Posts Tagged ‘Police cuts’

Police cuts: No battle is won without support in depth

05/10/2011, 03:00:49 PM

by Dan Jarvis MP

Yesterday we heard the latest in a long line of speeches from Theresa May about her vision for our police force: cuts of up to 20%, changes to police terms and service conditions and pension arrangements, electing police commissioners at a cost of 3,000 police officers, and vitally, a lack of strategic vision on policing – a far cry from the speech we heard last week from Yvette Cooper.  The Home Secretary believes that these changes will not effect the front line. I know, as we all know, that this is a catastrophic misjudgment and demonstrates a naivety of the work our Police force carries out.

We regularly hear the falling crime statistic which Labour achieved in government but it is worth mentioning again- a 43% fall in overall crime, 7 million fewer crimes a year and the first government in the post World War Two era to leave office with crime rates lower then when we took office. This is undoubtedly due to the extra police we put on Britain’s streets, the PCSOs and the community groups which were set up to tackle crime in their neighbourhood, but it is also due to a greater understanding of the causes of crime: that our children need an education, our young people need opportunities and adults need jobs.  We had to be tough on crime, but also tough on the causes of crime.

Theresa May, in her speech cited Bernard Hogan-Howe, the new Metropolitan Police Commissioner who has stated that police officers aren’t social workers, they’re here to stop crime, catch criminals and help victims. I couldn’t agree more, but, as I learnt from spending a week on the beat with South Yorkshire Police, Theresa May’s solution of cutting vital police numbers is not the answer. (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Wednesday News Review

31/08/2011, 06:59:01 AM

Ed to force a vote

Police cuts could lead to weaker law and order on the streets, Ed Miliband has warned as he called on the Government to “learn from the riots”. Mr Miliband has linked the riots to the need to have more officers on the streets. He wants to put pressure on the Government to reverse cuts to the amount of money given to police forces. He also opposes plans for directly elected commissioners which could cost £100m to implement. Mr Miliband hopes to be able to force a vote in Parliament on the issue – either through Labour’s opposition day debates or if enough members of the public sign a petition. But in the weeks since the riots, the Home Secretary defended the budget cuts and said they were not going to be as dramatic as some feared. While Labour have cited the figure showing the cuts amount to 20% in real terms, Theresa May argues they are smaller in cash terms. – Sky News

Labour leader Ed Miliband plans to force a Commons vote on police cuts to flush out Tory rebels and reveal Government splits. The move comes after Mr Miliband, 41, launched a new attack on Chancellor George Osborne’s decision to slash 20% from forces’ budgets. The Labour chief said it was “reckless” not to rethink the cuts in the wake of the riots that swept England earlier this month. The cost reductions will mean a 16,000 drop in officer numbers and a drastic fall in civilian police staffing. Labour may use an ­e-petition to trigger a Commons debate on cuts. Strategists believe many Tory MPs will not vote for the cuts, causing embarrassment for PM David Cameron. Those who do are likely to face a backlash from angry voters. – Daily Mirror

Mitchell is caught with his papers down

International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell was pictured holding the document as he left Downing Street. He had been at a meeting of the National Security Council, chaired by PM David Cameron. The papers welcomed Afghan president Hamid Karzai’s announcement that he will stand down in 2014, stating: “This is very important. It improves Afghanistan’s political prospects very significantly. We should welcome Karzai’s announcement in private and in public.” Mr Mitchell is not the first prominent figure to accidentally show secret information. In 2009, Bob Quick was forced to stand down as Britain’s most senior counter-terrorism officer after he revealed details of an operation to foil an al-Qaeda plot. The year before, then housing minister Caroline Flint was pictured entering Number 10 with a briefing paper predicting property prices were set to plunge. – the Sun

The warning from the World Bank was disclosed in a private Cabinet briefing paper which also showed the British Government welcoming the decision of Hamid Karzai to step down as Afghan president. The paper was prepared for yesterday’s meeting of the National Security Council by officials working for Andrew Mitchell, the International Development Secretary. The document was photographed as Mr Mitchell carried them out of the meeting uncovered. Much of the document refers to an ongoing dispute between the Afghan government and the International Monetary Fund. The IMF is reviewing its support for the Kabul government over allegations of widespread corruption. In April, Britain stopped its payments to the main Afghan reconstruction fund. Mr Mitchell’s note showed that the World Bank has said that unless the dispute is resolved soon, the “transition” process, where the Afghan government takes responsibility for security and Western troops gradually withdraw, will be jeopardised. “The World Bank have told us that the suspension of UK and other [donor] funds to the Afghan government will soon begin to destabilise [activities] essential for successful transition,” the note said. – the Telegraph

The Coalition is split over banking reform

Conservative and Liberal Democrat ministers are at loggerheads over plans for sweeping reforms to Britain’s banks aimed at avoiding another taxpayers’ bailout in a future financial crisis. The Business Secretary Vince Cable is demanding the immediate introduction of proposals to force the banks to ring-fence their high street and riskier investment arms that are due to be published by the Independent Commission on Banking on 12 September. But David Cameron and George Osborne, the Chancellor, are sympathetic to the banks’ demand for them to be given several years to build the “Chinese walls” to be proposed by the commission chaired by Sir John Vickers – which could see the reforms delayed until after the next general election. Nick Clegg is backing Mr Cable and the timing of the reforms threatens to provoke a power struggle at the top of the Government. – the Independent

Tories and Coulson avoid an inquiry

The Conservative party will not face an official inquiry into allegations that it broke electoral law by failing to declare News International‘s payments to its former head of communications, Andy Coulson, after the elections watchdog concluded that there was insufficient evidence of a breach. The Electoral Commission had been asked to investigate a series of payments amounting to a six-figure sum made to Coulson by News International in the months after he arrived at Conservative campaign headquarters in 2007, as well as a company car and health insurance he received for three years. Tom Watson, the Labour MP and member of the Commons culture select committee, had raised concerns that the money could have amounted to an undeclared donation to the party. The revelation that Coulson received the severance payments from News International while working for the Conservatives put renewed pressure on the party, which had previously denied that he was paid by anyone else while employed by them. – the Guardian

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Cameron must rethink police cuts

11/08/2011, 02:14:05 PM

by Matt Cavanagh

Two weeks ago, I highlighted the embarrassing gulf between David Cameron’s pre-election promise that cuts would not affect the front line, and the reality of the planned police cuts, as set out in the recent report by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary.

There is undoubtedly scope for efficiency savings in the police, but as HMIC set out, with 81% of police funding going on staff costs, and another 10% going on areas like transport and premises, cuts of 20% were always going to cut deep into police numbers. HMIC’s report is the most systematic and rigorous attempt so far, to estimate not just the likely effect on total police numbers – a cut of 16,000 by 2015, ironically the exact number the Met have deployed on London’s streets in recent nights – but also the likely effect on the front line for different forces around the country.

This is relevant to Cameron’s defence of the policing cuts today, when he was confronted in the Commons by former Home Secretary Jack Straw. To justify his assertion that the cuts will not affect the front line, or visible patrolling, Cameron chose to discuss his own local force, Thames Valley. This choice was either ignorant, or disingenuous. A glance at the graph on page 22 of the HMIC report shows the difference in the scale of the challenge faced by Thames Valley Police, in trying to protect the front line from spending cuts, compared to those forces who have been dealing with the riots, including the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, and Merseyside. Thames Valley Police would have to reduce their non-front-line officers by just under 50%, in order to avoid cutting into the front line. That is challenging, but arguably possible. By contrast, the West Midlands, Greater Manchester, and Merseyside forces would have to cut their non-front-line officers by 100%. Even those who hold the simplistic view that almost all ‘back office’ jobs are unnecessary would have to admit that to cut at this level without affecting front line police numbers is simply impossible.

As public concern about crime and policing soars, the government seems to be trapped in defending two increasingly indefensible claims: first, that the cuts won’t reduce front line police numbers, and second, that anyway police numbers don’t affect crime. This position was already starting to look naïve or complacent before the riots, especially with the signs that the long downward trend in crime may be on the turn. Now it looks reckless and hopelessly out of touch, as even Conservative MPs and ‘ministerial sources’ admit.

It has been amusing, if also a bit depressing, to watch Tory cheerleaders like Tim Montgomerie suggest that the way out of this problem is for Theresa May to introduce a new target for how much time police officers actually spend doing visible work. In fact, May inherited such a target from Labour. Admittedly, it was applied only to Neighbourhood Policing Teams, but she could have chosen to extend it; instead, in those heady days of last summer when ministers were falling over themselves to mock Labour’s ‘top-down targets’, she scrapped it.

Even more ridiculous is the spectacle of Conservative MPs and Conservative-leaning think-tankers trying to use the riots to back up the case for elected police commissioners – just like they did with the scandal over the Met’s links to News International – without realising that the Met is precisely the one police force which is already very close to the elected commissioner model.

These rather desperate moves are not surprising, since other than elected commissioners, and some useful development of Labour’s introduction of online crime maps, the government doesn’t really have any crime policies – and yet they need to talk about something other than police cuts. But these moves aren’t working. As John McTernan noted this morning, Cameron’s reluctance to break off his holiday to grip the riots ignored the “basic political law, that if you’re going to have to do something, you should do it of your own free will, rather than being forced to.” He needs to realise that rethinking the police cuts falls in the same category.

Matt Cavanagh was a special adviser on crime and justice under the last Labour government.

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon

Wednesday News Review

30/03/2011, 06:42:10 AM

Creep and compromise

After a day-long conference in London on how to move forward the political process in Libya, other developments included: An admission the Coalition did not yet fully know who made up the opposition, which came after Nato said American intelligence had shown “flickers” of al Qaeda among the rebels; A suggestion the Coalition would be prepared to see Colonel Gaddafi go into exile if a country was willing to take him; A claim by the Italians that several nations were working on a deal involving a ceasefire, exile for Gaddafi and a talks framework between Libya’s tribal leaders and opposition figures; Nick Clegg warning about the “danger of overreaching” during a speech in Mexico, but stressing liberal interventionism must be upheld. – Daily Herald

David Cameron today promised a “new beginning for Libya” was within sight as Britain held open the door for Colonel Gaddafi to flee into exile. He vowed that the UK and other allies would not abandon the people rising up against the dictator. Foreign Secretary William Hague had earlier made it clear that Britain may be willing to allow Gaddafi to flee into exile. Piling the pressure on the dictator, America and Britain also refused to rule out arming the rebels. Mr Hague signalled that Britain may be willing to allow the tyrant to escape to a safe haven as part of a deal to end the bloodshed. “We are not in control of where he might go. I am not going to choose Colonel Gaddafi’s retirement home,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme. Italy has already proposed an exit route into exile for Gaddafi – and Turkey has offered to act as a mediator to end the conflict. – Evening Standard (more…)

Facebook Twitter Digg Delicious StumbleUpon