Transparency data

PABEW meeting minutes, 10 February 2025

Updated 27 January 2026

Applies to England and Wales

10 February 2025, 10:30am to 12:30pm

Members present via video conference:

Independent Chair

Julia Mulligan

PABEW Secretariat

Chris Moore

Police Federation of England and Wales (PFEW)

John Partington

Bahar Munim  

Police Superintendents’ Association (PSA)

Warren Franklin

Chief Police Officers’ Staff Association (CPOSA)

Gareth Wilson

National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC)  

Stella Brooks

Clair Alcock

Andy Fittes 

Claire Neale

Kevin Courtney

Home Office (HO)

Tom Appleyard

College of Policing (CoP) 

Sandy Purewal

Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC)

Stephen Oakley

Association of Police and Crime Commissioners (APCC)

Andrew Tremayne

Food Standards Agency (FSA)

Neil Castle

Sally Cott

StJohn Costelloe

MET Trade Union

Valerie Harris

Met Police

Anthony Richards

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

Dilber Dervish

Welcome and Apologies

1. The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, apologies were received from Duncan Slade (PSA), Mel Warnes (PFEW).

Minutes of the meeting 29 October 2024

2. Minutes were agreed from the 29 October 2024 meeting.

Action Point 1: Secretariat to finalise minutes of 29 October 2024 meeting and publish on the webpage. Action: Ongoing

Action log of 29 October 2024

Action Point 2: The Chair to hold additional follow-up SAB meeting on ongoing actions before the next meeting in January 24th 2025.

Action Point 3: PABEW DSC to hold an extraordinary meeting on Duty of Candour and Chris Kaba Verdict.

3. The Chair noted action 2 had taken place and would provide an update under the SAB update item. As members had had no comment on Action point 3, The Chair said she would follow up outside of the meeting to decide whether it was still needed or to close the action.

NPCC Update: Guidance on Police Officer and Staff Secondments

4. Andy Fittes (NPCC) provided a quick update on the annual review of the secondment’s guidance. No amendments requested from bodies like NCA and HMICFRS. He said it was mostly positive feedback, with minor quirks resolved.

5. Andy Fittes (NPCC) would continue monitoring feedback from receiving bodies and address any issues as needed.

6. British Transport Police (BTP) did express disappointment about not being consulted during the drafting phase. But discussions clarified the issue, and no changes to the guidance were needed.

7. There was confusion about which body “owns” a seconded officer in terms of Home Office counting. It was believed that the officer remains part of the home force in all respects, but for Home Office counting purposes, it’s the receiving body that counts the officer.

8. Andy Fittes (NPCC) explained for all practical and legal purposes, the officer remains part of their home force. This is in line with government guidance. For statistical purposes, the officer is counted under the receiving body where they are physically stationed during the secondment. This is important because Home Office figures are affected by where the officer is seconded.

9. John Partington (PFEW) raised concerns over the lack of adequate coverage regarding shift patterns, travel time, and overtime entitlements for officers. He noted legal issues in the past where officers sought clarification on overtime rights.

10. Andy Fittes (NPCC) encouraged PFEW to send specific examples or concerns of the issues related to overtime or travel time. He expressed a willingness to assist further and engage with the relevant bodies to address any ongoing concerns.

Food Standard Agency Update

11. Neil Castle (FSA) introduced the National Food Crime Unit, which was formed 10 years ago with around 80 staff. The unit investigates food-related crime and aims to gain PACE powers for officers to execute search warrants, seize property, and take custody of arrested persons for interviews.

12. FSA sought to lay the Food Crime Officers Complaints and Misconduct Regulations statutory instrument (SI) on March 10, to take effect on April 1. The objective was to empower NFCU officers to conduct searches and seize property. There was no request for arrest powers; police support will be sought when needed for arrest and custodial actions.

13. NFCU has worked with IOPC and HMICFRS for oversight.

14. The IOPC will have the power to investigate NFCU officers for any severe breaches or criminal conduct.

15. An MOU has been established with the NCA to coordinate oversight and investigations.

16. The IOPC will oversee complaints and misconduct, with cost recovery in place for investigations related to NFCU officers.

17. Warren Franklin (PSA) asked if the IOPC oversight had been fully costed, given the current strain on resources. He also raised concerns about delays in cases due to resource constraints and questioned the potential legal challenges from companies investigated by NFCU.

18. Neil Castle (FSA) said NFCU has not had any formal complaints against officers in 10 years. NFCU has entered into full cost recovery agreements with the IOPC and HMICFRS.

19. The powers would apply to around 30 officers out of 80, with 80% being ex-serving officers.

20. Warren Franklin (PSA) also inquired about the delegation of investigations to local police or NCA. Neil Castle (FSA) clarified that the IOPC could delegate investigations under Section 43 to either local forces or the NCA, with decisions made on a case-by-case basis.

21. The Chair asked if NFCU had a formal MOU with HMICFRS. Neil Castle (FSA) explained that while they have a voluntary arrangement with HMICFRS, they are working to get it on a legal footing.

22. Stephen Oakley IOPC) reassured that the resourcing for this oversight would be minimal, as directed provisions are used only for highly technical cases.

23. The Chair asked PABEW to note the regulations and endorse the intention for the legislation.

24. The board members agreed to endorse the proposal.

PFEW Discussion Topics

Inspectors’ Rank Regulations

25. John Partington (PFEW) raised concerns about the inspectors’ regulations, which have not been reviewed in over 30 years. He suggested the PABEW draft a letter to the PRRB urging them to review these outdated regulations.

26. The Chair agreed with John’s concern but questioned whether PABEW was the right forum to address it. She proposed the issue be forwarded to the PCF first before considering further action through PABEW.

27. Stella Brooks (NPCC) agreed that after 31 years, it was reasonable to review the regulations. She suggested a general review and emphasised the need to gather input from NPCC to understand how the regulations are currently applied in policing.

28. The Chair noted that PABEW might deal with the regulations once a review was underway but suggested remitting the matter to PCF initially. Members agreed that further work was needed before addressing it formally within PABEW.

Fitness Testing

29. John Partington (PFEW) explained the ongoing concerns about fitness testing, particularly regarding the impact on female officers. He highlighted that while there has been no legal case yet, there had been settlements outside of court. The issue stems from disagreement about the required fitness standards, which negatively affects women’s operational careers. John requested PABEW’s oversight to help move the issue forward.

30. Stella Brooks (NPCC) confirmed she was aware of ongoing discussions led by Adrian Rutherford (NPCC) under the NPCC’s workforce program. She noted that funding and agreement among police chiefs had been a barrier to resolving the issue.

31. The Chair suggested that an update from Adrian Rutherford’s team might be helpful. She also noted that the matter has been on the agenda for several years and a strategic group could help make progress.

32. John Partington (PFEW) confirmed that funding had recently been allocated to push the work forward, and Adrian Rutherford was open to establishing a strategic working group.

33. Stella Brooks (NPCC) suggested reaching out to Adrian for an update, bringing together all the involved parties to discuss the next steps.

Action Point 2: Stella Brooks (NPCC) will reach out to Adrian Rutherford (NPCC) for an update on Fitness testing concerns and report back to the PABEW.

Leave During Term Time

34. John Partington (PFEW) introduced the issue of police officers needing leave during term time for personal reasons, particularly related to family commitments. He explained that certain events like the Commonwealth Games require specialist officers, which restricts their leave. John proposed exploring a standing agreement to allow officers to take their children out of school during term time without penalty, especially when the need for leave was planned.

35. The Chair acknowledged the complexity of the issue, noting that it might not fit into PABEW’s mandate but was worth discussing.

36. Andy Fittes (PFEW) recalled that the issue was raised with the Department for Education (DFE) during the COVID period, with little success. He suggested that flexibility could be explored on a case-by-case basis, especially if a specific event was planned in advance. He did not think that the matter was in the PABEW remit.

37. Warren Franklin (PSA) supported the idea of flexibility and case-by-case handling, suggesting that a letter could be drafted to highlight the impact of such events on officers and request dispensation. He mentioned that this approach was taken during the Olympics.

38. The Chair suggested solving the issue informally outside of PABEW but agreed that a formal approach through a letter could be helpful.

39. John Partington (PFEW) suggested PFEW draft a letter requesting dispensation for officers with specialist skills during 2025-year events. The letter will be sent to Tom Appleyard (HO) to forward onto the Department for Education. The Chair agreed.

Action Point 3: John Partington (PFEW) to draft a letter requesting dispensation for officers with specialist skills during the year’s events to allow officers to take their children out of school during term time without penalty. The letter will be sent to Tom Appleyard (HO) for forward onto DFE for a decision.

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

SAB Discussion on Remedy

40. The Chair provided an update from the Scheme Advisory Board (SAB) meeting held 14th January 2025 at the NPCC offices. She explained Clair Alcock (NPCC) gave an update on the NPCC perspective regarding how scheme managers have been implementing the remedy.

41. There was concern raised about data returns from scheme managers, which was hindering the ability to understand implementation effectiveness, especially around statement distribution.

42. The Chair took an action to write a letter about opt-outs, which was drafted and circulated. The letter addressed issues around transferees, missing data, and divorce-related matters.

PABEW Discipline Sub-Committee Update.

Home Office Update

43. The Chair noted draft regulations were issued in February with a closing date of 12th March 2025. The chair said a letter will be drafted to the Minister regarding concerns on the consultation process.

44. The Crime and Policing Bill was expected to be introduced in February. Various provisions in the bill were relevant to the Discipline sub committees work, although specific details were not discussed in-depth.

LQP Observations on Misconduct Hearings

45. The chair said there were challenges with LQP appointments, including issues related to role scheduling, diary management, and appointment processes.

46. She noted there was concerns were raised about the amount of time allocated for LQP’S to complete their work and the remuneration they receive. No Members had any comments.

Home Office Legislation Update

47. The Chair noted the paper was circulated prior to the meeting.

AOB 

48. Andy Fittes (NPCC) raised the issue of capability dismissals.

49. Previously, a PABEW Working Group investigated capability dismissals. It was shelved due to concerns over litigation and legality, but with new challenges arising, Andy Fittes (NPCC) proposed revisiting this conversation.

50. He suggested convening a working group to explore the original proposal and assess whether it could assist forces in handling capability issues more effectively.

51. The Chair asked why the issue was being considered again. Andy Fittes (NPCC) explained that it stemmed from ongoing challenges with deployability and the need to explore solutions that had already been drafted.

52. The Chair agreed a separate PAB meeting should be set up to discuss the topic further.

53. Andy Fittes (NPCC) said he would circulate relevant papers beforehand.

Action Point 4:  A PABEW Working Group to be set up to look into the impact of  capability dismissals.

54. The Next meeting was scheduled for 7 May 2025.