Nick Herbert's plan to get better value for money from our police

Nick Herbert MP, Shadow Minister for Police Reform, has - this morning - launched a mid-term policy review paper on his brief.  In The Telegraph he writes this:

"The lessons of New York are important ones. Better police performance was achieved by a combination of factors: a significant increase in police numbers on the streets, robust community policing and powerful reforms to enhance the accountability of managers. The changes were driven by an elected mayor who answered to the people, and an inspirational police chief who innovated and led his force... The founder of modern policing, Sir Robert Peel, famously said: "The police are the public and the public are the police." Police forces grew out of the localities. Restoring the accountability of the police to local communities will be an important counterbalance to the areas where more effective national co-ordination of policing will be required, such as in the fight against serious crime."

The key themes that are being put out to consultation are summarised below:

• Britain gets poor value for money in the war on crime. Every household in England and Wales spends £550 a year on law and order - two-thirds of which goes to the police.  Britain is at the top of the OECD spending league when it comes to the proportion of national income spent on tackling crime but, amongst developed nations, only Australians are more likely to be victims of crime.  The report: "Less than a quarter of crimes are detected and receive a sanction... Increasing levels of funding have not led to corresponding increases in arrests and detections... On any available measure, police productivity has fallen, meaning that taxpayers have not received value for money."
• Inadequate police visibility. Although's Britain's police officer numbers at 140,000 are at a record high that is still a low number by international standards.  In England and Wales there are 264 officers per 100,000 members of the population compared to 387 in France and 457 in New York.
• Local accountability must replace central control. Only 14% of officers' time is spent on patrol.  19.3% of time is consumed by paperwork.  The report: "The police's hands must be untied to give them the discretion they need.  Forms and process which do not help the police to deliver a better service to the public should be eliminated.  Central direction and targets should be replaced by locally accountable leadership and priority setting."
• Police structure must change.  The paper rejects the status quo and the Government's failed attempts at regionalisation.  It proposes two alternatives.  One option would keep the 43 forces and their current range of responsibilities but would add two ingredients: local accountability to ensure the development of community policing and effective leadership from the centre to drive cross-force collaboration against serious crime.  The second option would see the 43 forces lose responsbilities to a Serious Crime Force, answerable to the Home Secretary.
• Greater professionalisation.  The paper proposes a Sandhurst-style staff college to assess and support the development of a national cadre of senior officers who could be deployed across forces and responsibilities.  It also recommends that a more flexible police service might emerge if overtime costs are reduced and police officers receive a higher basic salary instead.  The paper also rejects positive discrimination and affirmative action as "counter-productive" routes to the creation of a more representative police service.
• Local and democratic accountability. In the most significant recommendation of the report there is the suggestion that directly elected police commissioners should replace police authorities.  Chief constables would retain operational responsibility for day-to-day policing but commissioners could appoint and dismiss them.  The paper also proposes a "right to policing." Local communities would gain a right to regular beat meetings - involving councillors - and access to detailed, transparent information on crime levels in their localities.

Download a pdf of 'Policing for the People'.

Comments

[Denis Cooper]

From the Telegraph news item:

"Directly elected police commissioners should replace police authorities."

I doubt that this proposal would be the key reform. Direct election of an individual would only work well if the voters could form a sensible judgement about who was the best candidate, and that would depend on the size of the constituency. How could voters across 3 counties choose between candidates for the commissioner to oversee Thames Valley Police force? They would all be unknown quantities.

And if a directly elected commissioner turned out to a dud (or even worse, went completely off the rails) how could he be removed?

"The role of the Home Secretary over local policing would be substantially reduced and re-focused on national policing and security."

Money is the key: there can only be local control over policing if it is funded
by taxes raised locally rather than by grants from central government.

"There would be a direct and transparent funding arrangement between voters
and elected commissioners so that the public can judge the effectiveness of
the policing they pay for."

Which means that funds provided by the taxpayers in a town for policing that town must be kept in a separate police budget for that town, not put into a regional or sub-regional pot from which the town is then given some notional allocation.

It comes down to reversing not only what this government has done, but preceding governments over a century and half, dissolving forces such as
Thames Valley and the new euro-regional forces, returning local policing
to locally funded town and county forces.

[Winchester whisperer]

What's the number of officers per 100,000 population in London?

[Umbrella Man]

More police officers will mean more spending but will George Osborne give Nick Herbert any extra cash?

[William Norton]

Nick Herbert was very good on the Today programme this morning: far better briefed than the BBC. Stourton, the presenter, kept spluttering that these ideas weren't policy yet. That's right, was the response, it's a consultation paper so we're consulting before we finalise the policy. Seems sensible (like the ideas being floated) but Stourton seemed to have trouble with the concept of actually consulting people over a consultation paper. That's what 10yrs of Blairism does for you.

[aristeides]

It is astonishing that Australia appears to be the crime capital of the world. Can this really be right? It feels about 100 times safer than the UK.

[Umbrella Man]

I agree William but the consultation on whether we should have a national serious crime police force or just more coordination was a bit lame. We need a bit more taking the lead and a bit less consultation.

[Alan S]

Good stuff, Cameron may be following the crowd on the NHS and Kyoto but he's taking on the establishment with police reform and the family.

[Arthur Burgess]

I welcome most of these proposals. I have just one reservation and this is the Sandhurst style staff college.I just do not think this will be acceptable to rank and file Police Officers and will cause tremendous resentment and a drop in morale.

[Tory T]

New York also benefited from the zero-tolerance policies of the Mayor, Guiliani. He assisted the police by getting tough on small, everyday behaviours that showed disrespect for the environment and others; broken windows in buildings, aggressive begging, people who held up traffic through "jaywalking" were given tickets.

If more visible police were able to hand out fines to litter louts and teens who cause trouble, and landlords/owners who did not clear up eyesores were pursue, civic pride and its twin, law and order, would return to the cities.

Local mayors and councils must assist the new police structure with a will to fight petty crime and disorder.

[malcolm]

Arthur Burgess, why?

[William Norton]

Arthur Burgess:I have just one reservation and this is the Sandhurst style staff college.I just do not think this will be acceptable to rank and file Police Officers and will cause tremendous resentment and a drop in morale.

What is the effect of the real Sandhurst on the real army?

[Andrew Woodman]

I remember when I first read this in the Direct Democracy handbook, I thought this idea is a real radical winner. When you talk to people, there is a real feeling the police priorities don't reflect their own. To empower people with an accountable police chief might get people interested in voting again.

[Paul Oakley]

Umbrella man at 09:58. Structural reform won't necessarily mean huge amounts of extra spending. As PC "David Copperfield" has said:
'My belief is that greater numbers of police are not the answer to rising crime. I think enough of your money is spent on the police, it just gets wasted. There are enough policemen, it's just that they are all sat behind desks.'

[Occasional Visitor]

Arthur Burgess:"I have just one reservation and this is the Sandhurst style staff college.I just do not think this will be acceptable to rank and file Police Officers and will cause tremendous resentment and a drop in morale."

William Norton:"What is the effect of the real Sandhurst on the real army?"

What is the effect of the existing Police Staff College at Bramshill?

[George Hinton]

Nice idea, get the wooden tops back out on the streets where they belong to serve as a visible deterrent.
But, you wil need to break the culture of PC that infests our police forces and limits their effectiveness. Bill Bratton? was effective in NY, because the mayor backed his plan and the mayor led the zero tolerance policy that the police enforced. Can anyone see such a policy getting promulgated in the UK, the lefties, civil libertarians and assorted riff-raff would be kicking up a fuss, probably led by Red Ken, who would then castigate the Met for failing to perform and stop crime.
Getting something like this of the ground will require direction and application of Thatcherite proportions.

[Deputy Editor]

As an anoraky aside, I finished reading the memoirs of Major General Le Marchant a couple of weeks ago, the man who founded the Royal Military Academy (Sandhurst).

He worked tirelessly to regulate the British Army at the end of the 18th Century, taking the initiative, for example, to design a highly superior new cavalry sword and write a complex book of techniques to accompany it. He saw the need for much greater professionalism and national training after seeing how good the Austrian cavalry were at Flanders.

The national officers' academy was entirely his creation, even down to the original buildings' design. Interestingly, the only part of his plans that wasn't implemented was including selected soldiers' sons in the leadership training.

This was rejected because of what Arthur Burgess has just said about this police academy (best not to call it that, reminds me of the comedy series!):

"I just do not think this will be acceptable to rank and file Police Officers and will cause tremendous resentment and a drop in morale".

The reason being that soldiers wouldn't accept authority from "jumped up" officers and desert, as they had done in France.

It's difficult to draw any parallels with this - the 21st century British police are centralised quite enough - so I think I've just waffled to myself!

[Cllr Nicholas Bennett JP]

Three easy to implement reforms:

1. After the prisoner has been booked in all further processes (Fingerprinting, DNA and Photograph) to be done by civilian staff.

2. Statements to be taken by civilian/retired police officers using laptops.

3. Intoduce single clicking for all computer forms (ie: basic details once keyed in are automatically reproduced on all forms without the need to fill in same dtails again).

[dog biter]

The police have been described as a corporal's mess run riot. It's high time they had an equivalent of Sandhurst. And a bit of public school intake wouldn't do any harm either. Trouble is that if Margaret Thatcher didn't dare take on the police and sort them out properly, will Cameron have the guts to do it?

[dog biter]

One other thing. When I asked a senior copper recently why they didn't have an equivalent to Sandhurst, he replied, "Our officer intake is our graduate intake." i.e. you need a degree in order to be capable of becoming a top policeman. What nonsense! And doesn't this sum up the current state of Plod?

[dog biter]

One other thing. When I asked a senior copper recently why they didn't have an equivalent to Sandhurst, he replied, "Our officer intake is our graduate intake." i.e. you need a degree in order to be capable of becoming a top policeman. What nonsense! And doesn't this sum up the current state of Plod?

[Annabel Herriott]

dog biter. Did you ask your senior copper what the graduates graduated in? Media Studies? Archeology? English Lit?

[Martin Wright]

A good start. If we want more police on the street without a huge rise in costs we'll have to cut out a lot of administration that has been imposed on the police in the last 20 years or so. Much of this was no doubt well intentioned to prevent abuses but it has had a big effect on police efficiency and effectiveness.

Priorities will have to be reset, so that we don't get regular repeats of the recent story about two policemen being sent round to interview a 10 year old boy who used the word "gay" in an email, but instead see them used on more serious threats like drug dealing mugging etc. I get the impression that some police like the new PC emphasis, as it diverts them from having to deal with dangerous criminals.

Whenever silly stories like this arise, the police say "some one complained so we have to act". We've got to get back to the old days when the police had the right to use discretion and a sense of proportion.

[dog biter]

Media Studies? Archeology? English Lit?

No, no, no. It would have to be some sort of counselling course....