An SIA review, involving wide consultation with the security industry, found insufficient substantiated evidence of risk or threat to the public to support in-house licensing, a statement said.
“The assessment took into account that regulation should only be targeted where action is needed, and that regulation should only intervene where there is a clear case for public protection,” it read.
“Following detailed discussion with SIA Chairman Baroness Ruth Henig and SIA senior management the Home Office approved the recommendation, requesting that the subject be revisited in three years time.”
SIA acting chief executive Andy Drane said: “During the review, no evidence was provided by the industry that would justify extending licensing to in-house security guards. While stakeholders are welcome to comment and provide feedback, there are no plans to re-visit the issue until 2012 – unless significant substantiated evidence is presented that clear risk to public protection across the in-house sector has developed.”
The British Retail Consortium has welcomed the decision. BRC director general Stephen Robertson said: “The Government is right to reject licensing for in-house security guards. It would have piled new costs and bureaucracy on to hard-pressed retailers while adding nothing to public protection.
“We told the SIA that licensing could not raise retailers’ standards for recruitment and training because they are already higher than the SIA requires. Its report rightly accepts this.
“We’re delighted that sense has prevailed. In its report the SIA acknowledges the good practice within retail, dismissing unsubstantiated claims that this is not so.
“Ultimately retailers live or die by their reputation with customers. No responsible retailer would employ security staff who put customers at risk.”
