APPENDIX 14
Memorandum submitted by the Mayor of London
BACKGROUND
1.1. The Greater London Authority is the
strategic body for London and is constituted through the Greater
London Authority Act 1999. The Authority has a democratically
elected executive Mayor, Ken Livingstone and an Assembly comprising
25 members that are responsible for scrutinising the policies
and decisions of the Mayor.
1.2 The GLA sets a budget for itself and
each of the four functional bodies. These budgets together form
the consolidated budget. It is the Mayor who sets the budgets,
unless the Assembly can achieve a two-thirds majority in favour
of alternative budget proposals. The Metropolitan Police Authority
(MPA) is one of the four functional bodies of the GLA.
1.3 The MPA is an independent body. The
Mayor appoints 12 members of the Assembly to the MPA and sets
the budget of the MPA (subject to the Home Secretary's reserve
powers to set a minimum budget for the MPA). In relation to the
Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), the Mayor can give comments
to the Home Secretary on his/her recommended officer, prior to
the appointment of the Commissioner.
1.4 The Mayor's budget priorities reflect
his strong commitment to policing and delivering on his manifesto
commitment to make London a Safer City. Crime and community safety
are top priorities for Londoners. These are reflected within the
policy priorities for Mayor Livingstone. In a recent MORI poll
for the Mayor, 52 per cent of Londoners rated safety and crime
as priority issues for the Capital.
1.5 The Mayor and the Mayor's Office work
closely with other agencies in London to ensure that efforts around
crime reduction are co-ordinated and that there is a joined-up
approach to crime prevention across all agencies. A current example
of such work is the efficiency and effectiveness review programme
in the MPS, which is led by a tri-partite MPA/MPS/GLA project
board. This programme of reviews will contribute to more effective
use of budgets and resources in the MPS and all savings will be
invested back into frontline services. Another example of this
type of project is the joint transport policing initiative between
Transport for London, MPA/MPS/GLA, which is focused on reducing
crime and the fear of crime, the efficient movement of buses and
the enforcement of taxi licensing arrangements in twenty key bus
corridors in London.
2. POLICE REFORM
BILL
2.1 Consultation Period
2.1.1 The Mayor is concerned that a period
of only four days elapsed between the end of the consultation
period for the White Paper "Policing a new Century—a
blueprint for reform" and the 1st Reading of the Police
Reform Bill in the House of Lords. It is unlikely that this allowed
for an adequate period of time for Government to properly reflect
on the submissions to the White Paper. Given the importance of
this legislation the consultation period needed to be substantially
longer. Notwithstanding this the Mayor welcomes the Government's
proposals for reform of the police service and believes that the
proposals contained in the Bill will contribute to ensuring a
more focused and responsive police service in London.
2.2.2 However, there are issues, which are
either not adequately addressed, or not addressed at all in the
Police Reform Bill. It is the Mayor's view that the issues surrounding
democratic arrangements in London and the fragmented policing
structure in London continue to be an area of concern. The GLA
Act 1999 recognised the need for a democratically elected Mayor
and yet failed to confer adequate powers to address areas of concern
such as crime. Whilst the Police Reform Bill may not now be the
appropriate Parliamentary vehicle to address the fundamentals
of this issue, the Mayor would like the committee to note this
point when considering the amendments he is proposing for the
Police Reform Bill.
2.2.3 The Mayor is seeking to secure amendments
to the Police Reform Bill to ensure that the role of the Mayor
in London's policing is properly reflected in legislation. The
Police Reform Bill needs to reflect the unique arrangements in
London recognising the role of all democratic bodies on the important
issue of policing.
2.2.4 Through the entirety of the Police
Reform Bill there is no recognition or acknowledgement of the
unique role of the Mayor in London's policing. The Mayor would
welcome, on the face of the Bill, provision, wherever there is
a need to consult with police authorities, that this consultation
is extended to the Mayor of London. For example the Mayor is not
regarded as a consultee on the National Policing Plan, despite
the fact that he sets the budget for the MPA. The Mayor believes
that this is an oversight that can be easily addressed by amendment
of the Bill.
2.3 Directions to Chief Officers
2.3.1 Overall, the Mayor welcomes Clause
5 which empowers the Secretary of State to require a chief officer
to take remedial measures to improve efficiency and effectiveness
where there is concern over a police force's performance. However,
in order to reassure the public, the Mayor believes that reference
should be made that this power of intervention will be exercised
with caution and used as a last resort. The Mayor also seeks an
assurance that the Home Secretary's directions acknowledge that
different Basic Command Units and forces are characterised by
different socio-economic conditions and communities.
2.4 Independent Police Complaints Commission
2.4.1 The Mayor welcomes the establishment
of this new complaints body, as the handling of complaints is
crucial to Londoner's confidence in the police system. It is the
Mayor's view that the proposals contained within the Bill do not
satisfactorily tackle the issue of disclosure. This issue of disclosure
was raised by William MacPherson in his final report on the Stephen
Lawrence enquiry and it is the Mayor's view that the proposed
categories for exemption will hinder openness within the system.
As well as this, direction and control of a force should become
a category of complaint.
2.4.2 The Mayor believes that serious misconduct
that may involve a member of the public, or be in the public interest
to investigate, may not be the subject matter of complaint for
a variety of reasons. He therefore considers it important that
the IPCC be given a specific stated power to call in non-complaint
matters.
2.4.3 Schedule 2 para (6) (2) provides that
the IPCC should be able to second police officers to its staff.
In his submission on the proposals contained in the White Paper,
the Mayor recommended that IPCC investigators should also be drawn
from civilian/lay officials with investigatory experience eg from
Customs & Excise, the Inland Revenue and local authority ombudsman
staff. The Mayor argued that this was necessary to safeguard the
independence of the IPCC. Neither of these proposals has been
included in the Bill and is, therefore, a matter of concern.
2.4.4 The Mayor is concerned that Clause
20 (6) allows for the Secretary of State to provide for exceptions
to the duty to keep a complainant informed about his/her case.
The Mayor wishes this Clause to be removed in its entirety, as
he considers that it will hinder openness, transparency and confidence
in the procedures. The Mayor is anxious that a police officer
that is the subject matter of a report will be able to claim that
disclosure will adversely affect him/her, if the report contains
criticisms of his/her actions.
2.5 Conduct of Persons in other forms of police
service
2.5.1 The Mayor seeks clarification as to
whether Clause 21 and 24 allows for the IPCC to issue guidance
on the handling of complaints, conduct matters or any other related
matters to Community Support Officers and Accredited Community
Safety Organisations.
2.6 Accreditation under community safety accreditation
schemes
2.6.1 The Mayor is concerned that Accredited
Persons under Clause 35 and Schedule 5 of the Police Reform Bill
could have conferred on them the power to detain and require the
name and address of a person acting in an anti-social manner.
The Mayor opposes this power on two counts. First, these powers
carry significant responsibilities, requiring expert training,
management and accountability systems, which are the remit of
a highly professional police force. Second, the majority of these
powers will be exercised in relation to incidents occurring on
the street, where there is the potential for volatile situations
to occur, putting the accredited person in a highly vulnerable
situation. The Mayor is minded that for the dual-key arrangements
for invoking powers to protect the public against abuse of authority
to be effective it should be limited to issuing fixed penalty
notices and not detention. In relation to London the dual key
process should involve the Mayor as a consultee.
2.7 Police Authorities to produce three year
strategy plans
2.7.1 The Mayor welcomes Clause 66. However,
he is concerned that it is not enough that strategy plans must
be consistent with the National Plans covering the same period.
He recommends that this strategy should also reflect those of
local Crime & Disorder Reduction Strategies, Youth Justice
Plans and Drug Action Strategies. This would enable policy makers
and corporate planners to integrate plans into cohesive frameworks.
Furthermore, a three-year planning cycle which coincides with
all these strategic plans would improve strategic co-ordination
of planning processes and ensure that all plans, national and
local, support each other and do not require energy to be invested
on planning to the detriment of service delivery. The Mayor would
like to see this reflected in the Bill.
2.8 Crime & Disorder Reduction Partnership
2.8.1 The Mayor is supportive of the Government's
proposal to maintain the profile of treatment-related aspects
of the Drugs Strategy and the significant contribution of health
to the wider crime and disorder reduction agenda. However, the
Mayor recommends that it should not be the sole remit of the Primary
Care Trust to be the responsible authority for the development
and delivery of the wider crime and drug-related harm reduction.
Accordingly he proposes that local educational and social services
authorities, probation and prisons falling into a local area should
also be made responsible authorities
3. ADDITIONAL
PROPOSED MAYORAL
AMENDMENTS
3.1 Attached as an annex is a list of the
amendments that the Mayor is seeking to achieve.
The Mayor of London
February 2002
| 
