TOO MANY CHIEFS - PART 3 - THE FULL REPORT

As promised, we are pleased to be able to announce that our report "TOO MANY POLICE CHIEFS" is now available on this site for download or viewing.  It has also been added to the "View Our Reports" sidebar on the right of the page. Click here to view the report now.

We would like to take this opportunity to thank Inspector Gadget, whose insightful words and views bring a sense of reality that can so often be lost in numbers and statistics.

The report is intentionally hard hitting, focusing on the profligacy and waste, both financially and operationally that occurs within the higher ranks of British policing.

A widely held view from the front line of policing is that there are “Too many chiefs and not enough Indians on the ground”. Officers report that their forces are top heavy with Chiefs and Senior Management ranks, causing confusion with a blurring of

responsibilities. This causes inconsistencies in strategy with one Chiefs’ flavour of the month project being superseded by another, often opposite viewpoint, sometimes within weeks or months of the first being issued.

Officers feel that their forces employ an unnecessary number of police staff (civilian support personnel), who apparent sole purpose in life is to bury the front line, public facing officer with e mails, administrative tasks, data capture requests, box ticking and apparently valueless instructions that tie them up in administrative jobs, keeping them from front line duties..

Many front line experienced officers openly state that it is not a shortage of people or finances within the force that is the problem. They state there are adequate numbers to do the job, it is just that too many officers are assigned to non operational or clerical type roles when they should be “on the street” helping to reduce the burden of the front line response teams.

It is imperative that a closer examination of existing resources, Chief Officer, non operational and police staff now be conducted. This report is intended to stimulate informed debate by taking a closer look at the numbers and ranks of officers and police staff engaged and highlighting for the first time, the cost by rank incurred by each force, and whether these costs represent the best value for money the tax payers pound can buy.

Over the pages contained in the report, we provide detailed reports on officer numbers, split by rank and force, together with the costs that these numbers create. Interleaved between the reports we provide explanatory notes with the findings, bullet point observations and summaries.

The report contains a 6 page conclusions summary, where we bring all the content together to point out the more obvious, non front line areas where many millions can be saved without compromising essential resourcing.

We are aware that these pages are monitored by all ranks of policing, associated police and criminal justice agencies, political parties and the media. For many of the higher management ranks of policing, some of the content will make uncomfortable reading as it will cause many consciences to be pricked. We make no apologies for that. 

For the powers that be who may read this report , those who have the authority to implement real change and reform within our police service, we would urge you to listen to the heartfelt needs of your front line, grass roots officers. You may be surrounded by advisors, many of whom have little knowledge of front line policing, including civil servants and senior police officers, whose errors and personal agendas have created so many of the problems that now face the service. We would urge you not to always believe  what you’re told by your advisors. 

If you truly desire to bring about the reforms that would most benefit the tax paying public, listen carefully to the views and concerns of the front line officers. You will find that their views and thoughts echo those of the average citizen who you have been elected to represent.

TOO MANY POLICE CHIEFS - PART 2 - THE BONUS SCANDAL

Following our article earlier this week  "Too many Police Chiefs" we would like to introduce you to The Bureau of Investigative Journalism,  that is looking to lift the lid off exhorbitant public sector bonus payments, including those of the most senior of our police officers. 

The arrival of a new Liberal/Tory Government committed to opening the books of public sector profligate spending has resulted in Senoir Police Chiefs hitting the headlines this week, protesting that the gravy train bonus scheme they have enjoyed was "forced upon them". 

A delegation of chiefs has told Theresa May that bonuses are not part of the country's "policing culture" and should be dumped. They said the system of making special payments was imposed on police despite concerns that private sector remuneration was not suitable for their unique role.

Where were the protestations and signs of dissent when the bonuses were introduced? For at least 5 or 6 years many of these fat cats have gleefully jumped aboard the gravy train and happily taken their millions in this orchestrated, deceitful practice.

The Bureau website explains their raison d'etre:-

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism is an independent, not-for-profit body that aims to produce the highest quality investigative journalism in the public interest. Our work will be on stories of significance – stories with clear issues at their heart.

Our journalistic ambition is to expose the exploitation of the weak by the strong. We will seek to reveal the failures of those in power to fulfil the trust placed in them. And we will be led by the ambition that, through revelation, real and positive change might occur.

We will do this impartially and apolitically, governed by the highest standards of journalistic independence. The Bureau will not lobby. Nor will we align ourselves with political parties or pressure groups.

Our stories, and our stories alone, will define us.

Focus

The focus of the Bureau will be on government and business: we will shine a light into their powerful worlds and on any abuses therein.

From flaws in the judicial system, to political profiteering, to human rights abuses on the production line, to corrupt arms deals, we will seek to reveal the facts that otherwise would remain hidden.

We will also focus on other powerful institutions, such as unions, religious groups, lobbyists, universities, hospitals and the media itself if they are seen to be abusing the public trust.

Our journalism will be patient and persistent. We will expose inappropriate practices, hold them up to public scrutiny and we will continue to do so until change comes about.

As such, we will stay with the issues. As long as there is more to be told, or there are more people to inform, we will persevere.

The following is an extracted adaptation from their website that is particulalry relevant to our recent report.  

Secret policemen's bonuses

May 21st, 2010

Why are so many police forces refusing to provide details of the bonuses paid to their chief constables?

 Regulations under the Local Government Statue no 3322, will compel every force to publish all remuneration details of their highest paid staff, including amounts spent on expenses and bonuses in their next accounts.

 The Bureau have been investigating bonuses within the police force for several months. Using Freedom of Information requests they have asked each of the 43 constabularies about such payments to their senior officers.

No answer
 Many forces have refused to provide the details about this contentious issue. (See the table below)

In an attempt to force the police to provide the information the Bureau went to the Information Commission. They discovered that others had already brought the issue to the ICO, but no decision had been made.

No information
 The Bureau pressed further.

They wanted to know how many complaints had been made but we were told that to obtain this information they would need to send in an FOI request to the Information Commissioner.

It is clear the police are being anything but transparent. 
 
Hidden payments 
 
This is all the greater a concern when you realise that the police receive ‘extra payments’, often undisclosed.

 These include mortgage payments private health insurance, private car costs, private school fees, honorarium payments and private membership of clubs.

 These extra payments are above and beyond the current national pay scales that have been centrally determined by the Police Negotiating Body (PNB), and remain not properly regulated.

 Bonus payments are in the spotlight. Keeping them secret is only going to make them more contentious.
 Good Cop, Bad Cop

We have provided the Bureau with an advance copy of our report "Too Many Police Chiefs" containing details of senior officer pay and a comprehensive analysis of police expenditure and costs to assist with their efforts.
 
A full copy of our 100+ page report will be available from these pages shortly.
 
Meanwhile, Senior Officers will undoubtedly continue the media charade that they were forced to accept such payments, that they were forced to create and implement barmy schemes that have obstructed front line coppers from doing the real job for so long. Do they really expect the public to be taken in?
 
The sense of public outrage that followed the MP expense scandal looks set to be eclipsed by the TOP COP PAY & CRIME SCANDAL. When the enormity of profligate waste and spending some of these officers have been responsible for, emerges as it surely must, it will be interesting to see how many times. the lame explanation of  "We were told to do it" is trotted out. Front line officers have long since remarked that there are Too Many Chiefs. Perhaps the prospect of force mergers may provide the natural solution.
 
Well done to those at the Bureau, stick with it chaps!

TOO MANY CHIEFS? PART 1 - THE BONUS SCANDAL EXPOSED

The arrival of a new Liberal/Tory Government committed to opening the books of  public sector profligate spending has resulted in Senoir Police Chiefs hitting the headlines this week, protesting that the gravy train bonus scheme they have enjoyed was "forced upon them".

The Times article sums it up succinctly.

Chiefs plead for an end to their own bonuses

A delegation of chiefs has told Theresa May that bonuses are not part of the country's "policing culture" and should be dumped.

They said the system of making special payments to all ranks was imposed on police despite concerns that private sector remuneration was not suitable for their unique role.

The bonus system was covered during a wide-ranging discussion between a handful of chief constables, the Home Secretary and Police Minister Nick Herbert.

How things have changed since last year when ACPO intervened to stop The Times  finding out which chiefs were receiving bonuses and how much they were getting.

In a report we are compiling entitled "Too Many Police Chiefs", we dig deeper than ever before into the numbers of senior police officers and the effect of their salaries, bonus payments and perks, revealing the scandalous waste of millions of the taxpayers cash with officially sourced financial data and observations about what must be done to restore a fair balance to UK policing.  We will include some of the graphics that illustrate some of the highlights from the reports below.

CLICK ON THE GRAPHIC TO SEE IT LARGER, then hit the back button to return to this page.

The report will reveal how rationalisation of the senior officer rank structure would slash £91million off the police budget and improve police efficiency.

We look at police staffing and show how £1.4billion of savings can be made.  We look in detail at the non staffing costs of £2.7billion and show how more effective management of resources can make savings of around £270million.

Our full report will be available on this site over the next few days. In the meantime, here is an extract that summarises our thoughts on the Chief Officer bonus rip off.

"All that's necessary for the forces of evil to win in the world is for enough good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke (British Statesman and Philosopher 1729-1797)

How these words ring true when applied to so many of the upper ranks of British policing.

Where were the protestations and signs of dissent when the bonuses were introduced? For at leat 5 or 6 years many of these fat cats have gleefully jumped aboard the gravy train and happily taken their millions in this orchestrated, deceitful practice.

The ACPO private 'boys club' :-

Are paid scandalously high performance target bonuses, often linked to decreases in crime.

Knowingly manipulate or condone the fiddling of crime & detection figures on which these outrageous bonuses depend. The practice is called 'Gaming' and is well documented and has been conveniently overlooked by Her Majesties Inspector of Constabulary.

Secretly pocket bonuses and perks, such as private health care and car allowances worth tens of thousands of pounds.

Earn excessive salaries – approximately 5 or 6 times the national average wage, many earn more than the Prime Minister.

Are proportionately too large as a group, draining essential front line resource funding with their scandalous bonuses & perks.

Direct street-duty officers to concentrate on higher volume ‘advantageous’ misdemeanors where a detection is certain.

In doing so, they divert front line attention from more urgent calls for assistance to the public.

Pay lip-service to what the public really want, blaming front liners when their latest schemes and mad cap projects fail to deliver.

Suck-up to their current political masters by concentrating too heavily on diversity issues and crimes.

Are too politically influenced and immersed to provide an independent police service for the public.

Complain about being "politicised", yet make statements intended to support this government policy or undermine that one.

Could frequently be found at Home Office press conferences and their comments are often helpfully attached to government press releases.

Flood the streets with PCSO’s – a cheaper option than fully empowered police constables.

Are profligate and wasteful with public funds, wasting millions on projects & benefits for senior officers (ACPO & NPIA).

Are financially incentivized and motivated to the detriment of the public interest and grass roots policing.

Maintain an unhealthy degree of secrecy about matters of public interest.

Dictate national policing policies via their unaccountable private clubs – ACPO and the NPIA

Have, by their conduct replaced the honour and distinction of achieving a high rank in public service with greed.

As a group, lack consistency and vision with their policies and strategies, losing respect with grass roots officers.

Are totally out of touch with the needs of the public and woefully oblivious to the concerns of front line officers.

As far back as January 2009, Heather Brooke, who famously exposed the MP expenses scandal attempted to quantify the vast sums of profligate waste that was involved in the Chief Officer expenses, bonus and perks scandal.

The police chiefs who accepted bonuses not only refused to reveal the amounts, but also declined to say what they were for.

They cited the Data Protection Act, claiming that it would be an invasion of their privacy for the public to know the details of their salary and benefits. In the private sector, Chief executives of public companies who must disclose this information in their annual reports.

The Data Protection Act is intended to safeguard the privacy of private individuals – not to help public officials to avoid accountability.

In the case of chief constables’ pay, the public has a right to know how much and for what they are paying. Heather asked "Are bonuses paid for cutting particular types of crime? Has this resulted in changes to the way crimes are recorded?"

Had Heather been successful in opening the books, she would have discovered, as one frontline officer put it "A scandal of such enormity that it would pale the MP scandal into insignificance".

Rodger Patrick, the retired DCI with the West Midlands Force revealed the practice of 'Gaming' late in 2009, illustrating the mass deceit that has been foisted upon the British public by senior police officers fiddling the books of crime statistics for thei own greedy financial gains.

In business, when a company is audited the profligacy, waste and deceitful conduct of the senior management rises to the surface, when all the books are examined.

It is only now, when the Lib/Tory audtors are on the verge of discovering the full extent of the outrageous plundering of the public purse that senior ranks have perpetrated, that the 'worm is turning' and they are bleating that the bonuses and perks were forced upon them by a Labour administration. HOGWASH! Had they put their case straight away, and refused the payments, we might be more inclined to believe them. As it stands, these after the event defences (and many more will follow) do not hold water.

Senior Police Officers - Guilty as charged. Now will the new Government have the courage to do something about it?

The culprits have taken far more than 30 pieces of Judas silver' - it is time they were brought to book for it.


http://thinbluelineuk.blogspot.com/

LABOUR REPORT CARD 1997 - 2010 : "F" = FAILURE

TWELVE years ago, Britain was crying out for change from a divided, exhausted Government. Today we are there again.

In 1997, "New" Labour, shorn of its destructive hard-Left doctrines and with an energetic and charismatic leader, seemed the answer. Tony Blair said things could only get better, and few doubted him. But did they get better? Well, you could point to investment in schools and shorter hospital waiting lists and say yes, some things did - a little.

 But the real story of the Labour years is one of under-achievement, rank failure and a vast expansion of wasteful government interference in everyone's lives.

Labour can no longer disguise the failures of Labour in Government over the last 12 years.

Who do YOU want to lead the country?

 Blair took office with bulging coffers, an invincible majority and weak opposition, and he and Gordon Brown could and SHOULD have worked miracles. Instead we are billions in debt with major failings in every sector where there should have been major progress and success stories.

They FAILED on law and order, their mantra "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" becoming a national joke. Knife murders are soaring. Smirking criminals routinely walk free in the name of political correctness, while decent people live in a virtual police state of snooping cameras and petty officials empowered to spy and to punish.

Labour FAILED on schools. Yes, facilities improved - but four in 10 kids leave those shiny classrooms still unable to read, write or add up properly. We are plummeting down international league tables for maths and literacy, but every year "grade inflation" ensures record GCSE and A-level passes to fuel Government propaganda.

Labour FAILED on health - spending billions on clipboard-ticking target managers instead of on frontline care.

Labour FAILED on immigration, opening our borders without any regard to the consequences. Illegal migrants and bogus asylum seekers poured in.

Labour FAILED the children they claimed to have made their priority. After 12 years of Blair and Brown, Britain is officially the WORST country in the developed world in which to grow up.

Most disgracefully of all, Labour FAILED our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving them to die through chronic under-funding and the shambolic leadership of dismal Defence Secretaries like Bob Ainsworth.

As our forces in two war zones suffered, the scale of Government waste at home was mind-boggling and tragic:

Billions blown employing a useless layer of public service middle-managers like those who condemned Baby P to die.

Billions more spent, insanely, making benefits more lucrative than a pay cheque - creating a huge, idle underclass for whom work is a dirty word. And all along the Government has had one overriding concern: Itself.

Blair and Brown's puerile feud has long been a cancer at the heart of New Labour, their divisions often paralysing the country.

Labour's driving ambition has not been to improve Britain. It has been to retain power at all costs - with no lie judged too great in its ruthless and relentless self-promotion.

They promised a referendum on Europe. They claimed they had ended "boom and bust". They tried to con the public with promises of endless investment, when they knew they would have to cut.

At the 2005 election, we believed Labour had many failings but gave them one last chance over a lacklustre Tory party.

 They have had that chance and failed.

We need a fresh Government with a genuine will to win the war in Afghanistan and the commitment to give our forces whatever they need to do it.

 

This mustl not be a Government that merely talks the talk, as Labour has. It MUST ACT.

We hope, and pray, that the next Government will have the guts and the determination to do these things.

The new Government must earn voters' trust by setting out their promising policies in detail and delivering on those promises.

Whichever party is elected, they must use the same energy and determination with which they have ignited the political debate these past months to breathe new life into Britain.

That means genuine, radical change to encourage self-improvers, not wasting time on internal party wrangling or pandering to the forces of political correctness. It also means an honesty and transparency of Government that we have not seen for years.

We are still a great people and, put to the test, will respond to the challenges we face.

One thing is certain - After three disappointing terms from Labour, we can’t go on like this.

Make your vote count this week

We believe - and pray - that fresh leadership will put the great back into Great Britain.

To see headlines of how Labour failed in your region, click the report link for your area. For more detail click the appropriate data link.

EAST MIDLANDS REGION REPORT CARD

EAST MIDLANDS REGION DATA

EASTERN REGION REPORT CARD

EASTERN REGION DATA

NORTH EAST REGION REPORT CARD

NORTH EAST REGION DATA

NORTH WEST REGION REPORT CARD

NORTH WEST REGION DATA

SOUTH EAST REGION REPORT CARD

SOUTH EAST REGION DATA

SOUTH WEST REGION REPORT CARD

SOUTH WEST REGION DATA

WEST MIDLANDS REGION REPORT CARD

WEST MIDLANDS REGION DATA

YORKSHIRE & THE HUMBER REPORT CARD

YORKSHIRE & THE HUMBER DATA

Britain feels broken . . . and the Government is out of excuses.

CRIME OF THE CENTURY - THE DECEPTION OF FALLING CRIME

It is time someone put the public straight about crime in the UK.

As expected, on the run up to the election, Nu Labour continue to perpetuate their conspiracy of deceit, that crime is falling faster than a stone thanks to their strategies.

A few days ago, the Times Online ran a piece entitled “Police record lower number of crimes than when Labour came to power in 1997”

In fairness to the Times, the article was balanced enough to make reference to the public mistrust of national crime statistics.

That mistrust is well founded.

Let us dispel the myths and state the facts so that the public can make up their own mind.
 “Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, said that if there was to be an honest debate on crime the Conservatives should accept what repeated surveys all confirm: that crime has fallen and is still falling”.

 An honest debate Mr Johnson? . . . . Bring it on!   Only, let us decide what will be on the agenda . . . .

Explain to us how you can rely so heavily on a two tiered crime measurement system that contains such disparities. BCS in 2009 suggested 10 million crimes were committed, yet only 4.7million were reported to the police. The British Crime Survey every year reports that actual crime is more than double that reported, and in fact less than 40% of crime is reported due to lack of confidence in your system. Could it be that your reliance on the two tier system has more to do with the fact that it is far easier to manipulate volume crime such as we have witnessed with vehicle and damage incidents ?

Explain to us how, whilst on your parties watch, you can justify the complexity of two major changes in the way crime is recorded that have subsequently enabled crime statistics to be so easily fiddled. The Home Office Counting Rules [1989] expanded the number of crimes recorded by including a greater number of minor crimes. The National Crime Recording Standard [2002] sought to make the process of crime recording more victim oriented. The introduction of these changes rendering figures before and after their introduction incomparable.

Outline for us, why continue to mislead the public about crime going down, when in fact you have overseen so many changes to the recording process that encourage the downward distortion of the enormity of crime. Shall we provide you examples? Ok… where a house is broken into, car keys taken and the vehicle driven away, only one offence of burglary [no vehicle related crime] is recorded. Worse, let us say for example, a communal housing block is entered via one door, twenty flats are entered, twenty sets of car keys taken and twenty vehicles stolen. Twenty victims, forty crimes. Under your changes, only one offence of burglary is recorded. Frontline police officers tell us of their frustration of how they are being forced to enact your deceitful conspiracy, with many, many more similar examples on record.

Explain to us why so many thousands of matters remain reported merely as incidents and not captured under the recording of crime. Perhaps you would care to divulge to us the numbers of incidents that should have been upgraded to a crime thereby revealing a more accurate reflection of the volume of crime. We’re assuming you will either not deliver that information or ensure it is suitably doctored so it continues to conceal the nefarious activities endorsed by your Government.

Admit the facts, that your party claims of a “significant fall in crime over the last decade” are in fact a fallacious headline masking a web of conspiracy and deceit about the recording and reporting of crime. Concede the truth, that in real terms, much of the fluctuation in crime rate had more to do with a number of major changes in the way crime was recorded than any direct influence of the Labour Party. Admit that the reported decline in crime has more to do with something criminologists call “attrition”, opposed to any specific Labour strategy. This is reflected by a massive reduction in the reporting of crime by the public (British Crime Survey suggests that less than 40% of real crime is reported for various reasons).

Tell us why violent crime carried out by children and teenagers, for example, has increased by one-third over three years. Frontline police are clear why this is happening. Rather than concentrating on persistent and violent youth offenders, they are busy creating crime to your government orders. Minor crime is going on all the time. Police merely “pluck something out of the air”, searching the pockets of a student for cannabis, for example, in order to detect a crime and so fulfill targets. Explain how you justify as one police officer put it : “bringing more and more people to justice - but they are the wrong people.”

Perhaps you would enlighten us as to why you measure Police performance in 'sanction detections'? [The term used for offences detected or cleared by charging someone, issuing a PND (penalty notice) or giving them a caution if they will admit the offence, have no previous record and have not recently received a PND. In order to meet your targets, police are now classifying incidents as crimes that would previously have been dealt with informally, classified differently or ignored. Section 5 of the Public Order Act allows police to arrest anyone for 'threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour within the sight of a
person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress'. Before the arrival of sanction detections, the police only used Section 5 for a public order offence, but now that police can now claim a sanction detection for an arrest under Section 5, minor crime and even innocuous activities appear in a different light. Could it be that your record of one new offence for each day in Government has enabled you to criminalise society just so that you can report increased detections and falling crime? Or are we being cynical?

Let us ask you to astound us with your honesty and ask you to comment on this. The rising numbers of sanction detections give the impression that the police are waging an effective war against crime, but, as one officer interviewed put it: 'We are bringing more and more people to justice but they are the wrong people.' Like other targets, they measure what was chosen to be measured, by Chief Officers in collaboration with the Home Office, not whether the public are getting a good service. 'Arresting someone for sending an offensive text on their mobile phone after a domestic dispute gets a sanction detection. The painstaking, time-consuming work of tracking down a missing child does not. A child stealing a Mars bar earns the same detection as a murder. Murders obviously require a lot more police time than a Mars bar. Officers are now forced by Senior Officer strategies to get involved in police work that does not earn a target. "We put less effort into areas we are not judged on."'

You’re not off the hook yet Mr Johnson . . . Plenty more for you to be honest about if you dare. Sixty five over-40s are now ‘made a criminal’ each day, which is confirmed by your very own Government figures. The number of people who are over 50 and enter the criminal justice system for the first time increased by 46.3 percent between 2000/01 and 2007/08, from 16,400 to 24,000. Meanwhile in the 40-49 age group, there was a 57.4 per cent rise to 32,900. How do you justify the targets imposed by your Government that have resulted in the mass criminalisation of a generation? Your party have introduced a range of offences aimed at householders which can be dealt with through on-the-spot fines. In doing so, you have criminalised a generation and treated tens of thousands of law-abiding middle-aged and elderly citizens like villains. Again, there are thousands of examples as evidence of your mismanagement. 

Explain for us, how the prisons are bursting at the seams with offenders, with numbers increasing every month, insurers report daily about increasing property theft claim numbers, and yet crime is somehow decreasing. Where are the offences these increased numbers of prisoners have committed? At the same time detection rates are declining. How do you explain this with increased occupancy reaching the stage where you are committing millions to increasing the size of the prison estate? The public smell a rat Mr Johnson. The game is almost up.

Speaking of Gaming . . . . .

How can you permit, condone or encourage the practice of manipulating crime statistics, tacitly approved by senior officers, police watchdogs and your Office? The techniques – dubbed “gaming” – are used to create the illusion that fewer crimes are being committed and that a bigger proportion are being solved. These practices inflame the debate about crime statistics, anger the frontline officers ordered to implement them, and wipe out any remaining public confidence in crime statistics and your claims about reducing crime and increased detections.

The techniques which you are surely aware of include: “Cuffing” – in which officers make crimes disappear from official figures by either recording them as a “false report” or downgrading their seriousness. For example, a robbery in which a mobile phone is stolen with violence or threats of violence is recorded as “theft from the person”, which is not classed as a violent crime. “Stitching” – from “stitching up”, whereby offenders are charged with a crime when there is insufficient evidence. Police know that prosecutors will never proceed with the case but the crime appears in police records to have been “solved”. “Skewing” – when police activity is directed at easier-to-solve crimes to boost detection rates, at the expense of more serious offences such as sex crimes or child abuse. “Nodding” – where clear-up rates are boosted by persuading convicted offenders to admit to crimes they have not committed, in exchange for inducements such as a lower sentence.

The academics call this ‘gaming’ but front line police officers call it fiddling the figures, massaging the books or, the current favourite term, ‘good housekeeping’. It is a bit like the police activities that we all hoped had stopped in the 1970s.

Simon Reed, vice-chairman of the Police Federation, which represents front line officers, said: “This demonstrates that senior officers are directing and controlling widespread manipulation of crime figures. The public are misled, politicians can claim crime is falling and chief officers are rewarded with performance-related bonuses. 

Rank and file officers were told in 2002 that informal police warnings could no longer be counted as a detection for common assaults. Within 12 months the number of recorded common assaults dropped from 22,000 to 3,000 while thousands more crimes switched to the category “other woundings”. Such a rapid adjustment confirms the organisational nature of the practice and must contain co-ordination and direction by management.

The scale of the ‘gaming’ behaviours, is confirmed from disillusioned front line sources that senior officers are directly orchestrating the behaviour or turning a blind eye to it. You must be aware that other gaming techniques are still being used in forces across the country. The use of “stitching” is “significant”, while “cuffing” has continued after the introduction of Home Office rules which were supposed to guarantee and standardise the way crimes are recorded.

“Cuffing” can involve a situation where a victim of crime is accused of making a false crime report, and is therefore treated like a suspect rather than an injured party. Mr Johnson…. You cannot have members of the public who have been victims of crime coming to the police for help and being treated like suspects. That is not right and you are eroding confidence in the police by either condoning or supporting these practices. How can you continue to preach the gospel of increasing public confidence in the police whilst permitting these practices to continue?

And now we turn to what is perhaps the most serious crime of all . . . . . a crime that if ever revealed in its entirety, will surely eclipse the MP’s expenses scandal.

We have come to expect politicians to be economical with the truth, but when the integrity of our most senior police officers is called into question, with suspicions about conspiratorial and deceitful conduct, the time has come for a very public enquiry.

We have reported on this subject previously in our reports:-

http://thinbluelineuk.blogspot.com/2009/12/top-cops-pay-crime-scandal.html
http://thinbluelineuk.blogspot.com/2010/01/top-cops-are-still-fiddling-crime.html

FINALLY Mr Johnson, we would invite you to disclose the truth about the whole sordid affair of crime figure manipulation and the financial inducements paid to Senior Police Chiefs to perpetuate the conspiracy.

The orchestrators of this deceit are the Government and Home Office, aided and abetted by senior police officers, who are obscenely rewarded for their part in the plot.

Front line police officers are unable to untangle this web of deceit, despite protestations by many with an informed and accurate perspective at the public coal face. Distortion of the figures has led to misallocation of financial and human resources, resulting in the public being deprived of the policing it deserves. The gravy train of police funds has been milked and the “con” disguised through years of bureaucracy, performance targeting and distraction techniques, have made the task of basic policing more difficult to deliver.

There is plenty of evidence that there are senior officers who are paid grossly disproportionate salaries and bonuses for perpetuating the deceitful illusion of crime reduction.

The honour and distinction of achieving a high rank in public service has been replaced with greed, with a convenient blindness to the immorality of their actions.

A full, transparent 43 force public enquiry is needed to force the disclosure of these illicit payments and inducements to perpetuate the politicised myth of falling crime.

The consequences are dire and plain for all to see. The victims in all of this are the tax payer, who is deprived of the police service his contributions are intended to provide, and the front line police officer who is forced into silent acceptance and resignation of a job that has become enmeshed with bureaucracy, risk averse policing and fiddled crime figures. Who could blame officers that have no faith or respect for senior officers and politicians who orchestrate a criminal deception of the highest magnitude for personal gain, and then expect the staff on the ground to do their dirty work with no resistance?

The secrecy surrounding these payments serves only to feed suspicion of a boys’ club stitch-up. Chief constables need to be open on pay and perks if trust is to be restored, not only with the public, but also with the front line officers who also feel cheated. Respect for Chief Officers is at an all time low and we have to sympathise with the front line officers who feel they are doing the dirty work of the Chiefs, betraying the public trust and feeling pressured into compliance.

No one should be surprised to see the dramatic changes to the crime reporting processes that occurred during the Labour ministry. What a clever game of smoke and mirrors they have played. Obfuscate, disguise, confuse or even blatantly lie about the statistics to prevent the truth getting out to the public, that they have failed spectacularly to handle the problem honestly and effectively.

The wider public have been well and truly conned by Labour. The police rank and file have become embroiled in a tangled web of deceit. The challenge is a scary one, because it involves the unwinding of many years of conspiratorial, deceitful conduct. But change it must if we are to move forward.

Whoever assumes the mantle of Home Secretary will face many obstacles from the media and Labour, who will not want the truth revealed for fear of the damaging consequences. The fact is public confidence is shattered almost beyond recognition and it will take a supreme dose of courage and perseverance to take the necessary remedial action necessary to start healing the wounds that have been inflicted.