Introduction

BEDA has consistently supported efforts to increase the level of regulation of door supervisors across the UK. For over a decade, BEDA lobbied for the introduction of a national training and registration scheme for door supervisors. We are therefore fully supportive of the Government's plans to deliver such a scheme through the newly created Security Industry Authority (SIA). The SIA can play a significant part in further raising the standard of professionalism amongst door supervisors and place further barriers to entry in the way of unscrupulous operators.

Background

While the local authority-led schemes developed in the 1990s have been effective in parts of the country, they could never adequately address the fundamental problems surrounding the need for registration. A large proportion of councils had not implemented the guidance notes circulated by the Home Office in the mid 1990s. Indeed some councils remain blissfully ignorant of their existence. Action needed to be taken at a national level in order to prevent the rogue door supervisor who finds himself barred from working in one area simply relocating.

The club and bar industry understands that our customers need to be sure that door supervisors are trustworthy professionals. More is expected of door supervisors than at any time previously. The late night entertainment market has expanded tremendously in recent years attracting the public into our town and city centres in ever-greater numbers. A well-trained, well-vetted door team can be a major factor in ensuring general good order and personal safety.

Analysis Of Proposals

Registration

BEDA wholeheartedly supports the Government's decision to license all those who provide door supervisor services. This top-to-bottom approach is the only way to prevent the sort of loopholes appearing that the criminal element has employed to side-step local schemes.

BEDA believes the creation of 'Inspected Company Status' will be of benefit to the industry in as much as it would provide a guide to operators seeking to employ reputable agencies. However, we feel that company inspection should be made statutory in the door supervisor sector, as this would provide managers with the wherewithal to resist pressure from agencies to employ inappropriate door supervisors.

Training

It was imperative that the new registration process included an appropriate, weighty training element. The SIA has, quite rightly, looked to go beyond current practice and develop a national standard training scheme that is more comprehensive than the courses available today. While this is clearly the correct way to proceed, many BEDA members are concerned that the SIA might introduce a scheme that is simply too expensive and time consuming for many potential door supervisors to undertake. After all, for many, door supervision is a second job.

These fears can be addressed by ensuring the training is available in a variety of formats and from competing providers. The SIA should also seek a training subsidy from the Learning and Skills Council in order to absorb some of the cost.

Conclusion

The creation of the SIA will take us a long way towards our goal of a clean, responsible, well-trained door supervisor industry. This will boost public confidence in door supervisors who will be perceived as being there to prevent trouble and keep venues drug free. The SIA should be well placed to contribute to the Government's initiatives to tackle the problems of alcohol related violence and drugs misuse.