Response driving is frequently conflated with pursuit driving, according to Detective Garda Mark Ferris, GRA Executive Member for the Dublin West Division. He writes that until such time as An Garda Síochána addresses the lack of pursuit training for Gardaí, these policies will remain theoretical and expose everyone involved to high-risk situations, not to mention representing a major risk to the public.
There has been recent public commentary around the updated pursuit policy of An Garda Siochana by the national broadcaster RTÉ. Commissioner Drew Harris has said: “Gardaí can now pursue people driving scramblers, scooters and electric bikes in a dangerous fashion, which they (Gardai) had previously been forbidden to do”.
He added that “the previous policy has been changed and these drivers, mostly young men wearing face coverings and not helmets, can be apprehended through pursuit and vehicle-stopping devices”, whilst finally saying of Garda members that “when it’s appropriate and proportionate to the threat, they can pursue”.
I feel this commentary requires some background and context, given the advocacy role of the Garda Representative Association (GRA) on behalf of our members. It is especially important given the often contentious – and occasionally highly controversial – nature of this aspect of police work.
High speed pursuits of reckless criminals are regular fodder for the media and the decisions of officers on the ground in exceptionally challenging circumstances are subject to the hindsight of commentators who will never have to make these decisions. That is why it’s important to look at this ‘policy change’ and its implications for Garda members.
POLICY VERSUS PRACTICE: The old policy set out in HQ Directive 44/19 (‘Managed containment and stopping of subject vehicles’) and the newer policy set out in HQ Directive 87/24 (‘Spontaneous Pursuit’), which cancels and replaces the older one, share identical foundational principles: proportionality, necessity, and accountability under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The rebranding of terminology (e.g., ‘managed containment’ to ‘spontaneous pursuit’) does not constitute any substantive or meaningful policy change. Key operational parameters – risk assessment, supervisory oversight, and containment processes – remain consistent across both documents. The perceived ‘change’ or shift reflects the confusion between organisational policy (written directives set out) and organisational practice (implementation of same).
These are the critical deficiencies that undermine the newer policy:
- Control Room Authorisation: Directive 87/24 mandates supervisory oversight for pursuits, yet control room personnel lack standardised training in dynamic risk assessment, pursuit initiation or termination criteria, or indeed ECHR compliance. This violates the policy’s requirement for ‘qualified oversight’ and makes the authorisation of a so-called pursuit potentially a violation of the policy itself.
- Pursuit Driver Training: There is no member of An Garda Siochana trained and appropriately authorised in pursuit driving which renders the policy inoperable. Competency Based Driving 2 (CBD2) drivers (which make up the vast majority of response drivers) are not trained in any element of pursuit.
Response driver training, as governed by the Emergency Services Driving Standard (ESDS) in An Garda Síochána, is frequently conflated with pursuit driving, highlighting a misalignment between organisational policy, operational implementation and public messaging. Driving to an emergency situation such as an armed robbery in progress with blue lights and sirens on is not, and should not, be confused with pursuit driving.
PURSUIT DRIVER TRAINING
Pursuit Driver Training, as defined by the College of Policing, the professional body for those working in policing in England and Wales, identifies the following situations:
(1) When a driver/motorcyclist indicates by their actions or continuance of their manner of driving/riding that they have no intention of stopping for the police.
(2) The police driver believes that the driver of the subject vehicle is aware of the requirement to stop and decides to continue behind the subject vehicle with a view to either reporting its progress or stopping it.
While pursuit driving requires active evasion and awareness of a driver’s refusal to stop it also requires a level of competence to engage, while response driving is a distinct driving activity that allows trained members, for example under CBD2, to exceed normal driving standards when responding to emergency incidents.
These fundamental differences highlight how the two activities should never be confused or conflated. In fact, the College of Policing also says of pursuits if ‘the situation falls within the definition of a pursuit, and non-pursuit trained drivers must discontinue immediately.’
