Growing concerns are emerging across the UK private security sector regarding the newly formed ‘S12’ security leadership group, which critics argue prioritises the interests of large multinational corporations at the expense of smaller operators, while raising serious questions about Minister Dan Jarvis’ positioning and involvement.
The S12 Group was established as an interface into the security sector for Security Minister Dan Jarvis. It was nominally intended to engage a cross-representation of the sector, but its makeup and process have been received poorly by SMEs and wider industry figures, with many warning it fails to reflect the true breadth of the sector.
From the beginning, the process has been poorly designed and exclusionary, following a series of changes throughout the process and a limited number within the industry understanding that it was being formed.
Only 740 ACS-(Approved Contractor Scheme) companies were permitted to nominate or vote people onto the group, despite there being over 12,000 security businesses across the UK. While ACS firms may nominate non-ACS businesses, this has been widely dismissed as tokenistic. Industry figures argue that over 90% of businesses have effectively been locked out of shaping S12, undermining its credibility and legitimacy.
Critics also point to the confusing and opaque way decisions have been made. Priorities such as vetting as part of the group’s initial areas of focus were communicated before S12 was even formally established, leaving many to believe the process was stage-managed in favour of a narrow set of corporate interests.
It speaks volumes that only four businesses generating over £30 million in turnover applied. With around 90 votes cast for nominees across the categories, this truly highlights the level of engagement within the sector—particularly among the 740+ ACS businesses who were able to vote for their nominees.
A letter from SMEs sent to Minister Jarvis has reportedly been met with a commitment from civil servants that he would be briefed, offering limited or no meaningful recognition of the concerns or narrative raised by the sector.
In response to the current position of the S12, Freedom of Information (FOI) requests are being submitted this week to examine the extent of ministerial and civil service involvement in shaping the process with leading figures from the group.
Despite these concerns, S12 is reportedly pressing ahead with plans for the Security Minister Dan Jarvis to acknowledge it within his speech at the International Security Expo
Michael Kill, CEO of the Night Time Industries Association, said: “The formation of the S12 group has raised significant concerns across the security and night-time economy sectors. The process has been rushed, exclusionary, and skewed toward the interests of a handful of large corporates, sidelining the vast majority of SMEs that make up the backbone of this industry. Decisions on priority focus areas were made before the group even existed, undermining confidence in its legitimacy and purpose.
Minister Jarvis must urgently clarify his position: does he back this flawed structure, or will he stand with the thousands of small and medium businesses who deserve proper representation? To push ahead in its current form risks entrenching elitism, deepening divisions, and misrepresenting an industry that is vital to public safety and economic recovery.
We need transparency, accountability, and an open process that ensures every part of our sector has a voice — not just the privileged few.
Satia Rai, CEO of the International Professional Security Association, said: “S12 must operate with trust, collaboration, and fair representation at its core. Yet its current formation risks undermining these principles. SMEs are the backbone of the private security industry, yet they have been largely excluded from meaningful engagement. This is neither fair nor sustainable.
Any credible industry structure must be transparent and genuinely representative — not dominated by the interests of a small number of large ACS businesses. The accelerated timeline and lack of consultation raise serious questions about S12’s governance, legitimacy, and long-term viability.
The suggestion of ministerial support, without clear communication or engagement with SMEs, has further eroded confidence. At a time when unity and trust are essential, such an approach risks deepening divisions across the sector.
We urge the Minister’s office to provide immediate clarity and to commit to an open, inclusive process that is representative of the sector, not just a privileged few. The future of our industry must be shaped collectively, through transparency and accountability.”
Sacha Lord Chair of the Night Time Industries Association said “The S12 group, in its current form, fails to reflect the reality of the UK security sector. By prioritising a small number of large corporates and limiting engagement with SMEs, it risks sidelining the very businesses that keep our venues, events, and cities safe.
Decisions appear pre-determined, with little transparency or genuine consultation, undermining trust across the industry. Minister Jarvis must clarify whether he supports this approach. A fair, open, and inclusive process is essential to ensure representation for all operators, not just the privileged few. The sector deserves nothing less.
John Owens – ISS – Director of Security Performance & Compliance said – While the initiative represents a step forward in principle, I have concerns about the pace and planning of its rollout. The process appears to have been expedited without sufficient strategic consideration for the broader interests of the security industry.
It’s important to acknowledge that the sector extends well beyond ACS accredited organisations. Many SMEs either do not see tangible value in ACS accreditation, face financial barriers, or lack clarity around the scheme’s purpose. With only around 840 ACS accredited companies out of an estimated 6,000 operating in the UK, just 14% of the market, the current approach risks excluding the majority of the industry.
The S12 presents a significant opportunity to engage the remaining 86% who have historically felt disconnected from ACS and similar initiatives. A more inclusive framework would ensure broader representation and amplify voices that have not previously been heard.
Expanding engagement across the full spectrum of the industry could also help identify phoenix companies and rogue operators, enabling more effective intervention from regulatory bodies such as the SIA and HMRC.
It’s worth noting that ISS, a major national and global player with a strong sector presence was not engaged until the structural presentation, despite claims that the top 30 businesses had been consulted. This raises questions about the inclusivity and transparency of the process.
Finally, I find the current structure of the group to be disproportionate and not reflective of the diversity within the industry. A more balanced and representative model would better serve the sector’s long term interests.”
John Melling Group Chief Executive Officer Pro FM Group – “To summarise my concerns, I believe the process has been rushed, and I question whether sufficient due diligence has been carried out on the appointed individuals. This concern is reinforced by the fact that changes have already occurred within the group, with certain appointees being removed and replaced so soon after the announcement.
In addition, I am concerned by the lack of diversity among the appointees. Frankly, around half of those selected were entirely predictable before the process even began. This gives the impression that the initiative has not been as open, inclusive, or merit based as it should have been. Instead, it risks being perceived as another programme that primarily benefits the larger players in the industry, rather than delivering real value to the wider sector and most importantly those on the frontline.
Given the significance of this leadership group for the future of our industry, it is difficult to understand how such an important initiative could be announced publicly and candidates confirmed within a period of less than four weeks. Such a timeline does not reflect the level of care, consultation, and scrutiny that should accompany a decision of this magnitude.
Paul Macarthur MSyI M.IPSA Chief Executive Officer SGC Security Services – “In my view, no private set up led or overarching ruling structure should be imposed on private security companies, particularly those with turnovers in excess of £100 million per year. These large organisations do not represent the
industry as a whole. The S12, as it stands, fails to recognise or reflect the realities of grassroots security companies, which make up a significant proportion of limited companies across the United Kingdom.
Instead, I believe the S12 should have been formed around five security and crowd safety companies with turnovers of £10 million or below. Each should be led by business owners who have operated as limited companies for a minimum of five years and can demonstrate a proven history of exemplary service and conduct. This would ensure the body is representative, credible, and in touch with the true nature of our industry.
Once again, an undue focus has been placed on ACS-accredited companies, as though ACS status is the benchmark of quality. In reality, ACS has become a tick-box exercise and is not viewed by genuine buyers or procurement departments as a reliable measure of professionalism or service excellence.
The creation of the S12, on top of the many existing associations, trade bodies, and SIA-led working groups, only serves to dilute the industry’s voice and adds confusion about its future direction over the next five -10 years.”
Badar Chaudhry Chief Executive Bold Security Group. “It would have been extremely beneficial for the S12 to be set up with more time and due diligence. Many of our business partners are not aware of the S12 and therefore not able to voice or put themselves forward for nominations.
The selection process has been rushed and has not reached smaller or medium businesses. They are a crucial part of the security sector.
Nigel Wright Sales Director Prime Security Services said – “In principle, I support the goal of regulating all security companies to create a fair and level playing field — not just for a select few. Currently, the S12 appointing process feels like a closed shop, limited to a handful of large ACS businesses, often through personal networks.
There are over 8,000 security companies in the UK, yet only around 800 are SIA/ACS accredited. This leaves thousands unregulated and unaudited. Regulation should apply to all companies, not just the top few, to ensure transparency and raise industry standards.
Smaller, professional firms are often sidelined despite delivering quality services. Large firms win major contracts, then subcontract work to smaller companies at reduced rates — sometimes below £17 per hour — and delay payments for months or even years. Some are still owed hundreds of thousands from events like the 2022 Commonwealth Games.
This closed-shop culture undermines fair competition and hurts credible smaller businesses. A democratic and transparent election process, with proper notice and genuine industry-wide participation, is essential. This must be a real industry vote, not a rushed decision made in 14 working days.”
Furqan Alam, Managing Director Leverage Security said – “The S12 group does not represent my sector. The process has felt rushed, 14 days from start to finish is not enough time for a group to lead such important work effectively. Many partners and leaders I’ve spoken to had never heard of S12 or understood its purpose. We do not support S12, as it is not representative of the sector I work in and serve. Without urgent intervention, critics warn, S12 risks entrenching elitism within the private security sector and sidelining the very businesses that make up the majority of the industry.”
Qadeer Qureshi CEbO – Aegis Group. “Thank you for giving our small business the opportunity to voice our view on this matter. We believe this process was rushed, we only became aware through a conversation with a business partner. More time would have given our SME’s (ACS and NONACS) time to be nominated and or put themselves forward. The fact that only around 94 businesses voted and engaged is a clear sign the S12 does not have by in from across the sector.
Andrew Cooper – Founder of Marcomms Consultant for the Security Industry. “I believe that a strong representation of security professionals to government level should be coming directly from the industry’s trade associations, unions and professional bodies. Our security companies each year make a significant financial contribution and commitment to us in order to represent their concerns, and it is our duty as a collective body on behalf of both the companies and their employees that we approach this issue in such an appropriate way.”
Deborah Mill-Burns Founder of Momentum Personal Solutions Ltd – “Firstly, I’m not sure how long the voting process was as I only learnt about it a week before the board was elected.
If only 7 days were given for nominations, I feel that this was done so only those ‘in the know’ could submit. To me it seems this is just an attempt for ego’s to be rubbed and for those who want to run their own agenda’s.
There is no diversity, no inclusion and it’s a clear backwards step in DEI, to follow suit with ‘the powers that be’. Totally disappointed and do not support in any way.”
Harry Hussain Founder & CEO of Uniguard said – “I was actually shortlisted in this process. I wish we had more time to consider and actually share this message with my partners. Most of whom are not aware of the S12. However the messages and meaning of S10/12 has been rushed, it feels like the same old boys club.
ACS and then non ACS and then they can’t vote, not a good look for our sector.It needs more time, it needs to reflect the diverse community of security professionals in our sector.”
Sean Pennington Founder / MD Nine Arches Ltd – summarises. Thank you for inviting feedback on the S12 Security Guarding Leadership initiative. While we support its aims of leadership, representation, and raising standards, we cannot support it in its current form.
There’s been little genuine consultation—no structured forums or engagement with SMEs, micro-businesses, or non-ACS companies. The unclear and unrepresentative voting process has left many feeling excluded and reinforced the view that S12 is dominated by ACS businesses and familiar names, risking it becoming another closed circle.
Instead of uniting the sector, S12 risks deepening existing divides between ACS and non-ACS, large and small providers, and influential players and those routinely overlooked. Concerns also remain about some “industry leaders” linked to poor practices that have harmed the sector’s reputation.
For S12 to succeed, it must open up engagement to all, hold regular inclusive meetings, focus on real improvements in pay, training, welfare, and accountability, and genuinely represent the whole industry.
We believe in reform and a stronger collective voice, but only through a transparent, inclusive, and representative process.
Muhammed Ikraam Fareed – Founder and CEO of 3V Solutions – “I think the S12 elected members do not reflect the wider market or the demographic within the market. The process of the S12 committee election was not something many of us were aware of. It seems everything regarding S12 has been done behind closed doors and then announced. And its something that we have to accept. I strongly suggest a review takes place which will allow for all parts of the sector to have a voice and representation.”
Paul Phillips – Chief Executive SSAIB Said – “My major comment on this is to question how representative the organisation is of the guarding business in general. The organisation claims to be putting forward a united message about guarding, such as mandatory business licensing and in-house licensing and yet appears to lack representation of a broader range of views, which may indicate that awareness of the organisation was limited. There is no representation from organisations representing the interests of front-line operatives.”
Richard Harris – Chief Executive Officer Guardium said – “The S10–S12 initiative had the potential to be a real step forward, but restricting participation to ACS companies risks excluding the very SMEs, training providers, and non-ACS businesses that form the backbone of our industry.
True credibility and diversity of representation will only come with genuine buy-in from across the whole sector. Without space for new voices and next-generation leaders, we risk stifling innovation, limiting growth, and undermining the long-term competency this initiative seeks to strengthen.”
