Speeches and Statements
Respected Nationally, Trusted Locally
Speech by the Home Secretary to the Police Federation Conference in May 2007.
I’d like to start by congratulating this year’s Police Bravery Awards nominees; an outstanding shortlist of 71 names that illustrates thousands of examples of daily bravery and commitment.
None more so than those who paid the ultimate sacrifice. So let me also state my heartfelt tribute to PC Richard Gray, whose death earlier this month was a terrible shock and tragedy, and David Shreeve, Debbie Harman, Joe Carroll, Alan Shaw, Richard Gostage, Conal Hills and Stacey Pyke, all of whom lost their lives this year.
Such commitment and bravery is an example to us all, and is what makes our police service so respected throughout the world.
While we’re in the North West let’s also remember Detective Constable Stephen Oake who gave his life four years ago in the fight against terrorism. I realise Jan that you and your members feel his bravery should be recognised. While such decisions aren’t within my remit, I know Sir Ronnie Flanagan is still examining grounds by which the matter might be reconsidered. Stephen Oake was an extremely brave officer and I hope this will be recognised.
At last year’s conference I’d only been Home Secretary for 11 days. Even then, I was not the shortest serving Home Secretary. Lord Grenville served only 2 days in 1783.
I’ve no idea what happened, perhaps the Police Federation Conference came early that year.
I’ve now been in the job for over a year. During which, working together, we’ve:
- cut crime
- introduced new systems to manage migration effectively and fairly
- and done our best to counter terrorism.
And throughout I’ve been especially grateful for the support of the police service, not least because the magnitude of those challenges and threats is greater than ever before.
Future of the Home Office
That’s why we’ve refocused the Home Office to concentrate on 'Protecting the Public, Securing our Future'. This brings together responsibilities for personal, community and national security in a single department.
As I said at the time, this refocusing is to do with national security for all of us, not job security for me. And so it has transpired, since I’ll be stepping down at the same time as the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister – and perhaps others, who don’t actually know it yet.
But I want to say two things:
Firstly, I’ll be here to see through the implementation of the blueprint we’ve designed – which will be embedded by the end of June.
Secondly, this new structure is not only good for the nation, but also good for policing.
Things have changed a bit since Lord Grenville’s time, but the duty of Home Secretary remains the same – to protect the public. Today, that duty spans anti-social behaviour locally to organised crime and terror nationally. From the local doorstep to the international stage you in the police service will be crucial in meeting this challenge.
As our challenges evolve, so must the Government’s response, and with that the police service – to become respected nationally, trusted locally.
During this year I’ve been privileged to meet many of your members across the country. From neighbourhood policing teams in Lambeth, Telford and Nottingham to police custody staff at Charing Cross and specialist teams tackling organised financial crime. On every visit I’ve been impressed with the commitment and professionalism of our police service.
Key Messages
When I speak to officers on visits like these, you won’t be surprised to learn that some common themes emerge:
- How we can meet the unprecedented challenges you face.
- The need to cut bureaucracy and focus resources on frontline policing.
- And the future of your pay arrangements.
I want to talk briefly about each of these issues and then take some questions.
Unprecedented challenges
I don’t need to tell you about the challenges you face. From being the service of last resort you must often feel you’re now the service of first resort. When you’re available 24/7 perhaps that’s inevitable.
So even though crime has fallen over the last ten years, the demands for your assistance have gone through the roof. Add to that the challenges of dealing with an enhanced terrorist threat and it’s no wonder you’re feeling squeezed from both sides.
So how do we manage this?
Well, one thing I’m not going to say is that the service must stop the excellent work it’s been doing on anti-social behaviour or low level volume crime. That it should focus only on so called “serious crime”.
I’m afraid you’ll have to continue doing both. That’s what I want. That’s what the public wants.
And I’ll tell you something else they want – a Criminal Justice system that supports victims and works for the law abiding majority. Rebalancing this system has been my key priority as Home Secretary.
That’s why, last year, we raised the sentence for carrying a knife from 2 to 4 years, banned the sale and import of imitation firearms and created a new offence of minding a dangerous weapon.
That’s why I ordered 8000 additional prison places as soon as I came in as Home Secretary.
And that’s why this summer we’ll be introducing a new Criminal Justice Bill to:
- To extend your powers to close all premises generating yobbish behaviour – not just crack dens.
- And to give you more powers to restrict the behaviour of dangerous offenders like where they can live or who they can associate with.
The public demand and deserve high standards. These can’t be met by forces acting alone. That’s why we’re establishing stronger national and regional capabilities.
It’s also time to discuss the relationship between local police and their communities and national government. I don’t disagree with David Cameron that we need fresh thinking about what strong local accountability looks and feels like, whether that’s a vigorous debate about the pros and cons of elected commissioners or looking hard at the contribution being made by our most effective police authorities.
But I do disagree with him when he seems to reach a conclusion before he has asked the question. I promise you the government will not propose solutions without engaging with you first.
So how can we help you meet these standards?
First, by helping you capitalise on the additional resources which have come to policing since 1997. Local forces have recruited 14,000 more uniformed officers alongside thousands of PCSOs in the neighbourhood policing teams we’ve pledged to deliver in every area by next year.
Second you shouldn’t have to manage these rising demands alone. I want to see other local partners working with the police to spread the load. Local councils and NHS trusts for example must play their part in dealing with the minority of individuals, who for whatever reason, from mental ill-health to alcohol addiction cause so many problems for everybody else.
But sometimes we cause ourselves problems, not least through needless bureaucracy or inappropriate targets.
Bureaucracy and targets
Policing is about information. Information, for instance, that might have prevented the Soham murders, that supports the ongoing struggle against terror and information that is necessary for the successful prosecution of all cases.
Bureaucracy is information gone wrong, caused by bad processes and bad information management.
As one of my protection officers said to me when I became Home Secretary, “if you take a hit, I’m going down with you boss – I couldn’t face the paperwork!”
One of the first visits I made as Home Secretary was to Charing Cross police station on a Friday night. I was amazed by the number of forms officers had to fill in – some taking 5 hours. These processes, which waste police time and taxpayer’s money, must wind you up and must be changed.
Equally, the targets and performance indicators set by the centre and locally by chief constables must act as genuine incentives to improve.
Contrary to the impression some may have, I’ve only set the Police service and other criminal justice partners three targets – and they haven’t been to pursue cream bun throwers or assault with a cucumber sandwich.
They are actually:
- to cut crime
- increase confidence in the criminal justice system
- and bring more criminals to justice
I make no apologies for this and I doubt any of you would disagree that these targets should be the core purpose of policing. Even with performance indicators – we have reduced them from 32 to 13 since 2000, and I’ll continue to see what more can be done.
But equally we shouldn’t be chasing minor misdemeanours at the expense of serious offenders – the sort of ludicrous examples the Federation flagged up earlier this week. I call this behaviour – “hitting the target, but missing the point”.
It is a decision for Chief Constables and local BCU commanders how these targets are met, but I’m clear that in future government crime reduction and detection targets should focus on serious crime, particularly the most serious violent crime – not numbers for numbers sake.
I want to see officers out on the street, not bogged down in form filling. That’s why I’ve asked the NPIA to work on the issues that bother you most like bureaucracy. Already they’ve had success with the Lantern project, which enables suspects to be fingerprinted at crime scenes and predicts annual savings of £2.2million.
And to ensure this work continues, Sir Ronnie Flanagan’s review, I announced in March, will focus on reducing bureaucracy – as well as:
- how we embed Neighbourhood policing
- enhance Local accountability
- and make best possible use of resources and funding
Pay
Finally I want to say something about pay.
I firmly believe ability should be properly rewarded. But as in other public services, as resources become tighter, tough choices must be made if the service is to modernise and improve.
Let me make two things clear though:
It would be very easy for me, today, to make unrealisable promises – that someone else who succeeds me will not be able to keep. That would be a cheap and cowardly way to popularity. No one should promise pay increases that are unfair, unaffordable or unrealistic.
I’ve made no secret of how tight the financial situation will be in the coming years. I can’t change that, and neither can my successor. It’s something that faces every government department. But by engaging in an honest dialogue, I hope we can reach a deal that’s acceptable to all parties.
Secondly, I’d like to say sorry. The massive uncertainty caused last year by the official side failing to table specific proposals was unacceptable, and I’d like to apologise for this.
This year, my letter to the Chair of the Police Negotiating Board sets out government policy and a timetable for considering the recommendations made by Sir Clive Booth in the report on the first part of his review of police pay. But let me make clear, the government is committed to genuine negotiation, not point scoring. We want to work with you, so your pay scales support the changing nature of the job and the workforce.
Improving officer protection
You don’t need to be reminded how much the nature of the job has changed. You know, far better than me, the risks involved and the dangers that can confront you when you least expect it.
You deserve our heartfelt thanks for taking on those risks every working day. But you deserve more than that. You deserve our protection.
Gone are the days when officers defended themselves from rioters in Brixton and Bristol with milkcrates and dustbin lids – thank God. And it’s not just riot protection kit that’s improved. You and your members also demanded better protection in everyday policing situations – so in the last decade we’ve made sure stab vests and incapacitant spray are available to every officer.
But we mustn’t stop there. If there are other options for improving your safety we must explore them. I know Jan, that you and the Federation have been asking for Tasers to be more widely available in appropriate situations. I agree – they should be.
I want them to be available to other specially trained teams – not just firearms officers – sent in to deal with severe violence or threats of violence. I’m waiting for final medical advice on this issue but, subject to that, I hope that from September this year we can start a trial to extend their use.
Conclusion
You face daunting challenges, both now and in the future, but I’ve every confidence that you’ll meet them with trademark professionalism.
I’m hugely proud of our police service, and would like to thank you for your commitment and support during my time as Home Secretary. I’ve thoroughly enjoyed working with such a professional organisation.
And I leave you with my assurance that the government will continue to work with you, to deliver a police service that is respected nationally, trusted locally and fit for the 21st Century.
