Examination of witness (Questions 80 -
99)
TUESDAY 21 NOVEMBER 2000
THE RT
HON MR
JACK STRAW
80. And it did not find that one single police
officer had acted in a racist fashion.
(Mr Straw) With great respect, it also found—and
it was not saying that the police service was alone in this, and
they are not—that the service had acted in an institutionally
racist way, and it had. I could have just sat on my hands over
this and said "Well, we do not want to disturb the horses,
let's leave it", but what would have happened progressively
if I had not established the Lawrence Inquiry is that confidence
in the police service by that 25 per cent of people in London
who are black and Asian—and a large part of the white population
who want to celebrate the fact that they live in a diverse society—would
gradually have reduced. That would have meant that the efficiency
of the police service would have gone down and they would have
been less capable of fighting crime. I draw a parallel here, Mr
Howarth, with the attitude of the police service to corruption
in the 1960s and 1970s. If you now talk to experienced police
officers around the Metropolitan Police Service in the 1960s and
1970s, they will tell you what every young barrister knew, which
was that there were parts of the Metropolitan Police Service—particularly
the CID—which were riddled with corruption. Everybody, from
Home Secretaries downwards, turned a blind eye to this. They said
it was justified as being "noble cause" corruption.
In the end, brave police officers and others said this was unacceptable,
and they flushed out the problem—not least Sir Robert Mark.
Yes, it led to some reduction for the time being in efficiency
in nicking criminals in that way, but if that had not happened
then public confidence in the police service would have collapsed.
81. I put it to you, Home Secretary, there is
a world of difference between actual examples of corruption and
something as vague and unidentified as "institutional racism",
when the report itself established that not one single police
officer—save poor Detective Inspector Bullock who described
the two boys as "two coloured lads", which was apparently
racist—was guilty of individual racism. That is now water
under the bridge, so that what you now have as a police service,
in the aftermath of MacPherson, is a situation where we are told
that at the Notting Hill Carnival police officers were told "not
to search gunmen" as The Daily Telegraph headline
had it. I do not know what inquiries you have since carried out
into the policing of the Notting Hill Carnival but I have not
seen any reports. Can you tell us now what is the instruction
that Sir John Stevens is giving his police officers? Is it to
tread warily at next year's Notting Hill Carnival?
(Mr Straw) That is a matter for Sir John Stevens.
I have certainly not carried out my own inquiries. I am not the
police authority of London any more, and there has been no evidence
presented to me that I should set up a kind of Section 49 inquiry
into the policing of the Notting Hill Carnival. It is open to
you to bring the Commissioner before you, if you wish. Mr Howarth,
it was you who raised the Lawrence Inquiry, not me, so let me
just deal with the point you raised. I am not suggesting that
corruption is the same as institutional racism, and I did not
suggest that. What I do say, however, is that long experience
shows that if there is a problem inside a service it needs to
be dealt with, and if you do not deal with it you end up with
worse problems.
82. They could not find a problem. The only
thing they could find was something which was indefinable.
(Mr Straw) With great respect, I do not think the
issue of how people feel they are treated, if they happen to be
black or Asian, by the police is incidental. It is a serious problem,
and there is also a serious problem about the quality of investigation.
I just want to say this: what has happened since the MacPherson
Report is that, contrary to what you are asserting, the police
service, as a whole, has embraced that report, and it is hugely
to their credit that they are getting on with implementing it.
I chair a steering group on which all the police associations
sit, along with Mr and Mrs Lawrence and other organisations. There
happens to be a meeting today at 4 o'clock. We have been working
progressively through the 70 recommendations of the Lawrence Inquiry
to ensure that they are properly implemented. It is greatly to
the credit of the Police Federation that they have embraced these
recommendations as well. Amongst other recommendations, we have
set targets for each of the police services to increase their
recruitment of black and Asian officers. That is gradually creeping
up and it has gone up from September 1998 by 10 per cent. From
2,500 in September 1998 it is now 3,029.
Mr Winnick
83. 3,029? In the Metropolitan Police?
(Mr Straw) No, in the police service as a whole.
Mr Howarth
84. How many in the Metropolitan Police?
(Mr Straw) The Metropolitan Police Service is up now
to 4 per cent of the total.
85. So that is 4 per cent of 27,000 or 26,000?
(Mr Straw) It is about 1,000.
86. So well short of your target of 5,500.
(Mr Straw) In ten years. It is a ten-year target,
Mr Howarth. We are making progress, is the answer, and we will
make more progress. One of the many benefits of the Crime Fighting
Fund is to provide more opportunities for recruitment of black
and Asian staff, as well as others.
87. I would like to stay on this but there are
other aspects of policing which I know colleagues also want to
raise with you. Can I just take you back to this business of recruitment?
How realistic are your recruitment targets when apparently the
National Police Training centres do not have the capacity to train
huge numbers of extra probationers which you are proposing?
(Mr Straw) We think they are realistic.
88. Apparently Manchester has had its bid cut
by 30 officers.
(Mr Straw) We think they are realistic. Some forces
may be able to recruit ahead of their target, others a little
behind. This is an uncertain science. The crucial thing is that
we have provided funds to ensure that there is a step-change in
the number of officers inside the service from, overall, 126,000
in 2000-01 rising to 128,000 in 2001-02 and to 130,000 in 2002-03.
That is the projected strengths we wish to see. There may be some
slippage in those but the aim is to ensure there is a significant
change in the number of police officers, and I hope that you would
be welcoming that against a background—to just remind you—that
police numbers began to decline in 1993, not 1997. The biggest
decline in the Metropolitan Police Service took place between
1993 and 1997, and I do not remember Conservative Members of Parliament
complaining about it at that time.
Mr Howarth: You may recall, Home Secretary,
that I was resting between engagements.
Mr Malins
89. So was I.
(Mr Straw) I was not suggesting otherwise. I have
no doubt at all that had you both been in the House you would
have complained about it. It is interesting that none of your
other colleagues who were possessed of your qualities of perception
did at the time protest about it.
Mr Howarth
90. They must have been distracted, Home Secretary.
We will obviously have to take your faith in the National Police
Training centres being able to deliver the level of training that
you want. Moving on to the question of retention and moving away
from the disillusionment issue that I mentioned earlier, can we
deal with the question of housing, which is a very important issue
in the home counties and, indeed, in my own county of Hampshire.
You are pouring money into recruitment, but what further efforts
are you taking, apart from pay, to deal with the problem that
particularly affects the home counties?
(Mr Straw) The issue of low-cost social housing, particularly
in the home counties, is extremely important. It is one that I
know that Nick Raynsford, the Housing Minister, and Hilary Armstrong
as well, are concerned about. It was raised with me yesterday
on the Floor of the House, and I am trying to remember by which
colleague. What we want to see (it is a matter, obviously, for
local authorities and the DETR) is more social housing being provided
for young recruits. May I just say this, Mr Howarth, on the issue
of recruitment in some of the home counties? We are turning the
corner so far as recruitment into London is concerned, and you
will be aware that some of the outer-London forces, particularly
in the Greater London area, have made representations about their
problems of recruitment, particularly as they are closer to London.
I have had representations from a member of your constituency
who I happened to meet on a visit not long ago. What I have provided
for there is for employers to make an offer to those working within
a 30-mile radius of London of a £2,000 increase and for those
working within a 30-40-mile radius there will be a £1,000
increase.
Chairman
91. It is column 10 of Hansard.
(Mr Straw) Thank you. The money is there, it has been
put on the table, for payment for 1 September. However, what is
extraordinary is the way in which the Police Negotiating Board
(and at the moment, I have no power to direct it to meet) takes
its time about things. It is due to meet, I discovered at the
weekend, to consider this in February, which is an extraordinary
thing, given the concerns of both police authority members and,
we are told, the police officer representatives about the need
to do something about this problem. So I have asked the PNB to
meet earlier and, also, we have discussions with the PNB about
changing their constitution. It is a byzantine, bureaucratic body
with 95 people on it (I gather all of them claiming expenses)
and only 4 of them can speak. So we have to speed up the process.
Any help being given from constituency members to police authorities
to say "Here is the money on the table and we may have to
tweak exactly how it is distributed" would be appreciated.
It is ludicrous that we are hanging around with the money there
and yet if we left the machinery to operate according to its normal
timescale it would probably be March or April before it came into
payment, because there would probably be some disagreement in
the PNB, they would have to go to arbitration and have to come
back to me. I want to see it speeded up.
92. Can I ask a final question, and it comes
back to the question of recruiting. I gather that the police service
is now prepared to relax its conditions on new recruits who have
minor criminal offences.
(Mr Straw) Even former Conservative Members of Parliament
could join.
93. To my knowledge not many of them have criminal
convictions, Home Secretary.
(Mr Straw) I was not suggesting that. I was saying
it could be regarded as a blemish on one's character. It was a
joke, Mr Howarth. I was not expecting to be taken seriously.
94. You invite us to take so many jokes seriously,
Home Secretary, I thought it was another one. You have announced
this policy. How easily does that policy sit with the rooting
out of corruption in the police service? Is there not a discrepancy
here, a paradox, between, on the one hand, seeking to root out
those police officers who are guilty of criminal offences and,
at the same time, recruiting new police officers who have had
criminal convictions?
(Mr Straw) May I say I have announced no policy on
this. The announcement to which I think you are referring was
one by Sir John Stevens, the Commissioner, because these are matters
for police chiefs and not for me, quite properly. Secondly, at
the moment, the recruiting criteria vary quite a lot. For example,
some services have banned officers who have got tattoos and others
have not; others have long had a policy of looking on a case-by-case
basis at people's criminal convictions, whilst others have had
a blanket rule about it. My understanding is that what Sir John
Stevens was doing was bringing practice in the Metropolitan Police
Service into line with the general practice across the country.
If we believe in redemption and we do not regard every single
criminal conviction has an equal weight—and that is certainly
the view I take—it must be the case that there will be some
people who apply for the police service who are otherwise well-qualified
yet have a criminal conviction but the conviction is spent and
is spent not only within the Rehabilitation of Offenders' Act
but is spent so far as that person's character is concerned. A
minor conviction for a minor criminal offence at an early age.
It is up to these people, otherwise, to make good police officers.
I think it is entirely reasonable for that judgment to be made,
just as it is in virtually every other walk of life. The other
point that you raised, Mr Howarth, I am afraid—
95. It is about the question of the paradox
between rooting out corrupt officers—
(Mr Straw) There is no connection at all between the
profile of police officers who are likely to commit serious corruption
and whether or not they have been involved in some minor act that
led them to the courts when they were young. Indeed, one of the
interesting things about officers who are seriously corrupt is
how difficult it is to profile them and how apparently good they
are at their jobs. These are, typically, officers who are completely
clean, who have a history of being "effective" as typical
criminal investigators, and it is partly because of that that
they are able to mask their criminal activities. So there is not
any connection at all there.
Mr Cawsey
96. Home Secretary, I was almost tempted to
say it is entirely possible to have a spent conviction and become
President of the United States, is it not. So, I suppose, in that
respect, to become a police officer is not necessarily a bad thing.
(Mr Straw) I am very grateful to you for drawing that
to my attention, yes it is. At the moment, I guess—because
unless the news has changed in the last hour, which is likely,
and he has been confirmed as President, we are talking about a
presidential candidate but I take your point entirely—my
guess is that whilst George W Bush is certainly well qualified
to become a candidate from the point of view of his criminal convictions,
leave aside one's personal views, whilst he is properly qualified
to become President of the United States he would not be qualified
were he a British citizen to be a member of the Metropolitan Police
Service. So it is quite a good point you make, Mr Cawsey.
97. I am glad to be of assistance. During your
answers to Mr Howarth's questions you talked about the decline
in police numbers since 1993, which set a few alarm bells ringing
because that was the year I became the Chairman of a Police Authority
so I hope there was nothing personal. Since that time there has
been a decline which has gone on almost consistently. The question
I want to put to you is really to explain the phenomenon to me
in one respect, that is that in the four years that I chaired
the Police Authority we saw systematic cuts in real term spending,
yet as we had a central establishment for police officers we tried
very hard, and with some success, to keep police numbers up to
that level and crime increased. The situation in more recent times
has been that the budgets have increased in real terms, police
numbers have gone down but so has crime. What do you think is
happening out there which is leading to this almost paradoxical
occurrence?
(Mr Straw) The answer is that there is no direct connection
between inputs and outputs. This is the same in any other public
service, indeed the same in the private sector as well. You have
to make sure that the resources are used properly. Now there is
plainly a reductio ad absurdum here which would not apply
if there are no police and certainly no recorded crime, there
are huge levels of crime. What we are talking about here, although
a great deal has been made about changes in police numbers, is
variations around the margin of two per cent, that is what we
are talking about, since 1997. It is a two per cent variation.
Instead of having 100 people in the room we have got 98. If you
have 100 people available to you and you use them poorly they
will be of less effect than if you have 98 and use them well.
I am happy to provide the regression analyses which have been
done[6]
which I have been trying to turn up in this compendious briefing
that I have got here. I think what may have happened was, first
of all, those forces which were suffering a bit of a squeeze put
an effort into using the officers they had got more effectively,
because they had to, and, secondly, other factors came into play,
including the effect of the money which we were investing in crime
reduction which was going directly into targeting burglaries,
vehicle crimes and things like that. The overall combination of
that was to see a reduction in crime. I may say that the experience
which you have had, Mr Cawsey, in Humberside has been replicated
in Lancashire where I regret to say that the settlements for the
Lancashire service in 1998/99 was one of the worst in the country.
It was the way the formula came out. Yet the record of the police
service there, in terms of reduction in recorded crime, under
the Chief Constable, Pauline Clare, was one of the best in the
country. That is what has happened. Also we know, as I have said,
there is no correlation between police numbers and variations
in crime patterns. Also there is no correlation between police
services which have got the biggest or smallest increases in budgets
and variations in police numbers. Some services which have quite
generous, comparatively generous increases in budget, had Chief
Constables who chose to use that money, for example, to invest
in technology or to put in to civilians rather than into police
numbers, as they are entitled to. Although, as I pointed out to
them, one or two of them then complained about the fact that their
choices have been less popular and they have blamed the Home Secretary.
98. Yes, I am quite interested in that point
because it was a long battle, which was finally conceded by the
former Government, and it was a decision which I supported, to
say that establishment for police forces should be a matter determined
between the chief constable and the police authority, not essentially
set by the Home Secretary. To a certain extent, the Crime Fighting
Fund that you have now set up to put more police officers in actually
starts to backtrack to that and draws you back into this process
again of being an arbiter on what police numbers are going to
be in what area. What made you feel that extra money had to go
directly for officers, irrespective of what a local decision may
have been as opposed to just allocating those funds locally, in
which case they may have chosen to recruit extra officers or they
may have chosen extra equipment, IT, civilians as part of an improvement
in overall performance?
(Mr Straw) The fact that I was concerned about the
drop in numbers, and it had gone too far, and they needed to go
back up, and that public confidence in the police service was
difficult to pin down and therefore, in the widest sense, that
was related to their own sense of safety and security, was related
to what they felt about the capacity of the police service to
deal with crime and disorder when it took place. In turn that
is related to what they see about overall police numbers. There
can be no doubt that concern about police numbers was feeding
into concern about crime. You cannot just deal with crime in terms
of the numbers, you have to deal with it in terms of public perception.
The other thing was that there was a number of police authorities
and Chiefs who on the one hand were saying "We want our independence
to spend as we wish", and on the other hand the moment there
was any difficulty locally was saying "Oh, it is all to do
with the Home Office". As I said to ACPO and the Association
of Police Authorities you cannot have it both ways. Many Chiefs
and police authorities helped to make the issue of police numbers
an issue. I have sought to resolve that. The only way of resolving
it fairly is by the Crime Fighting Fund.
99. One of the other things you could do which
would be of enormous assistance to police forces and police authorities
would be to come up with some sort of resolution to the issue
of police pensions. Again this is something which has been considered
all the time I have been involved with police authorities and
police forces. Where are you on that particular issue now and
what do you see as being the resolution to it?
(Mr Straw) You are right about that. Where we are
is we are considering responses to the consultation and we will
make announcements in due course. I have already flagged up the
interim proposals about it. It is a continuing problem. The difficulty
about this is people say "Go to a funded system" and
if we were starting from scratch again I would dearly love to
have gone to a funded system which would be outwith police budget.
In the long term a funded system would be better. The problem
is that as John Maynard Keynes famously said "In the long
run we are all dead" and in the short run moving to a funded
system will involve higher levels of public spending in order
to get the funding going. That is the difficulty about it. In
any one year there is always an argument about why you should
use the resources for something else rather than turning it into
a funded scheme. Now we are looking at whether there are any other
ways, as it were, of starting the funding which would be outside
the definition of public spending. It is hard to see how we can
arrive at that. Meanwhile what we have sought to do is to take
better note of the impact of pensions on police budgets. Pensions,
as a proportion of the police budget, have risen from seven per
cent ten years ago to over 14 per cent in the last year and are
still rising. We have factored that in to the settlement.
6 See Annex B. Back
|
