Mr.
Simon Burns (West Chelmsford) (Con): I am intrigued by
that. What happened when the prisoners didto use the hon.
Gentlemans phrasecough up?
Were they then taken to court, and, if they were, what incentive was
there for them to cough up? If they were not taken to court, on what
legal basis were they not taken to court, having admitted to committing
a
crime?
Mr.
Cawsey: They were certainly not taken to
courtquite the reverse. I think they were encouraged to believe
that their life in prison might be better if they did cough up. More to
the point, the crimes were written off as solved crimes; victims were
told they had been solved, and they were no longer on the books as
unresolved. This is a common practice across the country; it is not
just happening in my
area.
Mr.
Burns: Can the hon. Gentleman explain under what legal
basis such people were not taken to court if they coughed
up?
Mr.
Cawsey: All those things are a matter for the Crown
Prosecution Service. It is not at all unusual for someone to be
prosecuted for one crime, and lots of others to be taken into
consideration. It does not necessarily change the sentence.
Irrespective
of the mechanisms, the point is that it was a dishonest practice
employed so that police forces could put out better figures on crime
than was the reality. Do not tell me that once bosses are been elected,
they are not going to start to bend in the wind under those pressures
when elections are close, because they
will.
Mrs.
Dorries: Does the hon. Gentleman realise that, if there
were a directly elected police commissioner, residents would have the
ability to choose the kind of policing that they wanted on their
streets? Policing would be delivered in a much more diverse and locally
required way. There would not be any need to go around getting
prisoners to cough up for things they had not done, because such
statistics would not be the basis of peoples votes when
directly electing the chief commissioner. They would be voting on the
basis of how safe their streets were, and how safe they felt, not on
statistics.
Mr.
Cawsey: Much as I like the hon. Lady, I think that is an
extremely naïve view. It also implies that crime and disorder in
a neighbourhood are all just about the police, which they most
certainly are not. The way to get good crime reduction in an area is
through partnerships, in which the police are only one partner. I agree
in this regard: it is about what local people do in their
neighbourhoods in conjunction with the people who actually deal with
crime. The idea that only police deal with crime is nonsense. To blame
the police for crime is like blaming an umbrella for the rain. They are
only one of the partners in this.
Mrs.
Dorries: I like the hon. Gentleman him very much, too. I
grew up on a very rough council estate in Liverpool and I assure him
that, at the end of almost every street in my estate, there was a blue
and white police car. We did not dare to misbehave: if we did, we quite
often got a belt in the bizzie. But they were ever-present and the
high-level, visible policing on our streets acted as a deterrent that
meant that we as kids
owned the streets we played in, not the criminals. If we had somebody
accountable, residents would have that power to reclaim the streets for
themselves and their children, because they would be able to demand
high-level, visible policing. It would make a huge
difference.
Mr.
Cawsey: The hon. Lady should, if she can access the
records, look at the number of calls to the police for service in the
days when she was a young girl, compared with the situation now, when
she is a mature lady. I think she will see that there has been a
significant change, and it is those sorts of demands on police which
have led to changes in the way they do their jobs. I do not disagree
with her about accountability, but am simply saying that if the top man
is elected personally, the grubby electoral process will have its
effect. We will see the sorts of practices that brave chief constables
like Tony Leonard kicked out of the system. When Humbersides
figures came out, they were right down at the bottom, because they
stopped counting all the crimes they previously wrote off. He was
castigated for that, but he was the one who was doing it honestly. Do
we really want to return to a time when all the incentives were
perverse? I
once had the great honour of going out in America with the
International Association of Chiefs of Police, and meeting lots of
police officers there. They have elected chiefs of police there. When
we spoke to police officers at a lower rank than commissioner, I can
say that they all, to a person, said, Why do we have to be
involved in a system in which if we want to go higher than
lieutenantI think it is lieutenant in
Americawe have to become politicians? That is wrong; we
are professionals who do a professional job, and it is not for us to
enter the world of politics. That is for politicians. We should do our
job professionally and under the accountability of politicians, but not
as
politicians. Mr.
David Ruffley (Bury St. Edmunds) (Con): I want to ensure
that the hon. Gentleman is clear that the policy of Her
Majestys Opposition is not for the election of a sworn officer
or of a chief constable [Interruption.] If he can contain
himself, in his sedentary position, I will explain. Some Back Benchers
and Opposition Members have said that that should be the case,
following the pure American model, but that is not official
Conservative party policy. Our view is that there should be a lay
commissioner who is not a sworn officer. We are not in the business of
electing sworn officers. I wanted to make that clear, and I would be
grateful if he acknowledged that he is clear on
that.
Mr.
Cawsey: I was responding to the hon. Ladys
comments, not those of the hon. Member for West Chelmsford, although I
think that some of those issues are still
relevant. I
hope that the Committee will bear it in mind that it is easy to get
sucked down the route of greater accountability and more elected posts,
but that the police provide an important service to all our communities
and what they do deserves all our support. We need to find ways of
making them accountable without having the perverse incentives that end
up giving us dishonest figures. Such figures might make us feel better,
but the reality on the streets would be much
worse.
The
Minister for Security, Counter-Terrorism, Crime and Policing
(Mr. Vernon Coaker): May I welcome you to the
Chair, Mr. Bayley? It is the first time that you have
chaired the Committees formal proceedings, and I am sure that
we all look forward to serving under
you. The
debate has been interesting and I must say to all who have taken part,
including Opposition Members and my hon. Friends, that it has been good
and brought several relevant issues to the fore. There is no one on
this Committee, in this Parliament or outside, who is not reflecting on
what we need to do to improve the accountability of police officers and
on how to ensure that the public have an effective and informed voice
in trying to influence how the police operate. The police are also
reflecting on that. If one goes to different police forces, one will
see that they are trying all sorts of different ways of involving the
public, through face-to-face meetings, more leaflets, the internet,
neighbourhood policing and mobile police stations. They have longer
opening hours at police offices, make greater use of civilians and go
into schools. All those things are going on as the police strive to
give to policing the public face that people want, and try to ensure
that people feel that there is a proper response when they contact the
police.
The hon.
Member for Bury St. Edmunds challenged me on an issue on which there is
real disagreement, but he knows that there are difficulties with all
the various models. One reason why he knows that is because his hon.
Friend the hon. Member for Bromsgrove has said that she sees why the
Government are acting with caution, and that she is worried about some
issues in respect of her Front Bench. The hon. Member for
Mid-Bedfordshire showed a much more robust and dynamic desire and
passion for directly elected commissioners. That is why the hon. Member
for Bury St Edmunds had to intervene to clarify that that is not
official Conservative policy, which is for a lay commissioner, albeit
elected, and for the abolition of police authorities. Conservative
policy is not for an elected police chief who would have operational
control, whereas the hon. Member for Mid-Bedfordshire appeared to be
going down that
route.
Mrs.
Dorries indicated
assent.
Mr.
Coaker: The hon. Lady is nodding, so that is clearly what
she wants. I have problems with the idea of an elected lay
commissioner, so I think that the idea of having an elected police
chief would be fraught with difficulty in this country, as do her
Front-Bench colleagues. That is why her colleague was quick to
intervene.
Mr.
Ruffley: To be clear, I hope that the hon. Gentleman is
not criticising a Bank-Bench Member, from any part of the House, for
expressing interesting views. Labour Back-Bench Members, too, might
legitimately back the New Local Government Network and Local Government
Association proposition. It has not been mentioned today, but is a
valid take on enhanced accountability: it would match basic command
unit areas with second-tier local district and borough councils and
allow elected councillors to hire and fire BCU commanders. That is
another model of which I urge him to take account. It is yet another
contribution to a very wide-ranging and variegated
debate.
Mr.
Coaker: The hon. Gentleman is right to put that on the
record. A variety of views are held across Parliament and within
parties. However, is that not a good reason for the Government to take
stock and consider the way forward, rather than rush headlong towards
the direct election of crime and policing representatives, which we
originally proposed? Given the difference of views and the fact that no
consensus exists across the political spectrum, is not the mature and
responsible course not to continue to charge towards a road crash, but
to consider ways of improving accountability and to take stock and
reflect more calmly and rationally on how to take the debate forward?
We withdrew the proposals in the Bill so that we can do
that. Lynda
Waltho (Stourbridge) (Lab): Following on from that point
and to some extent a discussion this morning, will my hon. Friend
describe, so that I can tell my constituents, what it would be like to
have a BNP chief constable, lay commissioner, or whatever? We should
bear in mind that Nick Griffin said on Newsnight
recently: You
cant possibly separate the hard drugs trade from the question
of Islam and particularly Pakistani
immigration. Will
my hon. Friend describe the effect of such thoughts and background on
policing policy in the west midlands? It would be
horrendous.
Mr.
Coaker: My hon. Friend is right to point out the danger of
such a person becoming either a lay commissioner or a more directly
involved commissioner responsible for an entire police force. Nobody
wants a BNP candidate elected to office. I do not want to negate the
serious point being made, but we are talking about providing the
opportunity for BNP candidates to be elected to such positions. We can
all recognise the danger of that. As law makers and legislators, we
have a responsibility to decide whether to take that into account when
developing laws. One can only begin to imagine the consequences, not
only for the various communities in the west midlands, where my hon.
Friends constituency is situated, but for London and all the
other areas of the country. It would be
catastrophic.
Mrs.
Dorries: For the record, my Front-Bench colleagues were
well aware of my views. However, I support their position on lay
commissioners. Nobody wants to see a BNP commissioner or even a
councillor, but, in effect, the Minister is saying that we cannot trust
the people to
vote.
Mr.
Coaker: That is where we start to get into difficulty. The
hon. Lady makes a reasonable point about trusting the electorate, but
we have to be extremely careful when we are talking about the police.
Let me show how careful we have to
be. Conservative
Front Benchers are concerned about the problem, so they have come up
with proposals to overcome it. Suppose an extremist is elected, or
somebody who wants to ban road humpsevery one of us could think
not only of extreme politicians but particular issues. Members can
imagine what would happen if debate on such an issue happened to
coincide with the election of a police chief. I do not know what the
question is in Bedfordshireperhaps it is to ban farm
animals walking down the road. In Durham, it could be to ban lap
dancing, and so on. At a particular time, someone could get elected on
that single issue. The more extreme case involves the BNP. That is a
real issue, and those who want a single elected person must decide what
to do
about. 4.30
pm The
Tory Front-Bench proposalthe hon. Member for Bury St. Edmunds
may say more about itis reasonable, but it demonstrates that
there is a problem. Their position is that the election would be rerun
if a BNP candidate, or someone who says no to lap dancing in Durham, or
anybody who is not regarded as acceptable were elected. I take the
point about democracy, but there are consequences that have to be
thought
through. This
is a serious debate, and I am not trying to score points. The
Government have taken a hit, but it was the right thing to do. We have
withdrawn from direct elections for crime and policing representatives
because we need to proceed with caution. Others who continue to propose
direct elections in whatever form are wrestling with the same problems.
If they were in Government, I believe that they would step back and
reflect on how to deal with those
problems.
Mr.
Ruffley: I do not wish to interrupt the Ministers
flow, but on a point of clarification, my predecessor in this post, my
hon. Friend the Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert),
indicated that we would consult on a power of recall, of the sort that
is found in California, as a possible check and balance. There would
not be an automatic recall if a left-wing or right-wing extremist were
elected. The power of recall would operate as it does in the United
States, particularly in California: if a certain percentage of those
who voted at the previous election petitioned for a rerun of the
electiona recall electionthat would happen. Certain
triggers are required before a rerun could happen. I hope that that is
of assistance to the Committee when considering the Ministers
comments.
Mr.
Coaker: Of course that is of assistance to the Committee,
but it also demonstrates the point that I am trying to make. Others who
are thinking about models for taking the proposal forward are concerned
about some of the dangers that my hon. Friend the Member for
Stourbridge and the hon. Member for Bromsgrove raised. The hon. Member
for Mid-Bedfordshire asks, Dont you trust the
electorate? but people from every political party and in every
area of the country are concerned about the matter and are trying to
find a balanceto square the circle. If there are direct
elections and somebody is elected who is unacceptable by any stretch of
the imaginationI prefaced my remarks by saying that nobody
wants a BNP candidate to be electedwhat would we actually do
about
it? To
be fair to the hon. Member for Bury St. Edmunds, he recognises the
problem and is trying to find a way to deal with it. Because we are in
government, we do not think it acceptable, when we are putting a Bill
through Parliament, to say that we are wrestling with the issues to see
whether we can produce a reasonable set of proposals. We were concerned
that virtually every authority, council and police force in this
country opposed what we said we would do. In government, one has to
make a
choice. The hon. Member for Chesterfield rightly said that we have to
show leadership. I agree with that, but sometimes we have to show
leadership by saying that perhaps we ought to think
again. Ms
Sally Keeble (Northampton, North) (Lab): Does my hon.
Friend agree that sometimes the police have to police to protect
minority interests? That could pose a real difficulty if somebody has
to answer in an election that is just around the corner. I am thinking
of the policing of some of the early fascist marches in Birmingham and
around the black country. Someone who had to stand for popular election
later might not have taken the position that the police did then. They
were absolutely right to take that position and have now got public
opinion with
them.
|