---

Policing in the 21st Century

As Chairman of the Home Affairs Committee, I have made it my practice to write to the Home Secretary about the things that I think should and should not be shared with other parts of the country. In this case, I wrote to the then Home Secretary to suggest that the practice should be followed in every single force. It is not necessary to wait for pilots. As someone once said, "We have in Government more pilots than British Airways." If something works practically, it is essential to do it everywhere. I am not sure whether I got a reply from the former Home Secretary, but I am sure that when the Minister replies he will let us know whether that practice has been taken beyond the pilot areas. I certainly found the practice—and I know that the hon. Gentleman must have found it—extremely useful. We supported the greater use of non-warranted police staff in areas in which it is cost-effective, but not to the extent that the number of police officers required for maintaining public order is significantly reduced. Initially, the arrival of police community support officers was treated with concern by some police officers, but now they are a vital part of the local police service. It is important that we give credit to the police for the way in which they have worked so closely with PCSOs when, initially, there was concern from organisations such as the Police Federation. Regional collaboration on sharing services to cut costs works well in some parts of England and Wales, but progress elsewhere is too slow. There also remains a gap in the provision for tackling serious and organised crime. I am pleased to say that the Committee is shortly to hold an inquiry into the Serious Organised Crime Agency. At the same time, it will examine the work that is done by Europol, which is now led by a dynamic young British former police officer, and which celebrates this year its 10th anniversary. We did not support forced mergers as a solution, but we felt that if regional and local police forces wish to collaborate, they should be allowed to do so. As a local MP, I do not want to see my police force in Leicester being run from Nottingham, which is probably where it will end up. For some reason, everything is always put in Nottingham rather than in Leicester or Derby. I am very happy to see police forces collaborating, but I do not want to return to the policy of forcing mergers, because it was unsuccessful. We found no evidence of a drop in the number or quality of police officer applicants. Officer posts attract, on average, six applicants. However, we had some concerns over retention, especially and in particular in the south-east. Regional forces lost 1,038 officers to the Metropolitan police over the previous five years. That is something that the hon. Member for Reading, West (Martin Salter) successfully highlighted to the Committee. As for the rest of the work force, we advocated greater standardisation in the deployment of PCSOs and consideration of whether they could be granted some powers of arrest in very exceptional circumstances. We did not advocate affirmative action, but we were concerned about the lack of Government progress on the diversity targets set by the Government themselves under the previous Home Secretary, now the Lord Chancellor, following the Stephen Lawrence inquiry. We felt that greater efforts should be made to encourage more people from the ethnic minority communities and more women into the senior levels of policing in this country. Finally, we concluded that the Home Office should give back more control over policing decisions to local forces, which would result in a bottom-up approach to policing. There should be greater accountability of policing to the public at a local level. However, we were clear that proposals originally put forward by the Home Office to restructure police authorities did not meet that need and threatened to undermine the partnership that was already working between the police and local authorities as well as having the potential to be exploited by extremist parties. Following our representations to the Government, both in the report and in a letter following our one-off session that we held in December, we were delighted to hear that the then Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Redditch, withdrew her proposals to introduce direct elections to police authorities. Instead, the Policing and Crime Bill, which has reached Committee stage in another place, inserts into the Police Act 1996 a requirement for police authorities to have regard to the views on policing of the people in their area. We were pleased that the Government strongly welcomed our report and that the then Minister of State, my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling, was able to appear before us in March to give us an update on the recommendations. However, we are disappointed that the Government have failed to take up our recommendations in a few key areas, notably around minimum pricing for alcohol. The Government's chief medical officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, has since proposed the introduction of a minimum price of 50p per unit of alcohol, which would mean that a standard bottle of wine could not be sold for less than £4, a 2-litre bottle of cider for less than £5.50 and the average six-pack of lager for less than £6. He considered such a move could, after 10 years, lead to 3,400 fewer deaths and 100,000 fewer hospital admissions a year, and that it would also have a significant impact on crime rates. Alas, the Government did not follow the medical advice of their own chief medical officer. The Policing and Crime Bill introduces some measures towards reducing alcohol-related harm—for example, it increases the maximum fine for consuming alcohol in a designated public place—but the Committee feels that they are not sufficient. I am sure the Minister will give us more information when he replies. We welcome what the Government have done so far, but we believe they need to go much further. Since our inquiry, the UK has fallen into a recession and there are concerns about the potential impact on crime levels and speculation about capping the numbers of officers. I hope the Minister can reassure the House that no cuts will be made to the police force in England and Wales in the foreseeable future. The chief constable of Gloucestershire, Dr. Timothy Brain, who gave evidence to the Committee in March, described what tends to happen during recession. He told us that during the second half of the 1970s through to the mid-point of the 1980s, crime rose by about 124 per cent. The police have received record levels of funding in the past decade; we must ensure that police forces continue to be properly resourced to meet the challenges. We were therefore concerned to hear of the problems faced by some forces—they were described to the Committee as second-tier forces—that are losing out because of the police funding formula. The new chief constable of West Midlands police, Chris Sims, warned last week that officer and staff numbers are likely to be cut. The Home Secretary must take heed of Sir Ronnie Flanagan's recommendations on the formula. Capping is also causing some forces concern: Surrey police authority is seeking a judicial review of a Government decision to cap its budget, which resulted in a loss of £1.6 million; Derbyshire police authority is also planning an appeal to the Government against future budget restrictions; and Leicestershire police narrowly escaped being capped last year. Forces should never be in a position in which they may have to cap their budget. This Government have done so much for policing. Surely we should ensure that the situation does not come to cuts in our forces. I know that the Minister is concerned about his budget, but I say this to him: the National Policing Improvement Agency has spent £70 million on consultants at the same time as police forces have to cut officers. That is simply not acceptable. The funding difficulties make it imperative that the police operate as efficiently as possible. It is estimated that officers spend around 20 per cent. to 30 per cent. of their time on paperwork. The previous Policing Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Gedling (Mr. Coaker), told us in March that a total of 26,188 hand-held devices had been issued to police forces across the country as part of the Government's target of delivering 30,000 devices by March 2010. Jan Berry's lead on reducing bureaucracy in the police provided the Committee with an excellent framework to investigate that further—it is impressive that someone can go from marching with 100,000 police officers and support staff through the streets of Whitehall and end up becoming the Government's tsar on cutting red tape, but we welcome her appointment and look forward to her report. My own local constabulary, Leicestershire, recently deployed hand-held devices to 450 beat officers and PCSOs who patrol on foot or bicycle after discovering that officers were spending at least one third of a nine-hour shift at their desks accessing or recording information on the computer systems. The Committee and I want all front-line police officers to have access to a mobile device. We were pleased to be assured that our concerns about capacity issues on the Airwave radio network, which is now used by all officers, are being taken seriously, particularly in the light of the forthcoming Olympics. However, in an article in Jane's Police Review last week, Barrie Trower, an independent research physicist, predicted that Airwave users could be at risk of thousands of slow-growing brain tumours. The Minister has just taken up his post, but I hope that he will be able to assure us that there are no health dangers with Airwave. The Committee continues to scrutinise the work of the police and in the next 10 days we will publish our report into the policing of the G20 protests. I hope that it will recommend positive action for the police to take in response to the criticisms they have received. I am sure that the House will be aware of the disturbing news this week that police officers allegedly tortured suspected drug dealers during questioning. I hope that the Minister ensures that those allegations are investigated quickly and that they are responded to with the appropriate action. As I am sure he knows, if he does not do that, the Committee will—it is very willing to hold further inquiries. Finally, I would like to take the opportunity to thank the Minister and the hon. Members for Bury St. Edmunds and for Chesterfield for their presence here today, and members of my Committee for their work. I hope that the Government continue to take our conclusions and recommendations into account in working towards delivering a first-class police service that will be fit for purpose in the 21st century.