PCC Statement: HMIC Engage

West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner Simon Foster has today issued a fresh statement after HMIC decided to move West Midlands Police into the ‘Engage’ process.

“I am treating the decision of HMIC to move West Midlands Police into Engage with the utmost seriousness and as a top priority. I am committed to holding West Midlands Police to account and working with the Chief Constable, HMIC and other relevant partners, to address and resolve the areas of concern as a matter of urgency, so as to ensure that the people of the West Midlands receive the service from West Midlands Police that they are entitled to.

However, I continue to have serious concerns in connection with the decision-making procedure adopted by HMIC. On the 29 November, I wrote to the Chief Inspector of His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (“HMIC”), asking the following questions relating to the decision-making procedure.

I have requested that the Chief Inspector replies to my questions as soon as possible. As at 6 December, I am awaiting a reply from HMIC.

1. When my Chief Executive and I received an invitation from HMIC on Monday 20 November, to attend a Teams Call for 15 minutes on Wednesday 22 November, my Chief Executive inquired of the Inspector as to the purpose of the meeting and subject matter of the meeting. There was a flat refusal to disclose either the purpose of the meeting or the subject matter of the meeting. That is contrary to public law principles and procedural fairness. It cannot possibly be justified by reference to the need for confidentiality, which was the reason provided, since the purpose of the meeting and subject matter of the meeting would only have been disclosed to my Chief Executive and I. Why was it necessary for HMIC to adopt this procedure? 
2. When my Chief Executive and I met with the Inspector on Wednesday 22 November, it was represented to us that the decision to Engage West Midlands Police was the Inspector’s decision. I have now been advised that it was the Chief Inspector’s decision. If that is so, why did the Inspector represent to us that it was their decision?
3. At paragraph (c) of your letter [dated 23 November] you say: “You state that [the Inspector] agreed to this request”: that is to say my request for a period of 14 days to make representations to HMIC, relating to the decision to Engage West Midlands Police. Do you accept that your Inspector agreed to my request, that both West Midlands Police and I have until 4.00pm on Thursday 7 December, to make representations in response to a causes of concern letter, to be sent to West Midlands Police and myself on 23 November?
4. You state that you have been clear with your fellow HMIs, that the decision to move a force to Engage is for you to make. If that is so, why did your Inspector represent to us that the decision to Engage West Midlands Police was their decision?
5. You state that HMICs full approach to monitoring forces is no longer published. Why is it no longer published? Do you consider that it is appropriate and commensurate with clarity and transparency, for HMIC to conduct itself in accordance with unpublished policies/procedures?
6. How does HMIC reconcile a decision-making process based on an unpublished policy/procedure with (a) the need for accountability, clarity and transparency; (b) the requirement that HMIC acts in accordance with public law requirements of fairness; (c) the requirement not to act in a way that constitutes maladministration; and (d) the requirement not to act in a manner that undermines trust and confidence in HMIC?
7. Having regard to the email from your Inspector to me dated 22 November, it is clear that your Inspector was not aware of the policy/procedure to which you refer, because they simply refer to having been informed of a revised policy/procedure by yourself. Why was your inspector unaware of the policy/procedure to which you refer? 
8. You state that your Inspector was not authorised to enter into any agreements in relation to your decision. Bearing in mind that the Inspector did enter into an agreement with me, why were they unaware that they were unauthorised to enter into any agreements in relation to your decision?
9. Your Inspector is a highly experienced and senior Inspector within HMIC and represents your organisation. Do you not agree, that notwithstanding you state your Inspector is not authorised to enter into agreements on behalf of HMIC in relation to your decision, then HMIC should be bound to comply with that agreement, because the Inspector has held themselves out as authorised to enter into the agreement on behalf of HMIC?
10. Do you think that it was appropriate for you to countermand an agreement and a decision reached by a highly experienced and senior Inspector within HMIC, in circumstances where they had clearly held themselves out as being able to enter into the agreement on behalf of HMIC?

In the meantime, I repeat, that I am continuing to treat this matter with the utmost seriousness and as a top priority. I am committed to holding West Midlands Police to account and working with the Chief Constable, HMIC and other relevant partners, to address and resolve the areas of concern as a matter of urgency, so as to ensure that the people of the West Midlands receive the service from West Midlands Police, that they are entitled to.