The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord
Sharpe of Epsom) (Con) My Lords, I shall now repeat a Statement
made in another place: “With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a
Statement about the Government’s police uplift programme. Today is
a significant day for policing. We can officially announce that our
unprecedented officer recruitment campaign has met its target. We
said we would recruit an additional 20,000 officers, and we have.
We have...Request free trial
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office () (Con)
My Lords, I shall now repeat a Statement made in another
place:
“With permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a Statement about the
Government’s police uplift programme.
Today is a significant day for policing. We can officially
announce that our unprecedented officer recruitment campaign has
met its target. We said we would recruit an additional 20,000
officers, and we have. We have recruited 20,951 additional
officers. This means that we now have a record 149,572 officers
across England and Wales.
This is the culmination of a colossal amount of work from forces,
the National Police Chiefs’ Council, the College of Policing, the
Home Office and beyond. They have my heartfelt gratitude and
admiration. I feel honoured and privileged to be holding the
baton as we pass the finishing line. I am especially grateful to
my right honourable friends the Members for Uxbridge and South
Ruislip, Witham and North West Hampshire. Their vision and
leadership were instrumental in helping us reach this point, and
I know they will share my delight today. I pay tribute too to my
right honourable friend the Home Secretary, who has energetically
steered the campaign to its successful conclusion, and to my
right honourable friend the Prime Minister for his continued
support and encouragement.
This was not a simple task. There have been challenges along the
way and people doubted our prospects of success, but by sticking
to the course and believing unequivocally in the cause, we have
done it. To every single new recruit who has joined up and helped
us reach our goal, I say thank you. There is no greater or more
noble example of public service, and they have chosen a career
like no other. Not everyone will be as happy as we are today.
Criminals must be cursing their luck, and so they should, because
we are coming after them.
Not only are there more officers than ever before but the officer
workforce is more diverse than it has ever been. There are now
53,083 female police officers in post, compared with 39,135 in
2010. There are 12,087 officers identifying as ethnic minorities,
compared with 6,704 in 2010. There are more officers working in
public protection, in local policing and in crime investigations.
There are now 725 more officers working in regional organised
crime units tackling serious and organised crime, as we
promised.
While it is right that today we pause and reflect on the success
of the uplift programme, this is not the end. This is not just
about hitting a number. It is about making a real and tangible
difference to the lives of people we serve and the communities
they live in. It is the latest step in our mission to crush crime
and make our country safer. The public want to see bobbies on the
beat; we have delivered. The public want courageous and
upstanding public servants in whom they can have pride and, most
importantly, whom they can trust. Now the public quite rightly
expect forces to maximise the increased strength and resources
available to them. They want to see criminals caught and locked
up, and to feel safe and secure, whether in their homes, online
or out and about. They want the police to focus on the issues
that matter most to them.
We have made good progress already. Crime is going in the right
direction, falling in England and Wales by 50% since 2010,
excluding fraud and computer misuse, with burglary falling 56%,
robbery by 57% and criminal damage by 65% over the same period.
Figures also show reductions in homicide, serious violence and
neighbourhood crime since December 2019. On homicide, reductions
are being made, with the numbers 6% lower than in December 2019
as of September 2022. Now we need policing to work with partners
to ensure that these reductions are maintained.
Crime is a broad and ever-evolving menace, which is why we are
addressing it from all angles. We are acting to turn the tide on
drugs misuse through our 10-year strategy, and our crackdown on
county lines has yielded excellent results. We have stepped up
efforts to tackle domestic abuse, violence against women and
girls, and child sexual abuse. Our twin-track approach to
tackling serious violence is bedding in and having a real impact.
We are supporting law enforcement in the ongoing fight against
serious and organised crime, terrorism, cybercrime and fraud. We
have shown that when our constituents raise concerns about an
issue, we listen and we act. That was demonstrated recently with
the publication of our comprehensive plan to drive anti-social
behaviour out of our communities and neighbourhoods.
We will keep up the momentum. We will challenge and support the
police in equal measure. We expect police forces to maintain
officer numbers at the levels delivered by the uplift and are
pushing them to drive up standards and drive down crime. It is
vital that forces seize this opportunity. As the Home Secretary
has made clear, common-sense policing is the way forward. This is
our mantra, and it should be a guiding principle for forces
too.
For the Government’s part, we are holding up our side of the
bargain. That includes measures I announced earlier this month to
cut red tape that gets in the way of real police work. It
includes the steps we are taking on ethics, integrity and
conduct, as policing strives to secure and retain public trust,
which has been shaken by recent reports and cases. Before I
finish, I want to highlight that I will be holding a drop-in
surgery here in the large ministerial room from 3 pm today for
any colleagues who wish to discuss the uplift programme.
We said we would recruit 20,000 additional police officers; we
have delivered. We said we would bear down relentlessly on crime;
we have delivered. I am proud of what we have achieved, but there
is more to come. To the decent, law-abiding majority, I say this:
we have got your back. Your safety is our number one priority. My
message to the criminals is this: we are coming for you, you will
be caught and you will face justice.
More police, less crime, safer streets and common-sense policing:
those are the pillars upon which our approach is built. Today, as
we mark another hugely significant step forward in that mission,
we reaffirm our commitment to do everything in our power to
protect the public. I commend this Statement to the House.”
3.38pm
(Lab)
Well, there you go. I thank the Government for their Statement,
and the information they have provided regarding this police
uplift programme. This is not, however, year nought of a new
Government. It is the 13th year of this Government. Where are the
Government pretending to have been for the last 13 years? They
cut police numbers by 20,000 and now, having reversed those cuts,
want us all to clap them for it and to praise them for this
brilliant achievement. Why would we do that?
We all want more police, and we all congratulate them on the work
that they do on our behalf. But is it not the case that the last
decade and more of police cuts has had appalling consequences, as
the Government were warned? Let us look at some of the
consequences. Is it not the case that the numbers of arrests and
of crimes solved have halved? Is it not the case that since 2015
the charge rate has dropped by two-thirds?
In case the Minister feels that this is just Labour Party
propaganda—that we would say that—I quote from three articles in
the Daily Telegraph from the last 18 months; there are too many
but I chose just these three: “Record low of just 5.8pc of crimes
solved”, “Police fail to solve a single theft in more than eight
out of 10 neighbourhoods”, and “Police criticised for failing to
solve one million thefts and burglaries”. I could go on.
Police cuts have had consequences, particularly as we saw with
the complete and utter decimation of neighbourhood policing. How
will we see a restoration of this? How will we see a restoration
of that visible police presence—crimes investigated, victims
supported and criminals prosecuted? How will the police uplift
programme deliver that? Instead of fancy phrases about criminals
being frightened and so on, the public would have wanted to hear
from the Government how the police uplift programme will deal
with some of the consequences that they face in their everyday
lives in their neighbourhoods.
Following the recent awful findings of inquiries into the police
such as that on the murder of Sarah Everard and, most recently,
the Casey review, how will the police uplift programme restore
trust and confidence in our officers? Does the programme deal
with the fact, not mentioned by the Minister, that 8,000 police
community support officers were cut—alongside 6,000 police staff,
including some of the most specialised officers in forensics,
digital and many other such examples?
Of course, anyone would welcome more police officers, but this is
not a reform programme. It does not deal with many of the crucial
issues facing our police. Boasting about restoring the police
numbers that you have cut simply will not do it. What is needed,
alongside increased numbers, is a proper programme to restore
neighbourhood policing, proper training and accreditation,
ensuring that all crimes—including so-called low-level crimes
such as anti-social behaviour, bike theft and many others—are
properly investigated, with trust and confidence restored. How
does the police uplift programme do any of that? We have heard
not a word.
The Home Secretary said on TV last week that what has happened
over the last 10 years is irrelevant. Does the Minister agree
with that, or does he agree with me that it is not irrelevant if
you were a victim of theft, rape or violence against women, or if
it was your bike, your car or your shed targeted for theft or
attack?
I finish with this crucial challenge to the Government: does the
police uplift programme deal with the lack of police on the
street, on the front line? Does it deal with the fact that 90% of
crimes are unsolved? Does it deal with the lack of policing
experience, such as in the case of detectives? Does it deal with
low levels of public confidence? More police are welcome, of
course, but proper reform is needed alongside that, not the
populist rhetoric that we have just heard.
(LD)
My Lords, this is obviously a Statement that the Government are
pleased to make but, unfortunately, the rhetoric does not lead to
change, which is what the public will be looking for. A huge
number of questions fall out of the programme and tell you
something about the way in which policing takes place in this
country.
What we are seeing, of course, is that record numbers of police
are leaving the police force while new people come in. Does this
record number of police leaving mean that we are basically
trading inexperience for experience? In 2021-22, the last year
for which figures are available, 8,117 police officers left the
profession; that is a 20-year high. Can the Minister tell us
whether that figure is reflected in the figures up to the end of
March this year and whether, again, we are seeing that change?
Clearly, what we need is an experienced profession.
The second thing that the uplift programme shows is the number of
people in various age groups within the new police forces around
the country. If you look carefully the figures for those aged 55
and over, you see that they represent only some 1.8% of the
police force. Has that figure been shared, not in this financial
year but in previous years? Is that an accelerating figure, with
the number of older police officers declining? At present 38% of
the force are aged 45 or over. Was that figure higher or lower in
the past?
The other question that needs raising is how police officers are
recruited. We have had a series of questions back and forth with
the Minister about the way in which police officers are recruited
and we know that some 50% of all recruited police officers do not
have a face-to-face interview with another police officer. I know
that the Minister has replied to my questions and said that this
is being altered. I have read what the Government intend to do
with the police college and to make that change work, but we
certainly need to be reassured that the right people are getting
into the police force and we are not seeing the sort of problems
that we have seen in the very recent past.
If you want true community policing, what sense does it make to
lose all the community support officers that we have had? Since
2015, 4,000 police support officer posts have been lost and since
2019, given that that is the bedrock date that the Minister wants
to work from, 1,284 community police officer posts have been
lost. The great advantage for those of us who remember the way in
which those support officers worked around our communities is
that they were seen on the streets; they were what you might call
“bobbies on the beat”. They were an essential part of that. As
the Minister knows, you do not put one policeman on the beat; you
used to put a policeman with a PCSO. So it is two police officers
now, because the number of PCSOs has dropped.
The real test of this measure is: will the quality and nature of
the service that people get change? Some 275 car thefts per day
in the past year went unsolved, and just 3.4% of car thefts
resulted in a charge. Also, 574 burglaries went unsolved and only
6% resulted in a charge. The sort of result that people want to
see is people being charged and found guilty of the crimes that
are being committed against them. Clearly that has not happened.
The test for the Government is how community policing is going to
work in the future. A recent Savanta poll found that four in 10
UK adults have installed in the past year CCTV, stronger locks,
alarm systems or camera doorbells, all of which demonstrates that
people are worried about crime and about these crimes being
detected, which they have not been as yet.
One thing absent from the Statement is any mention of
cybersecurity. Those of us who have been privileged to hear what
is happening in this Parliament will know of the battle against
those who are trying to burst into the security of our nation.
Can the Minister tell us what resource is going to go into the
battle of the future against those who are causing
cybercrime?
Finally, there is the issue of head count versus full-time
equivalents. The Government in the published Statement say that
there is little difference—some 1% or 2%. However, 1% or 2% of
experienced people who are doing the work that we want to see
done is a considerable number. What we are seeing here is a shell
without the interior. The interior has to be made to work for the
communities of this country and I am not certain that that is the
progress which the Government have made.
(Con)
My Lords, I thank both noble Lords for their comments. Since I
arrived in your Lordships’ House, every debate and Question has
been a demand for more from the Government—money, resources and
so on. We have finally delivered more, on time and on budget,
and, if I am honest, I am a bit disappointed with the response.
However, I will do my best to answer the questions that have been
put to me.
To forestall any questions about fraud and the cybersecurity
aspects that will be asked, I will alert noble Lords to the fact
that the fraud strategy is going to be published this week. There
will be more to be said on that, and as a consequence I am not
able to go into detail about it.
Before I go into detailed answers to the questions, the data that
I read out in the Statement was in fact a little out of date,
because on Thursday last week the Crime Survey for England and
Wales published its latest data, which takes us up to December
2022. That shows that all crime, excluding fraud and computer
misuse, has fallen by 52% since March 2010, from 9.5 million
incidents in the year ending March 2010 to 4.65 million in the
year ending December 2022—a reduction of 4.978 million.
The latest data from the crime survey shows a 12% decrease in all
CSEW crime since the year ending March 2020 and a 14% decrease in
all crime since the year ending December 2019. There were 1.5
million incidents of neighbourhood crime estimated by the crime
survey for the year ending December 2022, a fall of 26%, compared
with the year ending March 2020. I could go on, but I think the
data supports the fact that the police have been doing a good job
and, hopefully, with this uplift in numbers, will continue to do
so. I remind the House that there are now over 149,500—more than
ever before. The Government are determined to cut crime and make
our streets safer. Over the course of the police uplift
programme, 46,505 new recruits have joined police forces. I will
come back to that in a moment.
The noble Lord, , asked about charge rates. I
agree that the current data on charge rates is concerning. We
expect police forces to get the basics right, to focus on
common-sense policing and to work with partners across the
criminal justice system to see more criminals charged and
prosecuted. But that is a shared responsibility and the system
needs to work better to catch criminals and help victims of
crime.
With regard to online crime, as I said, the fraud strategy will
be published this week. However, to put some numbers on that, we
have already committed £400 million over the next three years to
bolster law enforcement’s response to economic crime. The
strategy will set out a co-ordinated response from government,
law enforcement and the private sector to better protect the
public and increase the disruption and prosecution of
fraudsters.
The subject of vetting has quite rightly come up. The Government
have been clear that all police forces must meet the high
standards that the public expect, and that forces must root out
those who are unfit for service at the very first opportunity. It
is of the utmost importance that robust processes are in place to
stop the wrong people joining the police in the first place,
which is why we have invested in improving recruitment processes
and supporting vetting as part of the £3 billion of funding
provided to forces to recruit and maintain officers. New recruits
will have been vetted in line with the College of Policing’s
Vetting Code of Practice and relevant vetting APP, which were
first established in 2017. The APP is due for an upgrade very
shortly, as noble Lords will be aware.
On neighbourhood policing, there are now more officers working in
public protection, local policing and crime investigations.
Thousands of additional officers are already out on the streets,
and the latest data available shows that overall 91% of police
officers were in front-line roles. The uplift programme provides
the opportunity to ensure that we have the officers that policing
needs, both to respond to the increase in demand and to take a
more proactive response to managing that demand, including crime
prevention.
The noble Lord, , asked about the attrition
rates. We have made it very clear to police forces that the large
investment we have put into policing means that we expect officer
numbers across England and Wales to be maintained throughout
2023-24. The police uplift programme was designed to provide a
genuine uplift of 20,000 officers that accounts for attrition
rates. Voluntary resignation rates in policing are at less than
3%, which is low compared to other sectors. Policing is obviously
a career like no other, and the results of our latest survey of
new recruits showed a positive onboarding experience overall: 82%
of respondents are satisfied with the job, and 77% intend to
continue as police officers for the rest of their working lives.
Those numbers are very encouraging.
The noble Lord also asked me, perfectly reasonably, about
face-to-face contact. In February, the College of Policing wrote
to all chief constables with updated and reissued guidance on
post-assessment in-force interviews. The college reiterated the
importance of those interviews and that all forces should deliver
them using college assessment standards to ensure the same
quality nationally. The college expected forces to have
implemented the updated guidance by the end of last month.
Following the issuing of new guidance by the college on
post-online assessment centre interviews, the latest data
provided by the college shows that 38 forces are currently using
a post-assessment interview and that four plan to do so with
their next cohorts.
The noble Lord, , also mentioned CCTV—as if it
somehow indicates against the quality of the data I have already
shared with your Lordships’ House, and that there is more, shall
I say, concern about crime in local areas. Of course, people are
right to be concerned. However, perhaps it also demonstrates that
this equipment and technology is cheaper and more readily
available than ever before and, more to the point, that it can be
installed on a Sunday afternoon by oneself.
The noble Lord, , is quite right: the numbers
have consequences for everyday lives, which is why I believe that
your Lordships’ House should support them. I certainly do not
believe that any of this is irrelevant.
3.56pm
(Con)
My Lords, I welcome the tenor and content of the Statement my
noble friend the Minister read out. However, does he agree with
me that one of the principal problems our police forces have is
the lack of quality in their leadership at middle-rank and
senior-rank levels? Will he consider looking at the way the Armed
Forces trains its officers to ensure that, when police officers
take positions of senior command, they are prepared and wholly
trained for such awesome responsibilities?
(Con)
My noble friend makes some solid points. It is undeniable that
some of the incidents which have been seen over the past few
years, and which are coming to light now, are a consequence of a
failure of leadership. I am pleased that the leadership of the
country’s main police force is in very good hands, and I support
Sir Mark Rowley of the Metropolitan Police in the work he has to
do. My noble friend also makes some very good points about
leadership more generally. I believe—and I will be asking about
this more frequently—that the College of Policing is working on
the reinstatement of a national police college to ensure
rigorous, nationally consistent standards.
(Lab)
My Lords, it is no fault of the Minister, but metaphors about
passing batons and crossing finishing lines will be seen to be
complacent and even insensitive by many victims of sexual and
violent crime in particular. I share the concerns expressed
repeatedly on all sides of your Lordships’ House that, when
reversing drastic police cuts in a hurry, there will be issues
with the quality of recruitment, vetting, training and
discipline, as we have heard. So, rather than constantly batting
this off to the College of Policing, will the Government take
responsibility and propose a clear timeline for a legislative
framework of standards across the nation for all those vital
matters?
(Con)
The noble Baroness will be aware that a number of ongoing reviews
on matters such as dismissals are due to conclude very shortly.
She makes some very good points about victims, and we are
committed to delivering justice for victims and putting some of
the vile offenders referred to behind bars for longer, but there
is obviously still a long way to go. We have previously discussed
at the Dispatch Box some of the factors the noble Baroness
mentioned and, while I will not go into them in detail again, I
note that programmes such as Operation Soteria are delivering
meaningful results.
(CB)
The noble Lord was quite right in saying that I was going to
mention fraud. The Statement says that crime is falling,
excluding fraud. Fraud remains a substantial growth industry and
now accounts for over 40% of all crime against the individual.
The noble Lord agreed last week that the current level of law
enforcement resources aimed at it is insufficient. He skilfully
shot my fox earlier by referring to the national fraud strategy
that is to be issued this week, which is an improvement on
“imminently” and “shortly”. How many of these 20,591 officers who
have been recruited have specialist fraud skills?
(Con)
The noble Lord asks a question which I cannot answer at the
moment. I will endeavour to find out those statistics and I would
hope that some of those questions about resourcing will be dealt
with on publication of the strategy this week. As regards the
overall uplift, as I said earlier, 91% of the new intake, as it
were, are involved in frontline policing.
(Con)
My Lords, while the diversity statistics my noble friend outlined
are encouraging, in terms of women and ethnic minorities they are
still not proportionate to the population. Is not one of the
issues that many police forces have, particularly the Met,
retaining those staff? Can my noble friend outline how we are
going to monitor—maybe with swifter inspections from His
Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue
Services—whether they retain their female and ethnic minority
staff and promote them at the same rate as their white
officers?
(Con)
My noble friend makes some very good points. Obviously, as she
would expect me to say, these are matters for local police forces
themselves. However, I absolutely take the point, and we should
all be involved in making sure that retention and lack of
attrition remains as it is.
(Lab)
My Lords, I find it pretty astonishing that the Government should
call for national rejoicing that they have finally got the level
of policing up to the level of 13 years ago, under the last
Labour Government. An apology for all the cuts that were made in
the early years of this Government would be in order. As for
comments in the Statement such as criminals now “must be cursing
their luck” because the figures have gone up, the inevitable
response is that immediately after 2010, criminals must have been
rejoicing at the savage cuts made to policing—to dangerous
levels—in many cities in this country.
The Minister still has not answered a couple of specific
questions that were put to him. First, we are told that these
20,000 new recruits have been recruited since 2019. How many
people have left the police service during that precise period,
and is that allowed for in describing the number of police
officers available today? Secondly, this mass recruitment is
obviously to be welcomed, but can he tell us how many of these
new recruits actually leave the police service before they have
completed their probationary period? It is no use having the
police officers unless they give a substantial period of service
after they have been trained.
(Con)
My Lords, in fact there are more policemen than under the last
Labour Government: 3,542 more, to be precise. The fact is that
demand for policing has changed since 2010, which is why in 2019
the Government made this commitment to increase the number of
police officers by 20,000, to help the police respond. I am
afraid that I cannot say how many of this new intake will
complete their probationary period, as, obviously, some will
still be in their probationary period. I will endeavour to find
out the statistics and come back to the noble Lord. On the number
who left, I have already gone into the statistics in some detail
on the number who were recruited, as well as the attrition
statistics.
My Lords, it is very good to hear the Minister speak about police
uplift. I am certainly not asking for more and more but I am
asking for more join-up. I am really concerned about the “we are
coming for you” rhetoric being part of the solution, and the
sense that if we simply arrest more people and send more people
to prison, we will reduce reoffending. There was nothing in the
data about the high rate of reoffending. Unless we look at what
is going on in our prisons, at how we rehabilitate people and
address some of the systemic issues relating to why people offend
in the first place, we will not be doing that join-up across the
criminal justice system. I am really concerned about the rhetoric
whereby, if you arrest more people and lock them up for longer,
our streets will be safer; the data simply does not reflect that.
Will the Minister say more about the join-up across the whole of
the criminal justice system?
(Con)
The right reverend Prelate has made some very good points. The
public would expect charge, arrest and prevention rates to
increase from the current levels. However, without work on
reoffending and the criminal justice system in the round, as the
right reverend Prelate suggests, I think that things will fail to
improve as much as we would all like. I cannot give her any
precise details but, when it comes to the drug strategy, work is
being done between the Ministry of Justice, the criminal justice
system more generally and the Home Office on reoffending and
referring people to preventive programmes at an earlier stage.
That should yield some results.
(Con)
Will the Minister join me in paying tribute to Paul Sanford, who
was appointed Norfolk chief constable in 2021? He made it among
his priorities to clamp down on the county lines and low-level
antisocial behaviour, and he has succeeded in both areas.
However, is the Minister aware that rural counties such as
Norfolk, Suffolk and Lincolnshire are facing quite profound
problems with the police funding formula? As a consequence, Paul
Sanford’s predecessor had to scrap the police community support
officer programme. What can the Minister say about those counties
that have suffered relative to other counties in funding and
their desire to reinstate that programme in future?
(Con)
I thank my noble friend for his question and I am happy to join
him in congratulating the chief constable whom he has mentioned.
As for the funding formula, I do not have the precise details in
front of me. However, as I said in the Statement, the demand has
changed over the past 10 years. If the funding has changed, that
will be a reflection of the change in demand.
(Lab)
My Lords, the Minister’s Statement refers to the importance of
public trust. As the House will know, in the case of the
Metropolitan Police, that is understandably very low—indeed, the
Metropolitan Police is itself on probation. To follow up his
answer to my noble friend a moment ago about probation, do the
Government keep figures on the current number of police officers
in the Metropolitan Police who are on probation? Do the
Government have an estimate of those who are expected to pass
through their probation to become finally qualified police
officers?
(Con)
I am glad that the noble Viscount has raised the subject of the
Metropolitan Police. It is a little disappointing that it is one
of the only forces—in fact, the only force—that did not meet its
targets in police uplift, with only an additional 3,468 officers
recruited, whereas the target was for 4,557, and the funding was
there to do that. As for the probationary statistics that the
noble Viscount asked for, as I said in answer to an earlier
question, I am afraid that I do not have them to hand, but I
shall endeavour to find them and communicate them to the noble
Viscount.
(LD)
My Lords, the composition of police forces should reflect the
community that they represent. Why has recruitment of those from
ethnic-minority and diverse communities been so low in the
Metropolitan Police?
(Con)
That I cannot answer but, as I said, in the national picture, the
fact is that we have more officers identifying as ethnic
minorities than ever before.
(Lab)
My Lords, as the Minister said, it is not just about hitting a
target; it is also about public trust. How concerned is he about
the media reports around police recruitment of unsuitable
so-called rogue candidates being given jobs, precisely to meet
government targets? The police inspectorate has said explicitly
that hundreds of people have joined the police in the past three
years who simply should not have. If the Minister recognises
this, what is he going to do to address it?
(Con)
I hope that I have gone into reasonable detail about the
standards of vetting that are required and expected. I also point
out that there were 10 applicants for every job, which implies—or
should imply, at least—that there is a reasonable pool from which
to choose and, I hope, get the right people. That is of course
not a guarantee that there will not be a few bad apples in this
particular barrel, but I sincerely hope that there are not—but
perhaps I might be surprised if there are not as well.
(Lab)
My Lords, even with the police uplift programme, since 2010 there
are 9,000 fewer police officers, and 6,000 fewer on the beat in
real terms. Does the Minister think that this programme is
sufficient, given that 90% of crimes go unsolved every year, or
are the Government considering further action?
(Con)
My Lords, the noble Baroness asks me to comment on operational
policing matters. I have talked a bit about neighbourhood
policing activities; I have also, on a number of occasions, said
that 91% of policemen are involved in front-line activities.
These are really issues that should be debated
between Police and Crime
Commissioners and chief constables, depending on the
area.
(Con)
My Lords, as my noble friend said, rural crime takes on
a life of its own. North Yorkshire was the first police force, I
understand, to create a rural task force. Will the Home Office
give a specific target for rural crime to ensure that the funding
for such task forces is secured going forward?
(Con)
My noble friend will be aware that, as I said in answer to the
previous question, these are operational matters for chief
constables and police and crime commissioners—and, of course, in
the case of Police and Crime
Commissioners the people who elect them.
(Lab)
My Lords, this will not wash. The people outside know that crime
is going up; they know that there are not the police numbers on
the street. How will the Government make sure that these
criminals get longer sentences when there are no places in prison
for them?
(Con)
My Lords, the noble Lord is wrong: crime is going down and there
are more police officers than ever before. That is according to
the Crime Survey for England and Wales, which the Office for
National Statistics recognises as the most reliable source of
those statistics. As for inviting me to comment on sentencing
practices and so on, which obviously stray into the
responsibilities of other government departments, I am not going
to do that.
(Lab)
My Lords, the Minister has given us a great deal of data this
afternoon. However, the proportion of front-line officers is
lower today than in any year since 2011, while the proportion of
officers in organisational support is higher today than in any
year since 2011. Have the Government considered the merits of
committing to a target for putting more police and PCSOs on the
streets in our nations and regions?
(Con)
I say to the noble Baroness that, again, that is an invitation to
comment on operational policing matters, which depend very much
on local circumstances. However, 91% of all police are currently
in front-line roles and, as I have already said, the nature of
that—the demand, if you like—has changed over the last decade and
it would not be wise for me to speculate as to how that demand
has changed in various local areas.
(Lab)
My Lords, just last week we heard that the Met Police may be
failing to identify serial killers, in the wake of the appalling
case of Stephen Port. The report identified five key failings:
lack of training; poor supervision; unacceptable record-keeping;
confusing policies; and inadequate intelligence procedures. How
are the Government urgently supporting the Met to fix this?
(Con)
The Government’s support for Sir Mark Rowley has been very clear
indeed, and I am happy to wish him very well in his endeavours
over the coming months. He has a very large set of
responsibilities on his shoulders and, as far as I can see, he is
discharging them well. The noble Lord asked me about operational
policing in London. He will be aware that the responsibility for
that, as the police and crime commissioner, is with the Mayor of
London.
(Lab Co-op)
My Lords, 41% of crime is fraud, so why does the Minister keep
using figures that do not include fraud?
(Con)
The fraud strategy will be published this week.
(DUP)
My Lords, while the Government make a virtue of the fact that
police numbers in England have started to turn marginally
upwards, in Northern Ireland we have reached a point at which the
security threat is the highest it has been for many years from
terrorist and dissident organisations, and yet the number of
police officers in Northern Ireland is perhaps the lowest it has
been in many decades, if not the entire history of the state.
What representations have Ministers been making to their
colleagues in the Northern Ireland Office to ensure that the
citizens of Northern Ireland are given an equal level of
protection from crime and terrorist actions?
(Con)
The picture that the noble Lord paints is obviously concerning. I
will say that this is not a marginal uplift but a substantial
uplift. As regards specific circumstances in Northern Ireland, I
am afraid I cannot answer his question on the numbers, but I will
investigate and come back to him.
(Lab)
My Lords, I think there is general agreement that trust has
declined since 2010. We need to restore that as best we can.
Knowing the Minister, I was rather surprised by his throwaway
line in response to some of the questions about trust. When he
said that there will be “a few bad apples”, I found that rather
complacent. The police inspectorate has said that, of the people
being recruited into the police force, some hundreds have come in
within the past three years who should not be there. We know the
plan that has been set in place to try to avoid a repetition of
this in the future, but what is happening to try to root out the
300 or so that are around?
(Con)
I am sorry if I sounded complacent to the noble Lord. It was
really just a reflection on the statistics of this, as with any
normal distribution—the noble Lord will know how normal
distributions of population cohorts and so on work out. That is
all that that comment was meant to reflect. As regards the
numbers of police that have been recruited, I have commented
extensively on the vetting processes. The dismissals review,
which I referred to earlier, is concluding this month. I hope
that we will have a lot more to say very soon on how that process
will be strengthened.
(Lab Co-op)
My Lords, I am sorry: the Minister has not answered my question
about the fraud strategy. The Government have been consistently
excluding fraud from the reporting of crimes —why?
(Con)
My Lords, the noble Lord is quite right. I am sorry if I seemed
to evade the question. The simple fact of the matter is that I
cannot comment on the strategy because I have not seen it, it is
due to be published this week, and it will address all the
various questions that the noble Lord has asked me—in other
words, I do not know.
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)
My Lords, as we have heard from my noble friend Lady Lawrence,
even with the police uplift programme, there is still a shortage
of over 9,000 police officers. As well as the decimation of
neighbourhood policing that that has caused, many of the officers
lost in earlier rounds of cuts will have been among the most
experienced and highly trained; for example, officers trained in
specialist intelligence, firearms and dealing with sexual
offences. This has put immense pressure on those left behind to
hold the fort and may explain, for example, why only 1% of rape
offences reach a conviction. What assessment have the Government
carried out of the impact of this loss of experience, and how
long will it take to build back up so that the specialist officer
posts can be filled?
(Con)
The noble Baroness is right to talk about specialist skills and
experience. I do not recognise the 9,000 number: as I have said
repeatedly this afternoon, we have record numbers of police. I am
afraid I cannot answer, as with the question that the noble Lord,
, asked, about age distribution
and so on. I can say that certain specific programmes, such the
one I referenced earlier, Operation Soteria, are delivering very
strong results. The necessary people are being trained in the
right way in dealing with some of the things that are of
significant public concern.
|
