Important note: This is an archive of the website that was formerly at www.morrisinquiry.gov.uk. It is being hosted on the MPA website for archival purposes only and may contain out-of-date information.

This resource is from the News section. This section contains an opening statement by the Chair.

Sections available here:

• The Chair’s opening statement

The Chair’s opening statement

21 January 2004

Ladies and gentlemen, good morning and thank you for coming to the launch of our Inquiry today.

This Inquiry has been established by the Metropolitan Police Authority. It is an independent and impartial inquiry into professional standards and employment matters in the Metropolitan Police Service.

Although it has been commissioned by the Metropolitan Police Authority it is completely independent of it.

Let me at this point introduce myself and the other members of the Panel. I am Sir Bill Morris, recently retired General Secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union, a position I held for 12 years. I have been asked to chair the Inquiry.

There are two other panel members: Sir Anthony Burden, who has recently retired as Chief Constable of the South Wales Constabulary after a long and distinguished career in the police service, and Anesta Weekes QC, who is an eminent barrister and part-time judge. She was Counsel to the Lawrence Inquiry.

My task this morning is to do two things. Firstly I would like to outline our approach to the matters that we have to consider; secondly I would like to explain how we intend conducting our Inquiry.

After I have done this there will be an opportunity to ask questions and, following the close of the launch, I will be available to speak to members of the media on an individual basis. I will first take questions from the stakeholders who are present and then move on to representatives of the media.

Today will be the last time any of the Panel will be giving interviews until our report is published.

Copies of this statement will be made available for you to take away. You already have packs containing the terms of reference of the Inquiry, a protocol which sets out how we will work as well as details of how to contact the Inquiry team.

Before I move on to the formal part of these proceedings I would like to thank the Metropolitan Police Authority for entrusting to us this important piece of work. We recognise that we have been given a unique opportunity to make a lasting contribution to policing in London.

This is an inquiry into professional standards and employment matters in the Metropolitan Police Service. Our focus is the MPS as an organisation and not the individuals who make up that organisation.

We will be looking into the way the Service handles complaints, grievances, allegations against individuals and conflict within the workplace. In short, we are looking at a range of issues relating to their professional standards and workplace relationships.

We are not conducting an inquiry into what may or may not have gone wrong in a particular case.

Nor is our Inquiry about race or community policing, although we will clearly consider discrimination issues as part of our work.

We were not appointed to make findings of guilt or innocence against particular individuals and, although we will undoubtedly be considering some individual cases as part of our work, we are not here to revisit the past or to dwell on what may be past failings.

However, that said, the past must clearly inform the future and we are interested in identifying where things may have gone wrong in order that we can focus on ensuring that the lessons of the past are learnt and that mistakes are not repeated.

To earn trust and confidence a modern police service should reflect the community it serves. Any inquiry into the police service for our capital city must recognise the diversity of the community it has to serve.

The profile of this community has changed significantly over recent decades and we will need to consider whether the practices, procedures and systems of the MPS have evolved to meet the challenges of the changing environment and the twenty-first century.

If it is not too grandiose an aspiration, we hope by discharging our duties to assist in raising professional standards and improving public confidence in the MPS and its work by ensuring it is equipped with up-to-date and professional means of managing workplace relationships.

As a Panel, we recognise the important role that the MPS plays in the life of London. Police officers have a difficult task and a lot is said when they get it wrong. But not much is said when they get it right.

As I have said this is an independent inquiry. We will not indulge in a so-called culture of blame but we will be fearless in pointing out when we think the MPS has got it wrong. We will also not shy away from pointing out when we think the MPS has got it right; identifying examples of good practice.

To assist us in our task, we want to hear from you, the public, what is right with the MPS as well as what is wrong.

Most importantly, we want to hear what needs to change to make things better.

This will be a constant theme which will run throughout our work.

The MPS has a tough job to do. It is the largest police service in the country and the shop window of law enforcement agencies in the UK.

It must therefore be a beacon for others and a model of best practice.

I firmly believe that workplace relationships are the key to excellent policing.

If the MPS can get its internal relationships right, then the community benefits from a service that is well motivated, better trained and has a better understanding of social evolution and the profile of London’s community.

Conversely, if these relationships are poor, the quality of policing will be the poorer.

I hope that our inquiry can make a positive contribution to improving professional standards and workplace relationships and, by extension, the quality of policing to London’s varied and diverse communities.

We have an all-too-rare opportunity to contribute to moving the MPS forward and we are excited by the challenge to make a lasting contribution both to policing and the culture of the MPS, whatever it may be.

Let me now turn to the way we intend to proceed.

As I have already said, we are an independent inquiry. That independence is crucial to our work.

The Panel itself, its Secretary and its Solicitors are all independent of the Metropolitan Police Authority, the Metropolitan Police Service and all other organisations and individuals who are likely to wish to contribute to the Inquiry process.

We are determined to maintain that independence. This means that the Panel members will not be available for meetings or interviews until after our work is complete. This will ensure fairness and the integrity of the Inquiry as a whole.

We will be assisted in our work by a Secretariat and our solicitors.

Our Secretary is Amanda Kelly and she is primarily responsible for the administrative organisation of the Inquiry, supporting us in fulfilling our terms of reference.

All formal contact with the Inquiry should be through her and her contact details are in the pack.

Our solicitors are Clifford Chance.

We have not retained counsel to the inquiry and we, the Panel members, will be questioning witnesses direct.

We have been asked to undertake a specific task and that task is set out in our terms of reference which were drawn up by the Metropolitan Police Authority.

These too have been included in your packs and will also appear on our website - www.morrisinquiry.gov.uk.

Our terms of reference will identify a number of questions about the way the MPS deals with its police officers and police staff.

We will wish to examine whether the MPS has the right policies and procedures in place. Are they effective?

Are the procedures and structures fair? Are they too complicated? Do they place an unacceptable burden on police officers and police staff?

How do the MPS’ practices compare to other police forces and public organisations and, indeed, best practice?

In short, do they meet the demands of a modern police service and command the confidence of the communities they serve?

That is all I wish to say on our terms of reference.

Let me now deal with the structure and conduct of the Inquiry.

The Inquiry does not have statutory powers and therefore we are not able to compel individuals to attend before us or to compel the production of documents.

That said, we are greatly encouraged and re-assured by the welcome that the Commissioner, Sir John Stevens, has given to the Inquiry and the encouragement he has given to his officers and staff urging them to co-operate in order to ensure that we are able to complete our task.

In addition, the Home Secretary has made it clear that he wants our Inquiry to succeed.

If we find that our progress is impaired or compromised because individuals decline to attend and give evidence voluntarily, I am confident that he will respond positively to any request from us and the Metropolitan Police Authority to use his powers under the Police Act 1996 to ensure the necessary cooperation.

I hope that the need for such a request will not arise and that we can count on all those concerned to take advantage of the opportunity this Inquiry offers to influence the development of the MPS and policing generally in the twenty-first century.

One factor which I hope will secure this end is the approach we intend taking to our work.

I want to make it clear from the outset that this is an inquisitorial Inquiry.

We are anxious to avoid an adversarial process and that is one of the reasons we have decided to question witnesses ourselves, as a Panel, when the time comes for oral hearings.

Although we are inviting written submissions and expressions of interest from as many people as possible, we will decide which witnesses we wish to hear from at our hearings and the order in which they will be called.

I cannot emphasise too strongly that our approach will be to focus on the Metropolitan Police Service as an organisation.

It may occasionally be necessary to look at the actions of individuals, but only as a way of identifying problems with or defects in the procedures or processes that the MPS has in place and to formulate recommendations as to how these might be improved for the future.

I also want to stress that this is not a form of trial or a disciplinary hearing.

It is an Inquiry into the way the MPS approaches professional standards and workforce matters. There will be no parties to the Inquiry and in particular, no defendants. No one is in the dock.

We therefore consider that those contributing to our process should not require legal representation in order to participate.

No-one needs to hire a lawyer to contribute to this Inquiry and the Inquiry does not have the power to meet legal costs.

Our first step will be to consider documentation and written submissions. In the near future, our Secretary will be writing to the individuals and organisations that we have identified and that we wish to hear from.

She will indicate the areas on which we would like assistance and the time by which we would like to receive their written submissions.

But we are sure that there are other individuals and organisations that we will not have identified and who will have information that can assist us in fulfilling our task.

I would therefore like to extend an invitation to anyone who has any information or knowledge, which is relevant to our terms of reference, and which they think can assist us in our task to make a written submission to the Secretary to the Inquiry as soon as possible.

We are also anxious to hear from those who may be able to identify others who might want to contribute.

All unsolicited written submissions should be with our Secretary by 23rd February 2004.

These written submissions will inform our decisions on which individuals and organisations to invite to give oral evidence. The Secretary will write to these groups and organisations inviting them to attend and giving them notice of the areas that we will wish to explore.

We will begin our initial oral hearings on 18th February.

We will then adjourn to give us time to consider all the written submissions and will recommence oral hearings in late March.

The times, dates and locations of all our hearings will be publicised on our website.

Our hearings will usually be in public, although there may be occasions when we will exercise our discretion to sit in private because of the subject matter that we will be considering.

It goes without saying that the press and other media will be welcome to attend all our public hearings as well as members of the public at large.

We want this Inquiry to be as open and accessible as possible and the media have a legitimate interest in reporting what takes place.

We will try to offer as much assistance as possible to the media.

Details of our press office are contained in the pack and we will also issue regular press releases to provide information on progress, the timetable for hearings and the like. This information will also appear on our website.

However, in order to ensure fairness for those appearing before us, we do not envisage that we will permit the broadcasting of public hearings.

We will begin oral hearings on February 18th and the dates and times of our oral hearings will also be published on our website.

We will be holding our hearings at the Inquiry Offices, 8th Floor, 50 Broadway, London, SW1H 0RG.

As I have already said, the Panel will ask questions of witnesses. There will be no examination in chief or cross-examination by other witnesses.

Witnesses will be offered an opportunity, generally at the end of their evidence, to make a brief statement. The purpose of this is to ensure that the witness can clarify any areas which he or she feels may be unclear and to ensure that he or she has given a proper account of himself or herself.

There will be a transcript of all oral hearings and this will be published on our website each day – except when we decide to sit in private.

It is also our intention to publish written submissions and other evidence in the interests of openness and transparency.

However, again it is possible that we will exercise our discretion to keep some matters confidential where there are compelling arguments for doing so.

Finally let me say a few words about our report.

I am not in a position at this stage to give a firm indication of exactly when we envisage reporting. However, we are obviously keen to proceed with all speed so that we can complete our Inquiry within a reasonable time.

I can therefore let you know that we anticipate publishing our report in the summer.

Once we have conducted an initial assessment of the evidence, we will of course follow the usual procedures in relation to those whom we may possibly criticise.

We will write to those concerned setting out the possible criticisms which may be made by the Panel and give them an opportunity to respond.

We will consider any responses we receive very carefully before reaching our conclusions and producing our report.

The report will of course be a report to the Metropolitan Police Authority which has commissioned this Inquiry.

However, we will publish the report at the same time as we deliver it to the MPA.

Before I invite questions I would like to make one last point.

All three of us are fully aware of the enormity of the task facing us but also of the opportunity we have to affect the way the MPS operates and, by extension, the quality of policing in our capital city.

However, the quality of our final report and our recommendations will depend on the goodwill and cooperation of a vast number of stakeholders both inside and outside the service.

As the Inquiry Panel, we are impatient to seize the opportunity which falls to us. But we cannot do it alone.

I would therefore ask everyone here today, as well as those who may come to hear of the Inquiry in the future, to join us in helping to make this Inquiry the success it can and should be.

The people of London and the officers and staff of the MPS deserve nothing less.

On this website:

• Full transcript of the opening session
  A full transcript of the opening session, which contains this opening statement as well as questions from the public.