Reforming the police: Proposed changes for professional development, accountability and representation

Approximate read time: 5 minutes

1. Office holders, not employees

Police officers’ distinctive legal status shapes not only their employment rights and the mechanisms through which they are represented but also how they are held accountable. Police officers are not employed in the same way as the average worker.^[1] They are office holders, holding the office of constable, rather than employees. As a result, officers do not have normal employment rights. For example, various rights including around hours, postings, overtime and performance are governed by statute, primarily the Police Regulations 2003, instead of employment contracts. Police officers are also prevented from joining a trade union, having lost this right following strikes that took place after the first world war.^[2] They are instead represented by staff associations which are dependent on rank.^[3]

2. Proposed changes

The government’s workforce reforms are, it says, intended to move the focus on policing away from officer numbers towards professional standards, accountability and performance. In January 2026, the government published its policing white paper ‘From local to national: A new model for policing’. This document contained plans for comprehensive reforms to policing in England and Wales, including reducing the number of police forces through mergers and establishing a new National Police Service to lead on serious and organised crime as well as counter-terrorism policing.

The white paper also included proposals relating to the police workforce. The government said that despite the hard work of officers, the police workforce is not currently “set up to succeed”.^[4] It argued previous Conservative governments had taken a “wildly inconsistent approach”, initially cutting police officer numbers by 20,000 after 2010 and then rapidly trying to re-recruit the same number after 2019. It claimed this had led to success being measured “purely by the overall number of police officers”. This pressure to maintain numbers resulted in forces placing officers in roles that did not require warranted powers and could be done by police staff. The government labelled this “wrongheaded and enormously inefficient”.

To address these issues, the government argued it would embrace “radical reform”, with success no longer defined by overall officer numbers but by the results police achieve. It set out several reforms to the police workforce, including the introduction of a licence to practise, changes to vetting standards and dismissal rules, and policies aimed at improving officers’ wellbeing.

2.1 A licence to practise

The government has said that to support police professionals’ learning and development and to accredit them for their skills, it would introduce a licence to practise for police officers.^[5] It argued that a licence would signify the importance of holding the office of constable and “serve as an assurance that officers have the right support and development in place to uphold the expectations of the office”.^[6] The government also said that the licence would be underpinned by regular and consistent wellbeing and development checks as well as career pathways.

The government stated it recognised that it would not be able to introduce the licence immediately.^[7] It explained that it would look at the best pathways to implementation and consult extensively. The government also highlighted that the College of Policing already provides accreditation and licensing for some specialist areas. It said it would seek to build on this in stages.

Reaction to the licence has highlighted the tension between standards and funding levels. The Police Federation, which represents most police officers, said it was “particularly concerned” about the licence concept.^[8] It argued that “everyone wants professional policing delivering more for communities” but this required investment in training, time and support, which has been routinely cancelled to “plug gaps elsewhere in policing”. The Metropolitan Police Federation also raised concerns that the licence would become “an expensive, time-consuming, tick-box exercise”.^[9]

In contrast, the College of Policing, the professional body for everyone working in policing, welcomed the government’s proposal. It argued that a licence would recognise the skills of officers while providing reassurance to the public that they would receive a consistent level of service wherever they live.^[10]

2.2 Vetting and dismissal

Improving the culture of policing is a central objective of government reforms to the police vetting and misconduct systems.^[11] It argued that while policing attracts some of the best in society, it also attracts those who wish to abuse the powers and privileges that come with the office. It therefore set out plans to introduce national mandatory vetting standards and develop technology to alert forces in real time to any warning signs about serving police officers. In addition, it said it would build on work already done around vetting clearance, police misconduct and performance regimes and would further this by introducing a requirement for chief constables to suspend officers where they are under investigation for domestic abuse or sexual offences. Refuge, a charity which supports victims of domestic abuse, welcomed the government’s plans in this area.^[12]

2.3 Wellbeing measures

Government wellbeing proposals reflect a growing recognition that workforce welfare affects officer retention and police outcomes. In its white paper, the government highlighted the prevalence of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other trauma-related mental health injuries in the police workforce.^[13] It said these issues have been well-evidenced in both literature and sector-led surveys and are largely due to “repeated exposure to traumatic incidents, high-pressure environments and the cumulative stress of frontline duties”.

The government argued that police wellbeing must be prioritised to ensure “a motivated and thriving workforce”.^[14] It said it would work with the National Police Wellbeing Service (NPWS) and chief medical officer for policing to set national mandatory standards in wellbeing provision. It also said it would support the rollout of the NPWS’s mental health crisis line, expand the provision of psychological risk assessments from 75,000 to 140,000 per year, mandate protected time for trauma and suicide prevention training for new recruits and supervisors, ensure every force has implemented a trauma tracker, develop a proof of concept for a new innovative trauma intervention; and introduce a national standard on welfare support for those facing investigation. In addition, the government said it was looking at ways to strengthen the Police Covenant, the pledge to do more as a nation to recognise the service of those who work or have worked in policing, including through legislation if necessary.^[15]

The National Police Wellbeing Service, known as Oscar Kilo, welcomed the white paper’s recognition of the impact of repeated trauma exposure and cumulative stress.^[16] It also welcomed the link made between policing outcomes and wellbeing, arguing that “policing can’t deliver its best for the public unless the people doing the job are properly supported”. However, it warned that “change on this scale” would take time to design properly and be phased in. It also said it might require legislation.

2.4 Police Federation of England and Wales

Alongside proposals for individual officers, the government has signalled change is needed in police representative structures. Currently, the ‘rank and file’—constables, sergeants, inspectors, chief inspectors and special constables—are represented by the Police Federation of England and Wales. However, the government noted in its white paper that an independent review, led by Baroness Bousted (Labour), had recently raised concerns about the federation’s culture, performance, transparency and effectiveness.^[17] The government said it wanted to see “clear plans and rapid, demonstrable improvement” in the federation’s operation and that in the absence of such improvement, it stood ready to bring forward reforms. The Police Federation has argued that significant organisational reforms are already under way. In April 2026, the Police Federation published an update on its transformation programme, launched in response to recent criticisms.^[18] It said the programme was “a serious, structured plan to reform governance, strengthen our finances, change our culture and improve the services we provide to the 145,000 officers we represent”. It included reforms to the appointment of non-executive directors, the establishment of a remuneration committee and the launch of a victims and witness support programme.

---

Image by James Eades on Unsplash.