49. Second supplementary memorandum
submitted by the Home Office
POLICING AND
TARGETS
The Government has moved considerably to simplify
the target regimes as they apply to policing and to provide greater
flexibility to the police service on which crimes they choose
to target.
The Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets which
arose from the Spending Review in 2002 specified individual targets
for reductions on burglary, vehicle crime and robbery. There was
also a specific policing PSA target which sought to bring about
improvements in policing across all forces as well as increases
in front-line policing.
The new target arrangements which flow from
the Spending Review in 2004 seek to streamline this considerably.
Instead of a range of crime-specific targets, we have set a single
all-embracing goal which seeks to secure a 15% reduction in overall
crime by 2007-08 and more in high crime areas. This will give
forces much greater flexibility in terms of deciding how this
is best achieved to reflect local crime reduction priorities.
This step has been matched by a considerably slimmed down National
Policing Plan with five clear priorities for the police service.
As part of the process for delivering this goal,
the Government is asking each Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership
(CDRP)—involving the police and other partners of which
it is comprised—to set its own crime reduction targets in
line with the national objective.
Placing the responsibility on CDRPs for making
an explicit contribution to crime reduction reflects the police
service's view that they cannot on their own deliver the required
reduction in crime. They depend on many other organisations and
agencies to contribute as part of a joint and structured effort.
Clearly, of course, there does need to be alignment
between targets agreed with CDRPs and those which forces agree
with their police authorities. That is why we have stressed throughout
the key importance of both force and authority representatives
being part of the discussion process at CDRP level.
The agreements reached, CDRP by CDRP, are intended
to be reached by discussion and agreement with the full involvement
of both forces and police authorities. Clearly, there is a role
for regional Government Offices to seek to ensure that agreement
is reached on an appropriately stretching set of targets and to
report back if, in one or more individual cases, they do not think
this is the case. But this is a process of discussion and agreement.
In terms of the targets which drive policing
at force level, this is a matter for negotiation between chief
officers and their police authorities although clearly they will
wish to ensure that these are compatible with the decisions which
were taken at the CDRP level and take into account the National
Policing Plan priorities.
Underpinning these arrangements, the Policing
Performance Assessment Framework (PPAF) will enable forces, authorities,
partnerships and the Government to track policing performance.
The PPAF will monitor performance on seven crime measures thus
enabling all involved to assess relative and comparative strengths
and weaknesses and respond accordingly. This supercedes the earlier
PSA target on police performance whilst enabling us to continue
to achieve the Government's goal of narrowing the variations in
police performance and provide an equivalent standard of policing
to all communities.
By way of further context in terms of Southampton
specifically, Hazel Blears wrote to Mr Denham on 14 January about
the performance of the Southampton BCU—a copy of which is
attached. Hazel Blears has, additionally, recently replied to
two written PQs tabled by Mr Denham on BCUs and targets.
FRONTLINE POLICING/DIARY
OF A
POLICE OFFICER
Diary of a Police Officer was published
on 1 November 2001 and sought, as Mr Denham knows, to understand
what it was that police officers actually do and to identify ways
of freeing up officers' time so that they could concentrate more
on reassurance policing. However, although the study addressed
issues around how forces could reduce time delays in various processes,
make more use of (civilian) staff and how other agencies could
alleviate the burden on the police, that study did not attempt
a definition or general description of front line policing.
3 February 2005
| 
