Retirement Plan for Politicians set to Destroy the Police Service
The problem is not the principle of public accountability through elected politicians; the problem is the interference with operational policing that some of these people believe will be their right once in post.
Lord Prescott makes no bones about it, if he is elected as the new Commissioner for Hull he will interfere with operational policing as he sees fit.
He is quoted as saying: “The police always argue that many things they do are a matter of operations and politicians should not be involved. Well, I’m afraid I have a big argument with that.”
It is very significant that the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers Sir Hugh Orde, has said that many chief constables – including himself - would resign if put under direct political control.
Without serious change in Government thinking on how they will preserve operational independence the police service as we know it is gone forever. No longer will we adhere to founding principles of Sir Robert Peel, who enacted and introduced the foundations of the modern Police Service. Principles based on service delivered to all levels of the community and on social good governance. Principle that still hold true today.
The Peelian notion most often quoted is for the police to "… seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social standing". This is the basis upon which the police service has remained operationally separate from the politicians.
Politicians, either as private individuals or public figures, can make bad decisions, can be subject of criminal actions or be involved in illegal acts which require police intervention. We have seen this on numerous occasions from misuse of parliamentary expenses to the recent allegations of perverting the course of justice against Chris Huhne a serving cabinet minister. These are matters which require intervention with operational distance from the influence of politicians, politicians with the potential for the same human failing and frailties as any individual.
During my police career I saw numerous first hand examples of local politicians attempting to have an influence operational policing for their own personal reasons. Councillors insisting that the minor offence that affected them take priority over other policing matters. The Police Authority Chairman who took exception a circus legally setting up near his home and successful insisted that this non-police matter be investigated by a Police Inspector. Minor things you might think and they remained minor only because the politicians had no functional control of operational policing.
.
The Commissioners job is clearly seen as having a good deal of gravity, kudos and as being a very power position with the likes of John Prescott, the most high profile so far, putting themselves up as candidates. These people wouldn’t usually put themselves forward for local political positions which would be seen as a step of two down from their previous jobs. The Police and Crime Commissioner’s job, albeit a very local positions, is seen as very different. It has potentially to propel them back into the limelight that many still crave and is very well paid. The original idea that anyone could be elected is quickly being overturned by the notion that candidates will need the support of one or other of our political parties to be successful. Electioneering is an expensive exercise so to be elected you need to have a personal fortune or be politically connected.
If the government don’t recognise that this has grave consequences for the way in which the police service delivers to the public then they no longer deserve the support of the public that they will ultimately fail.
We will reverse on of the underpinning Peelian principles to read;
‘The Police must seek and preserve public favour not by demonstrating absolute impartial service to law but by constantly catering to public opinion’
The Editor.
Comments
Peter Griffiths (not verified)
Tue, 21/02/2012 - 17:03
Permalink
Retirement Plan for Politicians..........
Am I to believe from this article that we are confident that Chief Constables do not pander to public opinion, to not bend to political will and are independent people with only the public interest at heart? Are we confident that the Superintendents and above who aspire to that rank are not brainwashed by institutional political correctness and that their "operational decisions" are based upon the public good and not fear of not being promoted further, being criticised or being overlooked for the next CCs tea-party. If you believe that then you belong to a different police service to the one I did. Having someone from the outside look at the "modern" police service and give it a realistic kick up the backside may not be a bad thing at all and, if that means Prescott arguing in public with some of the characterless creatures we have at the top of the police service then bring it on. If they can't deal with him they don't deserve the job and, if they can deal with him, it could do us all some good.
The Editor
Fri, 30/03/2012 - 14:34
Permalink
Peter, thank you for your comments.
Peter, thank you for taking the time to comment. I'm sorry it's taken so long to get back to you, the IT company providing the site are ahead of the commercial side of PoliceComms! In short I didn't know the comments facility was active, now I do and I'm catching up.
I believe we may have been in the same police force and same division for a short while.
The suck up kick down culture upon which police promotion is built is fair only to those prepared to suspend doing what's right and appropriate in favour of doing what the ranks above like to see. The bulling style of West Yorkshire's present Chief Constable, for example, has spreads like a cancer down through the managers who's careers are solely about climbing to the top. I agree with you on the general ethics of police top ranks. My problem is with the general ethics of the vast majority of our politicians. Power and more pay may be the motivating factors for our top cops but whilst cops they are limited and restricted in the scale and scope of the damage they can do. During their service they at least have the opportunity to gain an insight into what the service should deliver.
Politicians, with the same personal motivations, have far fewer constraints and play far more damaging games with the power they wield. The solutions they seek are short term and often short sighted, based largely on election dates. My view of John Prescott is that he's a good communication but as long as he received the attention he craves he's not too worried about the long term damage his actions cause.
I'm in no doubt that the Police Service does need to changing. The debate should be, amongst other things, on how we put the right people in the right jobs, get the best value for money, the right support, the right equipment, the proper use of warranted officers and non warranted officers and provide the right balance in dealing with the public they serve.
Having someone from the outside looking in is the right thing to do but only with the right aims, the right objectives and the right motivations. I was once asked to talk to a representative from the Home Office in respect of reducing bureaucracy in the police service. He agreed that my suggestions would reduced bureaucracy but none them fell into the definition of bureaucracy given by the home office so didn't make it into his report. What chance does proper change have?
It's likely to be an irrelevance in any case, top police officer are not going top get the support of the main political parties, they won't invest their own money to campaign and so won't be elected. We are airing the principles of an issue that will be decided by the politicians based on the control of what will become a powerful position. It won't be decided on what's right for the Police Service or the public it serve.
Thanks again for your comments. Come back at me if you like
Editor
Michael (not verified)
Sat, 21/04/2012 - 21:09
Permalink
Political correctness is a disease
Many police officers regardless of rank use political correctness as a form of bullying, those who can not do their job effectively hide behind this method. Its also well known that the useless are promoted to remove them from a department due to incompetence, there are numerous useless Inspectors who stagnate in a department for many years and cause grief to the new police officers and staff that pass their doors. Police officers are taught to do as they are told and not question. Turning a service into a slave to stupidity and irrationality. The police even with budget cuts are still spending stupid money on things that shouldn't even be considered. What we must all remember, we joined our respective Constabularies/Police Forces/Services to protect life and uphold the law. That was a ideology that was quickly eroded, as Government targets required x amount things to achieve on a weekly, monthly and annual basis, based not on thief taking but political correctness destroying our abilities to be free thinkers and drones to a society that is not permitted to do our jobs without interference from internal or external pressures.
The Editor
Sat, 21/04/2012 - 22:27
Permalink
In reply to Political correctness is a disease
I agree with you Michael, though I don't know why you spotlight Inspector as in my experience the job often promotes people to and on occasion far beyond the point of an individual's competence. The problem isn't rank specific but does block whole the promotion path for others who may be more competent.
Editor
Add new comment