| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Ms Hazel Blears (Salford): The Audit Commission supports the view that there is no direct correlation between numbers of officers and amounts of crime. On the last occasion on which we debated the matter in the House, 18 March, the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir N. Fowler) said, unusually:
- "However, I rather agree with the Home Secretary on that point. I do not think that there is a direct correlation between police numbers and crime."--[Official Report, 18 March 1999; Vol. 327, c. 1277.]
Mrs. Lait: If the hon. Lady listens to the rest of my speech, she will understand my argument. It is difficult to disagree with the Audit Commission's figures, which show that smaller forces may have smaller budgets and higher clear-up rates. Indeed, the Audit Commission has compared like with like: it has compared one rural force with another and found differences in clear-up rates; it has also compared one inner-city area with another and found differences. Statistically, I do not disagree, but the problem is that the British public and police forces themselves do not make that link. I suspect that the better clear-up rates reflect both good management and historic spending patterns. As I pointed out, the problem is that the public and the police do not believe it.
As I said, the consultative committee in Bromley regularly links underfunding with lack of police numbers. When we toured various operations under the parliamentary scheme, we were told time after time by
the police, from the constable on the beat to the inspector in charge of any police station, that cuts in funding were leading to reduced numbers.
Mr. Ian Bruce (South Dorset):
One can always bandy statistics about, but for the first time in many years, there has been a cut in police manpower and in auxiliaries in Dorset and, for the first time in five years, crime has increased. That shows that criminals, at least, think that it is now safer to commit crimes in Dorset because fewer police and fewer resources are coming from this Government.
Mrs. Lait:
I would not go so far as to argue that, but it is an interesting point. One is conscious that hardened criminals are as astute and aware of the potential for crime and not getting caught as the general public are aware that, as they believe, there are not enough police on the streets.
The constables will describe the increased pressure that they are under because of what they believe are shortages in numbers on patrol. One of their principal concerns is that, when they are in trouble--they could easily suddenly find themselves in a fracas on a hot day like today, when people's tempers are short--there might not be sufficient back-up to help them out of it. Indeed, that already happens. If the police feel vulnerable and lose confidence, they will not do their job to the best of their ability and constituents will complain.
As I said to the hon. Member for Salford (Ms Blears), I acknowledge the argument--I am sure that she shares it--that modern and effective policing is intelligence-led. It is effective and it works. We have seen how successful Operation Bumblebee has been, for example, in targeting criminals and ensuring that continual troublemakers are taken off the streets or warned that they are being watched. Intelligence-led policing contributes enormously to modern policing, but I return to the fact that the British public do not believe that it is working because they do not see police on the streets.
The Police Federation also does not see police on the streets. Fred Broughton, the chairman, was quoted in The Guardian of 18 May. The article said:
Mr. Ian Bruce:
They do not in Dorset.
Mrs. Lait:
As my hon. Friend says, people in Dorset do not believe it--nor do people in Bromley, the Police Federation or, as I am about to quote, the Association of Chief Police Officers.
John Newing said that the 1999-2000 settlement
Anyone who has been into a police station will have seen the variety of computers and how they are not linked to one another. Work is duplicated because the custody officer may enter information into one computer, while upstairs the detectives are putting the same information into another system. That shows the need to spend money on communications. I am not arguing about the need for that; however, the public must also be reassured. If they are not, the whole basis of policing by the consent of the community will disappear.
Mr. Desmond Swayne (New Forest, West):
Does my hon. Friend agree that the phenomenal clear-up rate of the Victorian police force was primarily not because their methods were less fastidious, but because they lived in, and were part of, the community that they policed? As we have withdrawn forces into almost fortress-like police stations and police officers into panda cars, we have lost the proximity of the community, which was the source of success.
Mrs. Lait:
I can see my hon. Friend's point, although the whole purpose of the Scarman and subsequent reports was to try to develop the role of the community police officer, who builds up the intelligence that was enjoyed by the Victorian police force. We have not lost that form of policing; the problem is that we do not have sufficient police officers to be able to conduct it as effectively as one would wish. That is why I am linking the two subjects--even though the Home Office and the Audit Commission doubt the correlation between police funding and numbers. Such a link needs to be made because we must ensure policing with the consent of the community.
I pointed out the need for new communications systems and the cost of them. There is also the cost of the pensions problem facing all police forces. We must acknowledge what a large proportion of their budgets is going on pensions--about 17 per cent. in the Metropolitan police and 20 per cent. in Greater Manchester. Obviously, if we were starting again, we would not start from here. A pay-as-you-go pension fund and an historic inability to control it has left forces with a huge demand on their slender resources. John Newing said last week that if additional funds are not forthcoming, there will have to be cuts in the numbers of officers in operational roles.
As a great believer in the development of the pensions industry and the provision that we have managed to create, I would say that it is time for the Home Office
and police forces to get to grips with the pay-as-you-go pension scheme and reform it. That would be a most effective way of reducing the pressure on budgets. I know that that will not be easy and that it is a very long-term solution, but it should certainly be considered closely.
Despite the demands on budgets for things such as communications systems and pensions, I return time and again to the importance of the Home Office recognising the inextricable link in the minds of the British public between funding and proper staffing. The public cannot believe that there is no such correlation. As I have--I hope--shown, nor can many who work in the police, even when crime is coming under control. The position has clearly worsened recently and the forecasts are deeply pessimistic.
"Violent crime has increased because police forces are having to cut the number of officers on the beat.
Ms Blears:
The hon. Lady has made the point that intelligence-led policing works, but that the public do not believe that crime is being tackled unless they see bobbies on the beat. If she accepts the argument that there are better ways in which to spend our resources to tackle crime, is she in favour of spending money on, say, a medicine that does not work simply because the public believe that it does? Is it not her task and our's to lay out the facts and convince the public of what actually works
Mr. Broughton said successes in tackling burglary and car crime had been bought at the cost of a failure to patrol the streets.
'It is clear to every force that the uniformed presence is reducing on a monthly basis. That is while the government and chief police officers are talking about an alternative. All the indications are that it will get worse.'"
"leaves the Police Service well short of what it needs."
Even though the Home Office has said that the 2 per cent. efficiency savings can be reinvested, and even though the police forces can keep the income from property sales, the forces are facing the need to spend much more money on new communications systems.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |