§ Mr. MackinlayTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, (1) pursuant to his answer of 24 May 2000,Official Report, column 496W, what the basis was for his statement concerning the overcoming of recruitment difficulties relating to Metropolitan Police security officers at the Palace of Westminster; [130756]
(2) what, for the recruitment advertising campaign for Metropolitan Police security officers at the Palace of Westminster over the last 12 months, were (a) the budget, (b) the timescale of the most recent recruitment campaign and (c) the number of suitable recruits; and what actual and projected vacancies were, based on existing retirement policies; [130721]
(3) if he will make a statement on the difficulties encountered in attracting suitable candidates for posts of Metropolitan Police security officers at the Palace of Westminster; what posts elsewhere compete for the same candidates; and what their rates of pay and conditions of service are; [130757]
(4) pursuant to his answer of 24 May 2000, Official Report, column 496W, concerning the retirement age of Metropolitan Police security officers at the House, (a) on what dates discussions took place with the security officers' trade union representatives, (b) when the trade union representative was shown the letters, prior to their 886W dispatch to security officers declining to extend their period of service and (c) when those letters were dispatched; and if he will make a statement; [130706]
(5) pursuant to his answer of 24 May 2000, Official Report, column 496W, concerning Metropolitan Police security officers stationed at the House, if he will place in the Library a copy of the minutes or notes taken at the meeting between the Metropolitan Police management and the security officers' trade union representative; [130722]
(6) on what dates Mr. G. Roylance met the Metropolitan Police security officers' trade union representative (a) prior to the dispatch of the letters declining an extension of service to those officers due to retire and (b) after the letters' dispatch; and if he will make a statement; [130758]
(7) pursuant to his answer of 24 May 2000, Official Report, column 496W, when the decision was taken, and by whom, that the availability of recruits for Metropolitan Police security officers at the Palace of Westminster had improved; and on what basis an assessment was made that this situation would be sustained; [130723]
(8) if he will make a statement on the Government's policy on age discrimination in relation to the recruitment and retention policy of Metropolitan Police security guards at the Palace of Westminster. [131111]
§ Mr. Charles Clarke[holding answer 18 July 2000]The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis tells me that the Principal Security Officer and a member of the senior management team of the Palace of Westminster Security Force meets monthly with the Public and Commercial Services Union which represents the security officers. The minutes of these meetings are available to all staff. We are seeking the approval of the Public and Commercial Services Union to release the minutes of the meeting on 5 April 2000, at which the Principal Security Officer (PSO) informed the union representatives that it had been decided not to offer any further extension of service to staff over 60 years of age.
In the reply I gave on 24 May 2000, Official Report, column 496W, I acknowledged that the Metropolitan Police had experienced difficulties in recruiting security officers for the Palace of Westminster but that these have been overcome as a result of an external recruitment campaign.
Chief Superintendent Roylance of the Metropolitan Police (the officer in charge of policing the Palace of Westminster) met with the security officers' trade union representatives on 19 April after sending the letters on 13 April to those officers where a further extension of service had been declined. He did not meet them prior to the despatch of letters.
Internal selection within the Metropolitan Police Service is carried out at regular intervals by the local personnel unit at no additional cost. The recent external recruitment campaign for security officers was funded by the Metropolitan Police Service Central Recruitment Branch budget. The cost of the campaign advertisements was approximately £33,086. Planning for the campaign began in February 2000 and the advertisements were placed in May. Consideration of the applications and candidate interviews are now in progress. Some 212 applications were received in response to the campaign 887W but it is not yet possible to say how many of the applicants are suitable. The total number of anticipated vacancies is 68, of which 17 were anticipated to be retirements of staff at or beyond the contractual age of retirement in 2000.
The Metropolitan Police compares favourably with other employers of security officers in terms of both salary and working conditions. The starting salary of a security officer is £10,911 per annum and, in addition, Palace of Westminster officers receive £1,622 per annum London Allowance and a Shift allowance.
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Employment issued a publication: "Age Diversity in Employment: A Code of Practice" in 1999, a copy of which is in the Library. The code covers good practice in six aspects of the employment cycle, including retirement. I have no reason to believe that the retirement policy operated by the Metropolitan Police Service is not fairly applied in accordance with the advice given in the code.