Proceeding contribution from Robert Neill (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 3 May 2007. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Policing in London.
Policing in London
Dead right. It is a serious debate because, as the Minister suspected, this has been the top issue in the seven years that I have served on the London assembly and in the two elections that I have fought. It has consistently been the top issue in my postbag and I think that virtually all other assembly members would say the same. That is not surprising because, for many people, the ability to feel safe and secure as they go about their lives in our city is arguably the very first social service. That applies to everybody in London regardless of background and circumstance. It is hugely important that we get things right and I am glad that the debate has largely been a measured and thoughtful one. As well as being an assembly member, I am a member of the Metropolitan Police Authority, and that appears in my declaration of interests. I certainly recognise that good work has been done by the authority and by its chairman, who also has the advantage of taking the same sensible view of football as me even though we otherwise do not quite agree. In particular, I recognise the excellent work that has been done by the men and women of the Metropolitan Police Service and the other two police forces. Both the City of London police and the British Transport police deserve recognition. I have certainly found their work invaluable and I know that my constituents do, because many of them use overground trains to commute to the City of London. It is important that we take an holistic look at all the policing agencies in London. The Met is the main feature, but it is not the whole picture. A number of important points have been made, and I will not repeat them. However, the views expressed by my hon. Friends the Members for Orpington (Mr. Horam) and for Bexleyheath and Crayford (Mr. Evennett) about the position in the outer London boroughs, the perception of crime and the concerns that go with that are especially pertinent and are mirrored by people in my constituency and, I suspect, much else of suburban London. I pay tribute to my hon. Friends because, while I have been an assembly member, I know that both have worked tirelessly to raise these issues. The valid point has been made that London is not only a large and complicated city, but a very diverse one. It is diverse not only in its socio-economic and demographic make-up but in spatial and geographic terms. Not only are priorities different in different parts of London, but policing responses need to be different as well. That raises two concerns that have already been touched upon by my hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and Shoreham.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 459 c1720-1
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Crime prevention Crime Crimes of violence British Transport Police Finance Firearms Greater London Homicide Greater London Authority Home Office Emergency calls Police Offensive weapons Mayor of London Police authorities Police community support officers Metropolitan Police Metropolitan Police Authority Terrorism
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:26:30 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394860
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394860
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_394860