The Interview: Officers fear ‘trial by social media’
Welcome to the Bailiwick Express podcast. This is the interview. 1 in a series of podcasts where we, at the Bailiwick Express, speak to members of our community about events, personal stories, politics, current events, or charitable initiatives. Thank you for joining us. Those who take on the most difficult jobs often face the most scrutiny, usually because those jobs are for the public service.
Speaker 1:Teachers, nurses, police officers. If the community pays your wages, you can expect to get grief. And with the advent of social media, it has only become easier to criticize. It has also become easier to identify and scrutinize those instances where power has been used inappropriately. In this climate, it has become harder and harder to pick out the actual problems.
Speaker 1:Post anything about the police online in recent weeks and the comment section becomes awash with vitriol directed at law enforcement. Is this tidal wave of criticism reflective of a service crippled with corruption? Or is it the amplification of a handful of issues that are in fact being dealt with? Is it somewhere in the middle? That's the problem.
Speaker 1:If you take social media at face value, it's hard to know. Upholding the law is essential to a community. And when the trust is eroded, everything looks like a cover up. Police officers are granted powers the general public don't have. The power to arrest, the power to remove liberty.
Speaker 1:It's only right that the magnifying glass is held closer over them. But by who and to what extent? I reached out to Guernsey's head of law enforcement Rory Hardy to better understand the criticism the force is currently facing, whether it's warranted, and what is being done to build public support in one of our most important institutions. There seems to be a particularly acute scrutiny of law enforcement at the moment on social media, in particular. Why do you think that is, and how is that affecting, the island's police force in its way of operating?
Speaker 2:K. So I think I'll start generically that absolutely the police are an organization where quite rightly there should be inward looking as to our conduct, our behaviors, how we perform, what we do, and I think policing has been on an exceptionally complex journey, and I'm talking about policing nationally over the last 5 to 10 years, quite rightly. My career started at the time of the Stephen Lawrence inquiry in London, and I am very, very much used to, situations arising that policing has to wake up and listen to our community says, and quite rightly reflect inwardly how policing works. So, I think from a career police perspective, I'm used to being challenged. I'm used to, the the ethos of policing evolving and actually responding to what our communities say, and that is an absolutely fundamental element of policing today, policing historically, and policing going forward.
Speaker 2:So what we're seeing here in Guernsey at the moment is a situation where a small number of individuals are using, for example, social social
Speaker 1:media
Speaker 2:to put certain information into the public domain. The importance for me is that information is truthful, that information is accurate, and where necessary and where there has to be context to that information, that is also really, really important. As the head of Bailuit Law Enforcement, I absolutely accept the sort of work we do, we don't always get it right. We strive every day to get it right, and in the bulk of the work we do, and perhaps we can go on to discuss those different areas of work at some point, we strive to get it right. We are human beings, my staff are human beings, and we are in enacting and working with our community, which is a whole mixture of different people.
Speaker 2:People bring their own challenges, whether it's in the workplace, whether it's dealing with members of our community, with whatever incidents we're dealing with, we are humans working with humans, and that makes it challenging. So the point I need to make is I I'm not saying that we don't always get it right. Where we don't get it right, we're about learning. We're a culture of learning and development. And if we've got an individual member of staff or a way we train staff to deal with a particular type of incident, and learning tells us we need to evolve and change or an individual needs to have a a development plan to do that kind of incident better in the future, that is what this organisation is about because our community needs experienced police officers.
Speaker 2:Police officers during their careers won't always get every incident they deal with right. There's gonna be times when they make wrong decisions or they deal with people wrong. They might have a bad day at the office, as well as the member of the public we're dealing with might be having a bad day, and it just means that we're in the kind of business that can never be perfection for all parties. We're also in the business of upholding the law. The law is applicable to everybody, and I'm sure the people listening to this will know that not everyone in our community is a law abiding citizen who wants to adhere to the law and be subject to the law, and sometimes members of law enforcement have to take steps which they quite rightly have the powers to do in law.
Speaker 2:So for example, remove someone's liberty. So if you've committed an offence, that means you can be arrested because you've assaulted someone, you've stolen something, you've stolen a car, whatever it might be, you've imported drugs, we have power in law to detain that person, remove their liberty, take them into custody and investigate that offense. Not everybody we deal with wishes to be arrested or wishes to come quietly. That would be our ideal scenario. Everybody that we had to deal with, everybody that we had to take into custody, was compliant, did what the officers said.
Speaker 2:Sometimes people are suffering from mental health. Sometimes they're suffering from drugs and alcohol. All these things make the job that we have to do difficult. And we have to try and get it right. If we get it wrong, we have to reflect.
Speaker 2:And also, what I would say is when we have got it wrong in terms of, officers have really gone into territories which is criminal or way beyond what is even a conduct issue, I can show to our community that we have faced on to those sorts of issues. And in my time as chief officer, there've been times when, serving officers within law enforcement have been arrested, investigated for criminal matters, and some have actually been charged and taken to the criminal court. So when standards are found to be below, we are absolutely an organization that will do the right thing.
Speaker 1:I wanted to touch on a couple of things. Again, we talk about information being thrown around on social media as you mentioned there. So I want to tackle a couple of things head on that had been suggested online that often get repeated when these, complaints or concerns or conversations happen to happen on social media. One of them that always seems to rise its head is a perceived increase or increase in complaints over the last 5, 6, 7 years. I thought it'd be good to hear from you as to why that might be the case.
Speaker 1:I know we've heard about it in the past. But Yep. Particularly in this moment in time, there is, those kind of statements do raise their heads. What what would you say to those kind of, the suggestion that complaints have risen? Okay.
Speaker 1:Well, one of
Speaker 2:the issues that is really under review at the moment, and we have been asking for for a review for a significant period of time, is that we record and publish statistics. And one of those statistics is the number of complaints received. Now what we are doing there is we are absolutely publishing the number of individual matters that have been brought to our attention as potentially complaints. Not every one of those issues turns out to be something that has merit, I e, we've identified misconduct, gross misconduct, or even worse, a criminal offence. The vast majority of matters that we record tend to be quality of service issues.
Speaker 2:For example, people don't understand why police officers used a certain power. They didn't understand why they had to be arrested. That is the vast majority of those statistics, and that's how they end up being dealt with. A very very small number of those actual complaints end up in something where there's a need for a management action or further investigation or further findings. So there is a sort of anomaly in the way that we report, which is very different to the UK.
Speaker 2:What you'll probably find in the UK is they will just report the numbers of matters that turn out to be either misconduct, gross misconduct, or, worse, we are reporting everything that is reported. Our law requires that every allegation that is made, has to go through a process prior to it being established whether there is evidence of misconduct or gross misconduct. That is why that figure appears slightly higher than a lot of other UK forces.
Speaker 1:And so if we're talking about, thank you for the explanation.
Speaker 2:Good. I hope that helps.
Speaker 1:Yes. I, so when we're talking about complaints, there has been while I know you don't particularly wanna touch on particular people, there are clearly has been a cup, a high profile series of complaints and conversations that have been happening that have drawn, the attention of not only the public, but also politicians. And so I wonder, what you make of the there has been some political involvement from some members of our of our government in calling for, in their words, greater transparency and all this kind of stuff.
Speaker 2:Yes.
Speaker 1:I was wondering what you make of that.
Speaker 2:Okay. The first thing I'll say absolutely clearly is it is quite right. There is an open and transparent and accessible complaint system for the public. And I would welcome any member of the public who has come into contact with our service, who has concerns or doesn't understand or feels they've been agreed, absolutely, they should continue to come through a proper process. One of the issues that I have to stand firm on is there is a process for the public to use about complaining.
Speaker 2:That is not the use of social media. That is not putting small sections of footage, which should not be used in that way because it hasn't been, for example, made available certain individuals for any other process, say, a legal process, putting that through social media and putting staff through trial by social media, to me, is totally unacceptable. And I'm sure as this interview goes on, we can maybe unpack why that is such an important point. I absolutely also welcome political oversight and political involvement. We are a democracy, and it is quite right that politicians should have the ability to voice concerns.
Speaker 2:However, if they are going to do that, they need to have the facts and they need to have the proper understanding before, for example, raising issues in a way that may question public concern. So there have been a number of matters, for example, financial issues wrapped around certain elements of, how certain matters have been dealt with. Before raising it publicly and politically, you need to have that understanding of why those costs may have been incurred. So it has caused a lot of concern in the organization that some of these issues have been publicly shared in the way that they have. Yeah.
Speaker 2:But please be assured, there is no intention within this organization to cover anything up or not address or investigate any concerns people would have. And as the chief officer, I call all I can say is if people have got concerns, they should make complaints. What is a concern of of mine is vexatious and malicious complaints, and complaints just been made to tie up the system. That, for me, is something that is an issue of concern. And then if someone who may have been involved in that activity raises the issue, look how many complaints there are, But if a significant number of those actual big complaints have been generated by that individual, that is very disingenuous.
Speaker 1:I'm happy that you touched on vexatious because that is a word that has appeared multiple times in publication when it comes to answering questions, at the suggestion of a certain group of people, pursuing, particular concerns or complaints on social media. Those people, and I know you don't wanna touch on who they are, don't seem to be interested in stopping. And so this is this will be a continued campaign. What is the approach of Guernsey police in liaising with people who raise persistent concerns in this way?
Speaker 2:Okay. So when you look in the United Kingdom, their legislation that deals with police complaints and, also, the Independent Office of Police Conduct, the IOPC, They have legislation that if vexatious complainants continue under a certain course of conduct, there are routes and opportunities for them to deal with that issue and, prevent it being a perpetuation of similar complaints. We don't have any route or any avenue currently to do that. So part of the review of our police complaints legislation has to be looking at whether or not our law needs to have an ability to deal with what are genuinely vexatious complainants. So I know that the phrase has been used, and I know as a result of some of the involvement I've had, which I can't go into personally about certain things, I've used that phrase, but within our actual law, there is no way of properly dealing with vexatious complainant, which unfortunately means that individuals who seek to continue in that course of conduct can can presently continue continue to do that.
Speaker 2:So they can keep firing in complaints in different ways, under different guises, in from different sort of perspectives, and, we will still have to receive those complaints and process those complaints according to the law. So that is something that I am seeking through the Committee of Home Affairs to be looked at from a legislative point of view. And I would like to say that I am very aware that the committee, are aware of the issues that the current law has, and they have said clearly that they will seek to support that there is a proper review of the legislation and look at bringing it up to date to the legislation that is sort of appropriate that they've got in the UK and making Guernsey have a similar level of legislation. But the the issue is there are a lot of areas in a small jurisdiction like like ours that do need to be addressed. For me, it should be a high priority.
Speaker 2:The committee are are sort of Committee for Home Affairs are indicating it is becoming an increasing priority for them.
Speaker 1:You say, because I noticed that when you had the interview with ITV, you mentioned that officers are concerned about receiving complaints and civil and complaint issues. So is that because people should be able to give complaints? Right? So why is there a concern from officers Okay. That they're receiving them?
Speaker 2:So one of the issues for officers is that there is a law to deal with conduct around misconduct or gross misconduct under the police disciplinary regs. Where police officers feel particularly vulnerable is that they do not have the same cover as officers in the UK because of a judgment that happened before the courts here in Guernsey called the Lihure judgment. Now in essence when a police officer goes and does their, policing activity on behalf of their chief constable in the UK, there is a vicarious liability so that means the chief officer carries the liability for the actions of his or her officers. In Guernsey, the law doesn't allow the same thing. So the law doesn't absolutely show that when a police officer goes out into the public domain to do the work of a police officer, and there is a complaint made of a civil nature, there isn't the vicarious liability against the chief officer of police in Guernsey as there is in the UK.
Speaker 2:So the law here and the judgment in the RV le Hero judgment puts it back and the onus on the individual officer. Now I have been very clear, and I will be very clear for this podcast that I have made it abundantly crystal clear to my officers that they are working in my name, providing they are working within the law, and they're doing the best on the information that they have received. So I have a duty to stand up for my staff and represent my staff. So if civil claims are made against any mem any police officers or police staff or our established staff within Guernsey Police, I, as in the chief officer, are I'm duty bound to give them the legal advice they need and the support that they need to follow through with any proceedings. We've recently had an article in the local media which has basically said, you know, there's a load of cases coming, and, you know, Guernsey police watch out kind of vibe.
Speaker 2:Now that has been really unhelpful because all the police officers in this organization have seen that, and they're like, oh, am I getting a complaint? Their families have seen that. Their friends have seen that, and it really has cast a little bit of a, you know, an unnecessary and inappropriate concern on all the individuals who come here 365 days a year, do a really difficult job, and they're off a concern that, well, am I gonna get a complaint? What what have I done that might generate that? So that wasn't really very, helpful for my workforce and has caused and continues to cause a lot of concern.
Speaker 2:But the the main thing is that within whatever comes, whether they're civil complaints or further complaints, we will investigate them. We will look at them to see whether or not there is anything that is justified. And, also, as I said at the start of this interview, I absolutely accept we don't always get everything right, and we may make poor decisions. And, I would hope the bulk of the time, the decisions we do make are good decisions. But if decisions are or actions taken are below the standards we expect, well, of course, we will learn, and we will deal with these issues.
Speaker 2:We're not gonna try and sweep them under the carpet. And I think what I would like to do now is just link in. There has been a piece of video footage that was put out in the public domain, which showed an officer dealing with a member of public, in a vehicle and removing them from the vehicle. Now that was posted on social media. To be clear, as soon as we knew about that incident, which was filmed on the officer's body worn camera, we looked at that from a professional standards perspective, and that identified that that needed a proper investigation, and it went through the proper process.
Speaker 2:And the officer was investigated for their conduct, and it resulted in an outcome that that officer went through a process which, is a is a proper employment process, the process that would be available to any police force. So to reassure people when we come across something that is below the standards, we dealt with it appropriately. So when it went out on social media, that officer, that individual has already been through a disciplinary process. We've kept the victim updated. The victim is fully aware of the outcome of that process.
Speaker 2:But, also, what what's happened here is it's like trial again by social media. We've already done the disciplinary process, and that is why placing that on social media in the way that was done is truly unhelpful because it puts a total shadow over all my offices. The individual who had clearly not handled that situation well has been dealt with and has had a a development plan and other things to to to move forward because it's an officer who I think probably just had a bad day at that particular moment, and, you know, engaged in that process, and, you know, I think the outcome is is probably proportionate of course if that officer did that again that would be a very very different issue and be approached and I sincerely hope it never will happen again. So I I think it it is important I make those points. If I could, though, the the point that is a real issue for me is officers have discretionary power, and that discretionary power are is particularly around how we deal with violent or confrontational situations.
Speaker 2:You as a member of the public would expect a police officer to arrest someone who was potentially fighting, beating someone up, assaulting them, and that is a physically violent situation. And for an officer to engage in that situation and take control of it and arrest that offender, they're gonna have to use force. Because probably, if that officer said, would you stop punching that person, and would you mind me putting some handcuffs on? That probably isn't actually what's gonna happen. The officers are gonna have to use force to, make an arrest and take that person into custody.
Speaker 2:Those powers, we seek not to use. We train our officers to engage, to communicate, to reduce confrontation, reduce threat, and that is how we train. But sometimes we do have to use force to affect an arrest to do what the public expect us to do. My concern is, and this is certainly something that I've seen in the UK, and I know the commissioner of the Metropolitan Police very recently was talking about this very issue, that this trial by social media, this underlying, continual, time to undermine the police service, officers having to do their job are really almost gonna think, oh, am I really gonna have to use force here because people are filming me, or am I gonna be in the next person on social media? You know, if it's your loved one being assaulted by someone and that someone should be arrested, you're gonna want the police to step in and do their job straight away.
Speaker 2:And if that means they've got to use force, they've got to use force. It's making our staff's job a lot more difficult because it's making them feel really threatened and really concerned about having to do an already very difficult and dangerous job and that is why I'm really trying to say so much at the moment about the harm and the negativity of what's happening on social media. Sorry. No.
Speaker 1:That's okay. I was gonna just gonna jump in and say, of course, you're talking about, trial by social media after an investigation is already done. But I was hoping we could just quite shortly return to the original video that came out on Twitter because that was trial by social media, I suppose, to use your words. Yep. But during an investigation that hasn't concluded.
Speaker 1:So, I just wanted to quickly touch base on that one if
Speaker 2:that's okay. Yeah.
Speaker 1:Because the original statement from Ganzi police about when that footage came out was that, there are multiple investigations going on. I don't I don't know if you're able to touch on much of
Speaker 2:what's going on
Speaker 1:at the moment. Okay.
Speaker 2:So because
Speaker 1:I know there's a data protection one.
Speaker 2:Yeah. Let me let me okay. Let's what I won't comment on is the footage that was openly shared on social media has been referred as a complaint into our professional standards department. So I'm not going to comment on the individual conduct of officers because that is an ongoing investigation. But
Speaker 1:The only point I wanted to make about it because I thought you would come back and say that during the, ITV interview, you said the colleagues were following procedure.
Speaker 2:Okay. I'll I'll deal with that. If I can do it in in order okay. So as has already been stated in the public domain, the individual whose subject of that piece of footage, was arrested for a serious assault. At the time of their arrest, they were very violent.
Speaker 2:They they had caused a serious injury to a member of our community. They caused injury to the officers seeking to arrest them, and having been arrested they continue to pose a huge threat in terms of wanting to offer further violence towards the officers. Not only was that element to it, but the individual had caused injury to themselves by doing a certain act that injured themselves, they also threatened to further self harm which when you've arrested someone you've taken away their liberty, but looking after that person is now ours because you have taken away that person's liberty, and we have a duty of care. And in the circumstances that I'm aware about is that that threat was very, very genuine, that that person was threatening something that they potentially could try and carry out. What happened was that person was brought into detention and they continued to threaten violence and they continued to cause a lot of problems for the officers who were trying to deescalate the situation.
Speaker 2:The individual was back in police custody. There were no other members of the public to to wind it up further and we were trying to deescalate. But what we had to do to allow them to be in a in a cell on their own just to calm down was to remove clothing and put clothing on that was not a threat for self harm, which is normal safe custody procedure. There was a refusal to do that and then this is when the video footage is played because the officers then take action to put the detainee into clothing that cannot be used for self harm. The tactics that policing teaches, and this is a national tactic, is that by having more officers in order to control a situation that situation becomes safer.
Speaker 2:If you try to control a very violent individual with 1 or 2 officers, they would struggle. That's when people get hurt, that's when, for example, people can throw punches, kicks, head butts. People do all this sort of stuff to our officers when they don't want to be arrested, and our officers do not want to be assaulted because they want to come to work, they want to do their job to keep the community safe, and they want to go home safe at the end of the shift. So what we teach is if we are engaging with a particularly potentially violent or someone who has been violent, we teach a tactic which basically means we take control of their limbs and we take control in a way that doesn't threaten their breathing and that we can deal with it in a controlled manner with good communication between the officers who are engaged in whatever they're having to do. So this video, I won't comment on specifics, but the training we would ordinarily do is if an individual was violent, 5 officers is an ideal number to control that person because we can control the legs, we control the arms, and we can keep the head safe and prevent any injury.
Speaker 2:We can prevent any biting. We can prevent any head butting. So what the officers do is they they have you have to have that first engagement. So someone has to be in very close contact with that individual initially. The other officers then join, and then that individual is taken down onto the floor where it's safe.
Speaker 2:We maintain their breathing. We maintain their airway. We don't put pressure on the chest and the torso because that is an something that, you know, medical science has improved our techniques hugely. So we control the limbs, we control the head, and then they went through the procedure, and then they left left that individual in the cell. So, to to someone looking in, and, you know, let's let's be honest.
Speaker 2:Most of our community don't have to deal with the challenges that police officers have to deal with. Those individuals were trained in the technique that I just described, and that technique is designed to keep that detainee as safe as possible while we're doing something that obviously we're not having their consent, but actually if someone's threatened to self harm and we have to put them into clothing that means they can be safely left in a cell without doing something terrible, that's what we've got to do. So that's my sort of explanation without going into any of the specifics within that video. We as a force, any operational police officer has to do an annual officer safety refresher. They have to be trained in techniques of how to deescalate.
Speaker 2:They're trained in techniques if they have to to restrain and as I say the technique that we train is that there are the best number is 5 people for a violin person because they can control it appropriately. Now that does answer your question?
Speaker 1:That does answer my question. There was, I've got just a couple more on that one, and then I was gonna move on to tie up with we're gonna talk about social media and, hopefully, recruitment and that kind of thing. Yep. My, my first one will will begin. It sounded like a bit of a contentious question, but please bear with me on it.
Speaker 1:Because I do understand that the the man in question has since come out to say when we touch about the conversation about self harm has since come out to say I didn't say that. And this is an on we talk about this ongoing social media narrative and
Speaker 2:it's how
Speaker 1:are the public meant to decipher who to believe in this kind of scenario. Yep. Especially when it's a moment in time where I guess, there is this potential for trust to be a bit eroded. Does that make sense?
Speaker 2:It does. I I think with all respect to your question, that particular incident is under investigation. Okay. And I will, at this time, decline to take my answer further, not because I don't want to answer your question, but what I don't want to do is cause any complications for that investigation, and we should allow that to take its natural course. What I would say though is that, we have body worn cameras.
Speaker 2:We also have video cameras in our van. We have CCTV and audio in our custody suite. So, you know, we're trying to be as open and transparent as we possibly can, And any incident like that, we would secure and preserve all that kind of footage as part of an investigation. So let's let allow the inquiry to to to follow its course, and, you know, we we can perhaps come back to that at a later time.
Speaker 1:I think your answer to my next question will probably be the similar to that one then. I mean, the I was talking about tackling things, head on about we talked before about information being shared on social media, whether or not it's true or whether it's relevant. There was a lot of noise made about the prone position where questions being raised on leaving somebody in the position. I know you discussed about how to put them in there and get them to that point. But, is I you offer any context to leaving a a a person like that in that situation
Speaker 2:that way? Some of the comment on social media about this particular case, as you say, was concerning. Clearly, that is an ongoing investigation. So, again, I will not comment until that investigation has been fully concluded. Okay.
Speaker 1:And my final one. We'll move on after this. Much is being made online about the fact that, clearly we're not going to be naming any officers or anything in this conversation, but that this, one officer has been involved or linked to all these scenarios that are being discussed on social media. So I wanted to ask if you if the if you, I suppose, stand behind the processes that are in place for identifying an appropriate conduct and, how they are rectified.
Speaker 2:Okay. So I think I said at the start of the interview, we never shy away from reflecting on how we've dealt with individual incidents or individual officers conduct. The the video footage involving the gentleman and the vehicle, as I say as we've discussed, it's been through a process. It's been through a recognized management process, and the individual officer has been given a package to ensure that that kind of incident doesn't happen again. In answer to your question, I I don't know how much further you want to take that about that individual incident.
Speaker 2:I mean, I I
Speaker 1:Yes. It's it's about the what is being banded around on social media a lot is is one officer being linked to this, and I just wanted to get comment on that because
Speaker 2:that Yep. Keeps happening. So let's just take a step back and just suppose that officer has been involved in some very challenging incidents that have been on social media. And, actually, he has done in certainly, say he's been involved in the 2 incidents that we've discussed. If he has acted quite correctly in one of them, that shouldn't be held against him and that is exactly the point about trial by social media.
Speaker 2:Social media have have identified an individual without knowing the full context, and that individual has been tried by you through that question as doing wrong, and you don't know he has. So that just highlights how wrong the processes that are being instigated and used at the moment are, because until you know the truth and you fully investigated, that would be an inappropriate assumption to make. Now I absolutely get one of those videos. Yes. That individual didn't handle it well.
Speaker 2:Okay. And we've discussed what's happened after that. But, you know, I think that just highlights
Speaker 1:Your point, Adjira.
Speaker 2:And also, I think just going back to what I've said earlier, this what impacts all the other staff within the organization. The other 135 police officers in this organization fear that that is gonna happen to them and that is why what is happening from a small cohort of individuals is such a negative thing and I am saying it has to stop And I hope by sharing our views and our thoughts on it, that we can, engage with our community, and allow them to make an informed decision as to what their view is as well.
Speaker 1:And when we talk about social media, of course, it's a hotbed for for rumors and conjecture and kind of the stuff that whether or not it'd be true or not. So I just wanted to move on to to recruitment and to, you know, the impact as well. Some of the rumors I wanted to put to bed were we had an understanding that several officers had recently quit. If that is the case, how does that leave the force, or is that not the case at all?
Speaker 2:We are recruiting. We do have vacancies. Our recruiting strategy is to look for on island candidates,
Speaker 1:organization do go in cycles. At the moment,
Speaker 2:we've had, your organization do go in cycles, at the moment we've had a number of, staff have left, for a multitude of reasons a multitude of reasons. Unfortunately, a number of them have been fairly early on in their careers and unfortunately, in policing, it is it is one of those careers that until you've actually had a go and come into the organization, but there's no underlying commonality or theme as to why people have left. It's just one of those things at the moment. We're lower on numbers than we need, but we are actively recruiting.
Speaker 1:Has this has the recent the recent feedback to all of this stuff on social media, has it changed your approach to recruitment?
Speaker 2:Not not to date. I mean, obviously, things that have happened in the last 10 days or so, I think have had a significant impact on the morale of people within the organization. And, not only individuals who work within the organisation, but their families. We are a community. Your police force, Guernsey police force, we are members of the Guernsey community.
Speaker 2:When we finish work, we don't drive 50 miles to where we live and live somewhere completely different. We are members of this community, and we live and work in this community. What are police officers? Well, let's go back to when policing first started. Police officers, men and women who do the job, we're just normal members of our community who've chosen to do this job because we want to do the right thing and we want to protect and keep our community safe.
Speaker 2:The other members of the community need to respect the challenge that we've taken on undertaking this career, and I want our community to support our officers, not make their job more difficult. And that for me is the fundamental element of the negativity that's been caused recently. And going back to what I said to you at the start, I absolutely accept we don't always get it right, but if we don't get it right, we will reflect, we will learn, But the bulk of the time for what we're doing and what we're managing at the moment in terms of workload, I think we're doing a very, very good job, and I hope our community do too.
Speaker 1:As talking about recruitment, I mean, I guess you can't comment on top on it much, but but how's the process going for your replacement, and will this be a particularly difficult moment in time, I suppose, to to leave?
Speaker 2:Yeah. I can't really comment because my replacement is a matter for Committee of Home Affairs, and, it would be inappropriate for me to do so because I'm not involved in that. Yeah. So, if you're going to find more about that, you can please approach committee for home affairs at civil service.
Speaker 1:But will you find it I mean, will is it gonna be a difficult moment in time for you to
Speaker 2:to Yes. I I walked into the gates of Hendon in 1984, 16th September 1984. So, I'm in my 40th year within a career that, you know, we'd need an hour and a half, 2 hours to to go through all the different bits. It's it's been brilliant. And, you know, in terms of recruitment, if there are any people out there within our community who want to find out more about policing, if you want a job where you're gonna be helping your community, if you want a job that's gonna challenge you as a person, if you want a job where you know you're gonna do some good and you're gonna bring, you know, people to justice who may have committed crimes.
Speaker 2:You're gonna help victims. You're gonna help members of our community. You're gonna deal with people in crisis. You're gonna have to stand up to do the right thing. If you want that kind of career, this is the career for you.
Speaker 2:And, again, another reason why I'm really standing up at this time with some of the things that have happened because we do need local people to want to come and serve their community, and I do need the community to show their support for us doing a really difficult job. So that's why those 2 different tangents have to come together as a consistent approach. There There are some people in our community who want to undermine that philosophy. There are some people, for their own reasons, are seeking to do that, and I would encourage members of the public particularly when looking at social media to think why is that individual doing that in that way, what is their motivation because some social media is excellent, some social media is positive, some of it can be really damaging and negative, and I think most people get that.
Speaker 1:And we started on social, so I'll finish on social. And I mean, is there a kind of an action plan in place to rebuild confidence? And what is going to be going to the police's approach social media in the future?
Speaker 2:I I think we'll carry on doing what we've we've always done. We use social media to appeal for witnesses. We we use social media to highlight good work that we're doing in the community, and, we will always continue to do that. For me, what I don't want to see is that officers are tried through social media. The social media is used for bad and for really negative things.
Speaker 2:We have processes and procedures to deal with complaints and for me they work and they're adequate insomuch as we can demonstrate where we've identified poor practice or bad behavior we can show we're dealing with it. Social media should be used for good and I think Guernsey as a community not just in policing it could be education it could be health it could be public services it could be the buses it could be the airport People can use social media to show their frustration or what have you. I get that. But it can it should only really go so far because then there are other networks and systems, areas of governance that should be kicking in if you like to sort problems out. And, you know, I've seen a number of public figures in Guernsey subjected to really quite cruel and hurtful social media posts and things.
Speaker 2:That's not right. I know I can't stop it. I know it will always be there, but as a community we should respect one another and we should use the systems and processes that are there for complaints and that sort of thing rather than use social media for it.
Speaker 1:Is there anything else you'd like
Speaker 2:to add? I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to to have this discussion because I think it's really important that this organization does get its voice out there. Yeah. I know for police officers and staff across law enforcement, they've had to see some quite challenging product being placed on social media. Yeah.
Speaker 2:And they have stayed away from putting their own comments or crossing that line because we've been very clear to staff. We do not want them to start getting into tip to tap yeah, arguments on social media. Totally inappropriate. We will make the appropriate statements when the times are right, but we will not engage with really bad and inappropriate use of social media in a way that just draws us in. That wouldn't be appropriate.
Speaker 1:Thank you for your time.
Speaker 2:Great. Thanks.
Speaker 1:You've been listening to a Bailiwick Express podcast. If you like what you heard, please share, like, and subscribe so we at Bayulwick can continue to pull apart the stories that affect you, the listener. Thank you for joining us.
