Recently, the security Industry Authority held a special Conference on the 'Phased Transition to a New Regulatory Regime. Today, we bring you the key note address delivered by the Authority’s Chairman, Baroness Ruth Henig on March 30, 2011. The SIA conference was opened by Chairman, Ruth Henig. Addressing the 200 strong audience at the Honourable Artillery Company in central London, Ruth Henig called for views and input during the transition to new regulation.
She told delegates:
"We have a real opportunity to reshape regulation, to further drive up standards and reduce the threat from criminal activity. We want you, who work in the industry, to be actively involved in the front line of change, making it happen in a way which suits your needs. We want to see regulation based on business registration, qualifications managed by the industry and a clear focus on professionalism and on quality standards. Between us we have a real opportunity to translate this vision into reality and to start to adapt the current regime where we can to meet the needs of the future."
Enter: Ruth Henig
It is a great pleasure to see so many people here today, and to welcome
you to today’s conference. Today marks a really important milestone in the
evolution of regulation for the private security industry, and that is reflected
in the conference programme.
I was reminded recently of the ancient Chinese curse: “May you live in
interesting times”. Well, all of us at the SIA and all of you working across the
industry have been living in interesting times since we last met in
conference in June nine months ago. At that conference, I outlined to you
the SIA’s vision for lighter touch regulation in the future, and for greater
industry involvement in regulation, and I talked about the blueprint for
development which we were in the process of drawing up. There was
general agreement across the industry over our proposed direction of travel,
but also a strong consensus that we must not do anything to undermine
enforcement and compliance activities, particularly those aimed at tackling
serious and organised criminality.
And then came October, and the leak that the SIA was to be abolished by
the government along with nearly 200 other public bodies. There had been
no consultation and no warning – but it was very gratifying to hear the
strong words of support for the continuation of regulation of private security
coming from the Scottish government and from the Strathclyde police chief.
Both the Scottish and Northern Ireland governments said that they would
continue with the existing regime of regulation under their devolved powers
if necessary, if the UK government moved to end regulation in England and
Wales.
But clearly self regulation was not something most people working in the
industry wanted to return to. Companies and individuals started to write to
members of the government with whom they had contact, or to the Home
Secretary, the Cabinet Office and even the Prime Minister emphasising how
the industry had benefited from regulation and how a return to self
regulation would be a backward step. I think the government was very
surprised by the number of strong messages and letters it received in
support of continued regulation, and about the levels of risk which it might
face if criminality in the industry was no longer targeted and compliance and
enforcement policies did not continue, particularly as the Olympic Games
approached.
Page 2 of 4
They say that every threat also presents an opportunity. There was a real
threat after the leak – that individuals would hear the message that the SIA
was about to be abolished and would stop applying for new licences when
they expired, or would not bother to book for training. There was a brief
period when indeed licence applications dropped. But at the same time, the
axe hanging over the SIA’s head and the prospect of all the gains achieved
by six years of regulation being reversed in one fell swoop united the
industry as never before. Both the SIA and industry leaders and bodies had
the opportunity to spell out to the government what regulation had achieved.
And what our vision was for the future – for lighter touch, smarter regulation,
for regulation which would, in the government’s words, achieve ‘more for
less’. With greater industry involvement – but with no substantial changes
before the Olympics and a clearly thought out evolution of regulatory
change thereafter. I have been quoted by government ministers as
supporting self regulation – but what I actually support is a regulatory
regime which allows for greater industry involvement and greater industry
responsibility. What I didn’t understand was why we could not continue to
work for those outcomes through our Blueprint for change, and as the SIA.
As we all know, it is by no means easy to change a government’s mind but
working together, the SIA, Scottish and Northern Ireland governments and
industry bodies were able to bring about significant change. First of all, the
government’s announcement, when it came, talked not about the end of
regulation, but about a phased transition to a new regulatory regime and of
the abolition of the SIA as a public body. And the Home Secretary made it
clear that there would be no substantial changes to regulation until after the
Olympic Games.
Since that first announcement, the SIA has worked closely with the Security
Alliance, which really thrived during the crisis and provided a very strong
lead, and with a range of individuals, companies and buyers of security to
try to persuade the government to allow us to continue with the
development of our Blueprint and to establish a consensus within the
industry on how regulation should evolve. In December we established a
Strategic Consultative Group to enable the leading industry bodies to find
out at first hand what we were proposing, what was happening in Scotland
and Northern Ireland, what the thinking of the Home Office was, and to give
the Group the opportunity to feed into our planning for the future.
Last week the government made a second change – and agreed to take the
SIA out of the Public Bodies Bill altogether. This means that we will not yet
be abolished but that regulation and enforcement will continue while we
discuss with the government the most effective way of moving towards a
new statutory regulatory regime which, significantly, the government have
already agreed will be based primarily on business registration rather than
on individual licensing. This is something for which we and the industry have
been calling for some time now – and it is a major step forward. So today’s
Page 3 of 4
conference marks the beginning of a new phase in the evolution of
regulation.
We know that regulation has been increasingly effective across the industry.
Criminal gangs have been targeted and nearly 50,000 people have been
removed from the industry after being identified as not fit and proper to work
in it. The SIA alone has prosecuted at least 24 cases and 9 companies for
statutory offences, and we have supported our enforcement partners in
many more. Through collaborative working with the UK Border Agency we
have revoked the licenses of about 8,000 individuals with no right to work in
the UK. We have achieved an overall 95% compliance rate, and even
though regulation has been in place in Northern Ireland for just on a year,
compliance rates are already very high there as well. Every month, new
threats are being tackled such as serious training malpractice and organised
identity fraud. I know you will agree with me that all of this work must
continue.
But at the same time we need, with your help, to develop a new model of
regulation, one which is robust but less costly, less bureaucratic, and which
allows businesses and training partners more involvement and
responsibility. We need to develop a shared vision of what sort of regulatory
body we want and begin to adapt our processes to evolve towards it. We
also now have the opportunity to look again at the scope of regulation – can
we find a way of encouraging businesses with in-house security to associate
themselves with the standards and approach of the new regime? Should we
be looking to include private investigators and security consultants in the
new body?
These are all possibilities now which we could consider and
discuss the merits of. I should just mention at this point that we are working
in tandem with the Scottish and Northern Ireland governments to ensure as
far as we possibly can that they will sign up to our vision of the future and
that we take account of their needs. We must try, if we can, to avoid three
different regulatory regimes in the UK across which companies have to
operate. So in summary this has been a most interesting year and, in the
end because of our combined endeavours, a very productive one. We have
faced up to the challenges and really have turned them into new
opportunities. We are in a good place to begin a new phase of regulation.
There is a lot of work for all of us, starting here.
We will hold another conference in the autumn to enable everyone to keep
in touch with the development of our blueprint for change and the new
legislation. We need everyone in the industry to work with us as closely as
possible, in the next two crucial years, as we start adapting our current
regime to prepare for the future, and work with the government on what new
legislation to put in place. We will aim to be as transparent as possible and
as responsive as we can be to your views and suggestions for the future. I
know how wide ranging the interests of the industry are, and what a diverse
spread of businesses, large and small, there are in the different sectors. But
Page 4 of 4
we will do our best to listen and to take on board the issues that matter most
to you. I am not always optimistic by nature, but it does seem that now we
have a real opportunity to reshape regulation, to further drive up standards
and reduce the threat from criminal activity. We want you, who work in the
industry, to be actively involved, in the front line of change, making it
happen in a way which suits your needs. We want to see regulation based
on businesses, qualifications managed by the industry, and a clear focus on
professionalism and on quality standards. Between us we have a real
opportunity to translate this vision into reality, and to start to adapt the
current regime where we can to meet the needs of the future. Let us grasp
this opportunity and start work today.
***Please note that the text above is not a transcript of the speech given but
the draft text that Ruth read from. There may therefore be some variation in
the final wording and phrasing that Ruth used.