Memorandum submitted by Association of
Chief Police Officers of England, Wales and Northern Ireland
When I appeared before the Select Committee
on 27 July you asked that I write to you with ACPO's position
on the police service structure—and in particular, on mergers
and collaboration.
BACKGROUND
It is worth remembering that these issues have
been debated in policing for many years. The report of the 1962
Royal Commission on the Police observed that "|the structure
of the police system today, and its legal basis, echo not
only the requirements of policing a century ago, but also
the fears and prejudices, as well as the political wisdom, of
the Victorian Age. However successfully therefore this system
has been adapted there is no excuse for shirking some fundamental
re-thinking about the purpose of the police and how this
purpose can best be served in our own generation".
For a number of years ACPO has been concerned
about the structure of the Service. For example an ACPO debate
in 2002 proposed strategic mergers. The Service was last restructured
40 years ago in response to the Royal Commission—the general
professional view is that forces need to have greater capacity
and capability to meet the 21st Century needs than the present
structure provides. In 2005 and 2006 the debate crystallised around
proposals for merger following the HMIC report Closing the
Gap, which largely confirmed views that the Service needed
to change.
The position of Chief Officers remains positively,
though not unanimously, in favour of the strategic merger of forces
in the future. That position is based upon the same premise the
1962 Royal Commission laid down: namely that there is no excuse
for not considering the way in which the purposes of the police
can best be served. Those purposes are to keep the public safe
and protect against harm, summarised by the Home Secretary (herself
restating Sir Robert Peel) in her speech to the ACPO National
Policing Conference earlier this year, as to prevent crime and
disorder.
FINANCIAL CONTEXT
It is very clear that policing must prepare
for a significant reduction in funding over the coming years.
Cumulatively, the projections on central government grant funding,
locally generated precept funding and standstill pressures leave
police authorities facing an unprecedented funding gap. With over
80% of the police budget made up of people, there is little question
of an impact on police service strength. Chief Constables face
some tough choices and must ensure all avenues for efficiencies
are exploited before reaching the point where the "frontline"
is affected.
COLLABORATION
Since 2006, when the merger proposals became
stalled, the Service has been grappling with the concept of collaboration.
Where there has been both central direction and incentivisation,
in some places it has been possible to overcome some fundamental
obstacles that confront any collaborative effort—the growth
of the national CT structure is the most strikingly obvious example.
In other areas the obstacles have remained too fundamental.
These obstacles include sovereignty, accountability
and governance overwhelmingly loaded towards the provision of
local services. Even where these issues have been addressed barriers
to progress include different levels of sunk investment in capability
and technology; differential impact, real and perceived, on our
workforce; and "net donor syndrome" where contributors
believe shared resources will be disproportionately deployed away
from the home force.
In terms of governance of collaborations, HMIC
have stated they find existing arrangements "dilute the clarity
of leadership, inhibit dynamic decision-making and impose a degree
of Bureaucracy".[1]
For smaller forces in particular, collaborations that, on paper,
appear to be strong often are left under-resourced, creating a
perception of a lack of value and buy-in. Smaller forces that
contribute resources sometimes feel they do so by denuding their
own expertise and capacity whilst seeing no return on investment,
as assets are drawn into the more problematic conurbations; whilst
in larger forces, some describe the relationship as almost parasitic.[2]
DELIVERING PROTECTIVE
SERVICES
HMIC, in its seminal reports on Protective Services—Mind
the Gap (2003) and Closing the Gap (2005) considered
delivery models other than collaboration. More recently a speech
by Sir Paul Stephenson explored the same themes in consideration
of options for better equipping the police service to confront
serious and organised crime. A range of independent think tanks
have covered the same ground, most recently the Royal United Services
Institute (RUSI) in its publication Responding in a Modern
World: An Investigation into UK Policing Structures.
Sustaining an effective and efficient service
means policing must remain capable of delivering both visible
and invisible parts of policing: both a locally responsive presence
in neighbourhoods and a capability to respond to the threat of
serious harm. The latter takes in keeping people safe from a whole
range of largely unseen but major threats, from sexual or violent
offenders to organised crime and terrorism.
As we approach unprecedented cuts financial
projections indicate that many forces will struggle to remain
fully resilient and efficient in balancing the fight against serious
and organised crime while upholding their capacity to deliver
neighbourhood policing locally. This new economic reality means
that some may become unviable as separate entities. In all likelihood,
the prospect of force amalgamations will be forced back on the
table. There will need to be a plan for this potential outcome.
The recent experience of Bedfordshire Police
and Hertfordshire Constabulary provides a case study in how strong
the business case for merger can be. By contrast, extended collaborative
options still needed to retain two governance bodies and strategic
corporate infrastructure, as well as limiting the savings that
could come from operational areas such as control rooms, custody
suites and senior command structures. The business case also showed
how much more complex running large scale collaboration would
be.
Merger offered substantial savings through the
rationalisation of two corporate infrastructures and support service
functions into a single organisation. It allowed delivery of service
from a single location, thereby enabling greater economies of
scale to be achieved. Set up costs could be paid back within 18
months. The precept levels of both forces were nearly identical.
The projected savings generated equated to between 180 and 360
police officer posts against options involving collaboration.
CONCLUSION
It is ACPO's position that the Government should
now give consideration to a review of the number of existing forces
with a view to developing an organised road-map for the reconfiguration
to a smaller number of strategically sized forces that will support
the delivery of both local policing and protective services. Without
a plan to govern central direction, there is a danger that we
end up with a regionally piecemeal and disorganised approach to
collaboration that will inhibit rather than assist consistent
service delivery.
Local policing teams represent a cornerstone
of policing and regardless of the method of their organisation,
the public should enjoy the familiarity and accessibility of a
local policing service. This unswerving commitment is central
to our position. Visible and responsive policing is delivered
in communities by neighbourhood policing teams, already brigaded
under forces of differing shapes and sizes. As the largest force
in terms of capacity the Metropolitan Police Service is among
the leaders in delivering neighbourhood policing.
Chief Officers acknowledge the Government's
indication that mergers will not be allowed to happen unless they
are voluntary and supported by local communities. However, in
providing any professional advice to either your Committee or
to the Government, we are obliged to offer our professional view,
which is that the most effective and efficient means of delivering
both local policing and protective services is through a smaller
number of strategically sized forces.
In 1962 the Royal Commission recognised increasing
specialisation in policing and the non-viability of smaller forces.
It is not surprising that nearly 50 years on the same issues are
making the current structure increasingly suboptimal.
Over the coming months, if ACPO can be of any
further assistance to the Committee on this or any other policing
matter, do not hesitate to contact me.
September 2010
1 HMIC (2005) Closing the Gap: A review of the fitness
for purpose of the current structure of policing in England and
Wales p.74. Back
2
Ibid. Back
| 
