On the same day that the SIA announced government agreement on the framework for future regulation of the security industry, buyers of security services made clear their desire for continued regulation.
In a survey conducted by the International Professional Security Association (IPSA), over 220 buyers of security services responded to a series of questions about the future regulation of the UK’s security industry.
98.7% of respondents wanted to see the industry remain regulated, with an overwhelming majority (80.8%) preferring regulation of both security companies and security personnel.
The survey which was conducted by IPSA as part of their membership of the Security Alliance and sponsored by Impellam Support Services, had the support of both the Institute of Facilities Management and the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply: 26.3% of respondents were from the FM and logistics sector, with a further 12.1% coming from local government.
The survey also revealed that 89.7% of security buyers believed that now was the time to introduce the licensing of in-house security personnel; currently exempt from licensing and not currently included in future licensing plans.
Speaking on behalf of IPSA’s International Council, Paul Trendall said: “We were very pleased to see that the people who buy security services had the same view of future regulation as we have been lobbying in support of. Getting their opinion was, from IPSA’s point of view essential. Without security buyers, there is no security industry”. Paul went onto say “We were surprised though, at the strength of feeling about in-house licensing. Having been left out of the original legislation, it has been a Cinderella issue ever since. It is clear now that people buying security want a common licensing standard to dispel public confusion about who is licensed and criminality checked, and who isn’t. With almost 90% in favour, and new primary legislation required in any event, there will never be a better time than now to introduce the licensing of all security personnel.”