Memorandum by the Association of Chief
Police Officers (ACPO) (SOC 77)
INTRODUCTION
"ACPO" welcomes this opportunity to
articulate the very real and current opportunities for policing
to contribute even further to social cohesion. Over the past few
years there have been great strides made in relation to police
accountability and performance delivery, new partnership structures
implemented and a timely range of new powers and approaches for
tackling anti-social behaviour. These have introduced new ways
of working, assessing need and allocating resources against complex
and growing demands and public expectation. There has also been
running in parallel, an encouraging emphasis upon neighbourhood
renewal, with the capacity and funding to bring about significant
social and environmental improvement. Levels of crime, disorder
and tension cannot be disassociated from broader societal factors,
and improvements in the social fabric and policing should be mutually
beneficial and reinforcing.
Nevertheless, there is a danger that the burgeoning
reactive nature of policing, together with the way in which police
performance is measured, could skew police activity away from
its essential and evidenced role in social cohesion. Likewise,
there is a similar risk that conflicting structures, measurements
and initiatives between and within departments, result in the
diffusion of effort and focus. This is not to criticise the implementation
of much contained in the "Police Reform" programme or
through the "New Commitment", but their co-ordination
and the identification of conflicting pressures and interests
is critical if the potential for greater social cohesion is to
be realised. The inclusion of "community engagement and civil
renewal" as one of two major themes in this year's National
Policing Plan is a significant step forward, as is the current
consultation exercise "Building Safer Communities Together".
ACPO endorses fully the statement made in the introduction to
this consultation that community safety is not just a matter for
the police service. However, the four areas addressed in this
consultation, notably that of increasing community engagement,
strengthening accountability, improving operational effectiveness
and modernising the Police Service must all be explicitly linked
to a broader agenda of regeneration and social/quality of life
improvement, if crime is to fall further and civil renewal take
place. This paper will analyse the police role, examine current
challenges, overview developments and present proposals within
this context.
THE POLICING
ROLE
Historically, and from the inception of the
modern police service, policing can be said to have played a significant
part in the maintenance of social cohesion. Indeed, the first
"primary objective of an efficient police" was that
of the prevention of crime, followed only then by the detection
and punishment of offenders if crime is committed. The policing
role has never been simply confined to the imposition of authority
on behalf of the state but relies upon public consent, co-operation
and assistance in the fulfilment of the preventative duty. Confidence
in policing is vital not only for the criminal justice system
to function, but also if the police are to receive the "community
intelligence" and co-operation necessary to discourage offending
and enhance cohesion. This confidence is a product of an active
and progressive relationship in which the impact, visibility
and accessibility of policing is sustained and supported.
In the relatively recent past, however, the
capability of the police to respond to crises, whilst simultaneously
engaging in longer-term relationship building and problem solving,
has come under increasing strain. Indeed, 999 calls have doubled
in just eight years. This has led to the introduction of new and
more sophisticated models of geographic ownership, essentially
relying upon dedicated community beat officers to maintain relationships
and tackle quality of life issues, whilst generalist officers
and specialists deal with escalating emergencies and investigations.
Much of public demand actually has little to do with emergencies
or serious crime, but relates to issues affecting overall confidence
such as abandoned cars and environmental nuisances. These calls
for assistance are also increasing dramatically, perhaps a product
of growing societal uncertainty, and although they do not carry
immediate risk they must also be tackled effectively. If not,
confidence in the police declines leading to a lack of support
in more serious issues, and the collective effect of neighbourhood
nuisance eventually undermines social cohesion. Even recently
introduced models of geographic policing are coming under pressure
and scrutiny as too inflexible to simultaneously fight crime and
improve quality of life and confidence.
POLICING DILEMMAS
At this stage it is pertinent to articulate
the growing complexity and breadth of the challenges facing policing,
all of which directly influence social cohesion. It would be true
to say that global problems now affect every street corner in
a way that was unimaginable only several years ago. The impact
of the Iraq war and events in Afghanistan, for example, led to
a rise in heroin price on the streets of Leicester of 30%. This
in turn resulted in a corresponding rise in burglary as addicts
sought the means to finance the increased costs for their fix.
The implications of global terrorism do not need stating. Similarly,
societal changes have resulted in the greater polarisation of
differing groups and neighbourhoods, leading in turn to great
changes in both the context and nature of crime. It would be a
mistake to limit social cohesion to issues of race and culture,
as vulnerability and fragmentation are much more complex issues.
Indeed, even the term "community" is now questionable
as even small geographic areas contain a rich variety of multi-faceted
interests, associations and backgrounds.
Space does not permit thorough analysis of the
implications of such change, but the manifestations are very real
indeed. These have been recently articulated in the first national
strategic assessment. In summary, the drug market is growing,
taking full advantage of free movement between countries, the
growth in city centre entertainment, and the exploitation of deprived
estates and neighbourhoods. Firearm related criminality has risen
by 41% in two years. There are clear tensions in some areas where
large numbers of asylum seekers have sought refuge. Racially aggravated
crimes rose by 113% between 2000 and 2002 and there is an undoubted
rise in street level violence, much of which can be attributed
to binge drinking and new relationship patterns between young
people. Whilst there have been undoubted falls in vehicle crime,
burglary and other property related categories, the rise in drug
related criminality, violence, and anti-social behaviour have
major implications for social cohesion. This is even more so in
those neighbourhoods within which vulnerability, crime and polarisation
have created a destructive cycle with implications for everyone.
The observations of the Social Exclusion Unit that 10% of geographic
areas account for 40% of crime, remains of significant importance
if escalating demand is to be reduced and public confidence increased.
Not only that, but any success in breaking this destructive cycle
would free resources and capacity to tackle global threats and
broader based issues.
The rises in violence and anti-social behaviour
are, of course, partly attributable to changes in national crime
recording definition and procedure. These have brought welcome
consistency and a true baseline against which any analysis can
take place. Furthermore, the greater the accessibility of policing,
and the more confidence with which it is held, the more crime
that is reported and as such recorded. In some crime categories,
such as hate crime and domestic violence, the police service has
implemented new recording processes and practice which have undoubtedly
exposed a degree of vulnerability and tension previously hidden
to view.
POLICING DEVELOPMENTS
Nevertheless, in spite of these measures and
prolonged success against property crimes, overall confidence
in policing has fallen steadily in correlation to increasing demand
and expectation. Over the past decade, it has become increasingly
clear that resolving these dilemmas has required a radical look
at how resources are focused and an increasing imperative to be
creative and flexible. In response, the Police Service has introduced
tighter performance management and business discipline to assess
the impact of activity and target effort. Similarly, the introduction
of the national intelligence model across the country has enabled
rational and objective choices to be made at local, cross border
and national level. The national intelligence model is based upon
the thesis that crime can be reduced by concentrating upon four
things, notably the targeting of recidivist offenders, the identification
of crime series and their investigation, the identification of
crime "hot spots" and the identification of longer term
crime prevention opportunities. The use of strategic assessments
and problem profiles in this context are proving of immense importance
in understanding where resources are best positioned for maximum
effect.
On its own, however, the use of performance
management and the national intelligence model will not improve
public confidence and increase social cohesion. It could be argued
that, unless managed carefully, the business techniques employed
could lend themselves to short term measures at the expense of
longer-term relationship and capacity building. The solutions
to crime cannot be viewed as a series of discreet actions based
upon crime types or individual offenders without taking into account
their context or cause. It is relatively easy, for example, to
flood a high crime or "hot spot" area with police officers
and "keep the lid" on crime whilst they are present.
It takes a much longer and sustained presence to build confidence
to the extent where communities are willing to provide information
and the quality of life starts to improve. It also takes time
for local partnerships to operate with the basis of trust and
understanding necessary for success. Indeed, it is utterly pointless
relying upon random patrol, or the efforts of an overwhelmed and
isolated community beat officer to resolve complex problems, when
the neighbourhood in question may need intensive effort from literally
dozens of dedicated officers. Neither will simply providing extra
officers by itself create lasting change. The recent "priority
policing area" initiative showed very clearly that solving
the problems of a neighbourhood in Bristol, for example, required
local policing in concert with measures to tackle the importation
of drugs into the area. Similarly, recent initiatives in Leicester
centred upon the use of dedicated, long term policing teams on
inner-city estates, have also used the specialist skills of a
regional squad to disrupt the supply chain.
Performance management and the national intelligence
model both provide the framework to discern the scope and nature
of problems, and examine the impact of subsequent actions. They
can provide the "decision making" discipline to move
resources or focus specialist skills at a particular issue. They
must not conversely restrict flexibility and long term capacity
building, or restrain the role of policing to that of reacting
rather than pre-empting or preventing the breakdown of cohesion.
Neither must they create a scenario that undermines the importance
of routine quality of life or nuisance issues, or diminishes their
collective impact upon confidence in policing or social cohesion.
If there are two key weaknesses in current thinking
it is that there is insufficient regard taking of geographic difference/need
and quality of life issues in current practice and measurement.
This will be discussed later in relation to government policy,
but the benefits and potential of such thinking are already being
developed in two compelling initiatives. Both utilise rational,
business discipline in making choices as to where and how police
effort will be spent, as opposed to historical or ad hoc solutions.
They combine the best of the preventative role of policing with
the new techniques exemplified in the national intelligence model.
1. New geographic based approaches
As stated earlier, the use of community beat
officers to build relationships and problem solve has developed
in a number of guises, (for example problem oriented, geographic
or sector policing models), as demand has grown. These have been
based primarily upon artificial lines drawn on a map or political
boundaries. Unfortunately, the distribution of deprivation, vulnerability,
crime levels, social tension and even the prevalence of offenders
are not so simple. Therefore, spreading resource evenly across
geography in a somewhat ad hoc and random manner will not lead
to either the identification or resolution of deep-seated causal
factors. Five years ago, West Midlands Police made a strategic
decision to map out the nature of the "policing" terrain
by layering such information and assessing the implications. This
approach took account of major government regeneration investment
and opportunity, and positioned the policing role clearly into
"order creation" and not simply "order control".
In essence, the view was taken that if policing has a key role
to play in developing confidence and capacity building, then this
has to be reflected in the prioritisation and deployment of sufficient
resources to make a lasting difference. A convenient "strap-line"
to describe this approach might be "right people, right numbers,
right places". As a result, hundreds of police officers were
permanently posted as "guardians" into the most deprived
neighbourhoods, with clear deployment principles to ensure that
their presence was assured.
This specific initiative continues to be evaluated
by the Home Office. It is quite clear, however, that the strategic
prioritisation and use of police officers in this way has added
significant value and under-pining to other regenerative effort.
The evaluation highlights how police officers have become "agents
of community cohesion" and "catalysts of change",
and how in the longer term the quality of life of polarised communities
has improved. The evaluation also warns against the conflicting
pressures of centrally set targets and short term, reactive thinking.
The initiative has also raised a number of other considerations
of significance. Care must be taken that sections of the public
do not perceive that others are receiving more favourable treatment.
Spreading resource equally on mistaken notions of fairness will
undermine public protection and social cohesion. Whilst there
is a need to ensure response times and investigative standards
apply equally, concentrating resource in the right areas will
restrict offending behaviour and the export of crime. The principles
apply equally to urban and rural areas and make good "business"
sense.
In addition, the division between "reactive"
and "community" police officers is unhelpful and restricts
relationship building and knowledge. Whereas it may be necessary
for intensive police teams to be deployed in the most challenging
neighbourhoods or even streets, there is no reason why every officer
cannot be given personal responsibility for oversight of a particular
geographic problem or "micro-beat. This problem might be
a school, children's home, or even a collection of villages, and
personal accountability/guardianship would be the default position
to which the officer would revert when not fulfilling his or her
primary function. Current models of policing do not allow for
this level of intrusive or comprehensive ownership. Neither does
training prepare police officers for such a guardianship role,
or relationship building and the acquisition of community knowledge.
They are trained in the exercise of power and procedure without
sufficient emphasis upon their role in social cohesion. This is
important, as the style of policing described above is not imposing
policing upon people, but using policing as a means of developing
confidence and brokering solutions.
The findings of the West Midlands initiative
are replicated in a number of other Forces and the "priority
policing area" project. These are being brought together
by the "National Centre for Policing Excellence", (established
by the Police Reform Programme to produce national codes of practice
and guidance), under terms of reference to produce "community
cohesion" guidance that include the:
— Development of community cohesion
doctrine at a strategic, tactical and operational level.
— Role of policing and benefits of
co-ordination with regeneration initiatives, including the opportunities
for effective partnerships.
— The integration of mapping tension,
criminality and offender densities within the National Intelligence
Model to inform the appropriate levels of police responses and
effort.
— Guidance will include consideration
of how such a geographic focus through the National Intelligence
Model may engender and sustain broad based trust and confidence
whilst sustaining performance improvement in line with the National
Policing Plan.
— The guidance will also inform the
ongoing work of the National Intelligence Model.
It will be noted that this community cohesion
guidance is not specifically focused upon race related issues.
This is recognition of the fact that the problems faced by ethnic
minorities are more complex than simply matters of tension based
upon background or culture. Restricting potential solutions through
inflexible definition and "siloed" approaches would
be damaging in the longer term.
2. The National Reassurance Project
This initiative, overseen by Surrey Constabulary,
fundamentally challenges the way in which quality of life issues
are tackled strategically and at the local level. It takes the
premise that a failure to deal consistently and thoroughly with
"signal" crimes, (in other words the very visible manifestations
of anti-social behaviour that create fear), undermines public
confidence and ultimately social cohesion. The project is developing
new and innovative ways of engaging with local communities, prioritising
local police activity and establishing methods for local officers
to resolve community concerns. Although early days, the integration
of this with the national intelligence model means that quality
of life issues will receive due focus and attention on the basis
of rational decision making. Together with the National Centre
of Policing Excellence work, it provides the basis for policing
into the new decade. Indeed, a compelling observation of the former
head of the "Policing Standards Unit", is that the most
successful police forces not only use performance management and
the national intelligence model, but also have a policing style
that put resource in the right place and tackles quality of life
issues effectively. As such, they have a focus upon social cohesion
and fulfil the stated Home Office desire for community engagement
to empower local people, ensure a visible and accessible policing
style that helps local people to take action themselves and strengthen
involvement in policing.
THE WAY
FORWARD
Perhaps the start point of discerning the way
forward is a tacit recognition that policing has a full and essential
role in social cohesion. Economic and social improvement needs
good order to be successful, and the police service is the only
agency with the capacity to provide this. There are no artificial
choices to be made between crime fighting and social cohesion,
the two are part of the same process.
The fundamental question that has to be asked
is, therefore, does the current centrally directed police oversight
and performance regime support or restrict the policing role to
reactive and short term measures? Certainly, new accountability
structures and arrangements must be of benefit in raising standards
and professionalism. ACPO supports fully the ambition of the Police
Reform programme and the emphasis upon actual delivery. It is
also pertinent to note that the policing performance assessment
framework is under constant review. However, there are three areas
where close consideration needs to be given. Firstly, the current
regime of intervention is based upon a relatively short space
of time and needs to be more diagnostic in nature. Secondly, performance
should not be based essentially upon individual crime types but
against the deployments and use of resources across the spectrum
of policing activity. Some crime targets set arbitrarily four
years ago could skew police deployment away from geographic areas
and into short-term squads. Both may be needed, but performance
should be based upon justification for action and not simply short
term or annual delivery. Thirdly, the inappropriate use of some
performance targets may actually reduce the ability to move resources
and restrict actual street presence. If, for example, an over-emphasis
is given to providing an excellent standard of feedback across
all investigations or police interventions, then this will require
larger administrative units and office bound police officers.
This is of particular importance in the citizen focus elements
of police performance assessment, where pragmatic choices will
need to be made.
In addition, if it is government ambition that
policing should play a full role in social cohesion, are the "drivers"
of police activity recognised sufficiently to make a difference
and does the national policing plan provide sufficient prioritisation
and incentive? Targets set by other departments such as the ODPM
have little impact unless they are co-ordinated within the national
policing plan, and exhortations will be diminished in impact.
There is a need to clarify both the language of renewal, liveability
and cohesion in a way that translates into the delivery of policing
services. It would be an appropriate opportunity under the Home
Office "civil renewal" debate, to map and assess the
historical ambition of neighbourhood renewal, what has resulted
and whether national targets, initiatives and departments have
become over complicated. The divisions between strategic and crime
and disorder partnerships, community and crime and disorder plans
need careful attention if the right balance between strategic
and local oversight is to be achieved. Similarly, at present there
are well meaning structures for neighbourhood renewal, active
communities, community cohesion, community engagement and policing
priority areas, coming under a variety of differing regimes but
all essentially addressing similar concerns. In addition, the
new criminal justice arrangements have great potential for improving
the system, but the relationship and accountability of local boards
compared to other partnerships needs discernment.
This submission runs in parallel with the current
"Building Safer Communities" consultation and the following
points are made to inform that debate. They are based upon the
analysis of the police role and good practice outlined previously.
THE ACCOUNTABILITY
OF POLICING
— "ACPO" has always held
that the national policing plan should be positioned within the
broader context of a national community safety plan. This remains
the ideal vehicle for greater focus and co-ordination of accountabilities,
targets and initiatives and its introduction has been given greater
impetus by the civil renewal agenda.
— A greater emphasis should be given
within the police performance assessment framework to the prioritisation
and deployment of resource in support of social cohesion. Levels
of crime are symptoms of a lack of cohesion and assessment of
performance should be more diagnostic in nature. Greater emphasis
should be given to quality of life issues and aspirations in the
local context.
— Greater clarity should be given to
partnerships as to their scope, remit and the accountability of
individual agencies to the partnership itself. Crime and disorder
partnerships (CDRP) are able to deal with localised issues and
should become more responsive. However, there remain critical
interventions of vital importance to crime reduction and social
cohesion that are currently not sufficiently addressed. Strategic
partnerships must be established above "CDRP" level,
to co-ordinate and focus the supervision and support of all prison
releases, join-up measures to pre-empt offending by the next generation
of persistent offenders, identify the needs of specific vulnerable
groups and agree priority neighbourhoods. Such focus would bring
immeasurable benefit but does not fall within current accountabilities
or performance regimes. These points were made in the original
ACPO submission to the National Neighbourhood Renewal strategy.
The use of strategic assessments and problem profiling should
be introduced into all partnerships in line with the national
intelligence model.
— Any changes to local oversight or
consultation arrangements must not impede the ability of local
commanders or ACPO to deploy resources in priority neighbourhoods
or other intelligence led activity. There is scope to enhance
the influence and decision making of local people but this should
follow the good practice identified within the National Reassurance
Project.
— The vulnerabilities of ethnic minority
communities should be reflected to a greater extent in future
race and diversity strategies. Confidence in policing needs to
be enhanced but the links between recruitment and retention, professional
standards and training, the exercise of police powers (citizen
focus), and operational practice (community cohesion and reassurance)
are not explicitly stated. Greater strategic oversight is required.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
— Current approaches to freeing police
officer time for relationship building concentrate upon the reduction
of bureaucracy. This is insufficient and scrutiny needs to move
to that of redefining acceptable and unacceptable "busyness"
and prioritising key activities, rather than seeking excellence
across the board. The impact of the Police Performance Assessment
Framework must be carefully assessed to ensure it does not inadvertently
reduce such capacity through setting certain standards of quality
of service too high. For example, demanding high satisfaction
in feedback to police at the expense of greater street presence.
— New and more flexible "community
policing" models should be thoroughly explored within the
National Centre of Policing Excellence, in order to exploit fully
the potential of the community cohesion guidance and reassurance
project. In addition, the importance of relationship building,
problem solving and the role of policing in social cohesion should
be developed within police training, and integrated into current
probationer pilots.
OPERATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
— The capability of individual Forces
to concentrate resource, meet broad demand, and draw specialist
support into neighbourhoods when necessary, is a product of structure,
size and efficiency. A measured evaluation would be timely as
to whether a move to a smaller number of strategic Forces would
support social cohesion, and the tackling of national, regional
and local problems more effectively.
— The National Intelligence model should
be developed further to incorporate community/social cohesion
and quality of life considerations. This concept of community
cohesion is broader than simply "inter-ethnic" conflict
and seeks to reduce fragmentation due to disproportionate levels
of criminality, victimisation, fear and tension.
MODERNISING THE
POLICE SERVICE
— The use of specialist and community
support officers is expanding within the Police Service and has
brought timely flexibility. This "mixed economy" of
policing should be supported and should not be restrained by concentration
upon police numbers. However, it is important that new, artificial
divides are not introduced in the interests of efficiency between
response, community and investigation. The emphasis should be
upon the development of appropriate skills, (for example in the
micro-beat concept), and not upon rigid role definition.
CONCLUSION
There is now a unique opportunity to position
policing at the heart of social cohesion through the civil renewal
debate. The learning and good practice is already emerging, the
business disciplines and partnership structures already present
and the accountability regime developing. In 1981 Lord Scarman
observed that there was a need to "reconsider the provision
of opportunities for operational officers to get to know the community
they are policing" and that, "the police do not create
social deprivation or racial disadvantage . . . yet their role
is critical". This insight is as pertinent today as nearly
25 years ago and the measures outlined above would support progress.
|
