Well, we are entering the most important week in Police Reform and the proposed introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners:

• Debate on amendments in House of Commons today
• Debate on House in Lords on Wednesday

I am pleased to see that, whatever happens in the parliamentary debate, that there will be no changes to police governance this side of the Olympics.  However, plans for Policing and Crime Commissioner elections in November 2012 will decouple that from other polls usually held in May, adding an extra £25m to the anticipated costs.

Also, the Electoral Commission has said: ‘There are almost half as many daylight hours on 15 November compared with early May and there is also the increased likelihood of inclement weather.  It is possible that such conditions could discourage some electors from participating in the election and limit campaign activities by candidates’.

So it’s watch this space for the moment.

Kent Police Authority are getting very close to the end of its summer roadshows – have you any idea how many Kent and Medway people we have spoken to during the last six weeks? Go on, have a guess….you’ll be amazed!  There will be more next week about the details of that very helpful feedback from local residents.

Finally, I’m looking out of my office window at some really inclement weather – driving rain and very strong winds. It’s no wonder that my 9^th attempt to get up in a hot air balloon trip over East Kent fell foul of the weather yesterday. It was a rather daft present from my husband last year, just in case anyone is wondering why I am persisting with it – I am nothing if not tenacious.

I shall look forward to the week ahead of us.

6 September, 2011

A very short message from me today – it’s a busy week, what with the Kent Police Authority meeting tomorrow, the Association of Police Authorities’ Board meeting on Thursday, not to mention the first rehearsal of the Christmas play I am in with our local drama group in Lyminge!

The Government’s proposal to abolish Police Authorities and replace them with a single elected Commissioner is reaching its last stages in the Commons and the Lords. Rest assured though, that whatever the final outcome the Kent Police Authority will continue to work effectively on behalf of our local communities here in the county. We shall either continue as a high-performing Police Authority or we shall make sure that there is a seamless handover to a commissioner, if the latter is the will of Parliament.

I thought that readers might be interested in seeing the letter that the APA sent to all MPs and Lords last week, continuing to articulate our concerns over the proposals. It is signed by all constituent groups on the APA, Conservative, Labour, LibDem and by myself as the Independent Deputy Chair of the Association. The letter is to draw attention to issues that our representatives may wish to discuss in the final debates.

1^st September 2011

From the Association of Police Authorities

Dear Parliamentarian

The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill – A note from the APA

In advance of the final stages of this bill, phone hacking, riots and sudden departures of senior police officers this summer will have communicated the crucial importance of public confidence in the police and their overseers far better than any briefing.

In the light of these recent events, we write on a cross party basis to respectfully ask you to consider the implications of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill afresh.

We believe that the implications of these events and the many reviews that they have rightly prompted should be considered, and lessons learnt before a revolution in policing governance, which we suggest has been tested and found wanting, is enacted across England and Wales.

Aside from the many lessons that could yet emerge regarding police integrity, officers’ relationships with the press, their political oversight and the best means of securing both community confidence in, and effective communication with the police, the police budget is undergoing considerable cuts.

In this context, polling is clear: the public do not see the sense in spending over £100m on elections for Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) in the absence of any evidence of the benefits that those Commissioners will accrue. There is no public clamour for elected PCCs; just 15% think that they will help cut crime and 65% would rather keep the present system that has helped to achieve lower crime and higher public confidence whilst delivering enormous efficiency savings.^[i]

Whilst the outcomes of these reviews are still awaited, we would suggest that this is not the time to rush ahead and complete the remaining Parliamentary stages of this far-reaching Bill.

However, if ‘ping pong’ is to go ahead we would ask all Parliamentarians to consider preserving all of the amendments made by Peers, including the retention of a Police Commissioner, supported by a corporate Commission, instead of a solo Commissioner acting alone. We believe that this arrangement, proposed by a Liberal Democrat and supported across the House, (including by the vast majority of Cross Bench Peers who voted), could provide the necessary “strict checks and balances” on solo Commissioners which were both promised by the Coalition Agreement, and are the ‘bread and butter’ basics of corporate governance for British businesses and public services. This model could also provide a higher public profile for police accountability without loading extra costs onto an already stretched public purse amidst growing concerns about police cuts.

We do not believe that the crucial job of holding an organisation as large and a complex as a police force to account, and maintaining widespread public confidence in policing is a job for a single individual with a partisan remit. We also share the public’s concerns about rushing to spend substantial extra sums on such a risky reform amidst a context of cuts.

More than ever, we are convinced that this Bill is the wrong reform at the wrong time.

We should of course be happy to discuss any of these points and provide further information at your convenience. Please contact 07714 399 760 or nathan.oley@apa.police.uk.

Yours faithfully

 

Cllr Rob Garnham,                                                       Ann Barnes JP,
APA Chair, Conservative                                            APA Deputy Chair, Independent

 

Cllr Mark Burns Williamson                                          Cllr Brian Greenslade

APA Deputy Chair, Labour                                            APA Group Lead, Liberal Democrat

I am also including below the APA press release of yesterday, in response to the think tank, Police Exchange. Its report, also published only yesterday, assertions that there are too many police officers in backroom positions that could be done at less expense by Police staff. The APA points out that this is, unfortunately, a somewhat simplistic critique of a complex topic. It certainly isn’t true in Kent. Any Police Officer who undertakes a so-called “back room” role is there because it is necessary for him or her to be there, to support operational effectiveness. Anyway, have a read of what the APA has to say.

APA News Release

Date: 05 September 2011                               contact: Mark Castle

telephone: 020 7664 3178

email: mark.castle@apa.police.uk

Policy Exchange Report Cynical and Misleading

Commenting on a report released today by think tank, Policy Exchange – ‘Cost of the Cops’, the Chairman of the Association of Police Authorities, Rob Garnham stated, “The content and timing of this report is a crudely cynical attempt to discredit the significant achievement by all police authorities and forces to reduce costs and improve services on the eve of a Parliamentary decision on the future of policing and policing governance.”

The report proposes simplistic remedies for reducing costs that ignore the practical realities of policing – by backfilling many non-frontline roles with civilian staff.  While such a strategy has, and will continue to be an effective approach to modernising forces and driving out further efficiency savings, there are limits to the number of roles that can be civilianised.

Most importantly, much of the restructuring proposed by the report has been successfully pursued by police authorities for years.  The ideas are not new and police authorities have been quietly ‘getting on with business’ and delivering year on year efficiency savings.  We are disappointed that the Report fails to acknowledge the significant progress made by forces to reduce costs, including through a variety of initiatives such as better procurement, business process re-engineering and collaboration.  Headcount has also decreased within many forces, with expectations of further losses.  This includes the loss of a projected12000 police officers, required to address financial pressures.

We are particularly appalled at the cynicism of this report and the timing of its release.  The morale of police officers and staff up and down the country, already battered by recent high-profile events and a wave of uncertainty about their jobs, will only see this report as another headline grabbing attempt at their expense.

How much longer must we endure Policy Exchange and Mr Gibbs fronting as the Government’s mouthpiece on policing policy development in the absence of mature dialogue with the Service and a proper consultation process?

[i] Nationwide polls: YouGov polled 2,391 adults for Liberty, published 30.03.11: http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/media/press/2011/lack-of-public-trust-in-elected-police-commissioners.php and Opinion Matters polled 1,508 in February: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23921751-police-cuts-will-see-crime-and-terrorism-grow-says-public-poll.do ).Police Authorities have helped deliver lower crime and higher public confidence in policing, whilst meeting every government efficiency target to date. As the recent HMIC inspections made clear, of the 22 of 43 authorities inspected by HMIC, none failed and over 97% of 110 HMIC assessments were scored Excellent, Good or Adequate. HMIC also reported that between 2004-2008, police authorities delivered £1.5bn in efficiencies, far exceeding a government target of £1bn.