Julian Knight I will open my remarks by paying due regard briefly—I
know that the House will have a longer time to do this—to Jack
Dromey, the late, departed, much missed Member for Birmingham,
Erdington. Jack believed wholeheartedly in policing and he always
believed in cross-party working. He was a friend of mine and, like
many people, I am very deeply saddened by his loss. He would have
been here tonight very much contributing to this debate, so he is
much missed. I...Request free trial
I will open my remarks by paying due regard briefly—I know that
the House will have a longer time to do this—to , the late, departed, much
missed Member for Birmingham, Erdington. Jack believed
wholeheartedly in policing and he always believed in cross-party
working. He was a friend of mine and, like many people, I am very
deeply saddened by his loss. He would have been here tonight very
much contributing to this debate, so he is much missed. I know
that the House will have longer to pay tribute and I know that my
colleagues will join me in those comments.
When we worked on policing, we did so with my hon. Friend the
Member for Dudley South (), my good friend, to effectively
raise the precept from its ceiling to provide greater resource
for West Midlands police. As a result, band A, B and E properties
in my constituency will pay a direct precept of £217 each year to
the Labour police and crime commissioner for the west midlands.
As a Conservative, I am not proud of that. I do not want to see
tax money going in that direction, with such a high rise in
taxes. In fact, £13.7 million has come from Solihull alone.
The reason why the departed Member for Birmingham, Erdington and
my hon. Friend worked together on this was that we knew that
there was a situation—as the famous note said, there was no money
left—in which there had to be a series of financial savings
across many parts of Government, and we wanted to help with the
rebalancing of that. The agreement that we made at that point
does not match what we have now seen—frankly, it was not about
inflation-busting rises every year in order to more than make up
for any previous deficit.
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for securing this debate. In
Wednesbury, Oldbury and Tipton we are losing all three of our
police stations. People up the road in Aldridge were promised a
consultation—indeed, my hon. Friend the Member for
Aldridge-Brownhills () has been fighting hard to
make sure that that police station is safe. My hon. Friend just
talked about the agreement; does he agree that a key part of that
agreement is the principle that there will be consultation and
that it is utterly disgraceful to disregard it in the way that
the PCC has?
It is an absolute shambles, frankly. The announcement was
originally made in a press release and, basically, the same
insult has been followed through. We all knew what the result was
going to be as soon as the PCC election was decided. Lo and
behold, here we are with a PCC in the West Midlands who has been
elected through Momentum. If we look around the Chamber, we can
see that it is Conservative Members whose local police stations
are being closed. I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, and
although my hon. Friend the Member for Aldridge-Brownhills
() cannot speak in tonight’s
debate, she is also a fervent defender of her local police
station.
We hoped that the money that we agreed to would be adequately
spent. Let us have a look at it for a moment. More than £20
million has been spent on Lloyd House, the PCC’s head office—that
is a lot of wallpaper, is it not? When the previous PCC’s
original decision about the police station was announced, without
consultation, there was more than £100 million in the reserves.
That would keep my local police station going for more than a
century. The £20 million-plus that has been wasted—well, not
wasted but spent, or I suppose they would say it has been
invested; I would say, “Nice comfortable chairs—£20
million”—would effectively keep my local police station open for
40 years. Despite the Metropolitan Borough of Solihull having
contributed £13.7 million in precept allocations in this
financial year, we are about to be robbed of our main police
station.
I am hearing loud and clear that we have a police and crime
commissioner who is failing constituents not just in Solihull but
throughout the West Midlands—he is certainly failing the
constituents in Stourbridge. Does my hon. Friend agree that the
consistent problem with the police and crime commissioner is that
he is continually closing police stations and not reopening them,
which was the promise? He certainly promised to me to reopen the
police station in Stourbridge and that has not yet happened.
It is a familiar story from my hon. Friend. I will come on to the
promises that have been broken over this period.
Let me be absolutely clear: I stand against the proposal to
permanently close Solihull police station. The plans will leave
my constituency without an operational policing base. I know that
my constituents stand with me in opposing the plans. Just before
the Christmas recess, I launched a petition with my hon. Friend
the Member for Meriden (), whose constituency is also
greatly impacted by the proposals. To date, more than 700
residents from across the borough have signed the petition. That
is in addition to the 3,000 who signed the previous time the
Labour police and crime commissioner came knocking. I put on
record my thanks to my local residents and councillors and to my
hon. Friend the Member for Meriden for supporting the
petition.
I thank my hon. Friend for securing this debate. Does he agree
that this is not an either/or situation? Constituents in the
north and south of my constituency deserve adequate police
resources. The Labour police and crime commissioner has taken a
political decision to undermine the safety and security of
residents throughout the Metropolitan Borough of Solihull.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Actually, the police and
crime commissioner has tried to play my hon. Friend and me off
against each other by suggesting there will be extra investment
in the north of the borough and that that will somehow make a
difference in the south of the borough. Everyone knows that the
distances are large and the challenges are much different.
Frankly, as I will come to say, 125,000 residents in my
constituency and beyond, including in parts of my hon. Friend’s
constituency, will be left without a major police presence.
Is my hon. Friend aware that the disgraceful proposal also
includes closing the main police station in the royal town of
Sutton Coldfield? The only people who support this appalling
decision are the two Labour Birmingham city councillors. Is not
the right answer to build a police hub to serve my town of
100,000 people, with all the relevant police infrastructure,
rather than to replace it all with a front counter that is not
open all hours? Will my hon. Friend join me in praising Simon
Ward, the leader of Royal Sutton Coldfield Town Council, for his
motion condemning the decision, and Janet Cairns, a councillor
and community activist who has campaigned forcefully against the
dreadful proposals?
I concur with my right hon. Friend. The royal town of Sutton
Coldfield has been in the trenches with me over the last few
years following this disgraceful attack on our constituents,
which is completely unnecessary for the reasons I will now
outline.
I accept it is easy to speak against a police station closure, so
I hope Members will allow me to outline what I believe to be the
legitimate reasons why Solihull police station must remain open.
First, it primarily serves the south of Solihull borough, which
includes my constituency and some of the villages in the
constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Meriden, including
Dickens Heath, Dorridge, Knowle and Hampton in Arden. We are
talking about a population of around 127,000 residents. The fact
that an area with such a dense population is going to lose its
only operational police base is nothing less than a scandal and a
travesty.
It is also important to remember that in 2015 the previous Labour
police and crime commissioner closed Shirley police station. My
hon. Friend the Member for Stourbridge () and I were told that,
magically, there would be a police presence, and what has
happened? Absolutely zilch.
My hon. Friend has alluded to the previous police and crime
commissioner closing various police stations in Dudley borough,
including Stourbridge, Kingswinford and Netherton among others.
When he announced that Brierley Hill police station would be
closing in the next two or three years to open a new police
station in Dudley town centre, moving our only remaining police
station from the centre of the borough to the far corner of the
borough, he promised that a meaningful police presence would
remain in Brierley Hill town centre. Does my hon. Friend agree
that it needs to be a proper police station with officers
operating out of it, not just a locker and an office?
I completely concur with my hon. Friend, and we are in a similar
situation. Frankly, cars will have to come from Tally Ho and
Coventry, which is far too long a response time for my
constituents.
In response to my constituents’ rightful frustrations, the police
and crime commissioner stated in his estate review that
“locations for public contact offices in Solihull and Sutton will
continue to be explored”.
That is very big of him. There is absolutely no commitment to
give Solihull a public contact office. A number of questions have
been raised as to what a public contact office really means.
Reference has been made to it merely being a desk in a library
with someone wearing a bit of hi-vis. For 127,000 people a desk
in a library, 9 to 3, hi-vis—that is it, done. It is absolutely
ridiculous, a travesty and a disgrace.
How can I honestly encourage my constituents to report crime,
particularly crime of a personal and sensitive nature, to a
police desk in the middle of a public space that is open only at
certain hours and where they do not know precisely to whom they
are speaking? What if one of my constituents suffering from
physical and emotional abuse does not, for whatever reason, have
access to a telephone and wants to seek refuge in a secure
policing environment? That will now not be available anywhere in
my large town.
As my constituent Mr Thompson of Compton Close—not the other Mr
Thompson—put it brilliantly:
“We have already suffered the closure of the Shirley police
station. It’s clear this next step is unacceptable to all
Silhillians. Solihull residents deserve more than the muted
‘desk’ to take concerns. We deserve and should expect a local
Police station with officers to respond directly to our
needs.”
The police and crime commissioner tries to defend this cruel
decision to close Solihull police station by using the usual line
from the Opposition Benches, which are empty tonight, that West
Midlands police has suffered from cuts and austerity. In a press
release, he stated that once again—
“a decade of reckless Government cuts.”
Home Office data on direct money shows that from 2018-19 to
2021-22 it has gone up from £442 million to £694 million—an
uplift of £250 million in four years. So, in light of the
substantial increase in direct subsidies from the Home Office,
straight into the PCC’s office, we have to ask ourselves why on
earth he has decided to put forward plans to permanently close
our police stations, when funding is proportionally higher than
it was many years ago.
I would also draw the House’s attention to the fact that, as a
result of more Government funding to the Labour police and crime
commissioner, West Midlands police has managed to recruit
hundreds of new police officers. Indeed, it admits in a statement
that since the general election, this Conservative Government
have managed to recruit 867 police officers across the west
midlands. With the hundreds of additional police officers on the
beat across the west midlands, particularly in Solihull, the PCC
clearly forgets that we need adequate space to house those new
officers. By closing Solihull police stations and those of my
hon. Friends, and other stations across the west midlands, the
PCC is drastically reducing the size of the constabulary’s estate
just as the police force is growing, which means fewer desks,
less officers and a reduction in the number of cells.
I am sure hon. Members know just how often we are contacted by
our constituents about the levels of crime in our areas. I am
contacted daily by constituents about the concern that exists
about the substantial rise in crime across Solihull, which has
been going on for many years. In particular the fear of violent
crime, knife crime and burglary is a real concern to my
residents. In December 2019 we had the murder of 21-year-old Jack
Donoghue outside Popworld; he was simply enjoying a night
out.
Lockdown has created difficulties in assessing crime statistics.
However, despite our not having the full crime statistics for
2020-21, I can confirm to the House that of those that are
already reported, 666 individual cases of violent crime have been
reported in Solihull in the last year alone. That is already a
massive increase on the data for 2020, when we had 574 such
incidents. Undoubtedly, West Midlands police has a reputation—a
very unwelcome reputation—for suffering large-scale knife crimes.
What is the answer, I ask? Well, the answer of this police and
crime commissioner is first to stop stop and search; that is a
great way to stop knife crime. And the other one is to close our
police stations, despite the huge uplift in moneys that come, not
only from the precept, but from central Government.
My constituents deserve better. They deserve permanent policing.
Theirs is a large town, a vibrant town, a town with many older
residents who need the safety and protection that is the very
basic that we all ask for ourselves and our society.
It is no secret that I have always been sceptical about the role
of police and crime commissioner. In the financial year
2019-20—and who can blame him, frankly—the West Midlands PCC’s
office spent £437,000 on salaries for the PCC, his deputies and
the senior statutory officers alone, money that I believe should
instead be spent on frontline national policing.
To conclude, if we are not going to get rid of the role of police
and crime commissioner—and I would be absolutely delighted if we
did—we have to fold it into the role of the Mayor of the West
Midlands, someone who actually knows what he is doing and is not
an ideologue, and does not think that the cure for knife crime is
less stop and search.
Mr Mitchell
My hon. Friend is making a brilliant speech. I agree that there
is some scepticism about Police and Crime
Commissioners because when we set them up, earlier in the
period of Conservative Government, we were very keen
that Police and Crime
Commissioners should stand up for the public, so that they
were really well represented when the police made decisions. Is
not that the great failure this time, in his patch and in
mine—that the police and crime commissioner is not reflecting the
heartfelt views and opinions of the people that we represent?
My right hon. Friend has obviously been reading my speech.
My final challenge to the police and crime commissioner is this:
prove us wrong. Prove that you are not partisan. Prove to us that
you are committed to your job—that of protecting the residents of
the west midlands. And by so doing, acknowledge that you have had
the uplift in money, you have had the extra precept, and do not
close our police stations.
7.29pm
The Minister for Crime and Policing
Before I begin, may I offer my condolences to the family of
? I did not know him well, but
in all our dealings, he was always polite and respectful. He was
a party man to the last. I saw him last just before Christmas in
Westminster Hall where he had sponsored a debate, seeking, with
his Labour party colleagues, to defend the decision of the police
and crime commissioner in the west midlands to raise the precept
by the full £10. I am sure that he will be missed by many,
including me.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Solihull () for securing this debate and
allowing me to address what is obviously an extremely important
issue across the west midlands that has excited so many
colleagues to come along and defend the interests of their
constituents.
I should start by saying from the outset that I hope the
Government have demonstrated their commitment to supporting the
police in the past couple of years. They perform a unique role in
our society. They are on the frontline of the fight against crime
and absolutely critical to the foremost duty of any Government of
keeping the public safe. This is a mission of the utmost
importance to us and one that we are embarking on with tenacity
and relentless determination that the law-abiding majority would
expect. I hope that our actions bear this out.
For 2022-23, we are proposing funding for the policing system of
up to £16.9 billion, equating to an increase of up to £1.1
billion when compared with last year. For the west midlands, this
means that funding will be up to £694.9 million in 2022-23, an
increase of up to £39.4 million on the 2021-22 police funding
settlement, and, as my hon. Friend pointed out, a significant
increase over the past four years.
At the spending review last year, it was announced that the
three-year settlement had secured an additional £540 million for
the police uplift programme by 2024-25, enabling forces to
recruit and maintain the full 20,000 police officer uplift
provided for by our recruitment campaign emanating from our
manifesto. I am confident that, in the future, with this funding
settlement and the funding announced at the spending review in
October, police forces will have the necessary resources and
capabilities to perform their vital function and keep our
citizens safe from harm.
Strengthening police numbers is a key priority, and I am pleased
to say that we are halfway to meeting our 20,000-officer target.
As of 30 September, forces had recruited 11,053 additional
officers. Of this figure, as my hon. Friend said, west midlands
police had recruited 867 additional officers, a significant
uplift in resources. We expect this outstanding progress to
continue into the third year of the programme.
Although we will always play an active role in public protection
and crime fighting, it is important that we always remember that
local accountability is vital. That is why all operational
decisions, including those on the number of police stations and
their locations, are for chief constables and for the directly
elected Police and Crime
Commissioners and Mayors where they have PCC functions.
They are, we hope, best placed to make such decisions based on
their local knowledge and experience.
My hon. Friend, along with his colleagues, is obviously
expressing significant dissatisfaction about the decisions of the
police and crime commissioner. In his speech, he raised three
substantive points that I want to address. First, he raised the
issue of funding. I have addressed that in correspondence with
the police and crime commissioner and, indeed, in the Westminster
Hall debate that was called by the Labour party just before
Christmas. He is right to point out that there has been a
significant uplift in funding for the west midlands police, which
will result in a significant number of police officers being
recruited. They do need somewhere to operate from. He is quite
right in his assertion that whatever plans may have been laid as
a property strategy for the west midlands, it would seem sensible
to me—and I am sure to him—to at the very least review them in
the light of the expansion of police resources and to be sure
that every part of the west midlands receives an adequate
service, and, critically, that police response times from those
bases are acceptable. In some parts of the country, we have seen
police officers operating from patrol bases or stations, where
they naturally keep their kit, that are some distance from where
they need to get to operationally. That wasted time is
inefficient. As the money we are giving for the uplift includes
resources for things like buildings, equipment, cars and all the
ancillary support mechanisms, I hope that all Police and Crime
Commissioners including the west midlands PCC, will review
that issue.
The second issue is that I hear repeatedly from the police and
crime commissioner in the west midlands that his financial
situation is down to the actions of the Conservative Government
and that somehow austerity was uniquely targeted at West Midlands
police, which was somehow singled out—unlike other police forces,
from which I do not hear the same issues. That is patently
untrue, not least because police funding is distributed by a
legally enforceable formula that does not discriminate by area:
there is no discretion as to distribution. The formula may well
be elderly, and we have given a commitment to review it—I hope to
be able to run the new formula before the next election—but to
say that somehow the financial problems of West Midlands police
are down to the Government, when other police forces are faring
much better, is economical with the actualité, shall we say.
In truth, the situation in the west midlands is the product of
decisions made by the police and crime commissioner’s
predecessor. In the Westminster Hall debate, I challenged the
Opposition about why other forces were in a different position.
What different decisions have they made during the past decade
that have put them at an advantage over West Midlands police and
meant that they have not had to take such steps?
I am perfectly happy to take the consequences of and shoulder the
responsibility for austerity. I was not in this House at the
time, but I recognise that the country had to do something about
its finances, and thank God we did—if we had not, what state
would we have been in now and during the pandemic? There were
consequences to that, but it cannot be a sustainable argument to
say that all West Midlands police’s successes are down to the
Labour party and that all the problems are down to the
Conservative Government. Labour has to take responsibility for
the decisions that it took on police stations, the balance
between officers and staff, or the deployment of resources
generally. What is the point of someone standing for election if
they do not feel that they will make a difference?
The third point, which was raised powerfully by my hon. Friend
the Member for Solihull and my right hon. Friend the Member for
Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell), is about the police and crime
commissioner listening to local people. I was technically the
first police and crime commissioner in the country: back in
January 2012, London went ahead of everywhere else by five
months, and for that small period I was in the unique position of
being the only PCC. I believe in that position, because the
replacement of the old police authorities, which were faceless,
nameless, known to nobody and had very little accountability to
the public, was critical. We wanted to replace them with a named
individual, elected by mandate. Once the election had been fought
on party lines, that individual could then do what we all do:
seek to serve all our constituents equally, irrespective of how
they might have voted or of who their councillors, MPs or other
representatives might be.
Given the anger that has been expressed today and in the
Westminster Hall debate, in which my hon. Friend the Member for
Dudley North () complained that promises to
him about a police station had been broken, it feels as if the
consultation may have gone awry. If I were the police and crime
commissioner in any area, I would do as I did in London: seek to
build a coalition of support politically for what we were trying
to do. The work of the police is difficult, challenging and often
confrontational, so ensuring that coalition of support is
critical. When we hear that party interests are possibly being
put ahead of building that coalition, and when those loyalties
are not laid aside, it can be concerning. I am alarmed to hear
that in Sutton Coldfield there is dissent—albeit small in
number—on the council about the protection of people in the area,
and that consensus cannot be built in the area about the
disposition of resources.
Mr Mitchell
The Minister is responding brilliantly to the debate, but can I
just be quite clear that everyone in Sutton Coldfield is against
these monstrous proposals? The only people I can find in the
entire town who are in favour are the two Labour Birmingham city
councillors.
My right hon. Friend makes a powerful point. As I have said, my
view is that once elections are done, all of us in elected office
must seek to build consensus about what we are doing. We cannot
expect always to agree with everybody, but we must do our best to
ensure, first, that we are listening; secondly, that we are being
fair in communicating our decisions; and thirdly, that we are
fulfilling the promises we made to the electorate.
I will be in the west midlands on Thursday to review preparations
for the Commonwealth games, which hopefully will be a cause for
great celebrations across the whole of the west midlands, and
indeed across the whole of the Commonwealth. I will be having
conversations with the police and crime commissioner about this
and other matters, not least violent crime in Birmingham. We have
put in significant funding through our grip programme and the
violence reduction unit to try to get on top of that problem in
the west midlands. When I see him, I will express my surprise
that, at a moment of really unprecedented expansion in British
policing, when UK policing is stepping forward much more
confidently than it has in the past, I have heard such a chorus
of distress from elected representatives from across the region.
I hope that will give him cause to reflect on his role.
|