Tag: Private Security Industry

A blended approach to effective compliance and enforcement

In this blog Pete Easterbrook, Executive Director of Inspections and Enforcement explains how the SIA protects the public through a blended approach.

When people hear the word ‘enforcement’, they may immediately think of criminal investigations and prosecutions. These are important parts of our work, but they are only part of a much wider picture.  Effective regulation involves a range of interventions and is not measured in single numbers.

The legislation Parliament introduced to tackle criminality and violence within the private security industry is now more than 20 years old. At its heart were a relatively limited set of regulatory tools: individual licensing, a public register and, in the most serious cases, criminal sanctions. Our direct oversight of security businesses was narrower, extending mainly to licensing requirements for non-front line roles and the voluntary Approved Contractor Scheme. Approved Contractors could also supply some individuals before their licences had been granted through Licence Dispensation Notices.

For many years, success was largely measured by the volume of licences issued, levels of licensing compliance and the number of prosecutions brought. Compliance among those inspected (over 5000 last year) is now consistently around 98% to 99%. However, those intent on avoiding the rules or profiting from non-compliance have adapted. Some structure their activities to sit outside direct regulatory oversight, while businesses that do not join the Approved Contractor Scheme are not routinely assessed against its quality standards.  There are also a range of harms which take place in the industry which fall outside the scope of the Private Security Industry Act, which nonetheless undermine the integrity of the regime and place the public at risk.

Our role must therefore go beyond checking whether an individual holds a licence. We must understand the risk, identify the potential harm and select the intervention most likely to protect the public. Depending on the circumstances, that may mean giving a person or business an opportunity to put matters right through regulatory advice. It may mean issuing a formal warning or improvement notice, suspending or revoking a licence, attaching special conditions to a licence, removing a business from the Approved Contractor Scheme, disrupting harmful activity—often alongside a partner agency—or prosecuting those responsible.

This reflects the approach taken by regulators more widely. The Regulators’ Code requires regulatory activity to be proportionate and targeted, and like the SIA, organisations such as the Financial Conduct Authority, Information Commissioner’s Office and Environment Agency also use combinations of supervisory, civil and criminal interventions to secure compliance and address harm. The important question is not simply how often a particular power has been used, but whether the regulator has selected the right tool at the right time in order to achieve the best available outcome.

Our new Strategic Plan 2026-29 captures that balance clearly: we will be confident in setting standards, supportive in seeking compliance and uncompromising in our enforcement.

Preventing entry and removing unsuitable people from the industry

One of the most immediate ways we protect the public is through our licensing decisions. We have recently strengthened our licensing criteria to raise standards and make the requirements clearer and more transparent – Get Licensed

During 2025–26, we refused 1,710 licence applications because we were not satisfied that the applicant met the criteria for entry into the private security industry. We also suspended 2,164 licences and permanently revoked a further 8,286.

Many of the decisions to revoke a licence relate to licence holders who no longer hold the right to work in the UK. Others involved individuals who had committed serious offences or displayed behaviour fundamentally incompatible with working in a position of trust. This included cases involving sexual offending, drug supply, and violent or abusive behaviour.

A suspension or revocation is not simply an administrative action. It removes an individual’s ability to lawfully work in a licensable role. Where someone poses a risk, licensing action prevents them from continuing to work at venues, events, businesses and other locations where the public should reasonably expect to be protected.

This work is often fast-paced and often depends on information from the police and other partners. It may never result in a court case or a public announcement, but its effect on public safety is direct and significant.

Acting at the entry point to the industry

Our approach also takes us further upstream where the integrity of the licence is affected by the actions of third parties. It is not enough to check whether someone holds a licence after they have entered the industry. We must also have confidence in the training and qualifications on which that licence is based.

Operation RESOLUTE is our response to serious malpractice and qualification fraud in the SIA licence-linked qualification. Many training providers operate professionally and share a commitment to high standards. However, where training or the assessment is compromised, there is a risk that an individual may obtain a qualification without demonstrating the knowledge and competence required to work safely in the security industry.

Between April and June 2026—the first quarter of 2026-27—we conducted 64 unannounced checks on training providers. These resulted in:

  • 80 actions for improvement issued to training centres
  • 11 instances of blocks being placed on centres to cease registering or certifying new learners while concerns were investigated
  • 2 centres being closed following an SIA referral

Where concerns extend beyond malpractice and indicate possible criminality, we will investigate to determine whether there is sufficient evidence for the SIA or another agency to pursue a criminal investigation.

These outcomes demonstrate why effective enforcement is not synonymous with prosecution alone. Where we identify an immediate risk at a training centre, the relevant awarding organisation—regulated by Ofqual—has a responsibility to act and may block registrations or certification, suspend the centre or withdraw its approval altogether. This can prevent questionable training and qualifications from entering the licensing system immediately, without waiting for the outcome of a potentially lengthy fraud investigation that depends on witnesses and other evidence and is required to meet the criminal standard of proof.

Improvement action makes a meaningful difference in standards cases. It sets clear expectations, corrects poor practice and helps prevent problems escalating and becoming more serious. Where the evidence indicates cheating, deliberate fraud or organised criminality, we have the capability and determination to investigate and prosecute. We have a number of active criminal investigations which have included arrests and property searches to secure and preserve evidence of qualification fraud.

This is a consciously blended model: improve where improvement is possible and appropriate, disrupt where risk is immediate, and pursue criminality where the seriousness of the conduct demands it, the evidence can be sought, and it is clearly in the public interest to do so.

Assessing business compliance

Public protection and the delivery of competent and quality security services also heavily depend on the standards of the businesses recruiting, supplying and supervising security operatives.

Our Approved Contractor Scheme is voluntary, but membership is not automatic. Businesses must demonstrate that they are fit and proper and sign up to required quality standards.

We have taken a more robust approach to regulation of this area over the last few years. During 2025-26, 27% of new ACS applicants were refused. That means more than one in four applicant businesses did not satisfy us that they worked to quality standards and should enter the scheme.

Our scrutiny does not end when a business is approved. During the same year:

  • 27 non-compliant businesses had their ACS accreditation removed
  • 384 improvement needs were issued to approved contractors

Refusing an application or removing an approval protects the integrity of the scheme for the public and helps buyers of security distinguish between businesses that meet quality standards and those that do not. Improvement activity is equally important. It enables us to identify weaknesses, require corrective action and drive better standards before failings become more serious.

Intervening before criminal investigation is necessary

Not every regulatory concern reaches the threshold for a criminal investigation but that does not mean we ignore it.

During 2025-26, we opened and completed 1,030 intervention cases concerning individuals or businesses. These cases allow us to examine potential non-compliance, assess the regulatory risk and decide what action is appropriate and necessary.

The majority of interventions are resolved through non-criminal justice measures. These can include regulatory advice, formal warnings, improvement notices, licensing action, referrals to other bodies or closer regulatory monitoring.

Our involvement does not necessarily end when a sanction is issued. We may continue to monitor the individual or business to ensure compliance is maintained and to assess whether the intervention has worked. If the behaviour continues, or the risk increases, we can escalate the response.

Disruptions and partnerships

Some of the most impactful work we do is conducted jointly with other partners and may not always be visible publicly.

As of 1 July 2026, we had over 10 live intelligence development operations taking place with a wide range of enforcement partners.

These allow each partner to bring its own intelligence, expertise and legal powers to a shared problem. A concern that begins with suspected SIA licensing non-compliance, for example, may also involve organised crime, fraud, immigration offending, tax evasion, labour exploitation or money laundering.

In some cases, the strongest public-safety outcome may be achieved through another agency’s legislation and powers rather than our own. To support this, we may share intelligence and provide operational assistance, enabling partners to recover criminal assets, address immigration offences, investigate tax irregularities or disrupt wider organised crime networks.

These outcomes are not currently reflected in our enforcement statistics, but we are exploring ways to capture them without prejudicing the work of our partners. Nevertheless, our involvement may be central to identifying the links and risks, developing the intelligence and enabling action that more effectively addresses threats to public safety.

Prosecuting where it will make a difference

Criminal investigation and prosecution sit at the most serious end of our enforcement capability. Before bringing a prosecution, there must be sufficient admissible and reliable evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction, with the offence capable of being proved beyond reasonable doubt. Prosecution must also be proportionate and in the public interest.

A range of factors informs that decision, including the seriousness of the circumstances, the level of actual or potential harm, any evidence of deliberate or persistent non-compliance, and the strength and reliability of the available evidence. This includes whether witnesses are willing and able to give evidence, and whether other attempts to secure compliance have failed or would clearly be inappropriate.

One recent case demonstrates why it is important that we have both the will and the capability to undertake criminal investigations and prosecute in the right circumstances. We identified intelligence that an individual whose licence had been suspended following arrest for serious sexual offences was continuing to work in the private security industry. We investigated at pace, secured evidence from a range of sources and successfully prosecuted both the individual and others involved in the case.

Criminal investigations and prosecutions must, rightly, be undertaken with care. They require sufficient, reliable and admissible evidence, full compliance with disclosure obligations, and an assessment under the Code for Crown Prosecutors of whether prosecution is in the public interest. As a UK-wide regulator, we must also take account the difference between the legal and judicial systems within which we operate.

Cases involving the supply of unlicensed operatives can be particularly complex, especially where there are lengthy supply chains. Fraud-related offences, and investigations involving multiple suspects or witnesses, can also be resource-intensive and may take considerable time to conclude.  Penalties and cost awards available for some offending can be modest.

That does not prevent us from pursuing criminal action where it is appropriate. It means making informed—and sometimes finely balanced—decisions about whether prosecution is both achievable and justified in the public interest. We consider whether it is likely to deliver the strongest public-protection and deterrent effect, or whether another intervention could stop the harm more quickly and effectively.

We have also made the case for stronger and more modern powers and are working with the Home Office to improve our investigative capabilities and ability to respond to emerging harms and the increasingly sophisticated ways in which some individuals and businesses engage in criminal behaviour.

Following the money

Where offending is financially motivated, a fine for the original offence does not usually address the profit made from the criminality. This is why financial investigation is an increasingly important part of our approach, and we have recently strengthened our capacity and capability in this area.  Our powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act allow us to identify and recover the proceeds of offending.

As an example, following the conviction of a repeat offender for multiple Private Security Industry Act offences, a subsequent financial investigation earlier this year resulted in confiscation orders totalling £44,518.  This year we also worked closely with partners to secure our first confiscation orders in Scotland of over £40,000 of criminal proceeds, and in a separate matter we secured over £53,000 in victim compensation.

Since gaining confiscation and restraint powers, we have recovered more than £1 million, making it harder for offenders to reinvest criminal funds and return to the private security industry.

In 2024, we asked for and were granted powers to strengthen our financial investigation capability, and as a result we can now conduct our own money-laundering investigations.  This work is complex and necessarily takes time, but this, combined with our other powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act enables us to address the economic drivers behind offending rather than limiting our response to the initial regulatory breach.

Measuring what matters

Inspections, licensing decisions, warnings, improvement action, removal of approved contractor status, partner referrals, disruption, financial investigation and prosecution are not competing measures of success. Together they make up a range of tools we use in our compliance and enforcement work and should be seen as different but complementary parts of the same regulatory system.

Our investigators work hard to identify and secure evidence of non-compliance or criminality, understand the circumstances and use the most appropriate intervention—or combination of interventions—to secure the right impact and address the non-compliance and harm.

Sometimes that will mean helping a generally compliant business correct a one-off error or area of weakness. Sometimes it will mean acting immediately to stop or prevent harm by suspending or revoking a licence. Sometimes it will involve asking a partner organisation to act using powers we do not have or where they are better placed to address offending and secure the optimum impact. And sometimes it will mean building a criminal case and placing an offender before the courts.

We plan to share more about the breadth of our compliance and enforcement work, and the results it achieves. No single statistic can capture the complexity or impact of effective regulation. Our success is better understood through the risks reduced, harm prevented, criminality disrupted, compliance secured and public confidence strengthened in the services provided by private security operatives and businesses.

Our approach will remain robust but supportive in seeking compliance, and uncompromising where enforcement is necessary. We will be fair and proportionate in our decisions, clear in our expectations and focused throughout on protecting the public.

Safety Advisory Groups: Protecting the public during the world cup and beyond

An explanation of the SIA’s role in Safety Advisory Groups by Lucia Howland, SIA Senior Manager – Compliance & Inspections.

With the FIFA men’s World Cup in full swing, our regional teams have been busy attending Safety Advisory Group (SAG) meetings relating to various ‘pop-up’ fan zones being created for people to come together and enjoy watching their team of choice on big screens.

While seeing their country take victory might feel like the most important thing for the fans in attendance, our priority is making sure they can enjoy the match safely whether they win, lose or draw.

The SIA’s purpose is keeping people and places safe and secure by regulating the private security industry and venues across the UK. There are many ways we achieve this, one of which is playing a part in ensuring the safety of the public through attending SAG meetings.

Safety Advisory Groups were partly created following the recommendations of Lord Justice Taylor following his inquiry into the Hillsborough Tragedy of 1989. His report mandated the establishment of SAGs in relation to football and eventually the good practice model has been rolled out to ensure the safety of the public at wide range of events and gatherings.

The Health and Safety Executive has over the years played a significant role in the establishment of SAGs advising that they “provide a forum for discussing and advising on public safety at an event. They aim to help organisers with the planning, and management of an event and to encourage cooperation and coordination between all relevant agencies.”

SAGs are usually co-ordinated by a local authority ahead of an event taking place and are made up of representatives from the local authority, emergency services, other relevant bodies and the event organiser. The group has several key roles including providing advice and guidance to the event organisers, promoting good practice in safety and welfare planning for events, as well as ensuring events have a minimal adverse impact on the local community. They are an important forum for the conversations necessary for an event to happen safely.

Most events that need a SAG will, by default, have a requirement for private security which will be supplied by one or more security contractors. This means we have a significant role to play at these meetings as the regulator of private security. Attendance allows us to support both the event organisers and the security providers by providing advice and guidance on complying the Private Security Industry Act 2001.

When there is a SAG meeting associated with a temporary event in the area, like the current World Cup fan zones, local SIA representatives work with partners to consider the number of security personnel required and what impact that may have on other venues in the area. It’s important that the increased demand for security doesn’t leave other venues without security and therefore vulnerable.

A photo taken at an SIA inspection at a fan zone on Saturday

In many cases we work with the event organisers to establish their requirements for security. We support them in confirming the different roles of people working at an event and whether they fall into licensable conduct under the Private Security Industry Act 2001. For example – building the correct mix of stewards with appropriate numbers of door supervisors and security officers.

It’s important to note that we do not have any input into the decision on the number of security personnel required, this is not our remit. This must be specified by the organiser and is sometimes influenced by the police or local authority based on historical events or types of venue.

If a security provider hasn’t been chosen for the event, we will take the opportunity to promote our Approved Contractor Scheme as a recognised hallmark of quality for security suppliers. We will highlight to the organisers that their choice of security provider can have a significant impact on the success of their event. Investing time and undertaking some general due diligence enquiries before they choose a security provider can reap significant rewards for the success of their event and the safety of those attending. Where we can lawfully do so, we share best practice and intelligence to support the due diligence practices in place and to mitigate as far as possible any known risks.

When a security provider has been appointed, there are several areas we will look at to reassure ourselves, and the SAG members, of the provider’s ability to deliver the service necessary. We do this through engaging with the suppliers and will update the SAG meeting as necessary.

Our work in SAGs give us a greater insight to potential regulatory risks and supports our assessment as to whether we will undertake a compliance inspection during the event. We will also attend post event debrief meetings with the organisers and the SAG where needed, these meetings provide an important opportunity for both event organisers and agencies to feedback, learn, and share best practice which feeds into future events and ultimately contributes to keeping people safe.

When fans are gathered at fan zones across England tonight and on Sunday for the final, they can rest assured that their safety has been considered by many agencies that have a common aim of keeping the public safe.

Shaping the future of security licence qualifications

Qualifications Review Update, February 2026

A progress update on our strategic review of qualifications from Tony Holyland, Head of Individual Standards at the SIA.

I want to update you on the progress we are making on our strategic review of qualifications. This work is our major review of the qualifications that operatives require before they can apply for, and in some cases renew, a licence. 

Why this review matters

Licence-linked qualifications are one of the most important ways we can ensure operatives have the safety-critical skills to protect themselves and the public. Getting this right matters — for front-line operatives who need training that reflects what they do, for employers who need confidence in the operatives they deploy, and for the public who deserve assurance that security professionals have been trained and assessed against basic safety-critical skills. 

We are reviewing the qualifications to ensure they:

  • reflect current risks and challenges
  • keep pace with changing industry practice and new technologies
  • contain up-to-date legislation
  • address how social and cultural changes affect the work of front-line security operatives

This review goes beyond updating content. We are also examining how assessment and quality assurance are delivered and taking a fresh look at how top-up and refresher training arrangements have developed over the years. 

What we have done so far

 Since launching the review in November 2025, we have been actively engaging with the private security industry. So far we have: 

  • spoken with over 450 people through our webinars
  • received responses from around 4,500 people through our surveys
  • convened sector-specific Expert Working Groups to develop detailed proposals for new qualification specifications

The response from the industry has been fantastic, and the insights we are gathering are shaping the direction of this review. 

Who is shaping the review

This review is being driven by those who understand security work best — the people who do it every day. 

Advisory Group 

Our Advisory Group provides strategic guidance and challenge throughout the review. The group brings together senior figures from across the sector, including: 

  • representatives from trade bodies and membership associations
  • senior figures from major security employers
  • counter-terrorism and protective security specialists
  • skills and training experts
  • representatives from awarding organisations

The Advisory Group meets every four to six weeks, ensuring we receive expert input on policy issues and emerging challenges as the project progresses. Their contribution has been invaluable in helping us ask the right questions and ensuring our proposals reflect operational realities. 

Expert Working Groups 

Alongside the Advisory Group, our Expert Working Groups are carrying out the detailed work on each qualification specification. These groups are composed primarily of front-line security professionals — door supervisors, security officers, CCTV operators, and close protection officers — supported by subject matter experts in areas such as physical intervention. 

By placing occupational expertise at the heart of specification development, we are ensuring the new qualifications reflect what operatives genuinely need to know and do. 

What we are hearing

Some interesting proposals are emerging from the working groups. I have grouped the main themes below. 

Convergence of skills across roles 

We are seeing a drive for a more substantial common skillset across all licensable roles. This reflects a growing recognition that door supervisors, security officers, and CCTV operators increasingly need overlapping knowledge and skills to work effectively together. Experts are telling us there is growing demand for operatives to be familiar with roles across the industry, to foster better teamworking and collaboration in the delivery of an integrated service. 

Cultural, social, and technological changes 

Some proposals reflect the changing environment in which operatives work: 

  • a shift in focus from drug detection and seizure towards understanding the harms of drug use
  • new content on dealing with social media auditors — members of the public who film security staff and test their responses
  • greater emphasis on staff wellbeing
  • content that better reflects modern thinking on equality, diversity, and inclusion

These changes recognise how significantly the security environment has shifted since the current qualifications were developed. 

Other developments 

We are also seeing strong proposals on: 

  • enhanced physical intervention skills for operatives working in higher-risk environments
  • updates to address the challenges posed by the rise in retail crime
  • modernised professional skills and updated content in close protection

What happens next

All of these proposed changes will be subject to a public consultation, which will be available in the spring. This is your opportunity to have your say on the content and approach for the next generation of qualifications. 

Alongside developing new content, we are working closely with our awarding organisation partners to strengthen the security of qualification assessments and examinations. 

Thank you to everyone who has engaged with the review so far. Your expertise and insights are making a real difference, and I look forward to continuing this conversation through the consultation. 

To stay informed

Turning the Tide on Training Malpractice in the Private Security Industry 

Pete Easterbrook, Interim Director of Inspections and Enforcement talks about a new phase to our approach to tackle training malpractice or mismanagement.

Those working within the private security hold positions of trust and responsibility. It is essential that the public, customers and stakeholders have confidence and trust that security operatives are properly trained, qualified, and capable of keeping people, property and premises safe. A key component of ensuring this trust and confidence is assuring the validity of the qualifications that operatives receive before they can apply for an SIA licence.  The majority of providers who deliver SIA licence linked training are professionals who share our commitment to high standards, however where this is not the case, poor standards and training malpractice can, at its worst, put the public at risk.   

While we play a central role in setting the minimum standards for licence-linked training, we’re not the only players in the game.  We define the core skills and knowledge required for operatives to qualify for a licence. However, the delivery of that training is conducted by around 650 training providers who are in turn approved by six Awarding Organisations (AOs), each regulated by Ofqual (England and Wales), SQA (Scotland), CCEA (Northern Ireland), which oversees quality assurance across the sector.    

Qualifications’ regulation is a well-established model that is in use in other sectors across the UK, but having multiple organisations involved in the process doesn’t always make things straightforward.  Regardless of who is responsible for which part of the process, where a qualification leads to a licence being granted, then our role is to ensure that the individual we have granted a licence to is fit and proper – and that includes possessing the safety critical skills and knowledge to undertake their role effectively.    

In 2024, we began to focus greater attention on training malpractice, which at it’s most serious can constitute fraud – a criminal offence.  As part of this, we undertook work to improve strategic relationships with key partners such as Awarding Organisations and qualification regulators such as Ofqual.  An enhanced communications campaign resulted in an increase in the intelligence we received relating to training malpractice – essential for us to be able to take the appropriate action.  

Since April 2025, we’ve built on the foundations of this work, and we are now moving into a new phase under Operation RESOLUTE.  RESOLUTE has been designed as a high impact initiative with a strong operational focus on intelligence led, unannounced inspections to training providers, as well as a deeper collaboration with partners. 

We are realigning our resources and ensuring we leverage the considerable expertise of our people.  By way of an example, we’ve now brought specialist training integrity resources into our Inspections and Enforcement directorate.  This shift has unlocked wider investigative expertise and enabled a more proactive, intelligence-led approach to tackling training abuse.  In addition, we’ve invested in nationally accredited training to sharpen the investigative skills of our frontline teams to ensure they are equipped to tackle training malpractice head on.   

Our robust and decisive approach is already having an impact.   

Since the 1st April 2025; 

  •  we’ve increased the number of unannounced training centre visits by 120% compared to the same period last year.  Those visits have resulted in 10 training centres having their approval to deliver training withdrawn, and one centre suspended from delivering training until the Awarding Body is satisfied the appropriate standard can be met.  
  • we’ve commenced a criminal investigation in one case due to the serious nature of the offending.  As part of this investigation 17 individual SIA licences have been revoked where our enquiries have brought into question whether the training an individual has received has been up to the required standard.  
  • In July 2025 my teams conducted a series of targeted inspections across the UK, visiting 15 training centres in a single week.  Whilst standards were generally high, four training centres we visited were found to be delivering training below our expectations.  In two cases the issues were so serious the centres were sanctioned by Awarding Bodies and any further training will be scrutinised and monitored. One of these centres was further sanctioned, and the Awarding Body will not authorise the release of any further qualifications until it is satisfied the quality of training can be met 

We are about to undertake a strategic review of the licence linked qualifications, within which we will seek to further reduce opportunities for abuse of the training system.  Naturally, this will involve us taking a close look at how assessments are conducted and administered.  In the meantime we are working closely with partners, will continue our work under Operation RESOLUTE, acting swiftly and decisively to root out abuse, detect and disrupt criminality, and make the private security industry a hostile environment for those who seek to exploit it. 

We will continue to provide updates on our progress as appropriate. 

If you have concerns about a training provider, please do report your concerns: Find out how you report training malpractice. 

More information about the parties involved in delivering SIA licence-linked training is available from our Learn about SIA licence-linked training  page. 

Tackling labour exploitation – an update on Operation EMPOWER 

Ronnie Megaughin, Head of Compliance and Inspections, Security Industry Authority  

In August this year Paul Fullwood, the SIA Director of Inspections & Enforcement, published an article on our response to labour exploitation in the private security industry. This is an update on our operational response to the issue, which we are calling Operation EMPOWER.

The issues that Paul highlighted in his article are most prevalent in extended supply chains involving sub-contracting labour provision to service contracts.

EMPOWER, which has been running for about four months, combines a number of approaches. These include an intensive media campaign, primarily on social media platforms, and an operational response driven by a dedicated team of SIA Compliance and Inspections (C&I) Investigators working closely with partners in HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) and Home Office Immigration Enforcement (HOIE).

We have raised around 150 investigation cases under the EMPOWER criteria. These relate to tax evasion through bogus self-employment, failure to pay National Insurance, breaches of National Minimum Wage legislation, and abuse of student and skilled worker visas.

Whist some cases are relatively straightforward and can result in a referral to HMRC Fraud Investigation Service, others are far more complex and will require time to work through and gather evidence. One such investigation resulted in Operation JACKFRUIT. This was a UK-wide day of action, led by SIA C&I and Criminal Enforcement investigators in partnership with HMRC and HOIE teams.

The main themes which JACKFRUIT aimed to address were NMW breaches, benefit fraud, abuse of visas, and bogus self-employment. We visited 35 separate sites, with two business inspections included in the plan. HOIE arrested one individual for visa abuse (working on a skilled worker visa in front line security). HOIE have the power to apply significant fines on the offending business in such circumstances. We and our partners are progressing other lines of investigation as a result of the information we obtained on the day.

We adapted our approach to inspections at summer festivals and events this year to include engagement with operatives to establish their employment status and who they were employed by. That work identified 283 individual cases with concerns about employment status. HMRC will follow those up with a view to addressing the companies responsible for their deployment.

We launched our social media campaign on 27 August 2024, using a newly-designed campaign identity based on our brand. Since then we’ve shared more than 50 posts across Twitter (X), LinkedIn and Facebook. We have written messaging to target four specific audiences: general licence-holders, businesses, buyers of security, and potential victims of labour exploitation. Our messages have been seen more than 100,000 times, with a good deal of positive engagement.

A significant challenge we face is the use of closed WhatsApp groups to recruit and arrange deployment of security operatives. At one time many of these groups would post hourly rates well below National Minimum Wage. However, the actions of well-intentioned members of the security industry, who sought to expose them on social media platforms, have driven their activities further underground. Many will now only offer an hourly rate over the telephone. Intelligence indicates that some groups are being operated entirely in foreign languages to further frustrate any attempts to infiltrate them.

Anecdotal evidence and feedback from all our public engagement indicates overwhelming support for our work under Operation EMPOWER. We are under no illusion that there is a quick fix. However there is no doubt that more robust contract management and greater due diligence in supply chains by the larger companies in the private security industry could have a significant positive impact.

We will continue to work under Operation EMPOWER, in partnership with all interested parties, to reduce the harm.

What is spiking and what can I do about it?

This blog was written by Dr Amy Burrell, Research Fellow at the University of Birmingham. She can be contacted  on a.burrell@bham.ac.uk or via LinkedIn

What is spiking?

Spiking is the covert administration of substances (e.g., drugs, alcohol) to another person without their knowledge or consent. People often think about spiking in the context of drinks and, whilst drink spiking (i.e., adding a substance to someone’s drink) is a common way to spike someone, it is not the only way it happens. There are also reports of spiking using food (e.g., lollipops, brownies, gummies), cigarettes and/or vapes, as well as chewing gum and even via needles/injection.

What is commonly used to spike people?

Drugs such as Rohypnol, GHB, and Ketamine have been associated with spiking and incidents involving such substances do occur. However, alcohol is the most common substance used to commit spiking. This is not surprising as it is cheap and easily available, especially when in a night-time economy context.

Why do people spike others?

Spiking is a criminal offence. However, it can also be used to make someone more susceptible to being a victim of another crime. There is little research evidence about motivations but what we do know is that they can vary – for example, from sexual assault to robbery to pranking. We also know that spiking is not always followed by another offence which lends more support to the idea that some perpetrators commit spiking for “fun” or “a laugh”. Whatever the motivation, the impact of spiking can be dangerous and, of course, frightening for the victim.

How can I tell if someone has been spiked?

Symptoms of spiking can vary, depending on the substance used. Sometimes it will look like someone is just very drunk – unsurprising if the substance used to spike is often alcohol. Symptoms can, therefore, look similar to drunkenness – e.g., nausea, dizziness, being unsteady on their feet. Other signs someone might have been spiking include becoming unresponsive, behaving out of character, paranoia, and/or hallucinations.

What should I do immediately/first if I think someone has been spiked?

First and foremost, focus on safety. Seek medical attention if necessary. Also, make the venue aware as well as SIA colleagues working nearby. It is not always easy to establish where spiking has taken place so making everyone aware of an incident is helpful. Listen to the person who is reporting they have been spiked – and their friends – as this will help you identify what will help them calm down/feel reassured/what help they need.

How do I help someone who has been spiked?

Remember that the person might not be aware of what is happening. They might be very frightened and/or distressed. It is important to try and find the person’s friends as, hopefully, this will help you understand what has happened. In particular, it will help you establish where they have been and if their behaviour seems out of character for them. One useful tip is to look at the group and the context – whilst it might be very difficult to determine if someone has been spiked if it is 4am and everyone is drunk, there are other times where it should be much clearer. For example, if it is 10pm and one person seems completely out of it, their friends are nearby, (more) sober, and telling you their friend is behaving oddly then this is a strong indicator of spiking. Either way, if in doubt, work on the basis it could be spiking and take the appropriate action.

How do I report a spiking incident?

Victims can be worried about reporting spiking as they might be frightened or feel like they won’t be believed. I would encourage people to report if they feel able to as this helps us to build up a picture of spiking and the more we know, the more effectively we can respond. Police UK have a website on spiking which includes links to reporting spiking incidents. If the victim would prefer not to contact the police, they can still report what has happened to them – for example, at Stamp Out Spiking and The Egalitarian.

What do I do if I want to find out more?

The Security Industry Authority can signpost you to training that is available to you. For example, the Welfare and Vulnerability Engagement (WAVE) training is offered to SIA licence holders via the Safer Business Network. This offers you a good opportunity for supplementary training as an extra to your regular refresher SIA training.

There are also many charitable organisations who can offer help and support around spiking. They often have free resources available and/or options for reporting incidents. For example:

Jo’s Day in a Life at Reading Festival

One of our Investigations Officers, Jo, takes us through two days on site at the Reading Festival, as part of our SIA team ensuring licence holder compliance.

The famous music event attracts over 105,000 festivalgoers each year, while the security provision numbers around 2,000 operatives.

Walking to the festival

Tuesday 22 August

10.45am I arrive at the festival command centre for the event. It’s home to control teams from the police, ambulance and fire services, as well as event control and security. There’s already an impressive buzz to the place. Communication equipment, monitors and displays are arranged in the centre’s multi use courts.

11.00am I meet the rest of our inspection team who are supporting me today. We meet the Safety Manager for the Reading Festival, and he takes us to the site.

Before we’re allowed in, we must go through a site induction and be given our access wrist bands. This was one of the smoothest processes we’ve encountered to access an event. We were impressed by the improvements to the accreditation process implemented since last year.

The weather was glorious – so no festival mud to traipse through.

When operatives arrive, they must scan in a QR code, which amongst other details includes emergency contact details, then they move to accreditation desk.

11.15am The Safety Manager takes us to the compound for one of the larger of the three security companies looking after public safety at the event. Two others are also supplying security. In the main accreditation tent, we get to grips with checking the process and how security officers coming onto the site are being checked.

Our inspection team splits into groups to do the same with the other two companies supplying security.

Firstly, we are assured of how their accreditation is set up. When operatives arrive, they must scan in a QR code, which amongst other details includes emergency contact details, then they move to the accreditation desk.

Each operative is checked against a staff list, their SIA licence is checked against additional photo identity and against the SIA register of licence holders, as well as a physical check of the card itself using an ultraviolet light to test security features.

It is a good set up and well run. We see people being taken out of the line to undergo further clarification on their accreditation, which shows due diligence on behalf of the security company.

Operatives then move through to pick up their uniforms, any equipment they need and a tabard, different colours for security staff and stewards.

Before they leave, they attend an initial briefing and one final SIA licence check.

It was a good set up and well run.

Next to the main stage

12.00pm Within the accreditation area, we undertake our own further checks on SIA licences and contact our operation control to confirm all is well.

By the time we finish, our team has checked 85 licence holders – all good.

It’s worth a note, that the total security provision numbers around 2,000 individuals across the whole weekend, less today as the event is still setting up. But the number of operatives on duty will increase when the festival opens to the public.

1.30pm We man the gatepost where operatives enter to undertake initial checks before they get to the accreditation gate.

2.00pm We return to the main security compound and meet back up with our team who have been doing similar checks with the other companies.

After a brief break, we go to see the deployed security staff. There’s security staff at three gates to the site and more dotted around arena and stages. We go to the main site gate then walk into the arena, checking staff as we go.

On our way back to the security compound, we hitch a ride on a buggy. We are held at a junction to make way for a convoy of 12 ice cream vans!

5.00pm We meet our team and make our way to the exit performing a few more checks along the way.

6.00pm We’re signed out of the site, and I can make my way back home. I endure the M25 again and when I get home, spend a little time catching up on emails and messages before signing off the day.

Thursday 24 August

Jo, Elsie, Dawn and Michelle on site

11.00am We arrive back at the command centre and meet with our team including our Chief Executive, Michelle Russell who is joining us today.

Despite threats of rain, and taking heavy coats and stout shoes, it was another glorious day.

By now, the festival is functioning rather than being set up. The campsites are filling up fast, there are already tents cheek by jowl. Concessions stands are open and the festival feels like it’s getting into full swing.

There are lots of people walking around, sitting about, enjoying the atmosphere, and getting to know where things are. Metal roadways along the main routes save these from turning into mud baths if it rains.

We can see a constant stream of people arriving, some with some strange luggage solutions; chairs strapped to backs, tents being dragged, sleeping bags hanging from rucksacks, things being dropped.

Security staff are now doing their job rather than being accredited.

Operatives are deployed walking around the camps, keeping an eye on concessions, undertaking access controls and deploying searches for main access areas.

There are eight camps in total; white, brown, orange, purple, blue, yellow, orange and eco.

Our team splits into a separate group.

11:30am We head off for ‘white’ camp, the furthest away, about a 30-minute walk. It was a good day for steps. I clocked up around 15,000 during the day.

White camp is over a temporary bridge built over a river. At each of the camps is a camp manager, store and security manager. We make further checks as the Security Manager radios his team one-by-one to come in for a check.

On the way back we check a further two camps. In addition, we sweep up any security operatives we meet as we walk through and carry out further   licensing checks.

1.45pm We stop for lunch sitting down for a well-deserved break. After which, we walk on a bit further to a site access point and carry out some more checks. We don’t interfere with the search area, as this is very busy.

2.30pm We visit the brown and purple campsites on the way back carrying out more licence checks.

4.15pm As we sweep our areas the other team does the same with theirs. We meet up at the main arena where another security company is providing service for the main arena with the huge stage. We introduce ourselves. The manager is helpful but very busy, so we carry out checks as efficiently as possible and let them get on.

“It was good to have our Chief Executive, Michelle Russell along to share our experiences and talk to her about the little things that can help make our jobs easier.”

4.45pm We decide to call it a day and sit in the command centre for a de-brief.

Overall, the team undertook a total of 85 checks during the day.

It was good to have our Chief Executive, Michelle Russell along to share our experiences and talk to her about the little things that can help make our jobs easier.

5.50pm Michelle thanks the event controller and we leave the site.

8.30pm I get home. A quick check in to catch up on emails and messages before logging off for the day.

Overall, the team completed 170 checks during the two-day operation. In addition, I created 14 watchlists and checked 637 licences prior to the event. So quite an achievement.  

This was the first festival operation that I was leading on, and I was pleased with how it went. Everything was well planned and everyone in the team, both (literally) in the field and at control did a marvellous job.

It was good to see the security provision being deployed to a very high standard. All the checks we undertook were positive, testimony to the work we do with security suppliers long before events take place.

Thank you to the SIA team, the security and events management companies and security operatives who all did a fantastic job in keeping the public safe over the two days.

“Everything was well planned and everyone in the team, both (literally) in the field and at control did a marvellous job.”

Minister of State for Safeguarding out on inspection with our compliance team in the City of London 

On Tuesday 12 September Sarah Dines, Minister of State for Safeguarding, accompanied our compliance team members and City of London Police on an inspection across six locations in the square mile. 

The Minister, Sarah Dines, and our Chair, Heather Baily met and spoke with frontline security operatives, including door supervisors and security guards. The Minister was keen to understand the role and the experiences of licence holders as well as speak with them about public safety. 

Our Investigations Officer, Kirsty Tagg shared with the Minister our ongoing work to tackle violence against women and girls in partnership with local boroughs and the police.  She also highlighted the vital training that operatives receive on recognising indicators of abuse and their duty of care to protect vulnerable people. 

The visits provided an opportunity for the security operatives to speak with the Minister and our Chair, and an opportunity for the Minister to observe our role in enforcing standards within the private security industry. 

The visits allowed us to meet security operatives with a wide range of experience of working in the private security industry. A couple of the operatives had been in role for over ten years, with one holding 18 years of service at the same venue. We also met with an operative who had only just recently received their first licence. 

One of the head door supervisors detailed that they had recently turned away a security operative, with what they thought may have been a fake licence.  

Using ultraviolet light, they had been unable to detect a lack of security features that should have been present on the individual’s licence card.  

We discussed the issue of counterfeited licences with the Minister and explained the ways in which we are tackling this issue by encouraging companies to undertake checks. 

The inspection was completed with a short debrief at the end of the night. 

It was a valuable exercise to introduce the Minister to the work we do out in the field, learn about the experiences of the SIA licence holders, and discuss some of the challenges we can encounter in our work.   

Our thanks go to Sarah Dines, her team, the City of London Police and to all who took part for their continued commitment to working with us. 

Safety Advisory Groups

Lucia Howland our Regional Investigation Manager and Tactical Events Lead talks about our role in the Safety Advisory Groups.

Safety Advisory Groups (SAGs) are usually co-ordinated by a local authority and made up of representatives from the local authority, emergency services, other relevant bodies and the event organiser.

The group’s role is to:

  • Promote high levels of safety and welfare at events by giving advice and guidance.
  • Promote good practice in safety and welfare planning for events.
  • Ensure events have a minimal adverse impact on the local community.

We are generally invited to SAG meetings by the police or local authority to contribute to the public safety agenda of the meeting- with a particular focus in relation to the provision of security at an event.

In many cases we work with the event organisers to establish their requirements for security.  If necessary, supporting them in confirming the different roles of people working at an event and whether they fall into licensable conduct under the Private Security Industry Act.  For example – is there a correct mix of stewards and is there an appropriate amount of door supervisors and security officers to be supplied.

We do not get involved in the number of security personnel required.  This is not our remit – this has to be specified by the organiser and is sometimes influenced by the police or local authority based on historical events or types of venue.

If a security provider hasn’t been chosen, we will take the opportunity to promote the ACS as a recognised hallmark of quality for security suppliers.

We will highlight to the organisers that their choice of security provider can have a significant impact on the success of their event. We recommend that they carry out some general due diligence enquiries before they choose a security provider. Investing time by undertaking some basic checks can reap rewards.

As soon as a security provider has been appointed there are a number of areas we will look at to reassure ourselves, and the SAG attendees, of the capability and capacity of the provider to deliver the service, these will include:

  • That they are capable of providing the required numbers of security personnel, or if not, have they got sufficient contractual relationships in place to deliver the requirement.
  • What screening and vetting checks of the operatives will be put in place to ensure that the supplied licensed operatives hold a valid and genuine SIA licence. 

From the SAG meeting we can gain an understanding of how the event is likely to run in terms of security personnel being accredited. We may share best practice and known intelligence to support the due diligence practices in place to mitigate as far as possible any known risks.

We will need reassurance that there will be a robust process in place to thoroughly vet and register the operatives deployed.

We don’t attend every event but when we do, we are generally very well received. We work alongside security suppliers during inspections to check the validity of SIA licences. Going forward we will be working even closer with event organisers as customers of security businesses, to mitigate the risk of the use of counterfeit and cloned licences at events and festivals.

Following the event debrief meetings will be arranged with event organisers where needed. These meetings provide an important opportunity for both event organisers and agencies to feedback, learn and share best practice.

Ensuring the integrity of the SIA licence

Iestyn David is our Head of Licensing and Service Delivery. Here, he writes about our work to make sure that licences end up in responsible hands.

The SIA doesn’t just grant licences – although last year we granted 160,000. We make sure that only the right people hold an SIA licence. That means we refuse licence applications and revoke licences from those who are not fit to carry out the important role of protecting the public. It’s a key responsibility that we have as the regulator of the private security industry.

Our work to safeguard the integrity of the SIA licence begins with the application process. Our checks are thorough; last year we refused 1,362 licence applications for reasons such as criminality, or not having the right to work in the UK.

We won’t hesitate to remove licences from licence-holders who fail to live up to the standards required of them. Last year we suspended 917 licences and revoked 1,049 licences. Maintaining trust in the SIA licence is a top priority that involves teams across the SIA, from our Legal and Criminal Investigations teams to our Decisions officers and Intelligence staff.

We have close ties with police forces throughout the UK. They provide us with valuable intelligence relating to licence-holders or applicants involved in criminality. Our Intelligence team gathers relevant information and passes it to our Integrity team for detailed assessment, which may lead to us deciding to suspend or revoke a licence. This information can also come in from employers or members of the public via the ‘Report a Crime or Concern’ page on our website.

Our Inspections and Enforcement teams conduct enforcement operations across the UK with the police, local authorities and other government agencies. These operations may be conducted because of something we have been told (intelligence-led), or they may be random inspections to check compliance in a particular area.

We regularly prosecute those who commit offences under the Private Security Industry Act 2001. This is the Act of Parliament that established the SIA. It created several new offences, which include contravening licence conditions (you can see a full list of offences under the Act here). Last year we brought 39 prosecutions against individuals and businesses who chose to operate illegally.

We also prosecute for offences that could have a detrimental impact on the private security industry. These include fraud, forgery and counterfeiting in cases where people use forged or cloned licences. At the end of November 2022 our Criminal Investigations team had 119 open investigations, as you can see in our monthly SIA Enforcement Report.

We take our licensing responsibilities very seriously. The safety and security of the public depends on a professional and well-regulated private security industry that everyone can trust.