Former SIA chairman Baroness Ruth Henig joins SecuriGroup

Award-winning security firm SecuriGroup has announced the appointment of Baroness Ruth Henig as a non-executive director.

Baroness Henig joins SecuriGroup after completing two successful terms as chairman of the Home Office Regulator, the Security Industry Authority (SIA).

Baroness Henig’s commitment to security and policing is well documented, having held the post of chairman of the Lancashire Police Authority and the chairmanship of the Association of Police Authorities in England and Wales (which led to the award of a CBE in 2000 for services to policing).

The Baroness also served on the National Criminal Justice Board and Street Crime Action Group, chaired by the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

Baroness Henig was appointed as Deputy Lieutenant for Lancashire in 2002 and made a life peer in 2004 as Baroness Henig of Lancaster. As a sitting member of the House of Lords, Baroness Henig takes her place on the European Scrutiny Committee on Foreign Affairs and is a member of the Independent Policing Commission.

Prudent timing for the appointment

The timing of this appointment is particularly prudent for SecuriGroup as the Home Office prepares to reform the Private Security Industry Act 2001 and create a new regulatory system.

Baroness Henig was instrumental in devising the new regulatory strategy and her in-depth knowledge will ensure that SecuriGroup is well placed to meet the requirements of the new regime.

Baroness Henig said of her appointment: “I am delighted to join the SecuriGroup Board of Directors. The new regulatory framework will provide exciting opportunities for a company with such a strong reputation, and I’m keen to play my part in delivering further success to the organisation.”

Russel Kerr, the managing director of SecuriGroup, said: “This appointment helps to underline our ambitions and further strengthens our credentials. Our organisation continues to expand well ahead of the industry average, and this announcement will increase our profile even further.”

SecuriGroup has navigated the recession well and has experienced double-digit growth throughout the downturn, doubling its turnover in less than five years.

Board exhibits extensive security experience

The Baroness joins a Board with extensive security experience which is chaired by retired Strathclyde Police deputy chief constable John LS Malcolm QPM.

The SecuriGroup Board also includes former assistant chief constable and head of counter-terrorism for Scotland, namely Allan Burnett QPM, and the former joint regional liaison officer and civil contingencies expert Colonel John Kelly MBE.

The Security Institute announces Emma Shaw as its new chairman

The Security Institute, the UK’s largest membership body for security professionals, has announced that Emma Shaw is its new chairman.

Working alongside her fellow directors, Emma will take the organisation to the next stage of its development by ensuring that it continues to meet the needs of its growing membership.

Shaw is the founder and managing director of Esoteric, a well established electronic sweeping, counter espionage and intelligence gathering company based in the UK. An MBA graduate and a Chartered Security Professional (CSyP), Emma’s early career was spent with the Royal Military Police, followed by a period working in the UK Security Service.

Having previously been vice-chairman of The Security Institute, with responsibility for its strategic direction and finances, Emma takes over from Mike Bluestone CSyP, who had been in the position since 2009.

Bluestone stated: “It has been a pleasure and a privilege to lead The Security Institute over the last four years and I will continue to promote the excellent work that it does wherever and whenever I can. Having worked closely with Emma during that time, I’ve no doubt that the Institute is in the best possible hands and I wish her all the best.”

Refinement of the membership process

Emma has served on the main Board of The Security Institute since 2007. Having also been both registrar and chairman of the Validation Board for several years, she has been instrumental in the ongoing refinement of the membership process, ensuring it remains both current and relevant.

In addition to her work at The Security Institute, Emma is the southern region chairman of the Defence Industry Security Association (DISA) and a council member for City and Security Resilience Networks (CSARN). An active participant in the development of industry standards and Best Practice techniques for technical security counter measures, Emma has worked closely with Skills for Security on National Occupational Standards and with the National Security Inspectorate on Codes of Practice.

No stranger to industry acclaim, Emma was a finalist at the Association of Security Consultants’ (ASC) Imbert Prize 2012, a finalist for Director of the Year at the 2013 Toast of Surrey Awards and won the Security Consultant of the Year 2012 accolade at the 2012 Security Excellence Awards.

Emma also featured in the list of recent IFSEC Global ‘Top 40 Influencers in Security’.

Commenting on her new role, Shaw said: “I feel both delighted and privileged to have been elected to lead The Security Institute. Although we are a UK-based organisation, our future direction, approach and thinking should also reflect our ability to support our members globally. It’s my intention to achieve this objective via a cohesive strategy that makes use of external communications to develop and influence the shape of our industry, as well as supporting our members in their professional career development. The Security Institute has many dedicated volunteer security professionals and I’m looking forward to working with them to shape the organisation’s future.”

Lone Working: why risk assessments are vital

If you look on Wikipedia, risk assessments are defined thus: ‘The determination of the quantitative or qualitative value of risk related to a concrete situation and a recognised threat.’

Such assessments – or security risk analyses – are essential for every organisation. Only by conducting these exercises can those who hold the purse strings be absolutely sure that the controls in place – and the expenditure aligned with them – are fully commensurate with the risks to which any given organisation is exposed.

Drilling down to the micro level, it’s also true to say that risk assessments around employees are equally vital. No more so than when it comes to members of staff who work alone. The Corporate Manslaughter Act and companies’ Duty of Care to staff as part of today’s CSR policies absolutely set that assertion in stone.

What factors, though, demand most consideration for a genuinely collaborate risk assessment procedure to be executed between manager and employee?

Fundamental questions must be asked

Certain fundamental questions must be asked. For example, can the work defined be carried out safely by a lone individual? What arrangements need to be put in place to make certain a lone worker isn’t exposed to a greater risk than those who operate in tandem?

In essence, the risk assessment for any lone worker has to pinpoint all potential hazards, identify those who may be affected by the perceived risks and outline the right control procedures.

Looking specifically at hazards (or threats), does the workplace present a special risk to the lone worker, perhaps because of the environment, its location or any degree of unfamiliarity with their surroundings?

From a Health and Safety perspective, is the working environment appropriate in terms of, say, lighting and heating? Are welfare facilities – toilets, drinking water, etc – on site both adequate and accessible? And what about immediate access to First Aid facilities should they be required?

From a pure security point of view, does the lone worker have access to suitable communication devices for summoning assistance? Needless to say this area is always important, and particularly so if there’s any perceived or real risk of violence associated with the work activity or location.

Is there an emergency plan in place, and is it appropriate? Has the employee received specific training in how to respond to emergency situations that may arise in the course of their duties when working alone? Variables such as fire safety or the need for electrical shutdowns ought to be considered.

For their part, control measures are focused on reducing risk and the consideration of alternative work methods/patterns, additional training (around, say, emergency procedures and personal safety) and adequate supervision.

Enhanced on-site security (courtesy of CCTV and personal alarm systems) will likely be part of the mix, so too increased lighting at entrances, exits and for external zones like car parks.

When, where and how to seek guidance

As a ‘must’, all lone workers have to be privy to the necessary information that assists them in dealing with everyday scenarios but they should also understand when, where and how to seek guidance or assistance from others should they be confronted by threatening or otherwise abnormal situations.

Generally speaking, the level and extent of training required for lone working employees depends largely on the nature of the work to be conducted in addition to the knowledge and experience of the individuals in question. It stands to reason that younger, less ‘worldly-wise’ individuals and those new to the company have to be inducted by way of more training.

Supervision must also be paramount. The level and degree of this ‘mentoring’ is determined by the nature of the risks involved in tandem with the aforementioned abilities and experience of each lone worker.

Manual (panic alarms) or automatic (motion sensors) warning devices may come into the mix, along with periodic telephone contact/site visits from managers at set intervals. Regular contact (by way of dedicated radios or telephones) or perhaps ‘end of shift’ or ‘end of task’ contact could be initiated.

At the end of the risk assessment, every lone worker must be made fully aware of the outcome and of all necessary control measures to be orchestrated.

Brian Sims BA (Hons) Hon FSyI
Media Solutions Manager
UBM Live Security and Fire Portfolio

Access control: what happens next?

For some time now, an ongoing drive for converged solutions has dominated the security debate across corporate management. A simplistic version of events is that task consolidation helps to realise reduced costs. While that may be an undercurrent bolstering the convergence movement in these austere financial times, there’s far more to it than mere pounds and pence.

Converged solutions actively assist companies in meeting their regulatory requirements and obligations while helping to enforce consistency of policy.

At least in part, the convergence movement is motivated by due recognition that business assets are increasingly information-based. In today’s commercial landscape, information assets demand every bit as much attention – if not more, some would argue – as do their physical cousins.

One need only converse with recognised experts from ASIS, ISACA and ISSA – co-founders of the Alliance for Enterprise Security Risk Management – to support and develop that statement.

This overriding desire for convergence is mirrored in the access control solutions market. For operational convenience, end users now increasingly crave a single credential that will allow – in the first instance – access to buildings, followed swiftly by an ability for personnel to log on to the company network with that same credential and, subsequently, access remote networks without the necessity for any one-time password tokens or key fobs.

Such solutions are not just about convenience, either. Importantly, it’s a more secure response to the situation. Why? Converged access control permits far stronger authentication throughout a given company’s IT backbone and doesn’t solely focus on defence at the perimeter.

By extension, organisations are able to leverage their existing credential investment, appending logical access control for network access on the way towards energising multi-layered and fully-interoperable security solutions that truly span their network, systems and physical facilities.

Trends in the access control sector

That’s one trend in the access control space, then, but what of the others as we rapidly approach the 40th Anniversary edition of IFSEC International?

Card technologies are themselves continuing to evolve from prox to magstripe and on to ‘smart’ variants. Contactless smart cards founded on open standards are viewed by many as the ‘Holy Grail’. More and more layers of additional security are being added, be they purely digital or visual. Meantime, card storage capacities are expanding to accommodate the latest biometrics as well as other multi-factor forms of authentication.

One of the $64,000 questions here is: ‘Will Near Field Communication (NFC)-enabled smart phones come to replace physical smart cards in the years ahead?’ Received wisdom suggests the answer is: ‘No’. It’s more likely the case that the two will co-exist as part of overall physical access control solutions.

In terms of developing NFC-enabled projects, the security sector spent much of 2012 laying a solid base from which to build mobile access control solutions.

If widespread adoption is to take place, though, a distinct ecosystem has to continually evolve and include widely-available and secure handsets, readers and locks that can recognise digital keys embraced by those handsets and service providers able to deliver and manage mobile credentials duly created.

Outsourcing traditional ‘badged’ solutions

Speaking of mobile credentials… One trend witnessed of late is that some organisations have begun to outsource what might best be described as traditional ‘badged’ access control solutions to those offering services in the Cloud. Put simply, mobile devices could be connected to the network via, for example, a link that’s WiFi-enabled.

A further approach is derived by making use of mobile network operators ‘over the air’. New applications can be farmed out to the NFC-enabled phones in much the same way that Apps and music may be downloaded by consumers in the social environment. The idea is that multi-factor authentication is then transformed into a managed service run in the real-time arena.

Last, but not least, what about Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)? Companies may save money on technology while employees can work with chosen systems that might just boost staff productivity and/or morale. However, key company information could be rendered somewhat less secure.

With a recent Logicalis study suggesting that only 20% of employees surveyed had signed a BYOD policy, there’s clearly much work still to be done here.

CCTV: is it really spiralling out of control?

1987 wasn’t a great year, to be frank, what with the Stock Market crash in the States (how ironic that the movie Wall Street hit our cinema screens at the same time), the King’s Cross London Underground fire, special envoy Terry Waite’s kidnapping in Beirut and the horrific Zeebrugge ferry disaster.

On a more positive note, 1987 witnessed my first year at university and, lest I forget – and possibly incur the wrath of millions of Bart, Homer and Marge disciples – The Simpsons made its TV debut.

In terms of what transpired in our security world, 1987 was pretty monumental. Why? We witnessed – no pun intended – the very first UK town centre CCTV system installed across King’s Lynn with a view towards protecting its 40-odd thousand citizens.

Since then, of course, CCTV’s presence in the public domain has burgeoned both in terms of the number of cameras involved and the quality of the technology that lies within them (which is quite superb). Positively, specific systems operators are now licensed and regulated by the Government.

These regulated operators in unison with top quality cameras have given rise to myriad success stories of more and more criminals being brought to justice by way of all-seeing ‘Eyes in the Sky’.

Buy-in from members of the public

Key to the ongoing success of CCTV has been, is and always will be buy-in from the public – the people being watched. As citizens, we all need to know that surveillance is both appropriate and proportionate in its deployment.

It must also be the case that camera system operators, and those who use the information duly captured, demonstrate integrity in doing so at all times – and are held to account.

All of which is why the current UK coalition Government is committed to the further regulation of CCTV by way of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, and is presently seeking views on a draft Code of Practice focused on surveillance.

That Code is built squarely upon 12 guiding principles. Interestingly, and for the first time, the notion of ‘surveillance by consent’ is brought into play. There’s an obvious parallel here, then, with the ethics behind ‘policing by consent’.

The consultation period – which closes on 21 March – takes place while surveillance commissioner Andrew Rennison’s comments (reported in The Independent just before Christmas) remain fresh in the memory.

If you’re not committing a crime, what’s the problem?

The commissioner has stated that the proliferation of HD surveillance systems – and facial recognition technologies – in public spaces could result in a backlash from citizens.

“The technology has overtaken our ability to regulate it,” said Rennison in the broadsheet. HD cameras are “popping up all over the place”, asserted the commissioner, with the exponential growth of high power megapixel cameras potentially becoming an issue around Article 8 of the Human Rights Act (relating to the protection of family and private life).

Of course, discussions around ‘The Surveillance State’ have surfaced time and again. They’re not likely to disappear. Indeed, across the years I’ve chaired numerous industry debates on this topic – all of them impassioned affairs.

At one of those debates I suggested that the proliferation of CCTV cameras in public spaces isn’t an issue if – like myself – you happen to be a law-abiding citizen and are behaving appropriately. Some would assert that such a suggestion is perhaps a touch naive.

In all honesty, I would argue that neither the number of cameras monitoring us nor the inevitable advance of technology is the crux of the matter. Rather, it’s what subsequently happens to the images, data, information – call it what you will – gathered as a result of that process that really matters.

The Protection of Freedoms Act is to be welcomed, as is the draft Code of Practice on surveillance.

Certainly, the balancing act that has to be struck for CCTV – between the need to enhance public space safety and, at the same time, safeguard privacies – is far from an easy task, but those two outcomes are not mutually exclusive.

Let’s never forget the vital information gathered by CCTV during 7/7 and the London riots of August 2011. Properly regulated, deployed and used CCTV is one of the very best crime-fighting tools at our disposal.

NGNs… and The Future for Intruder Alarms

Whether you’re talking landline or mobile-based networks, it’s fair to say the UK’s communications infrastructure is evolving.

For their part, members of the general public continue to clamour for ‘super fast Broadband’. The Government is actively supporting that desire, in turn setting specific targets for its roll-out right across the board.

Evolution of the aforementioned communications infrastructure is all bound up in the terminology of the ‘Next Generation Network’ (or NGN if you prefer acronyms). Such networks are already operated by the ‘Big Boys’ in communications, among them Sky and BT.

NGN: what lies beneath?

The general idea behind the NGN is a simple one: a lone network is designed and configured to transport all information and services (voice, data and myriad other media such as video content) by encapsulating it into ‘packets’. Packets similar in nature to those employed on the Internet.

With NGNs commonly built around IP, it’s not surprising that the terminology ‘all IP’ is also sometimes used to describe the transformational period that leads to the fully-fledged NGN.

So what does all of this have to do with the security and fire sectors? Well, it’s very much the case that many security, fire and indeed social alarms absolutely depend upon the telecommunications network for processing alarm signals. That being so, does this evolution pose potential difficulties for those who work with such alarms (not to mention the end users of same)?

An overriding fear is that any fundamental, unchallenged changes to the communications status quo could result in signal failures. That would be a wholly unacceptable scenario for all involved.

BSIA: leading the charge

To its great credit, the British Security Industry Association has been leading the charge in addressing this key issue.

For instance, the Trade Association has actively worked with Sky to test the latter’s Voice Broadband Network (SVBN) – itself an IP technology-based NGN. At the same identifying an issue affecting digital communicators, the test procedures highlighted the extent of the problem and Sky duly reconfigured its software by way of resolving the issue.

Good news all round, then, you’re thinking. Yes, but – and there’s always a ‘but’, isn’t there? – this episode does highlight the potential for the wider problem of NGN providers changing their network designs without first consulting professionals operating in the security, fire and social alarm sectors.

Positively, Sky has continued to involve the BSIA in sample testing of communications equipment whenever the company’s all set to launch new software upgrades.

Moving forward, it will be imperative all communications solutions adopt the same attitude. That way, member companies of organisations like the BSIA, the Fire Industry Association (FIA) and the Telecare Services Association (TSA) will have the necessary lead time to adequately prepare their solutions for change and cut back on the potential for any signal failure.

The BSIA is continuing to raise awareness of NGN and call-routing issues through regional and technical meetings, seminars and other dedicated events. Crucially, a support service is available to member companies who have experienced (or are now experiencing) signalling failures.

Links have also been nurtured with the communications industry forum NGNuk, a debating focal point established to provide communication providers and OFCOM with a central point of contact for addressing issues linked with NGNs and Next Generation Access (NGA) across the UK.

The BSIA is still seeking an answer to the maximum network delay expectations – a fundamental issue addressed over the past few years.

Memorandum of Understanding

Just prior to Christmas, the BSIA, the FIA and the TSA agreed to work together on ensuring that members of all three trade bodies are represented and supported in discussions focused on telecommunication changes.

By dint of a Memorandum of Understanding, these organisations are looking at a joined-up approach for communicating with OFCOM and the telecoms providers to ensure consistency of message between all three organisations. The ‘one voice’ tactic also puts the full weight of the collective memberships behind those communications.

It’s a development that can only be a good thing for the alarms sectors in the security, fire and telecare/telemedicine spaces.

Project Griffin: a milestone in counter-terrorism awareness

Thursday 17 January 2013 was memorable but not wholly for pleasant reasons. From a negative perspective, the World Bank cut its growth forecast for the global economy while yet another UK High Street institution – this time DVD rental specialist Blockbuster – was hurtling towards administration.

That sad news was prefaced by horrifying breakfast time drama engulfing London’s Wandsworth Road as a helicopter crashed into a tall building in the midst of fog-laden skies. Two deaths would be confirmed by the emergency services. A tragic start to the New Year in central London.

Thursday 17 January 2013, though, also witnessed the City of London Police’s 100th Griffin Awareness Day – undoubtedly a magnificent milestone for a groundbreaking counter-terrorism awareness initiative, the influence of which has spread far and wide since its inception in 2004.

Project Griffin: the background

Project Griffin was devised by the City of London Police and brought forward as a joint venture with the Metropolitan Police Service. The remit was simple yet vital: to educate and advise security managers, security officers and the myriad employees of public and private sector organisations based across the capital on counter-terrorism, crime prevention and security issues.

In essence, Project Griffin provides an official channel through which the police service can share and update crucial information relating to security and crime prevention. There’s an ongoing desire to raise awareness of current terrorist and crime issues, gather intelligence and share information, build and maintain effective working relationships and seek Best Practice solutions to defeat would-be terrorists.

As a by-product of all this, a key goal is to maintain trust and confidence in the police and other authorities while at the same time empowering members of the community to be bold in reporting what they believe is suspicious activity. Laudable goals one and all, I’m sure you’ll agree.

In the wake of rightly being dubbed “an unqualified success” in London, Project Griffin earned recognition as representing national Best Practice and was rolled-out by a host of police forces (Merseyside and North Yorkshire among them) to benefit cities and communities the length and breadth of the UK.

Griffin’s influence even spread overseas, with plaudits emanating from as far afield as the United States and Australia.

The Awareness Days are one of four main strands comprising Griffin’s operational framework – the others being online refresher modules, regular Bridge Calls and emergency deployments of registered personnel.

Awareness Days are staged locally by participating police forces to introduce ‘Concept Project Griffin’, establish relationships and facilitate networking forums. They focus on how people can recognise, respond to and report suspicious activity and behaviour.

Importantly, they also assist and prompt all those taking part to think about their own procedures when dealing with certain types of incidents and emergencies in a given locality.

Cross-Sector Safety and Security Communications programme

Let’s not forget that Griffin provided a base point for the concept around which the hugely successful Cross-Sector Safety and Security Communications programme was built to serve the London 2012 operations. From a law enforcement perspective, the latter stands as a shining legacy of the Olympics.

With all of this in mind it was only right that, on the evening of this milestone day for Project Griffin, an awards event was orchestrated by the City of London Police to honour those who’ve actively furthered the scheme’s credentials.

Deserving of so much credit are Don Randall MBE – current chairman of the Project Griffin Executive Committee and co-founder of the whole initiative – as well as Jim Busby (executive head of NaCTSO) and senior police officers Ian Dyson, Richard Morris and Paul Crowther. As the new chairman of the London Project Griffin Board, Graham Bassett will also be a tremendous force for good.

Project Griffin is all about the police service, the business community and private sector security companies working in genuine partnership. A partnership underpinned by co-operation, of course, but also that commodity which is most priceless – absolute trust.

It’s the very embodiment of convergence. The convergence of like-minded souls. Like-minded souls determined to protect us from harm.

Here’s to Griffin’s next milestone.

BSIA issues end user guide to security regulation

The British Security Industry Association (BSIA) has produced a guide for end users and security buyers to help them understand the proposed changes to the licensing and regulatory regime of the UK’s private security industry. These changes are set to impact all companies that use private security personnel.

From 2013 onwards, there will be a gradual change in the way in which private security companies and individual officers operating in the UK are licensed and regulated, a function presently undertaken by the Security Industry Authority (SIA). These changes will be implemented over time and will alter the requirements and responsibilities of both security companies and their customers under the law.

Following the Public Bodies Review in 2010 – often better known as the ‘Bonfire of the Quangos’ – which aimed to increase the transparency and accountability of all public services and ensure that the Government operates in a more efficient and business-like way, it was announced that the SIA was to be abolished.

The BSIA – among others – acted quickly in response to this announcement and, following the draft of a letter to the Home Secretary, the Government’s message was softened to one of reform rather than abolition.

The new solution – preferred by Government and industry – is a phased transition to a business licensing regime. Under this regime, the focus of regulatory control would move from the licensing of individual security operatives to the licensing of private security businesses. Those same businesses would be responsible for ensuring that required checks on individuals are carried out, although the Regulator would continue to undertake individual criminality checks.

Trevor Elliott, director of manpower and membership sServices at the BSIA, comments: “Over the next couple of years the regulatory landscape of the private security industry will change dramatically, and the legal responsibilities of both security companies and their customers will be affected.

“Although it may take a while for these changes to become apparent to the end user, early preparation is essential to ensure that companies procuring security personnel understand what’s changing and what they need to do to ensure that they continue to operate within the law.”

To help customers of the industry who may be affected by this change, the BSIA has produced a handy online guide which answers end -users’ frequently asked questions. It also provides essential background information on why this change is taking place.

Importantly, the guide details key dates in the transition process and advises on how businesses can begin to prepare themselves for this change.

Elliott continues: “The BSIA is encouraging all of its licensable member companies to discuss the potential impact of regulatory change with their customers at an early opportunity. While many of them are already doing so, this guide will provide a useful reference point for end users wishing to make sure they’re fully prepared.”

Download a copy of ‘Regulatory Change in the Security Industry: How It Affects You’ from the BSIA’s website.

Is the security industry heading towards a legislative cliff?

Brian Sims and Bobby Logue canvass UK security industry leaders’ opinions on why swift primary legislation is going to be so important for the future roadmap of private sector regulation.

At the conclusion of the Public Bodies Review by the UK Government (which focused on creating greater transparency around all public bodies), the Government – in consultation with the security industry – agreed that the Security Industry Authority (SIA) should be reformed.

In November 2012, the Home Office began consultation on the future of the regulated UK private security sector. Key to the changes suggested by the politicians was the formation of a new regulatory body which requires primary legislation to take effect.

Key changes include the licensing of security companies, the idea that the Approved Contractor Scheme (ACS) may become an industry-led Hallmark Scheme and that the security industry itself could be vested with direct responsibility for skills development.

Some of the proposed changes don’t in fact require primary legislation, but key areas of the proposed changes do.

Warning from industry leaders

Now, industry leaders have warned that, without primary legislation materialising before the next General Election, the private security industry faces the possibility of sliding off a legislative cliff.

A concerned James Kelly, chairman of the Security Regulation Alliance and the CEO of the British Security Industry Association, commented: “The BSIA recently collated responses from across its membership to the Home Office consultation on the proposed new regulatory regime. It was noted and accepted that the main substance of the consultation document reflected the key proposals submitted to the Home Office by the Regulator – to which the BSIA and its partners in the Security Regulation Alliance had contributed. There was, however, one notable concern: the current absence of any provision for the scheduling of primary legislation.”

Kelly continued: “The BSIA, along with its partners in the Security Regulation Alliance, believes that the efficacy of the proposed new system of regulation depends wholly on the requisite primary legislation. Without this, the proposals will be ineffectual, and it will represent a missed opportunity to build constructively on the industry-Regulator-Government consensus achieved to date.”

Elaborating on this point, Kelly went on to state: “Indeed, the credibility of the Home Office’s recent industry-wide consultation, which states that such legislation will be introduced – but there is silence on the timing of it – will be undermined in the absence of such primary legislation. Accordingly, it’s imperative that the relevant primary legislation, giving effect to the Security Industry Authority’s successor body and conferring enforcement powers on that body to challenge businesses that fail to comply with the terms of their licence, is scheduled at the earliest possible date within this Parliament.”

Sense of cautious optimism

Commenting on behalf of The Security Institute and its membership, chairman Mike Bluestone CSyP said: “It’s well over two years since the formation of the Security Regulation Alliance. That body was established in the autumn of 2010 as a combined security sector response to the Government’s announcement at the time that the SIA was to be abolished along with hundreds of other ‘Quangos’ [ie Non Departmental Public Bodies or NDPBs].”

Bluestone explained: “The Security Institute was a founder member of the Security Regulation Alliance. I’m proud of the role that the organisation has played to date in contributing to the work of the Alliance, and in particular to the SIA’s Strategic Consultation Group (SCG). The SCG was, of course, the brainchild of Baroness Ruth Henig who, until earlier this month, was chairman of the SIA. To the surprise of many of us, and despite her outstanding leadership, Baroness Henig’s tenure as SIA chairman was not renewed. We do of course wish the new acting chairman, Bill Matthews, every success in this important role, and look forward to working with him.”

Bluestone also said: “There’s a sense of cautious optimism that the move towards a new regulatory regime centred on business licensing will be completed sooner rather than later. One reason for the ‘cautious’ element in this optimism is the ongoing delay in the passing of the necessary primary legislation. Primary legislation is essential in order to give the new regulatory regime the required mandate to operate fully, including new and essential enforcement powers which will be needed to oversee licensed businesses as opposed to individuals.”

Concluding his statement, Bluestone explained: “Let us hope that the assurances being given by the Government to pass that legislation materialise very soon. Those of us who have the responsibility of consulting with the SIA and the Home Office on a regular basis will certainly not rest until that legislation is passed and the new regulatory regime is in place. The UK simply cannot afford to let the future regulation of such a vital industry be allowed to hang in the balance for much longer.”

IPSA: supporting the case for reform

Also voicing strong opinion on this vital matter is Mike White, chairman of the International Professional Security Association (IPSA).

“You could be forgiven for thinking that the recently ended Home Office consultation around the future regulation of the private security industry was, in real terms, Hobson’s Choice given that one option was to do nothing, a second was to remove all regulation completely and the third was the wonderfully drafted description of ‘a phased transition to a business regulation regime’,” said White. “Having been part of the consultation on the future of regulation for some time now, IPSA supports the case for reform and, specifically, the need for business regulation. However, we do have concerns.”

White continued: “For any business regulatory regime to have meaningful credibility, there will need to be suitable and sufficient enforcement powers enshrined within the process. These will need to include proportionate measures that could range from cautions, improvement notices and fines up to the ultimate sanction of the revocation of a company’s licence to trade in the industry. It’s our understanding that, for these powers to be guaranteed, there’s a need for primary legislation to be passed by Parliament. However, Government business managers only point to a vague offer of an opportunity of some Parliamentary time sometime in the final session – most probably 2014 – just a year before the next General Election.”

White went on to state: “This is not good enough, and is arguably an insult to an industry that’s actively seeking to enhance its professionalism, drive out – and keep out – criminality and which has positively embraced the need for change. The Private Security Industry Act 2001 stumbled through Parliament at the end of a Parliamentary session. We mustn’t let that happen again.”

IPSA’s chairman explained: “We support our colleagues in the industry with similar misgivings, and join them in calling upon Lord Taylor and the Home Secretary to grasp this opportunity as proactively and positively as the security industry has and confirm a date when draft primary legislation will be put up for debate. This must be well in advance of 2014 when MPs will inevitably be starting their General Election campaigns and their thoughts will be elsewhere.”

In conclusion, White stressed: “This is an opportunity to shape our industry for the next 20-plus years, and it needs to be underpinned by well thought out, fit for purpose legislation that ‘does exactly what it says on the tin’.”

Brian Sims (media solutions manager, UBM Live Security and Fire Portfolio) and Bobby Logue (managing director, Interconnective)

Info4Security End User News: Fighting crime in the community

Once again, it’s great to see the Home Office supporting the victims of crime. Rightly, the politicians have also honoured crime fighters at a point when community safety is in sharp focus. 

Continuing that theme, congratulations to the Facewatch team on another excellent crime-solving initiative. 

Also very pleasing to see is the latest crackdown on illegal activity in the night-time economy following enforcement operations carried out by the Met Police in tandem with the Security Industry Authority. 

Speaking of private security sector regulation and its future, make sure you read an excellent Opinion article by Professor Mark Button on the latest round of Government consultations. 

Interesting to note is the latest Foreign and Commonwealth Office statement on UK security companies operating overseas and the Home Affairs Select Committee’s stated desire to see a Royal Commission tasked with examining current drugs policy. 

Before the seasonal festivities begin, it’ll be worth your while making time to scan the latest blogs from The Security Analyst (on PSIM), The Networker (where the focus is critical infrastructure protection) and The Core Thinking (TUPE for security personnel). There’s also a regulation update courtesy of the SIA’s CEO Bill Butler. 

Looking towards developments in the New Year, here at UBM Live we’re very excited to announce that Info4Security.com will soon be migrating into a new online community designed specifically to serve the business needs of the global security and fire sectors. 

In 2013 and beyond, IFSEC Global.com will showcase the knowledge and capabilities of the very brightest and best professionals in those environments. We very much look forward to you joining our community in January and lending your voice to the debate. 

In the meantime, Thank You again for your loyal readership in 2012. 

Let me take this opportunity to wish you a very Happy New Year. 

The Future of Regulation: ‘The Good, The Bad… and the Too Little to Determine’

Hugely respected senior academic Professor Mark Button offers a personal view on proposed changes to regulation of the private security sector in England and Wales 

Home Office: ‘Victims of crime must have their say’

Victims of antisocial behaviour and low level crime will be able to have their say on the out-of-court punishments of offenders, the Home Office has announced 

Intruder alarms: BSIA, TSA and FIA agree MoU on telecoms changes

Current telecommunication changes to both landline and mobile networks in the UK as they affect alarms are being addressed by the BSIA, the FIA and the TSA 

The Security Analyst: PSIM’s true value lies in incremental gains

The benefits of Physical Security Information Management are being realised by end users calculating their ROI, as Jamie Wilson explains in his final blog of 2012 

IQ approved by Ofqual to offer Functional Skills

Industry Qualifications’ accreditation has been extended by regulator Ofqual such that the organisation can offer qualifications in Functional Skills 

The Core Thinking: ‘Why the bare minimum isn’t enough for TUPE success’

Peter Webster focuses on the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations, and in particular the positives that can be derived by all parties involved 

FCO adopts new standard for private security companies

The British Government intends to adopt PSC1 as the standard for private security companies “working on land in complex and high risk environments overseas” 

Ten video surveillance trends for 2013

IMS Research has issued its fourth annual Video Surveillance Trends White Paper, this time looking ahead to 2013 

Lodge Service introduces bespoke monitoring facility

Lodge Service, the £22 million UK security group, has opened a dedicated signal and services monitoring facility in Accrington, Lancashire 

Home Affairs Committee calls for Royal Commission to examine UK drugs policy

After a wide-ranging and in-depth inquiry lasting a year that examined all areas of UK drug policy, the Home Affairs Committee has called for a Royal Commission on the issue 

Brian Sims
Media Solutions Manager
UBM Live Security and Fire Portfolio