RiskUKAugust2017

The Certified Technical Security
Professional: Focusing on Systems
brought about any discernible change or means
of introducing minimum standards setting for
individual practitioners. In short, there have
been a good many expressions of
dissatisfaction but, until now, no action.
The demands placed upon the Government to
address heightened levels of risk – and
particularly so in relation to the increasing
threat of terrorism – are unlikely to abate, while
it’s generally accepted that the responsibility
for safeguarding our society rests with central
Government via the national police service, the
Security and Intelligence Services and,
increasingly, the private sector.
Next month, the
Register of Certified
Technical Security
Professionals opens
for business in order
to recognise the
competence of – and
qualifications gained
by – installers as well
as those individuals
who maintain fire and
security systems.
Kevin Matthew
recounts the benefits
of this landmark
development for
practising in-house
risk and security
managers
Many UK industries are governed by some
form of regulation and Best Practice. In
our business sector, the UK’s Private
Security Industry Act 2001 led to the creation of
the Security Industry Authority, the regulatory
body that has subsequently realised mandatory
licensing for various security activities, among
them security guarding, door supervision, close
protection, Cash and Valuables in Transit, key
holding and Public Space CCTV Surveillance.
However, there’s a viewpoint commonly held
by many operating within the security industry
that licensing hasn’t gone far enough in terms
of instilling competencies and raising
standards, nor has it reached far enough across
what is today an extremely diverse sector.
One significant area which has certainly
escaped the Regulator’s reach is that of
security systems, and more specifically those
individuals who are responsible for installing
and maintaining such systems.
For many years, the technical security sector
has expressed concern – all-too-often only
within its own ranks – about the absence of
recognised professional standards and
protocols. This has allowed the proliferation of
unqualified and potentially unscrupulous
individuals operating within this field.
Despite those protestations, no-one from the
Regulator’s office, wider Government or,
indeed, the technical security sector itself has
Electronic security systems
Security and fire detection systems have
advanced beyond all recognition in the last
decade. Anyone visiting IFSEC International at
London’s ExCeL back in June would have
witnessed the hugely diverse range of
sophisticated technologies on display such as
video surveillance systems with HDI, CVI and
TVI cameras, 4K and 8K monitors, cyber tools,
drones, analytical software, biometric access
control solutions, wireless intruder alarms and
fully-integrated systems orchestrated by a
central Command and Control point.
A major element of security planning and
developing strategy is the use of electronic
security systems. CCTV and many types of
technical access controls are fundamental when
it comes to combating crime and terrorism.
With such reliance placed on security systems
technology, it’s ever-more vital that those
charged with installing and maintaining such
high tech equipment are appropriately
experienced and qualified to do so, while
always looking to embellish and enhance their
skills by dint of accredited training.
Security systems which fail due to incorrect
installation or sub-standard maintenance can
result in major consequences for those
responsible. The fall-out here can affect
companies and directors, sometimes extending
to criminal charges and/or litigation, not to
mention untold reputational damage.
In-house directors of security have a duty to
ensure those systems they procure are fit for
purpose and that the equipment harbours the
requisite quality standards. Their ‘responsibility
remit’ here also extends to taking all
reasonable steps needed to ensure that such
62
www.risk-uk.com