POLICE FORCE, ISLE OF WIGHT (INQUIRY). (Hansard, 21 May 1942)

§ Mr. H. Morrison

Yes, Sir. In view of the publicity which was given to criticisms of the chief constable during the course of the proceedings at the inquest on the late deputy chief constable, I decided to hold an inquiry locally into the allegations which had been made by the late deputy chief constable, and certain further allegations which had been made to the standing joint committee by serving members of the Isle of Wight Constabulary and the administrative staff, in so far as they reflected on the administration of discipline and the efficiency of the Isle of Wight Constabulary, and generally into the state of efficiency and discipline of that police force. For this purpose I appointed a committee of inquiry, consisting of three officers who were experienced in the administration of discipline in a civilian organisation, and the examination of witnesses. The committee held an exhaustive inquiry into these allegations and heard evidence from all the witnesses who expressed their willingness to give information on matters coming within the scope of the inquiry, including the evidence of the chief constable himself and of witnesses who wished to give evidence on his behalf. The standing joint committee were present throughout the inquiry and had an opportunity of bringing to the notice of the committee any points or considerations which they considered to be relevant.

The committee came to the conclusion that, of the specific allegations made against the chief constable, there was legitimate cause for complaint only in respect of two incidents, namely, the procedure followed by him in a disciplinary case in December, 1938, and the unauthorised use by him of a police patrol car. As regards the disciplinary case, that had been investigated at the time by the proper authorities, who were satisfied that no injustice had been done. As regards the second incident, the chief constable had obtained permission to use the car under certain definite conditions, from which he departed without obtaining the necessary authority. Apart from the irregularity in the disciplinary case, the committee found that there had been no cause for complaint with regard to the administration of discipline by the chief 394W constable, that the Isle of Wight Constabulary is efficient, and that its efficiency has been much increased during the tenure of office of the chief constable. The committee also found no evidence that the chief constable himself is inefficient or unfit for his post, and ample evidence to the contrary, and that he is well qualified by character and experience for his present position and for any emergency he may have to meet. I have discussed the findings of the committee with the representatives of the standing joint committee who, although they differ in certain matters from the conclusions of the committee of inquiry, do not challenge the findings of the committee on the specific allegations made against the chief constable.

In my view, the two irregularities referred to by the committee of inquiry are of minor importance and are not of such a character as to require any disciplinary action against the chief constable. After considering the whole circumstances in the light of the representations made by the standing joint committee, I have come to the conclusion that the findings of the committee of inquiry ought to be accepted and that there are no grounds on which I should be justified in holding that Mr. Spicer is unfit for his post as chief constable, and I have informed the standing joint committee to this effect.