then have to be enforcement, but we need to make sure that we get the balance right.

First and foremost, we are trying to look after people and encourage them to do the right thing. We have a responsibility as elected representatives. Communities have a responsibility. Everybody with a leadership role in the community, be that in a sporting organisation or whatever else, has a responsibility. At the point at which all of that has been tried, there will need to be PSNI enforcement. It is a two-way street. If there is something that we should or could do that the PSNI needs us to do, ask us, tell us and speak to us, and we will do the same when everything else has been tried and enforcement has to become an option. As communities, we have a massive responsibility. There is no point doing every other element but not doing that bit.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): Thank you, Linda. I will wrap up the meeting, members, because the Ad Hoc Committee is sitting in the Chamber at 2.30 pm, and we need to allow the technical people time to get ready for that.

Are members content with the information that we have and the engagement that we have had? The statutory rule will be laid tomorrow. It is subject to the negative resolution procedure, so we would need to put down a prayer of annulment if we did not support it and then vote on that. It will be outside the 21 days normally required, because of the circumstances that have been outlined. I would like to be able to convey to the Department the position that the Committee will take. Given the justification for it and the circumstances that we are in, I am content to proceed, but I wish to hear from members whether that is their position. It is certainly the position of my party.

The Chairperson (Mr Givan): On that basis, the Committee is unanimously content to support the urgent statutory rule that will be laid tomorrow. I thank the officials for coming and giving us an open and transparent account of why it is necessary. We appreciate their engagement at such short notice. Thank you.