Conclusions and recommendations
1. The
role of the police in the 21st century is broader than it has
ever been, owing to a sharp rise in crime levels during the second
half of the 20th century, the classification of increasing numbers
of incidents as criminal offences, the impact of changes in society
and technological advances on patterns of criminality, and growing
police involvement in multi-agency approaches to public protection.
To ensure the police can fulfil their core roles effectively,
there is a need for greater clarity as to their mission and the
extent of their responsibilities. Recent reviews of different
aspects of policing have not gone far enough. We recommend that
an independent review, such as a Royal Commission, or similarly
independent review, is established to review what the police do
and how they are organised to do it. This review should be focussed
and time-limited, in order to provide the police with the clarity
about their role that they urgently need. The Government should
exercise caution in future when classifying undesirable behaviour
as criminal offences. (Paragraph 17)
2. It is vital that
the police are involved in partnership activity at a local level
as an effective means of preventing and protecting the public
against crime. However, the police should not be expected to fill
gaps left by a lack of capacity on the part of other statutory
or community organisations. All agencies involved in partnership
work should be held accountable for delivery. In replying to this
report, the Home Office should provide us with assurance that
all local authorities in England and Wales will be held to account
for Assessment of Policing and Community Safety indicators. (Paragraph
18)
3. The current system
of measuring police performance has distorted operational priorities,
criminalised many individuals for trivial misdemeanours, and prevented
forces from focusing on what is important locally. There is much
to be welcomed in initial attempts to reform the performance framework.
We are pleased that the generic targets for offences brought to
justice and sanction detections, which encouraged forces to focus
on the easiest crimes to resolve rather than those which have
the most significant impact on public safety, have been removed
from the 2008/09 statutory performance indicators. These changes
should be reflected in local practice and must be reinforced by
an alignment in performance measures between the police and the
Crown Prosecution Service. We support the Government's proposal
to end top-down numerical targets, as set out in the Green Paper.
The shift towards greater performance monitoring at a local level
will require that police authorities are properly resourced to
undertake this role. (Paragraph 38)
4. We are disappointed
that fraud is not a police priority, given that it is estimated
to cost the UK nearly £14 billion per year and identity fraud
is a cause of major public concern. We recommend that forces are
required to give greater priority to tackling fraud and are allocated
sufficient resources to carry out this function. (Paragraph 39)
5. There should be
a greater focus on the qualitative aspects of police performance.
We accept that it is inappropriate to measure performance on counter-terrorism
and serious and organised crime through quantitative targets and
the Home Office should devise a different means of measuring performance
in this area. (Paragraph 40)
6. Officers should
be given greater discretion so that they can deal with incidents
in the most appropriate way, particularly from the perspective
of the victim, but also for the perpetrator and the criminal justice
system as a whole. But the success of this measure relies on effective
supervision from frontline sergeants. To this end, we urge the
Government to facilitate speedy implementation of HMIC recommendations
for national standards for the role of sergeant, training for
frontline sergeants and review of promotion processes. We also
seek assurances that training for all new officers will help to
ensure that they are confident to use their discretion, and the
public can have confidence in them to do so. (Paragraph 41)
7. Low levels of public
confidence in the police and distrust of crime statistics are
in part driven by a lack of clear information about local crime
and police activity. The public should be provided with better
information about crime levels in their neighbourhood. Neighbourhood
crime mapping appears to be a useful means to achieve this, but
the Home Office should be alert to the potential for criminals
to use this information to target certain areas. Local police
successes should also be publicised in more detail, to reassure
the public in a way in which outline crime reduction statistics
do not. The Government should consider how this information can
be provided in a way that is genuinely accessible. In addition
to improving trust and confidence, this information should prove
a useful tool in setting neighbourhood policing priorities that
genuinely reflect local problems. As a matter of course, police
forces should make available to the media the general details
of criminal activities that have been reported to the police.
(Paragraph 46)
8. The majority of
the public do not have confidence in the police's ability to deal
with minor crime and to be there when they are needed. While,
on the one hand, we support the renewed focus on serious crime
as a way for the police to focus their attentions on this important
area of work, on the other, we are concerned that minor crime
and anti-social behaviour, which are of great concern to the public,
will continue to lack sufficient police attention. (Paragraph
56)
9. We were impressed
with trials undertaken in some forces to give members of the public
who contact the police in a non-emergency situation more choice
of whether and when they would like an officer to attend. Forces
should take note of this approach as a way of increasing public
satisfaction. (Paragraph 57)
10. Members of the
public are often unsure of how to contact the police in a non-emergency
situation, which results in misuse of the 999 emergency number
and delays in reporting and resolving low-level crime and anti-social
behaviour. We are disappointed that the Home Office withdrew funding
from the single 101 non-emergency number, which would have helped
to resolve this situation. We recommend that central funding for
the single 101 non-emergency number be reinstated and that the
scheme be implemented across England and Wales. (Paragraph 58)
11. We support the
principle behind providing local people with mobile numbers for
their neighbourhood officers, but in this form the proposal is
impracticable, given that neighbourhood officers are not always
on duty. It may be more appropriate for forces to reconfigure
call-handling procedures to ensure that members of the public
can access local information and be directed to the relevant local
officer. (Paragraph 59)
12. The public want
a more visible police service. We support greater use of visible
patrols as a key component of neighbourhood policing and a means
of increasing public confidence in the police and, potentially,
deterring crime. We welcome the Government's removal of the front-line
policing measure from the statutory performance indicators, because
the range of activities included within it had the potential to
mislead the public as to its meaning. Rather, the Home Office
should keep the public informed of the amount of time officers
spend on visible patrol. (Paragraph 63)
13. Police representatives
believe that the funding increases allocated in the most recent
Comprehensive Spending Review are not sufficient to meet requirements.
We consider specific aspects of policing for which a case has
been made for additional funding later in this Report. However,
in general, especially given the fact that the UK spends a higher
percentage of GDP on public order than comparable countries, we
consider the solution lies in finding ways to release resources
through greater efficiency rather than major increases in funding.
(Paragraph 72)
14. We support Sir
Ronnie Flanagan's recommendation for full application of the police
funding formula at the next Spending Review. The Home Office must
work closely with forces that currently benefit from the damping
arrangements to help them manage the transition. In the interim,
we recommend that the 5% cap on council tax be removed for those
authorities which have below-average precept levels, and that
this is coupled with measures ensuring greater accountability
to local people for policing. (Paragraph 73)
15. It would appear
that foreign nationals are more likely to be victims than perpetrators
of crime. However, it would also appear that they are disproportionately
represented among numbers of those committing certain—mostly
low-level—crimes. We recommend that all forces employ consistent
recording practices for offender and victim nationality, in order
to improve understanding and allow resources to be allocated to
meet demand. In addition, we recommend that some of the monies
from the transitional migration fund allocated to integration
projects be diverted to support greater education on British laws,
particularly those governing driving, on how immigrants can protect
themselves from becoming victims of crime, and how to report crime,
in the manner of information already provided by some local authorities.
The results of the Migration Statistics Improvement Programme
should be made available in time for the next Spending Review.
The Home Secretary should give consideration to how population
growth can be captured more quickly in funding settlements. (Paragraph
90)
16. It is clear, however,
that dealing with foreign nationals is more expensive for police
forces because of the need to employ interpreters and because
offenders often spend longer in custody. In replying to this report,
the Home Office should clarify whether or not individual police
forces will be allowed to bid from the transitional migration
fund. If they will not, the Home Secretary must set out proposals
to assist those forces whose funding has not kept pace with changes
in population. (Paragraph 91)
17. A more diverse
workforce can ease some of the burden on forces by reducing interpretation
costs and facilitating information-sharing between new communities
and the police. (Paragraph 92)
18. Alcohol-related
crime places a heavy burden on police resources and diverts officers
away from dealing with other types of crime. There is limited
evidence of the effect of the Licensing Act 2003 on the total
number of alcohol-related offences, but there is certainly a strong
perception amongst police forces that alcohol-related violence
is on the increase. What is clear is that forces now deploy resources
to deal with alcohol-related crime and disorder for longer periods
of time, as a result of longer opening hours, and in larger areas,
as late-night drinking is no longer confined to city centres.
(Paragraph 100)
19. Licence-holders
who sell to under-age drinkers or who do not take reasonable steps
to prevent alcohol-related crime and disorder increase pressure
on the police. We are not convinced that full use is being made
of powers under the Licensing Act 2003 to review licences where
the holder is found to be irresponsible. The Government should
also investigate the ability of local authorities to refuse licences
or impose appropriate conditions on licences to promote the licensing
objective of preventing crime and disorder, and their capacity
to monitor compliance with licence conditions. (Paragraph 106)
20. Increased police
powers to deal with drunk offenders do not appear to have had
a significant impact on their ability to reduce alcohol-related
crime. We recommend that the Government commission further research
into proactive use of penalty notices for disorder. Alcohol referral
schemes may prove effective in reducing the numbers of repeat
alcohol-related offenders but, having heard sceptical views from
frontline officers, we recommend that thorough evaluation of the
pilots should be completed before they are implemented nationwide.
(Paragraph 107)
21. We support the
principle behind Alcohol Disorder Zones, which encourage licensees
to work with the police and local authorities where there is a
particular problem of alcohol-related disorder. However, we share
the concerns of the House of Lords Merits of Statutory Instruments
Committee that they may be overly-bureaucratic. We recommend an
evaluation of their take-up and effectiveness within one year
of their commencement. We further recommend that the Government
encourage greater participation in voluntary Pubwatch schemes
to facilitate partnership between licensees and the police. (Paragraph
114)
22. The cheap availability
of alcohol in the off-trade is fuelling alcohol-related crime
and disorder and under-age drinking. A lack of clarity about competition
law is impeding effective action in this area. We recommend the
Government establish as soon as possible a legal basis for banning
the use of loss-leading by supermarkets and setting a minimum
price for the sale of alcohol. The Home Office should also work
with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to ensure that
local authorities are fully informed on how to use their powers
under the Licensing Act 2003 to impose licence conditions forbidding
drinks promotions. (Paragraph 124)
23. KPMG has issued
a damning verdict on the negligible impact of the alcohol trade's
Social Responsibility Standards. The standards need to be reissued
on a compulsory basis with a more effective inspection regime
and penalties for breaches. They should include a ban on drinks
promotions and measures to ensure responsible labelling and staff
training. We are also disappointed by the decision by the British
Beer and Pub Association to withdraw its policy on promotions.
Safeguards intended to promote public health and reduce crime
and anti-social behaviour are needed. The Government should clarify
whether competition law really does prevent such safeguards, if
necessary by bringing a test case. (Paragraph 125)
24. We understand
that policy makers are considering proposals for under-21s to
be banned from buying alcohol from supermarkets and off-licences
while continuing to be able to buy it in bars. Such proposals
seem to unfairly penalise young people who do drink responsibly.
Furthermore, we have seen no evidence to suggest that teenage
drinkers cause more problems for the police than those in their
early 20s. We do not support an increase in the age at which alcohol
can be legally purchased; rather, young people should be encouraged
to drink responsibly. (Paragraph 126)
25. We strongly believe
that there should be a presumption against the award of bail in
cases of murder, owing to the grave nature of the offence and
subsequent risk to the public. We support the option set out in
the Ministry of Justice consultation on Bail and Murder proposing
that bail be granted in cases of murder only if the court is satisfied
that there are really exceptional circumstances to justify it.
(Paragraph 138)
26. Police forces
do not always have sufficient capacity to monitor offenders released
on bail. Therefore, we also support proposals for courts to be
made aware of local police practices regarding monitoring of bail
conditions, so that these can be taken into account in determining
the adequacy of bail conditions; and for courts to be able to
impose conditions that must be met by the police before the defendant
is released on bail. Given this lack of consistency in police
practice, ACPO should consider drawing up guidance on monitoring
procedures for offenders released on bail. (Paragraph 139)
27. Although not directly
within the remit of our inquiry, we were concerned by evidence
we heard of the experiences of victims' families in attending
trials, in terms of the distress they suffer in having to fight
for a seat and the potential for intimidation by defendants' supporters.
Therefore, we welcome the proposal that Her Majesty's Court Service
should introduce separate seating arrangements for victims' families
in court. This should be done immediately. (Paragraph 140)
28. We welcome the
use of tagging orders to enable the police to monitor more effectively
defendants released on bail. However, we still have some reservations
about the extent to which breaches may occur; the Home Office
should keep this under review. In our opinion, breaches should
be dealt with by withdrawal of bail. (Paragraph 144)
29. Official statistics
appear to demonstrate a slight decrease rather than an increase
in knife crime but we doubt whether these represent the true picture.
Greater use of accident and emergency data would help to build
a better understanding of the extent of the problem, as would
proposals to extend the British Crime Survey to cover under-16s.
Gun crime causes irreparable damage to the communities affected
by it. We do not underestimate the importance of police efforts
to combat it. However, we believe that more emphasis and resources
should be assigned to tackling knife crime, given its far greater
prevalence. (Paragraph 151)
30. The evidence we
heard on knife-crime convinced us of the value of undertaking
an inquiry devoted to that subject, which will commence in the
autumn. We do, however, make a series of initial recommendations
here, based on the evidence we have taken in this inquiry. (Paragraph
163)
31. We were impressed
by successful approaches in Hackney and Moss Side which combined
focused, intelligence-led campaigns against key offenders with
diversionary activities to tackle knife and gun crime respectively.
We recommend that the additional funding provided by the Government
to tackle knife crime is used to replicate this approach. (Paragraph
164)
32. The power to search
for weapons, where used appropriately, is a key tool in tackling
knife-crime. We recommend that police officers are given clearer
guidance as to when they may search those they have stopped for
non-arrestable offences for weapons, upon discovery of any recent
convictions for carrying a knife or gun. (Paragraph 165)
33. We are concerned
at evidence suggesting that many who are convicted of being in
possession of a firearm do not receive the minimum jail term,
and that very few teenagers found in possession of a knife receive
appropriate sentences. Possessing a weapon is a very serious offence.
We recommend that the Home Secretary asks the Sentencing Guidelines
Council to revisit their guidelines for knife and gun offences
to ensure this is properly reflected. (Paragraph 166)
34. We are disappointed
that police officers are still spending 25-30% of their time completing
paperwork. However, we were impressed by Staffordshire Police's
efforts to condense their crime-recording procedures and look
forward to the results of the crime-recording and streamlined
justice process pilots. Should they prove to be as successful
as anticipated, we urge national implementation as soon as possible.
In addition to the two-tier approach proposed for recording 'serious'
and 'local' crimes, we consider there are a number of minor crimes
which could be re-classified as 'incidents', with discretion as
to whether they need be recorded. (Paragraph 176)
35. Time spent waiting
for CPS charging decisions means that officers are often forced
to bail offenders before charges can be brought. Earlier this
year, Sir Ronnie Flanagan recommended the issuing of guidance
to enable forces to make full use of the charging powers that
they currently hold, and extension of these powers to include
all summary offences and additional offences subject to trial
at magistrates or crown courts. In its reply to this Report, the
Government should confirm that these recommendations are being
implemented. (Paragraph 177)
36. On the basis of
the evidence we have heard, we conclude that Sir Ronnie Flanagan's
proposals for Stop and Account incorporate the appropriate accountability
mechanism and are unlikely to damage community relations. We therefore
welcome the change of PACE Code A to allow the approach to be
piloted in seven Basic Command Units across four forces over the
summer. We await the results of the pilots, which will be presented
to the House in due course. (Paragraph 181)
37. On the basis of
early evidence from the pilots, we are cautiously optimistic that
current attempts to reduce bureaucracy may be more successful
than previous efforts. It is essential that the service achieves
the level of efficiency savings quantified by Sir Ronnie Flanagan.
(Paragraph 182)
38. Personal digital
assistants can significantly increase the amount of time that
police officers spend on visible patrol and dealing with incidents
outside the station, and reduce the time they spend on paperwork.
We welcome the Home Secretary's recent grant of £50 million
to fund PDAs in 19 English forces and her promises of a further
£25 million, but recognise that many forces were disappointed
not to win funding bids. We recommend that sufficient funding
is made available as soon as possible to enable all frontline
officers to have access to a PDA. (Paragraph 192)
39. Central procurement
of new technology allows for economies of scale, consistent standards
and integrated systems, and makes the police service a more attractive
client for providers. In addition, while we commend individual
innovations towards more effective policing on the part of individual
forces, we query how much time is wasted in duplicated efforts.
In our view, it is possible to achieve a balance with meeting
the needs of individual forces by developing a common platform
that can then be tailored to suit the local situation. (Paragraph
205)
40. The National Policing
Improvement Agency should take the lead in negotiating the purchase
of PDAs and their supporting infrastructure on a uniform basis,
in order to reduce costs and remove contractual burdens from individual
forces. In doing so, they should give careful consideration to
the supporting infrastructure to ensure ease of use and flexibility
to adapt to future innovations. It is important that officers
who will use the technology are involved in system design to ensure
it meets their needs. (Paragraph 206)
41. The British Transport
Police play a key role in protecting against the threat of terrorism.
It is therefore essential that the force is able to access the
Police National Database on the same basis as Home Office forces,
to enable intelligence to be shared fully across the service.
We hope that, in its reply to this report, the Home Office can
provide assurances that funding for this will be forthcoming.
(Paragraph 209)
42. Collaboration
between forces at a regional level to share support services enables
forces to operate more efficiently. While there is a range of
good practice throughout England and Wales, it appears that many
forces are not collaborating to the extent that they could be.
We recommended last year in our Police Funding report that the
Home Office should keep under review its policy of not mandating
forces to share services. Given the lack of progress in this area,
we recommend the Home Secretary should now use her powers to mandate
those forces who are not doing so voluntarily to share support
services. (Paragraph 215)
43. We accept that
the use of experienced professionals from outside the police service
in administrative roles such as finance and human resources, and
the transfer of back-office functions to police staff, allows
for a more professional service to be delivered in a more cost-
effective way and facilitates the deployment of more police officers
on the frontline. (Paragraph 228)
44. However, we urge
caution when it comes to allowing police staff to undertake investigative
tasks. Despite evidence suggesting that staff can undertake tasks
such as taking statements in a cheaper and potentially more effective
way, we are concerned about the implications for resilience in
dealing with emergency situations, should officer numbers fall
significantly; and for public consent for policing, should officers
only be seen to undertake confrontational roles. (Paragraph 229)
45. In particular,
we do not consider the role of custody sergeant suitable for a
non-sworn officer, owing to the complexity of the role and the
need for a police officer's training and experience. Therefore,
we welcomed the assurances we received from the Minister of State
that he would seek to repeal Sections 120 and 121 of the Serious
and Organised Crime Act. (Paragraph 230)
46. As control over
performance moves away from the centre to the locality, it is
important that local accountability structures are strengthened
so that people have the means to judge police performance and
express their confidence, or lack of it. Police authorities in
their current form are under-resourced and relatively unknown
to local people. Therefore, we support reform in this area. (Paragraph
245)
47. It is not clear
to us how the Government's proposals for reforming police authorities
as set out in the Green Paper will help to increase the accountability
of the police to local people. The relatively low turnouts at
local elections are unlikely to rise for independent authority
members, meaning that new Crime and Policing Representatives may
have as little, if not less, mandate to represent local people
than current councillors. In addition, with regard to London authorities,
we query why elected authority members appointed by the Mayor
to sit on the MPA have any greater democratic mandate than elected
councillors who sit on other police authorities. We are also concerned
about the potential for this additional layer of representation
to undermine partnership working between the police and local
authorities. (Paragraph 246)
48. We do, however,
welcome the Government's further proposal to raise the capacity
and influence of police authorities by introducing guidance on
capacity, improving training and skills development and removing
barriers to exchange of data from police force to authority. It
is doubtful, however, whether their capacity can be much improved
without more resources. (Paragraph 247)
49. Early evidence
suggests that neighbourhood policing can have a positive impact
on public confidence in the police. In order to improve confidence
levels, it is important that the public is kept informed of progress
against local priorities. (Paragraph 257)
50. We believe community
engagement exercises facilitated by neighbourhood police teams
can be an effective means of setting local priorities. However,
in order for priorities to be truly representative of local concerns,
the local community must be made more aware of how they can be
involved. Despite the proposed move away from central targets,
conflicts may still arise between neighbourhood priorities and
priorities set at Basic Command Unit, force or national level.
Neighbourhood police officers should be prepared to give an explanation
to local people where it is essential that higher priorities take
precedence. (Paragraph 258)
51. Local intelligence
gathered through neighbourhood policing is being used to help
tackle terrorism and other serious crime. All forces should ensure
that they have adequate systems in place so that intelligence
can be shared easily between neighbourhood officers and specialist
and response teams. (Paragraph 261)
52. Neighbourhood
policing is competing with specialist services for funding. We
welcome the Government's three-year commitment to continue to
provide ring-fenced resources to neighbourhood policing. We are
concerned that a large number of neighbourhood officers also have
to undertake with response duties. In our view, all forces should
adopt an abstraction policy that ensures that neighbourhood police
officers are dedicated to operating in their neighbourhood. (Paragraph
264)
53. We are concerned
about the shortfall in police capacity to deal with serious and
organised crime. In our view, there is a strong case to be made
for more resources to be provided to the police. We remain unconvinced
about the effectiveness of the Serious and Organised Crime Agency
and its relationship with police forces. (Paragraph 277)
54. While we consider
the Government was right to withdraw its proposals to compel forces
to merge, we are convinced of the need for closer working at a
regional level. Therefore, we are not opposed to voluntary mergers
but reiterate we our support for the Government to require collaboration
in protective services where this proves necessary. (Paragraph
278)
55. We are encouraged
at progress made to improve the ability of the police to manage
the terrorist threat. However, we were unable to judge during
our inquiry whether the police have the capacity and capability
to respond to a major terrorist attack. (Paragraph 279)
56. Insufficient progress
has been made in bringing forward a plan to secure the London
Olympic Games, which are now only four years away. We are concerned
at the potential implications both for security during the event
and for planning by individual forces who will be involved in
delivery. The Home Office should take urgent steps to ensure that
planning security for the Games is properly co-ordinated across
police forces and other authorities. (Paragraph 293)
57. The Airwave radio
network can struggle to cope where a very large number of users
are concentrated in the same area. We are concerned about the
potential for the network to fail during the Olympic 2012 games,
given the numbers of officers who will be deployed. The Home Office
should address this as a matter of urgency, including consideration
of expanding the radio band assigned to Airwave. We expect the
Home Office to keep us informed as to practical steps they are
taking in partnership with Airwave Solutions. (Paragraph 294)
58. We welcome assurances
that radio communication between tunnel and surface is now possible
through most of the London Underground network. This is of particular
importance should the system once again be subject to terrorist
attack. The priority for remaining installation work should be
those stations with greatest operational need. (Paragraph 295)
59. There has been
a slight decrease in officer strength between 2007 and 2008. We
would be concerned should police numbers reduce significantly.
However, we accept that police forces and authorities should focus
on how officers can be deployed in the most effective way rather
than concentrating on maintaining an arbitrary number of officers.
(Paragraph 301)
60. During our inquiry,
we saw little evidence of a problem in attracting candidates to
the force, or of any concerns about applicant quality. However,
we note police representatives' concerns about future recruitment,
given concerns about pay, changes to terms and conditions and
an ageing population. It can be difficult to make up any recruitment
shortfalls very quickly because of the amount of training which
officers need to undertake. The Home Office should continue to
monitor applicant to vacancy ratios. (Paragraph 307)
61. According to official
figures, retention levels remain relatively high. However, forces
are more concerned about their potential to retain experienced
officers than they are about recruitment. We strongly regret the
move a year ago not to give officers the full pay award recommended
by the independent pay review. However, we anticipate that efforts
to cut bureaucracy and restore officer discretion, should they
be successful, will also have a beneficial impact on morale.
(Paragraph 316)
62. Retention is a
particular problem for forces surrounding London, who have collectively
lost over 1,000 officers to the Metropolitan Police over the past
five years because of the latter's favourable terms and conditions.
We recommend that the South-East Allowance be substantially increased
to make it more feasible for officers living in the South-East
to work outside London. In addition, we encourage the Metropolitan
Police to agree a protocol with surrounding areas to seek to limit
transfers. (Paragraph 317)
63. Police force resources
are being stretched by the number of officers on long-term sick
leave who are not capable of serving on the frontline but who
cannot be compelled to carry out back office functions under the
terms of their contracts. The Home Office should commission research
on the cost implications to forces of officers on long-term sick
leave, with a view to move towards more flexible contracts that
would allow for them to be transferred to a staff role. (Paragraph
318)
64. We oppose direct
entry to the police at chief officer level. In our view, operational
experience is crucial to allow chief officers to fulfil their
role effectively. We were particularly struck by evidence which
underlined the value of strong leadership in combating risk aversion
in the service, which relies on a solid operational background.
We understand the argument put forward by the Association of Police
Authorities that forces benefit from external professionals directing
human resources, for example, but such roles should be separated
from chief officer responsibilities. More needs to be done, however,
to attract applicants to chief officer positions. We are not convinced
that the Government's proposal for advertising posts in co-ordinated
rounds, with a greater role for the Senior Appointments Panel
in advising on matches, will be sufficient. (Paragraph 325)
65. We agree that
the primary role of PCSOs should be to provide a visible presence,
act as the "eyes and ears" of the police service and
facilitate community engagement exercises undertaken to inform
local priority-setting. However, we support a cautious extension
of their powers so that all PCSOs are awarded powers that are
currently at the discretion of Chief Constables. Moreover, the
Home Office should consider piloting the provision of a warrant
card to allow PCSOs to make arrests in exceptional circumstances,
where lives are in danger. We understand that this will require
more rigorous training and supervision. PCSOs should not undertake
any more than the bare minimum of bureaucracy necessary to the
role and should not be based in police stations. (Paragraph 337)
66. The public needs
to be made better aware about the role of PCSOs. We believe that,
in addition to standard powers, PCSOs across the country should
wear the same uniform, as the current disparity is confusing to
the public. We hope that PCSOs are now accepted as full members
of the policing family. (Paragraph 338)
67. Although the service
is a long way from meeting the Home Office target for women in
the service, we are encouraged by the proportion of women entering
the service and do not support the introduction of affirmative
action. We are concerned at the significantly higher levels of
resignation from female officers and urge forces to offer more
flexible options to make it easier for women to remain in the
service. There do not appear to be structural barriers to women
progressing through the ranks, but we believe there should be
more mentoring opportunities throughout the service to support
women in applying for promotion. (Paragraph 343)
68. We support increased
diversity in the police to ensure forces have access to the best
people, regardless of their background, and can continue to improve
relationships between the police and minority communities. (Paragraph
353)
69. We are disappointed
that police will not meet Home Office targets for BME recruitment
in 2009. We do not support affirmative action, but concerted efforts
must be made to make the service a more attractive prospect for
BME candidates. In particular, Home Office resources should be
invested in a targeted recruitment campaign. The level of PCSO
recruitment from minority communities is encouraging, and we hope
that some of these PCSOs will be encouraged to apply for officer
positions where appropriate. (Paragraph 354)
70. We are unable
to assess the extent of racism in the police service. Amongst
the police leadership who gave evidence to us there appeared to
be a genuine belief in the importance of increasing recruitment
from BME communities for policing. It is important that all claims
of discrimination are investigated in a transparent manner, and,
where guilt is established, those who are responsible are punished.
We note that the Mayor of London and the Home Secretary have initiated
inquiries into racism in the Metropolitan Police and the police
service as a whole, respectively. We hope that the results of
these inquiries and subsequent actions taken will encourage black
and minority ethnic officers to join the police. (Paragraph 355)
| 
