Annex to Circular 21/2002

 

Police Reform Bill - Home Affairs Select Committee

Members present

Chris Mullin (Chair), David Cameron, Janet Dean, Bob Russell, Bridget Prentice, Gwyn Prosser, Marsha Singh, Angela Watkinson, Tom Watson, David Winnick

APA representatives

Ruth Henig, Anthony Peel, Melanie Leech

Introduction

Ruth Henig gave a brief overview of the roles and responsibilities of police authorities and the APA. Chris Mullins outlined the scope of the Committee’s inquiry. He said that they were conducting pre legislative scrutiny of the Police Reform Bill as it progresses through the Lords and aim to report by the time it reaches the Commons. 

National Policing Plan

Marsha Singh asked whether the APA had concerns about the proposed National Policing Plan. Ruth Henig said that the APA accepted that there should be a strategic level plan but had concerns about the level of prescription that existed in the current proposals. The APA would expect to be consulted in further discussions on the plan and would not have a problem with it if there was a clear and appropriate demarcation between local and national issues.

Improvement targets

Angela Watkinson asked for views on the Home Secretary setting improvement targets. Ruth Henig said that the APA were opposed to this and found it difficult to understand how the Home Secretary could come to a better decision on local priorities than the police authority.  In answer to further questioning Anthony Peel accepted that there might be some areas in which national standardisation might be appropriate, for example equipment, but this should follow a tripartite consultation and decision.

David Cameron asked why, if police authorities were doing a good job, the Home Secretary wanted these new powers. Melanie Leech suggested that he might want new means of exerting influence, but pointed out the tensions this could create between national imperatives and local accountability. Ruth Henig stressed that police authorities did support many of the reforms in the Bill and our main concerns centred on Part 1.

Questioned about the Standards Unit, Ruth Henig said that the APA welcomed the idea of spreading good practice but felt that closer police authority involvement with the Unit, particularly at BCU level, would make its work more effective.

Role of police authorities

Chris Mullins suggested (somewhat provocatively) that police authorities were not independent of their chief constable and did not provide effective scrutiny of their forces. Dr Henig and Anthony Peel provided a robust defence of police authorities, stressing the areas in which they were making a positive difference, particularly in relation to best value.

Bob Russell argued that authorities were simply tax raising quangoes. Again the APA representatives disagreed, stressing the unique nature of police authorities with their mix of councillor, magistrate and independent members.

Powers of the Home Secretary

Operational Procedures

David Cameron asked how seriously the APA regarded the provision in the Bill that allows the Secretary of State to issue directions to forces on operational procedures and practices. Melanie Leech pointed out that having any power of this nature in statute was serious. The Bill set out that there should be consultation with the Central Police Training and Development Authority prior to the issuing of a direction but the APA felt that this consultation should be extended to police authorities and chief officers as well.

Removal of senior officers

Bridget Prentice asked why the Home Secretary felt he needed new powers to remove senior officers. Ruth Henig said that there had been some difficult cases in the past and the APA would support better ways of dealing with them. However, it was hard to imagine a situation where the statutory procedures laid out in the Bill would be necessary. Anthony Peel drew attention to the danger that a Home Secretary, under pressure from the national media to do something about a particular case, might take precipitate action when local resolution by the police authority was already underway.

In general Melanie Leech agreed with the committee that the increased powers for the Home Secretary represented a centralising agenda that would change the nature of the tripartite structure and had the potential to also result in the politicisation of policing. It seemed that the current Home Secretary intended to take greater control – but what ever one felt about his current intentions, it was clear that the Bill would provide a future Home Secretary with the means to go much further in terms of control.  That was of great concern.  In any case, improvements could in practice only be delivered locally, for example through the best value programme.

Community Support Officers

David Winnick asked for the APA’s views on Community Support Officers. Ruth Henig said that the APA was not opposed in principle to CSO’s and recognised that there was a need for them in some areas, especially in London. However the local police authority should have an opportunity to consult the community before they were introduced. The APA welcomed the fact that the CSO provisions in the Bill were enabling rather than prescriptive, but consider that the ring fencing of finance could be a way of the Government forcing forces to introduce CSO’s at a future date. The APA also have concerns over whether CSO’s as envisaged in the Bill would represent value for money given the amount of training they would need. It might be better to take on more civilian staff in order to release officers for other duties.

Additions to the Bill

Tom Watson asked what the APA would have wished to see in the Bill. Ruth Henig highlighted the repeal of the Riot Damages Act, which the APA feels is an inappropriate piece of legislation in 2002. The APA would also have liked to see provision for police authorities to be statutory partners in crime and disorder reduction partnerships.

Other points

	The APA recognise that it is important for the police rank and file to have confidence in the overall police reform process;
	The APA also recognise that the way in which crimes are recorded is a part of the public having confidence in the police. New ways of recording crime, on which police authorities have been consulted, will be introduced from 1 April;
	Police authorities accept that early retirements from the police service are an area of concern. The ongoing work on the new Occupational Health Strategy for the police should help to address this.

Further action

The APA agreed to provide the Committee with notes on:

	Examples of warden schemes already in place around the country;
	The APA’s estimate of the overall costs of the implementation of the police reform package.

 

© APA 2002

APA Circulars   |   Circulars March 2002
Circular 21/2002    |   Top of Page