THE PLIGHT OF UK POLICING IN 2011

A COPY OF A LETTER POSTED IN THE

SURREY ADVERTISER

From MICHAEL NICHOLSON O.B.E.

Former Chief Foreign Correspondent ITN

Special thanks go to The Surrey Constabulary Blog, for bringing this article to our attention. 

Born in Romford, Essex, Michael Nicholson was a war reporter for ITN, who has covered more wars and conflicts than any other British newsman. He has reported from wars in Nigeria, Northern Ireland, Vietnam, Cambodia, Jordan, India and Pakistan, Rhodesia, Beirut , Cyprus, Angola The falklands and The Persian Gulf.  During a twenty-five-year career, Nicholson reported on fifteen separate conflicts and became one our most respected and admired journalists. He has won numerous British and International awards, including the British Academy of Film and Television Arts, The Richard Dimbleby Award for his reporting of the Falklands War, and three times The Royal Television Society's Hournalist of the Year. He holds the Falklands and Gulf Campaign medals, and in 1991 was honoured with the OBE.  

It was on matters closer to home that Michael wrote to his local newspaper, The Surrey Advertiser concerning the plight that faces UK policing, in particular, the challenges now facing his local force, Surrey Police.  

To read what Michael has to say about the cuts to policing click here.

Clearly au fait with the policing plight, Michael makes reference to many of the issues highlighted previously on these pages and those of many other police bloggers. Whilst the content of his letter is focused on the challenges faced by Surrey Chief, Mark Rowley and the likely effects of the tax paying residents of the county, his observations and astute comments apply to each of the 43 forces of England and Wales and therefore to the tax paying community on a national basis. 

Michaels main complaint is that the residents of Surrey have not been adequately consulted on the proposed cuts to the service and the likely consequences. This is synonymous with typical reports from around the country.

To illustrate Michaels clear grasp of the "policing plight" we have reprinted here some of the relevant points that transfer across all police force boundaries.

"In another of those optimistic police pledges, these response teams, sirens blaring, blue lights flashing, promise to be with you within 15 minutes of your call. That will indeed be all improvement because in reality current official response time figures show that it is more often nearer sixty minutes. Last year in the Haslemere area, only 30% of police response time were within target. That is one in three. Surrey police record for quick response is among the worst in the entire country and that’s official".

Officers and regular readers will echo these sentiments, knowing that it is the poor managerial application of resources that has resulted in this travesty of policing, not just in Surrey, but in forces across the UK. Earlier this year, Home Secretary Theresa May ordered that all forces must scrap the Policing Pledge.

Most Police Forces in England and Wales have ignored the Home Secretary’s stated aim to abolish Policing Pledge and Public Confidence targets. Ignoring her instructions on June 29th 2010 is an act of defiance because for 13 years, ACPO officers collectively wrung their hands and rolled over to acquiesce to everything the Home Office and Labour ministers suggested, no matter how silly or damaging. Now, suddenly, they pretend that they do not have to do what the Home Office tell them, even though it makes perfect sense. Over 300 own police officers commented on the Inspector Gadgets blog pages, confirming that their forces were still promoting the pledge:

• Bedfordshire Police

• Cambridgeshire Constabulary

• City Of London Police

• Devon & Cornwall Police

• Dorset Police

• Essex Police

• Hertfordshire Constabulary

• Sussex Police

• Kent Police

• Leicestershire Constabulary

• Lothian and Borders Police

• Northumbria Police

• Metropolitan Police

• Merseyside Police

• Cumbria Constabulary

• West Yorkshire Police

• South Yorkshire Police

• Lancashire Constabulary

• Lincolnshire Police

• Northamptonshire Police

• Nottinghamshire Police

• Surrey Police

• North Yorkshire Police

• Norfolk Constabulary

• Essex Police

• Gloucestershire Constabulary

• British Transport Police

• Cheshire Constabulary

• West Mercia Police

• Derbyshire Constabulary

• Warwickshire Police

• Wiltshire Police

The Policing Pledge was a bureaucratic, top down way of attempting to improve performance which just became a whole lot of targets in disguise. It was wrong to spend £6 million of taxpayers' money to advertise it. The Coalition have said they want to replace bureaucratic accountablity like this with democratic accountability. They scrapped the policing pledge to cut central bureaucracy and ensure a focus on cutting crime. Of course the police need to deliver a high quality service, but this won't be achieved by central dictat. In future it should be local people who judge whether the service they get is good enough, through the Police and Crime Commissioners, and it will be for Commissioners to determine the strategic priorities of the force.

 

Michael again . . .

"In another of those police pledges, Surrey is promised 200 new constables. Great news but given a 20% cut in revenue how will the county afford them? And where can we expect to see them? On the beat? Or more likely ensconced in their offices keeping their seats warm, or attending classes in social engineering? When was the last time you saw a uniformed warranted Policeman patrolling your high street?"

"The make-up of Surrey’s police force is revealing and on closer examination, rather disturbing. Did you know that there are more civilians in it than police officers? We have, at the last count, around 1,840 full time police officers in Surrey but more than 2,500 civilians on the Pay roll".

There are around 143,000 warranted police officers in England and Wales with a basic salary cost of £4.8billion. There are 82,000 civilian or police staff employees that cost in the region of £2.7billion. Much media coverage has focused on the growth in police numbers over recent years, yet the growth in civilian personnel has dwarfed this by comparison. The argument is that civilain staff are cheaper to employ, but is this what the public want? Would they rather not see more police officers making our communities a safer place to live? Would the better allocation of funding on warranted officers not alleviate much of the media and senior officer hype about the liklihood of rising crime in that wake of future austerity cuts?

"There is not a square foot of space to be seen between the parked cars and most of them do not belong to police officers. As the budget shrinks, how many of them will be handed their P45s? How many casualties? We bankroll them. Do we have a right to know?"

Excellent point well made Michael. This echoes what police bloggers have been trying to bring to the public attention for many years.

"Delve further and you find that fewer policemen than you think are on what they call ‘front line’ duties. In other words, out there in the cold, rain and snow protecting life, liberty and property. There are currently only around 460 front line uniformed warranted officers on call in Surrey. But about a third of them will not be available for duty because they are either on leave, (including maternity), at in-service training, on court attendance or absent due to the increasing contagion of days off sick.

So if my arithmetic serves me correctly and with Surreys population at around the one million 100,000 mark, we have only around 300 officers on call spread over three eight-hour shifts. That works out to one front line police officer for every 10,000 people.

And given that Surrey already has one of the lowest detection rates in the country, does it make you feel any safer?"

Once again, this echoes the points in reports from this site and many others, supported by in depth reports from Her Majesties Inspector of Constabulary. Too many of our warranted police officers are not avaialable when and where it's needed most .... at the front line of British policing, not sitting behind a desk, ticking boxes, filling in forms and adding to the over stretched burden of the frontline staff with nonsense e mails regarding targets that should by now have been scrapped.

"What exactly will a police presence represent? A part lime copper-cum counsellor on a nine to five shift, Monday to Friday? And where will that police presence be situated?

How accessible will it be? How visible? How responsive?

We do not want him or her squatting in Tesco or in the back room of the library or along a dim corridor of a council office. Surely we should demand it deserves prestige, some dignity? Perhaps even a blue lamp?

Public confidence of the police has fallen to an all-record low.

PC Plod has lost the plot and all because, according to Sir Denis O’Connor, currently Chief Inspector of Constabulary, the police “have retreated from the streets… they should be more visible, more in touch with the very people they are meant to protect”.

Isn’t that exactly what the rest of us have been saying for years?

Much the same complaint has come from another of our knighted policemen, Sir Ian Blair, the less than successful former head of the Met. How ironic then that these remarks are made by these two former chief constables of Surrey who were, in no small part, responsible for our current policing crisis. The one Mark Rowley has, much to his annoyance, now inherited.

That we have been left out of the loop and all but bypassed by the arrogance of a small number of un-elected people who reckon they and only they, know what is best for us".

Many readers will undoubtedly echo the sentiments so eloquently expressed by Michael as being representative of their forces. Many members of the public too, would confirm that they have little or no consultation in how the cuts will affect their quality of life.

This will be music to the ears of the Home Secretary Theresa May and Nick Herbert, the Police and Justic Minister, who will be pressing for the introduction of Locally Elected Police and Crime Commissioners in 2012. The main driver behind this proposal is that greater local consultation on policing matters will be introduced with Commissioners holding Chief Constables to account for their performance on local issues such as this. 

The invisible and under performing police authorities have been shown to be unfit for the purpose they were intended to fulfill. This point was endorsed by the HMIC inspections of the 43 police authorities, who were shown to have a weak grasp and control of police issues. 

There are arguments for and against the introduction of Localy Elected Commissioners and whilst not seeking to comment on that debate at this juncture, the experience and reporting of Michael Nicholson suggest that this is one area where the new regime needs to improve communication between the police and the tax paying public they serve. 

We are hoping that Michael will be given the opportunity to read these pages and that he might lend his weight to the issues on a national level. Either way, he is to be thanked for his contribution as a tax paying citizen who has earned the respect of us all.

POLICE FORCES HAVE ENOUGH CASH IN RESERVE TO EMPLOY 40,000+ CONSTABLES!

Could someone please enlighten us as to exactly what is going on in the financial management of the police forces in England and Wales?

An article in the Telegraph today reports that a study of the 43 constabularies in England and Wales has found that almost half have more than £20million put aside for “rainy days”.

The article states that these findings call into question recent warnings from chief constables that officers and staff will have to be lost because of budget cuts of up to a fifth.

We would go further than that . . .
We would call into question whether the Chief Officers and their financial advisors are fit and capable to occupy their roles, when NOT ONLY have the majority built up empirical profligate fiefdoms with exhorbitant salaries and fiddled bonus schemes that they have fought so hard to protect, but now it transpires that between the 43 forces there is sufficient bank reserves to employ 40,000+ constables at two year service level rates!

Excuse the language, but what the heck is going on ?????

For many months we have stated from these pages that there is a major "deceitful deflection strategy" being employed by some of our most Senior Police Officers. Crime statistics have been fiddled shamelessly, linked to remuneration packages of up to 15% of Chief Officer salaries. Therea May has scrapped the policing pledge (over half of forces have ignored her instruction), and other performance based targets in favour of the eminently sensible single priority of "Cutting Crime". However, the crime and detection statistical reporting process MUST be thoroughly cleansed of its current impurities and "Gaming" practices if any confidence is to be given to statistics produced by senior police officers. Failure to do this will cast doubt over any genuine success that may be achieved in this area.

The list of profligate spending and misallocation of funds on hair brained projects and events such as the ACPO conference is endless and runs into millions.

I know, let's send out the message that we may not be able to prevent frontline job losses as a result of the Government Cuts. That will deflect from what we've been up to! Better still, as ACPO, we can cut out the proper negotiating channels of the Police Negotiating Board and the rank and file representation of the Federation. We'll compile a report that shows how we can slash the frontline overtime and recommend the payscales are reviewed. Tell you what, we'll make sure those interfering Fed boys don't obstruct our plan by sending the proposal directly to the Home Office. By the time we're done, the Government will be so tied up with pay and conditions reviews, they will have forgotten about the millions we're being overpaid and how much we've screwed the system while our mates Tony and Gordon were in charge. They might even overlook our shiny new 4x4 company cars and all those other lovely perks.

A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said: “Like all public bodies, police forces are obliged to hold reserves against one-off events such as legal challenge. Policing by its nature is exposed to particular unpredictability and risk. It is critical to distinguish between genuine reserves and annual budgets. Most forces will expect to balance budgets at year end. Some forces may opt to build up funds to pay for planned and specific contingencies, in consultation with police authorities, and as such the level of reserves will vary between forces.”

Excuse me for sounding thick . . . .  Why can't police forces take out liability insurance like any private sector company does? The premium costs would save millions, freeing up the bank reserves to be offset against cuts.

The Treasury announced last month that central government funding for the police service would decrease by £1.2billion by 2014-15, exactly what is in the police “bank”. Rank and file leaders said that forces must now use some of the reserves — set aside for unforeseen emergencies and insurance payouts — to ensure front line services are saved.

The Metropolitan Police, the country’s largest force, has £250million in reserves. I know it's simplistic, but that would fund or save 9000+ constable positions. The second wealthiest force is Northumbria, with £82million, potentially funding/saving almost 3000 constables. The West Midlands has reserves of £70million equating to 2,500 constables.

Durham Constabulary, where 1,160 civilian workers have been put on notice, has £13 million in reserves equating to 473 coppers.  

North Wales Police, which may order 250 officers with 30 years experience to retire over the next four years after enforcing a little-known pensions regulation, has £23 million saved, 838 Constables jobs. Sussex Police, which has gone as far as barring officers from listening to music in their patrol cars to save £23,000 in royalty fees, has £50 million in the bank which would employ/retain 1,821 constables . . .  ironic considering it only employs 1,652 constables at present strength!

Paul McKeever, the chairman of the Police Federation which represents rank-and-file officers said: “Reserves are there for rainy days and we have got not just a rainy day but a hurricane force storm going through the police service. Surely if you are going to use those reserves this is the time to use them.” Spot on Paul. If this were the private sector, and those in charge of the purse strings of UK Police PLC had £1.2billion sloshing in a bank account, you can bet that the funds would be used to protect the most valuable resources, in this case, the front line copper.

Meanwhile, senior officers have also warned that the effectiveness of policing across Britain could become a “postcode lottery” because the cuts will fall so unevenly.

WHY? Why is it that no one has looked at this globally? Let's face it, whether the funds come from the Home Office or Council Tax receipts, THIS IS THE TAX PAYERS money we are talking about. Surely there plenty of bean counters within the financial side of the service who could ensure the reserves were allocated as a priority to protect our front line policing? The general public do not want or expect to see diminished police resources, especially where it matters most, in the front line response of policing, those coppers who actually turn out to protect life and property and prevent and detect crime, as opposed to the more dispensable plethora of box ticking auditors.

As well as the wide variations in the amount of reserves held, forces which receive most of their money from the central government, rather than local funding such as council tax, will also suffer disproportionately. They include the constabularies of Merseyside, South Yorkshire, Greater Manchester, West Yorkshire and West Midlands – all of which receive four-fifths of their money direct from the Home Office.

Responding to the concerns, Sir Hugh Orde, the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers, warned of the danger of a “north/south divide” opening up in policing. Isn't it time someone applied some common sense to the allocation of funds? If a force has surplus to its requirements, then those funds should be reallocated to the forces that need them most.

The argument may be simplistic, but perhaps there is a very real danger that it has been allowed to become far too complicated than it need be. Proper due diligence of the financial needs of each force would provide a global solution here. How ridiculous can it be that a force like Sussex has enough reserves to double its strength without blinking whilst other forces are apparently under threat? 

This needs looking at urgently. 

As we have reported previously, millions if not billions of savings could be made if those in positions of influence have the nerve to take action. 

FORCE MERGERS

We have commented in detail in our previous reports that the time has come to seriously consider merging police forces. We have suggested that there could be as few as 10 to correspond with the regional areas. Finally, ACPO are being forced to accept this possibility, with Sir Hugh Order conceding that the "overwhelming majority" of chiefs want to talk about merging 43 forces into more regional units.

These chiefs now accept that mergers will save money. The historic problem is that mergers were politically unacceptable to government, allegedly hard to sell to communities and don't sit easily with the plan for locally-elected commissioners.

When a member of the public calls for a police officer, does he/she look at the officers cap badge or insignia and say "Sorry you can't deal with my problem, you're not from my force area" Of course not, all they care about is that a police officer has turned up to help them. It is no more complicated than that, and any other objection to force mergers is pure obfuscation.

Until now, we would hardly expect Chief Officers to support a strategy that might reduce their number by 75% - after all, "Turkeys don't vote for Christmas". Times have changed though, and mergers must now be given serious consideration going forward.

EFFECTIVE USE OF RESOURCES

* 144,000 police officers
* 80,000 staff  - cost £2.7 billion
* 17,000 PCSO's - 484 million
* 17% Increase in ACPO ranks 1997 to 2010***
* 16% Increase in SMT ranks 1997 to 2010***
* 11% Increase in PC rank 1997 to 2010***
* Only 11% of warranted officers available for "Visible Policing"
* ACPO and SMT ranks basic salary £230million

*** These figures prompt the question: "In view of there being a 17% increase in ACPO and 16% increase in SMT ranks and only an 11% increase in PC ranks, is there not an argument that there are in fact TOO MANY CHIEFS and an ineffective use of the resources of indians?"

Force by force, there is a top heavy ACPO/SMT and Police Staffing level.
Force by force, there is a disproportionate number of specialist or non visible roles.

The policing cuts debate fundamentally comes down to a balancing act between visible and invisible work. Half a century ago, more than a third of a constabulary's manpower was spent on those foot patrols - nabbing burglars with their swag bags.

Today there are forces that dedicate just 11% of constables to patrols because they have expanded forensic units, intelligence teams and largely invisible public protection work like child abuse, domestic violence and sexual offences.

Given the political and community pressure to protect the "front line", most chief constables are planning to cut specialist units, even though they argue they prove their worth. And many chiefs think the pressure to focus on local "visible" crime will grow if the government's pledge to create elected Police and Crime Commissioners goes through.

But surely that's the point of policing? Dealing with what matters to local people?

The time has come to strip away those roles whose value is doubtful, and there are plenty of them.

The time has come for the rainy day reserves to be used to protect the front line. It's not just raining chaps, it's chucking it down.

The time has come for some tough decisions, the right decisions about how the tax payers money is spent. Locally elected police commissioners may not be popular among ACPO ranks and perhaps we should ask ourselves why.

Could it be that a fiscally wise commissioner might actually apply some common sense to the way our money is spent? Whilst this may expose the weaknesses and activities of our Senior Police Officers and their advisors, perhaps the public would welcome the return of the common sense, back to basics, no frills coppering. Perhaps then, we might actually see the good guys start winning and more of the bad guys being caught and dealt with. 

We can but live in hope. 

"CHRISTMAS FOR CRIMINALS" - AN IMPASSIONED PLEA FOR THE FUTURE OF POLICING BY PAUL MCKEEVER - CHAIRMAN OF THE POLICE FEDERATION OF ENGLAND & WALES

Paul McKeever - Chairman Police Federation

of England & Wales

As supporters of the front line police officers in the UK, we are in total support of the efforts of Paul McKeever, Chairman of the Police Federation of England & Wales. Paul is not afraid to put his head above the parapet and stand up for the rank and file officers when it is clear that their position is being unfairly compromised or threatened.

Paul and support team, together with Federation representatives from forces all around the country were aghast recently, when the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), in a digraceful act of betrayal to their junior colleagues, compiled and forwarded a secret document to the Home Office, making 49 recommendations that included drastic slashing cuts to the pay and conditions of federated ranks. In a totally self serving and deceitful act, the Police chiefs submitted the secret document to the Home Office ahead of severe public spending cuts, suggesting that hundreds of millions of pounds could be saved. No recommendation was made by ACPO to accept any reductions to THEIR numbers or conditions.

ACPO have courted contraversy all too often in recent years, with many examples of profligate spending and nefarious activities with a shameful disregard for the rank and file officers who actually police our streets and keep us safe.

We are pleased to reprint here, an informed and impassioned plea from Paul McKeever, regarding the proposed budgetary cauts to UK policing, asking why other areas of the public sector are ring fenced, yet policing, which affects the quality of all of our lives, every day, looks set to face fiscal cuts that will impact on us all. To download the full transcript click here. Alternatively, click on the images below to enlarge.

Over to you Paul ....

STOP POLICE CUTS - £125 MILLION IN CUTS MUST NOT COMPROMISE THE FRONTLINE

On 27th May 2010, Nick Herbert, the policing minister announced the force by force budget cuts of £125 million in the written ministerial statements in Parliament. 

In our latest report, we look in detail at the existing costs incurred, on a force by force basis, enabling us to demonstrate that these cuts can be delivered by prudent Chief Officers and their respective police association, without compromising the frontline officer and resources.  

We explore four key options amongst those available :- 

• OPTION 1: Reducing PCSO Strength
• OPTION 2: Reducing police staff  
• OPTION 3: Reducing non staff costs  
• OPTION 4: Shared cuts non staff/PCSO/police staff

We also list numerous other areas that are more worthy of scrutiny and consideration for cost cutting than essential frontline salaries and resources.

As police authorities and Chief Constables decide how they will deliver their share of the £125million in budget cuts, there is simply no case to answer in allowing frontline resources to be compromised or in any way affected by the cuts. There are far too many other areas, whose contributory value is surrounded by doubt as to their worth and effectiveness in delivering improved operational efficiency.

To read or download the full report click here.