This presentation was delivered as a keynote talk at one of IQ's Security Industry Forum meetings on the 26th July 2013. The presentation is about the future of physical intervention training in the security industry sector and why there is a need for change and what form that change should be in.

1. Physical Intervention
The Ongoing Debate

2. The question probably really is
“What is the future for physical
Intervention in the Security
Industry?”
To answer that we first need to
look at the current climate and
what changes are happening.

3. Currently the Government is considering a ban on the use of face-down
restraint in English mental health hospitals following figures which show the
controversial technique being used hundreds of times a year in some trusts
and been responsible for over 13 deaths last year alone - a level described by
a health minister as "shocking" and apparently "excessive"

4. You have also heard today from the SIA
this morning that there have also been a
number of deaths in the door supervision
world as well, related to restraint and use
of force situations.

5. Also an article recently appeared in PoliceOracle.com entitled: "Mental Health:
'Officers should not restrain patients'", states that police officers should not be
called to mental healthcare settings to assist in the restraint of violent patients
because they do not have the skills and knowledge to deal with complex mental
health issues.

6. Article 2 (1) – The Right to Life
(Absolute Right - A Positive Obligation to Preserve Life)
“1. Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No
one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the
execution of a sentence of a court following his
conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided
by law.”
The Human Rights Act also has a role to play in Physical
Intervention, especially Article 2(1) which requires all public
authorities to take positive steps to promote and preserve the
right to life of all UK Citizens. This means removing and
techniques or practices that could increase the risk of death
and finding safer ways of controlling individuals who may
have to be restrained. This positive obligation also extends to
the protection of staff!

7. 1. It failed to protect a member of
staff working in conditions known
to be dangerous;
2. The company ignored well-
recognised industry guidance in
this area;
3. There was a gross breach of the
duty of care owed to the member
of staff who died, and
4. The way in which its activities
were managed or organised by
its senior management formed a
substantial element of the breach.
The Corporate Manslaughter Act
In addition, the Corporate
Manslaughter Act is now
being more widely used for
prosecutions and the above
points illustrate what the
main failings were in the
majority of prosecutions so
far. This applies directly to
many organisations whose
staff are expected to control
and restrain potentially
aggressive and violent
individuals.

8. “…..private firms managing people held in custody can be
prosecuted for Corporate Manslaughter.”
“…..they could be prosecuted if they failed to ensure the
safety of someone in their care.”
“…..examples could include……when someone has been
restrained using an unauthorised or badly taught body hold.”
The Corporate
Manslaughter Act has
also now been
amended to include
the following:

9. Corporate Manslaughter
Cases up 40% in One Year
In One Corporate Manslaughter Case Simon
Joyston-Bechal from Pinsent Masons' Solicitors said:
"High-risk industries and companies cannot be reassured
by the current lack of convictions for corporate
manslaughter.
These convictions so far are just the tip of an iceberg."

10. Corporate Manslaughter
Cases up 40% in One Year
He then went on to say…..
"Cutting corners on safety in order to save money is
probably the most serious aggravating feature of an
offence.
All businesses need to have robust health and safety
procedures in place."

11. Yet in spite of all of the
deaths and injuries and
changes in legislation that
make organisations and
training providers more
accountable physical
intervention systems are
being used that are not fit
for purpose, techniques
are being taught that
should not be used and
door supervisors are still
being expected to restrain
on their own!

12. We can no longer hide away from
the facts.

13. Otherwise this could easily end up
being the future for many
managers and training providers.

14. It’s really is now.……….

15. The Question was then asked as to whether moves
were being made to standardise the physical skills
so that everyone teaches the same techniques
Although the intention is good the
application could be difficult and there could
be many conflicts of interest from many
stakeholder groups.
It would probably be better to move
towards a more principle-applied approach
to training delivery as opposed to
specifying specific techniques.
The one thing to bear in mind is that we are all now much more
accountable for what advice and guidance we supply under Human Rights
Legislation as you will see from the next slide……...

16. Article 13 of ECHR
The police are now quoting
Article 13 of the Human
Rights Act 1998 during their
training, which states:
“Everyone whose rights and
freedoms as set forth in this
Convention are violated
shall have an effective
remedy before a national
authority notwithstanding
that the violation has been
committed by persons
acting in an official
capacity.”
In lay terms this means
that if anyone has been
violated by someone
working or acting in an
official capacity they are
entitled to a remedy
before a national body -
and possibly even an
enforceable right to
compensation (Article
5(5) of the Human Rights
Act 1998).

17. The Coroners Inquest has also found that Mr. Mubenga was ‘Unlawfully
Killed’ by G4S staff who were using ‘unapproved techniques’ to restrain
Mr. Mubenga which resulted in his death. The CPS are now re-
considering their initial decision not to prosecute.

18. Lady Nuala O'Loan, in the also however, expressed her
critisism about "inadequate management of the use of
force by the private sector companies……..”
She felt that there was an urgent need to review the
systems of restraint and training. She went on to comment
that "the training was textbook training but.....it was one
size fits all: it made no difference whether they were
dealing with a five foot girl or a 20 stone man".
Lady Nuala O’Loan, commenting on the issues surrounding the Jimmy
Mubenga incident gave the following statement ……..
The day of the “one-size fits all” training package is coming to an end.
That means that it would be unwise to recommend a standard set of
techniques.

19. • £180,000 Compensation for Security Guard Attacked at Work
• £28,000 Compensation for Prison Officer Attacked by Inmate.
• £200,000 Compensation for Carer Hurt During a Restraint.
• £400,000 for Teacher after pupil knocked arm into filing
cabinet.
• Golfer sues for £750,000 damages over „eye explosion‟
Also, what if the ‘one-size fits all’ standard set of
techniques doesn’t work for everyone or is not fit for
purpose?
Well the answer would be that people injured as a result could sue the
organisation who provided or commissioned the training as we can see
from the above cases.

20. For example, restraint is a manual handling activity, so the Health
and Safety at Work Act, the Manual Handling Regulations and even
Lone Worker Guidance must apply.

21. Automation or
mechanisation
43. If, so far as is reasonably
practicable, handling of the
load cannot be avoided, then
can the operation/s be either:
(a) automated; or
(b) mechanised?
Also, to eliminate or reduce the need for prolonged manual restraint
other options such as handcuffs, soft-cuffs and Emergency Response
Belts (or other approved items) should be used in line with the Manual
Handling Guidance..

22. The Decision Making Model
The Decision Making Model is a new use of force model that has been
adopted by the police and now the court’s are looking at it too as it
provides a structured and objective way of training, managing and
reviewing use of force incidents .

23. Statement of
Mission
and Values
Gather
Information &
Intelligence
Assess threat
and Risk and
develop a
working strategy
Consider Powers
and Policy
Identify options
and contingencies
Take action and
review what
happened
There is a whole
module on this in
our Online
Reasonable Force
Course whch you
can view at:
http://www.nfps.inf
o/reasonable-force-
course

24. The facts are things are
moving on and times
are changing

25. The old way of
delivering autocratic
one-size fits all
training by technical
rote based ‘monkey
see – monkey do’ is
now limited.

26. So What is the Purpose of Training?
“To provide people with the correct underpinning
knowledge, information, instruction and resources to allow
them to deal professionally and competently with what they
are likely to expect, and also to be able to use all of those
resources with professional discretion when required to
make decisions in situations of high emotional arousal.”
This requires more than just teaching people a set of ‘pre-prescribed’
techniques. This means teaching people about all of the underpinning
principles: legal, health and safety, psychology and human
behaviour, etc., aimed at making them competent.

27. “As to methods there may be a million and then
some, but principles are few. The man who
grasps principles can successfully select his own
methods. The man who tries methods, ignoring
principles, is sure to have trouble.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson

28. By embracing a „principle-based approach and by
listening and acting on feedback you can also embrace
opportunities outside of the Security Sector

29. • The biggest growth area is in Health &
Social Care.
• This is also true for PI training.
• Largest user of Physical Intervention is
the Health and Care Sector.
As Sallyann Baldry from IQ stated at the beginning
of the meeting that…...

30. • Must be Legally Accurate.
• Be based on suitable and sufficient assessment of risk.
• Comply with other Health and Safety legislation –
including the Manual Handling Regulations, HSG 65 and
HSG 48, etc.
• Be Principle based as opposed to Technique driven.
• Be taught consistent with new learning models.
• Develop organically by using feedback pro-actively from
the people being trained and other sources.
• Be properly monitored as part of every businesses
QMS.
The Future for PI Training?

31. Thank you for viewing this
presentation and if you would
like to know more about what
we can do for you please visit
our web-site at: www.nfps.info
or e-mail at
markdawes@nfps.info