Panorama: Britain's Protection Racket, BBC One 8.30pm Monday 21 January 2008

The debate is now closed but a selection of your comments are published below.

I found the programme fascinating! As a security officer myself, I found it appalling that the SIA are allowing criminals to run security companies as consultants, and by doing this getting away with it. Surely, it must do some proper checks on the backgrounds! Also,I find it a disgrace that the cost to renew the license is �245 - a LOT OF MONEY in terms of how much the security officer makes in a week!
Andrew Goodin, Washington,Tyne and Wear

It would be churlish to say 'I told you so', but the SIA were warned at the outset by many other professionals in the industry about what was happening and what was needed to correct it. The SIA prided itself at the outset on not employing anyone from the industry; it has in effect reaped the harvest from this mistake. I would like to say that the programme painted an inaccurate picture, that its reporting was slanted or indeed deceptive, but that is not the case. Bruce George was mentioned in an earlier reply as being the knight who could have saved the industry, but I rather see him as the piper who led the industry into its current mess. After all, he is a member of the governing party and was Chairman of the Home Affairs Committee and as such, had great influence over the badly drafted Security Industry Act. Of course things can be addressed and sorted, but it takes a big man to admit to a big mistake and if there is one thing that both the government and SIA doe not possess, it's big men.
Nick Evans, Sheffield

If you were a financial consultant you would be involved in licencable activities all day long. Why should it be the different for the security industry?
Dave Bennett, Basildon

As an ACS and NSI gold manned guarding company, the introduction of licences and the SIA were welcomed. But, after watching last nights programme and seeing by simply calling a "criminal" a security consultant he can work in an industry and bring it into disrupte is beyond belief. We have audits twice a year by the SIA and the NSI and all our directors and managers have SIA non frontline licences, and are constantly working to promote a more professional image and to get away from the "cowboy and ciminal" side that in the past it has been renouned for.
Lyn Hanna, Birmingham, England

A good programme quite rightly highlighting serious impropriety but failing to report the improvements that have been made since the SIA came into being. The reality is that the culture of the private security industry is changing for the better, but slowly. In-house trainers and training will not enhance the speed of change nor improve public perception/confidence of the industry.
Alan Cronin, Wrexham, North Wales

I watched your programme last night and feel that you have portrayed the whole security industry with the same brush. You started off your programme talking about CCTV cameras (electronic), then the remaining programme only spoke about MAN GUARDING. Please note that these are very different businesses and are self regulated by other organisations. The SIA were initially brought in to sort out the man guarding industry (security guards, bouncers etc) as these where generally unprofessional operations. The electronic side has for many years been self regulated. Companies like ourselves are inspected and registered by organisations like NSI (National Security Inspectorate). The BSIA (British Security Industry Association)and do not fall under the SIA umbrella. I feel that your programme misrepresented the security industry as a whole. You should have branded the programme name as Man Guarding. I agree that your programme should expose these issue, so keep it up, just get I right.
Ray Anderson, London

Both my wife and I watched Panorama tonight and found the programme interesting but spoiled by background music. Why do you do it? Some programmes you broardcast have needless background music so loud that it is difficult to here what the people in the programmes are saying.
Jim Reay, England

I've just watched your show and found it lazy and biased. Your reporter referred to 'convicted criminals and other undesirables'. This is shocking. What are convicted criminals meant to do? I bet she'd also do a report on the 'undesirables' that leave prison and sit about claiming the dole. I would hope that her obvious right wing views are not those shared by the BBC and that in the future you will be a little more careful when choosing which journalists appear on an otherwise informative show.
Alex Warwick, Leeds

After watching your programme on the security industry i find it amazing that you have not uncovered the more serious problem of the standard of the legitimate security licence holders. The SIA 'training course' even if delivered correctly and in full is a complete and utter joke. Training does not cover any relevant skills needed to be a door supervisor for example, there is no training in connection with emergency first aid, drug prevention, or dealing with attack. The only training given is 'put your hand up openly and calmly talk' unfortunately as a doorman that has worked in the worst and most violent clubs in the Midlands, the SIA training course is nothing more than a gesture for the real goal of the government making money, with the extortionate fees charged the harsh reality is that accomplished experienced security professionals are now leaving the industry in droves.
Rob Holloway, Wolverhampton , England.

As an SIA licensed Door supervisor one of the biggest rackets is to use ex employees badge numbers or made uo ones to fill contracts using non licensed personnel. Seen it happen countless times and you might as well be on your own police check the door and you've no option but to say you're short staffed, or no one watches your back
Gary Evans, Wolverhampton

At last!!! Maybe the truth will out!!! the people that work genuinely in the front line have said this all along - I have heard of guys taking the exam in a pub during opening hours - there are a lot of people out there that should not be licensed, but nobody listens to the "good guys" when we say anything- further investigation and name & shame should be done and these people weeded out, so that the genuine of us can be respected for being professionals and not a gang of thugs! Conditions and hours should also be looked at. The government should step in and look again at the whole SIA because as a lot of us have said all along it is NOT WORKING !!!
Eileen Williams, Birkenhead, Merseyside UK

I am a SIA qualified doorman as I wanted do undertake security work, the training and examinations were so simple as to be an insult to someone with average intelligence. I now await the SIA program for investigators as that is my main role. It is clear that the SIA is a government attempt to convince the public that they are safe from those who should not be trading. In typical government style they have failed to provide a body with any authority only to succeeded in creating a useless, toothless, very expensive body. That body does no more than raise funds from those who would offer a professional service and operate legally anyway and provides no protection to either the customer or the legitimate industry. The sooner the public realise the SIA is no more than a government scam that can never do more than fail the better.
Paul Puttock, Christchurch, Dorset

Thanks. You have done nothing to help the thousands of legitimate security officers around the country doing a difficult job without any legal powers. The SIA are the ones to blame, they have approached the licenses the wrong way and will try to blame everyone but themselves. They should have liaised directly with the Security Companies, but instead they have put the responsibility on individuals applying for the license making it difficult for Managers to check applications properly. You cannot talk with Senior Officials from the SIA as when you call them all you get is low paid call centre staff who are quire frankly awful and often give conflicting advise. My Security staff are well trained, law abiding citizens; they are well trained because they have been trained by me and I was trained by the British Military. Not this nonsense of a four day course.
Ronald Melia, Gosport

I think the sensationalistic tone of this programme is very damaging to the industry as a whole. I have been working in the security industry for some 15 years and all companies that I've worked with including The Up Front Group are law abiding hard working businesses dedicated to raising standards throughout what was a very criminal fraught area. It is exactly bad press like this that creates the stigma attached to security companies and their employees, making our job more difficult. There may well be rogue traders still out there, but that is the responsibility of the SIA to clear these out. The small snap shot of the industry you provide is not representative of the industry as a whole.
Chris Clarke, Dundee Scotland

I am a licensed front line operative and believe that the licence has been put into place for no other reason other than a new money making incentive for our government. 250.000 licensed front line operatives at �190.00 a licence says enough. If the licence was put into place to resolve issues with rouge and corrupt companies or staff then why is it so easy to obtain these licences. Another instance of working class individuals having their salary further reduced!
Kevin Barber, Wigan

It sounds like security consultants could be a whole threat to the nation! But the government allows all sorts to operate under pseudo names as there is no protection of job title and function, even for professionals such as accountants, architects, etc. For example, anyone can practice as an architectural consultant with no qualifications or insurance. What happens if a building falls down and kills everyone? At least architects have at least 7 years training, have to retrain for a week every year and have PI insurance. There are more deaths in the building industry than in night clubs!
Michael, Bath, UK

Your programme was good but only scratched the surface on how criminals can work in the security industry. The SIA is money driven, as stated by the C.E. they have registered over 250,000 people. That is an income of over �62 million for what? His big pay packet? A Security Company can become an accredited company by paying the SIA more money. This way they are allowed, by the SIA, to have people working for them that are not registered. Hence the large amount of illegal people. My son has been waiting since October last year for his SIA Card. He has had CRB check form since November. The SIA say that if he pays more money they will get the card to as soon as possible. Due to Bank Holidays he is out of pocket to about �10,000 are the SIA going to compensate him? It just goes to show that the SIA are not interested in who works in the Security Industry so long as they pay the SIA money. Until this culture is driven out you will still have problems within the industry.
John Mason, London

What SIA have failed to say, and you do not know, is that when we apply for our licence, it takes up to 6 months for security checks at which a door personal, or close protection officer cannot work in the industry, or earn money, to support his family and kids, until he/she receives the licence or valid letter with 16 digit number on it which goes against the human rights act, the right to work. Many personnel leaving the Army struggle to work, until the licence is granted.
Lee Hill, Hampshire

The SIA is a total sham. I have been working as a door supervisor for eleven years and have never gone through such useless training as that required for the SIA test. This training is over priced and so is the badge. Training =�200 SIA fee = �245 When I first did my licence it was �30 for the course and the badge, and the course covered more in one day than the SIA covers in a week. i have recently renewed my license as it expires this month but due to the SIA failures I have still not received my new licence after they received my documents in November. I have been on the phone to them today, it took over an hour to get through to someone who then informs me that this is a clear case of incompetence on their part. I am not the only one several of my friends who put their renewals in months before the expiry date are now out of work as they do not have their licence. No wonder the crooks are getting all the jobs their the only ones with a licence. There are several cases in my town alone where the SIA do not do their job - clubs notorious for drug misuse to the point of the door staff being allocated as the dealers. Unlicensed door staff working not waiting for their licence like most of us but not even applying in the first place.
E Khalil, Swansea

My door supervisor training took place over 4 days with an extra add-on day for static guarding. I passed the exam. In my opinion my training was very thorough, however, I have been asking the SIA, both by e mail, online application form and phone, for OVER THREE MONTHS now, for an application pack for my licence, without which I cannot work in my chosen profession. In essence, my livelihood depends on my licence. What the hell are the SIA playing at, when legitimately trained people like myself cannot even get the licences they've worked hard and trained for?
Sue Wilton, Rushden, Northamptonshire

I watched with horror your excellent programme on the Security Industry, especially the part where you interviewed the CEO of the SIA, to see the look of total disdain on his face when called upon to answer a question; which if he were in control of the SIA; he would have known the answer to. The reason why 'Consultants' are not REGULATED is because of the inefficiency of his organisation, it is they, and no one else who have yet again 'put back' the regulation of Consultants as a check on their website clearly shows!!! If only Blair had put Bruce George MP in charge, he having been the prime mover of Legislation over self-regulation for many years, then this, alongside Illegal's being granted licences would NEVER have happened. I, like so many genuine Consultants and member of the Security Industry, attended the conference at Bramshill; I think it was in 1994, and who all actively agreed that this was the only step to take in order to restore public confidence in an industry plagued by crime and corruption. Unfortunately there were several of us who also saw it being hijacked by the so called 'self-regulatory' bodies and the 'big players' in the Manned Guarding element of the Industry.
Christopher J Forbes-Ritte, New Milton, Hampshire