Select Committee on Public Accounts Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 100-121)

DEPARTMENT OF CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT AND THE ROYAL PARKS

2 NOVEMBER 2005

  Q100  Mr Bacon: Royal Parks Police, paragraph 1.7. It talks about the merger of The Royal Parks Constabulary with the Metropolitan Police. Dame Sue, what drove that? Cost?

  Dame Sue Street: No. It was primarily driven by the public order and public safety needs, looking across London. It seemed extremely desirable that the Metropolitan Police should take care of the public in the parks.

  Q101  Mr Bacon: When you say "looking across London", that is interesting because where I live, representing a very rural area, we are often disadvantaged if there is an incident in the major city, Norwich, because the police are drawn away from the rural area to deal with what tends to be a greater crime area, namely the urban area. I would have thought that the advantage of having a separate constabulary was precisely that those people were dedicated. They do not get drawn away to deal with crime in Oxford Street, for example. When you say "looking across the whole of London", are you saying that those police should be available all across London and for London's needs as a whole rather than just for parks, because that is what it sounded like.

  Dame Sue Street: This was the operational advice from the Met. What drove this was a concern to ensure that the safety of the public in the parks was as expertly enforced and had the same access to the resources of the Metropolitan Police.

  Q102  Mr Bacon: Apart from the unfortunate incidents of slippage and limb breakage by the Diana Fountain, what evidence was there that The Royal Parks Constabulary were unable to look after the public in the park?

  Dame Sue Street: I do not for a moment cast aspersions on their ability.

  Q103  Mr Bacon: I was not asking whether you were casting aspersions. I was asking what evidence there was that they were unable to do the job, because you just said the advice from the Metropolitan Police was it would be better if it was done by them.

  Dame Sue Street: I thought that what was important was to understand what would be best overall for the safety of the public, so we opened a discussion not on the basis of evidence—

  Q104  Mr Bacon: It was not an evidence based discussion?

  Dame Sue Street: It was in the spirit of inquiry.

  Q105  Mr Bacon: A spiritual discussion?

  Dame Sue Street: Certainly not. This is quite an important matter.

  Q106  Mr Bacon: I know it is and I speak with feeling because I used to work in The Royal Parks. It was my first job after university. I did not bother to declare it because it only lasted three weeks but I was an assistant gardener in The Royal Parks. I went round the world instead, but it was a very nice three weeks and there was a separate Royal Parks Constabulary. Many of the gardeners were not contracted out and it seemed to work perfectly okay. You have just said that the Metropolitan Police gave you advice that they should merge. I take it you did not take advice from The Royal Parks Constabulary as to whether they should merge, or did you?

  Dame Sue Street: This has been agreed by all. I remember the bombs, as we all do, in The Royal Parks in 1982. These are obviously extremely important risks in this climate. What everybody wanted was to make sure that we are able to keep people in parks absolutely safe and that the accountability regimes the Metropolitan Police have in place apply to all.

  Q107  Mr Bacon: I just heard the Chairman, who runs through the park often in the mornings and swims in the Serpentine with some other Members of Parliament each morning, say soto voce that there are no police in the parks at all. Certainly when I was in the parks you did see the police. What assurance can you give us that this is not going to lead to a further diminution in the amount of policing that goes on protecting the public in parks?

  Dame Sue Street: I am extremely grateful to my colleague who has advised me that the police exceeded their targets for high visibility policing by 140% in 2004-05.

  Q108  Mr Bacon: Could you send us a note about what the targets were?

  Dame Sue Street: I will send you all the information I have[3].


  Q109 Mr Bacon: When I worked there, on a Monday morning, the park was absolutely disgusting because it was covered in litter. My first job was to pick the litter up. I have not been in the park early on a Monday morning for some years. Is it still the case that at seven o'clock on a Monday morning the park is disgusting, or on a Sunday night?

  Mr Camley: On a Monday morning I come through Hyde Park and it is in very good condition.

  Q110  Mr Bacon: Is that because you now clean it up the night before?

  Mr Camley: There are regimes for clearing up, yes.

  Q111  Mr Bacon: I always used to think there should be swingeing fines for people who drop litter to encourage people not to, but is there a problem with security and terrorism that we simply cannot have enough bins?

  Mr Camley: We could probably look at where we could have more bins, although we try to keep them away from the main areas of grassland and so on because they break up the view of the park.

  Q112  Mr Davidson: You have only been appointed in the last six months or so?

  Mr Camley: That is correct.

  Q113  Mr Davidson: You were not the deputy before?

  Mr Camley: No.

  Q114  Mr Davidson: You are not guilty of anything that has previously happened. Is that fair?

  Mr Camley: I was not there previously.

  Q115  Mr Davidson: Am I right in thinking that there are a number of steps that have now been instituted which should result in the parks being woken up a bit and that the programmes that are being introduced are likely to result in the usage being much more socially inclusive?

  Mr Camley: I hope so. My aim is for the parks generally to be more focused but that is about learning from others and bringing in other users.

  Q116  Mr Davidson: If you produce a report for us indicating usage and how it has improved, say, for 12 months from now in terms of age, race and social class, all of that would be positive, you think?

  Mr Camley: Yes.

  Q117  Mr Davidson: Could I therefore ask that such a report is produced and that the figures are not made up.

  Mr Camley: Of course.[4]

  Q118  Chairman: Most people who currently use this park presumably want to go there for peace and tranquillity. I read in paragraph 2.7 that you are targeting with a view to attracting "disaffected young people". What planned activities have you for them?

  Mr Camley: Sue mentioned the work we did with the Prince's Trust at Bushy Park, where people who had few job prospects were invited for a week of working in the park so that they could gain some experience.

  Q119  Chairman: Like our friend, Mr Bacon? A disaffected youth?

  Mr Camley: He has gone on to greater and better things since.

  Q120  Chairman: He was more useful when he was working in the park.

  Mr Camley: That is one of the ways in which we have tried to work with local communities, so that we can help people who are more deprived.

  Q121  Chairman: How many were injured in the fountain in the first few weeks?

  Dame Sue Street: There were 15 injuries in the first 16 days. Since the remedial works have been completed, since last May, with over 600,000 visitors there have been four accidents.

  Chairman: Thank you very much for appearing before us. On behalf of all of us who use the park, may I thank you and your staff for the excellent job they do? If this was a near fiasco, I am sure no blame attaches to you or your staff. I suspect they were not adequately consulted. Thank you very much.nb





3   Details of targets are published within the Metropolitan Police, Royal Parks Operational Command Unit Policing Plan, and are available on the Metropolitan Police's website: www.met.police.uk Back

4   Note by witness: A report on the usage of the Parks will be published in 12 months time. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 21 March 2006