Proceeding contribution from Anne Milton (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 9 June 2009. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Council Tax Capping (Surrey).
Council Tax Capping (Surrey)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Mole Valley (Sir Paul Beresford) on securing this debate. As we have heard, it is hard to herd Surrey MPs. The fact that we are all here shows our strength of feeling, and I hope that the Minister will take note of that. As time is short, I shall not say more on matters that were so eloquently mentioned by my hon. Friend. However, some key factors must be re-emphasised. Surrey police force is a county force with urban challenges; it borders two airports and some of the busiest motorways in London. Half of the crime there is committed by people from outside Surrey. Indeed, Lord West acknowledged criminals as""people doing 'away days' from London in order to redistribute wealth."—[Official Report, House of Lords, 12 January 2009; Vol. 706, c. 1012.]" The Audit Commission assessment states that there is no doubt that Surrey police have managed their affairs and finances excellently and that they give value for money of the highest grade, being one of only six forces that achieved that status in 2007-08. It has the lowest expenditure per band D property. Much of what Surrey police do is excellent, but with tight resources it is not always perfect. To a large extent, resourcing has been a continuing problem for the force, and it acknowledges that it cannot always give the service that it would like. Rightly, it is cutting 144 back-office jobs and replacing them with technology improvements to hold on to its front-line force, but it faces losing another 50 front-line jobs if the Government have their way. Policing in Guildford is not easy. We have a busy night-time economy, persistent crime in the large rural areas, and some serious antisocial behaviour, much of which involves criminal damage. Indeed, antisocial behaviour is often a euphemism for crime. There is terrible criminal damage; someone stole a saw and cut down trees on an estate; elderly residents are being terrorised and are afraid to go out in the evenings; and a local business woman could not cope with the police response to the number of racist and violent attacks on her staff and now employs her own private security. It is not good enough. Given the tight police budgets, with the best will in the world the police cannot respond as they want; they are angry and the public are frustrated. Too many kids are getting away with completely unacceptable behaviour. I cannot speak too highly of the community wardens, the police and community support officers and the neighbourhood specialist officers in Guildford. However, poor resources leave many areas badly wanting. The public are not getting the service that they deserve; it falls well short. I now give a quick plug to the Street Angels project in Guildford. Those not familiar with Street Angels should come to Guildford in the evening and watch. Set up by the churches in Guildford, they support the town police. Surrey police have been excellent in working with them, and we have seen a real drop in crime. None the less, it is difficult. I get very tired of having to listen to Ministers telling us what they are giving us. The truth is that in 1997 we were receiving £96 per head; in 2009 we are getting £93 per head. As a result, 50 per cent. of the funding comes from the council tax payer; elsewhere in the country, it is approximately 25 per cent. We in Surrey raise a lot of money for the Treasury, and we are not getting a good deal in return. This year, the situation is ridiculous. The Government rejected attempts by Surrey police to meet officials and Ministers. The Department for Communities and Local Government created the notional precept, and I know that the Surrey police force is considering taking legal action on that. Police officials raised the concept of a notional precept with the DCLG, but were reassured that they should set their budget as normal. Three days before the Surrey police authority set its budget, the Government wrote to say that they had not yet determined any capping principles. With officials refusing to talk to it, Surrey police authority had to set a budget in the dark. I hope that the Minister will respond to many of the arguments raised today. Everyone in Surrey, and Guildford in particular, wants their council tax bills to fall, but they also want to be safe. The police struggle, and the public are cross, fearful and not getting the service that they deserve. The Minister has it within his power to reconsider this matter before he lays the draft order. I hope that he does not come out with the usual platitudes. We have heard that the Prime Minister is very keen to listen to people, and I sincerely hope that the Minister will take this opportunity to listen to the people of Surrey.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 493 c191-3WH
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Council tax Billing Neighbourhood policing Finance Local government finance Surrey Surrey Police
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-05 22:21:52 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_564754
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_564754
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_564754