The forensic science system in England and Wales is in a crisis that poses “a serious risk to the criminal justice system”, a Lords committee said, in the latest instance of austerity straining public services.
Funding cuts including the abolition of the government’s Forensic Science Service, as well as poor regulation and leadership, had resulted in a market that was “becoming dysfunctional”, an investigation by the Lords science committee found.
“Simultaneous budget cuts and reorganisation, together with exponential growth in the need for new services such as digital evidence, has put forensic science providers under extreme pressure,” said Narendra Patel, committee chair. “The situation we are in cannot continue.”
The closure of the national Forensic Science Service left a fragmented and uncoordinated system, the peers said. Altogether the 43 police authorities carry out an estimated 80 per cent of their forensic investigations in-house while commissioning 20 per cent from private companies, the report found, but these proportions varied markedly between forces.
Routine fingerprint analysis and digital forensics — processing mobile phone and computer records — was increasingly performed in the forces’ own labs while more specialist work, such as analysing textile fibres or DNA traces from a crime scene, was usually contracted out, the peers said.
Police spending on forensics in England and Wales has fallen by more than half over the past decade from £120m in 2008 to an estimated £50m-£55m last year, according to evidence received by the committee. Carolyn Lovell, head of operations for Crime Scene Investigation at Hampshire Constabulary told the inquiry that forensic work was suffering as a result of austerity-related spending cuts, with all forces having their budgets “restricted and they will be restricted again next year”.
If police had to pay more for work by private providers to make them financially viable, forces would have to “review what we submit and perhaps no longer submit certain aspects of our work to them because we do not have any other financial resources”, she said.
The three largest forensic science companies operating in the UK have all suffered from financial “instability”, the committee’s report said. “The result is a forensic science market which is becoming dysfunctional and which, unless it is properly regulated, will soon suffer the shocks of major forensic science providers going out of business and putting justice in jeopardy.”
The peers called for a stronger Forensic Science Regulator as well as two new standards bodies.
“Since 2012 the Home Office has made empty promises to give the regulator statutory powers,” said Lord Patel. “Seven years is an embarrassing amount of time to delay legislation; our forensic science provision has now reached breaking point and a complete overhaul is needed.”
The committee discussed whether to recommend restoration of a public Forensic Science Service but decided that it would be less disruptive to continue with an improved version of the existing “mixed market” of private contractors and police laboratories.
To deliver a new forensic science strategy and take overall responsibility for the field in England and Wales, the peers recommended the creation of a new Forensic Science Board. Another new body that the peers want the government to establish is a National Institute for Forensic Science, which would set scientific priorities and direct funding for research and development.
