|
Police Minister promises to Visit North Oxfordshire
Vernon Coaker, the Minister for Security, Counter-Terrorism, Crime and Policing has promised North Oxfordshire MP Tony Baldry that he will come to North Oxfordshire to see the good work being done locally by the Thames Valley Police in neighbourhood policing.
The following is the speech made by Tony Baldry in the House of Commons on Wednesday, together with the Minister’s reply:
10.4 am
Tony Baldry (Banbury) (Con): It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Hood, not least because you and I have adjoining offices in the narrowest corridor in the Palace—appropriately known as the yellow submarine. Whichever Whip decided that you and I should have offices next door to each other in the narrowest corridor in the Palace clearly had their own particular sense of humour.
The hon. Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) has done the House a service by initiating this debate on neighbourhood policing, and I endorse everything that my colleague, constituency neighbour and friend, the
19 Mar 2008 : Column 233WH
right hon. Member for Oxford, East (Mr. Smith) said about the achievements of Thames Valley police.
We usually have debates in Westminster Hall because there is a problem, but I do not think that there is a problem with neighbourhood policing—an issue to which I shall return. There are, however, a couple of problems with policing, and I should like to mention them briefly. First, the Minister must recognise that there is still considerable upset, dissatisfaction and frustration at the fact that the police pay award was not fully honoured this year, and that will rankle for a long time. If an independent police arbitration system says that a fair pay settlement is 2.5 per cent. and the figures are then massaged so that officers do not receive that settlement, it is simply unfair, bad personnel management and unjust for those people who provide an excellent public service.
Mr. Ruffley: Does my hon. Friend also welcome the announcement by the shadow Home Secretary, our right hon. Friend the Member for Haltemprice and Howden (David Davis) that a departure by a Home Secretary in any future Conservative Government from any independent award will only ever happen under the affirmative procedure in the House? That is an important safeguard for police officers.
Mr. Jim Hood (in the Chair): Order. The hon. Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Ruffley) must not stand with his back to the Chair.
Tony Baldry: I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Those in public service need to know that they will be treated fairly and that, if independent arbitration systems are put in place, they will be honoured except in the most exceptional circumstances, which would have to be demonstrated using the affirmative procedure in Parliament. I hope that we never reach that situation.
The second issue is a problem, and as the Minister is present, I should like to have another crack at it. I am sure that I shall be supported by Members with constituencies not only in the Thames valley but throughout south-east England. The issue is the haemorrhage of police officers from Thames Valley police to the Metropolitan police. Over the past five years, we have lost 388 police officers to the Met, but the problem is worse than that, because they tend to be firearms officers, detectives and road policing officers. The chief constable of Thames Valley police, Sara Thornton, says:
“This is a disproportionately high number of specialist officers, who are more experienced and highly trained. It seems likely that this proportion will rise in future years because of the high demand for specialist trained officers for the 2012 Olympics, the increased risk of terrorism, and other factors such as the opening of Terminal 5 at Heathrow.
The loss of specialist officers impact in two ways: it leaves a capability gap, and increases the recruitment and training costs to replace the lost officers.”
In Thames Valley police, it costs £55,000 to train a patrol constable, £63,000 for a detective constable and £77,500 for a firearms constable—not insignificant figures. The chief constable observes:
“One of the factors cited by police officers who left or are thinking of leaving is the increased pay in the MPS”—
19 Mar 2008 : Column 234WH
the Metropolitan Police Service—
“due to the London Allowance, compared to the South East England Allowance, and the difficulties of buying a house because of high property prices in the South East. Police officers are £4,393 p.a. better off by transferring to the MPS, in addition to free travel on public transport up to a radius of 70 miles.
A key point is that the South East England Allowance is frozen, while the London Allowance increases with inflation. When it was set in 2003 the differential was £4,000, it is now £4,393.”
The situation is worsening.
Several hon. Members went to see the Home Secretary, and I am sure that we were all grateful to her, because she very courteously listened to what we had to say. We do not criticise police officers who move, as anyone who has skills must be allowed to transfer them, but the difficulty in the Thames valley is that we are spending money on training police officers and then losing our most experienced officers. It would be fairer if police officers in the Thames valley got the same kind of pay and settlement as those in the Met. It is difficult to see why police officers in Slough should get one rate of pay while those just across the border in Uxbridge should get so much more. It is also daft that a police officer who lives in Banbury can travel to work in London for free, as police officers have free travel, thus taking the benefit of their skills and knowledge away from the Thames valley and my constituents. That issue cannot rumble on; it must be addressed.
Let me turn from the matters that are of concern to neighbourhood policing. The other day, I spent a day with neighbourhood police officers in Bicester, and I was extremely impressed by what I saw. There are three groups—established police officers, police community support officers and street wardens—and I was impressed by the mutual respect that they have for one another. I was particularly impressed by the respect that regular police officers have for PCSOs, and vice versa, and by the way in which all three teams work together.
PCSOs focus on areas in which they can make a difference, such as neighbourhood environmental quality. They respond positively to the concerns and needs of young people, and they deal with litter, antisocial behaviour and graffiti. One young PCSO has shown great initiative. She took it upon herself to write to Network Rail to ask what it was doing about the homophobic graffiti under a bridge in an underpass through which many people walk between housing estates and Bicester town centre. She did not receive a satisfactory answer, so I took the matter up with the chief executive of Network Rail. We eventually got it sorted, and the underpass has been painted. Similarly, the district council has now put litter bins in an area where the PCSOs had picked up a lot of litter. I was impressed to hear that the same PCSO, when she realised that a derelict factory was being used as a refuse dump, tracked down the owner and told them to get it sorted. Regular police officers probably would not have time to do that, and the matter would not necessarily be picked up by street wardens.
My impression is that everyone works together positively in Bicester—I am sure that that happens in other towns—and that it is making a real difference. However, there are also concerns about PCSOs, such as their pay, which is not fantastic. It is fine for young, single people, but I suspect that it is not a great salary for married PCSOs whose pay is the only family
19 Mar 2008 : Column 235WH
income. Also, it is difficult to see what the promotional prospects will be for PCSOs, although I am glad that quite a lot of them in my patch eventually transfer into the regular police force. That creates a good opportunity for each side to evaluate the other and works well. However, there might be issues about the long-term career and pay structure for PCSOs. I do not see neighbourhood policing as a problem. In fact, it is very positive and everyone understands where it fits in. In my patch, it is a good news story.
The final issue that I want to discuss is neighbourhood watch. One advantage of being my own Member of Parliament is that, when I write to myself, I always agree with what I have to say, and I should like to share with the Chamber my views about neighbourhood watch. The traditional, old-fashioned neighbourhood watch scheme has something of Miss Marple about it and may have passed its sell-by date. Villagers think of themselves as living in villages, but people in towns do not think of themselves as living in neighbourhoods, except perhaps those in the Grimsbury area of Banbury. However, people recognise that the relationship between neighbours is important.
We could introduce variations on neighbourhood watch, such as neighbour schemes that invite people to act as neighbours. Given that most future policing will have to be intelligence-led, the police will frequently need information, so people should be encouraged to give relevant information. In addition to the telephone numbers that people can use to give information, we should make better use of websites. We could increase people’s ability to send information, perhaps anonymously, by text or electronically to local websites, such as a Banbury neighbours site.
Keeping young people on side is also important to intelligence-led policing. A difficulty with neighbourhood policing is that, if we are not careful, we can give the impression that all young people are a problem. When I go out with my two children, my son says to me, “Look, dad, you’ve got to be very careful; if we meet another youngster and they join us, we will be a group of feral youth, and you will be associated with a group of feral youth.” There is a danger that younger people will feel that way. They will often have intelligence and other information that they could send by text, so we need to have mechanisms by which they can do so.
Another variation of the neighbourhood watch scheme could be to use e-mail, which most people use. If we wrote to people locally to ask for their e-mail addresses for a positive purpose, most of them would respond. If the local police had the e-mail addresses of people in Banbury, they could send them updates about neighbourhood policing once a quarter. They could also send out instant alerts, for example, if the M40 is closed, which it is from time to time, or if they were looking for particular people. There is two-way traffic with information and intelligence, but how do we bring in the community? The community wants to be brought into neighbourhood policing, but the difficulty with neighbourhood watch is that it has depended very much on everything going through neighbourhood watch co-ordinators. With interactive websites and e-mail, the community could be more involved, especially if local authorities contributed, and the whole issue could be more positive.
19 Mar 2008 : Column 236WH
I find it difficult to get Ministers to visit my constituency. I wanted the Secretary of State for Health to come, and I offered to lose two stone before Easter, but even that did not persuade him to visit Horton hospital. I should like the Minister for Security, Counter-Terrorism, Crime and Policing to come at some time. [Interruption.]The hon. Member for Stafford laughs, but it is almost impossible to get Labour Ministers to visit our constituencies. That is bad policy, because they do not see what is happening in middle England.
What is happening in middle England on policing is good news, but I would welcome a visit to north Oxfordshire from the Minister for Security, Counter-Terrorism, Crime and Policing to see the good work that is being done by neighbourhood policing, and so that we can bend his ear about the outflow of officers from the Thames valley to the Met. I should also like the opportunity to suggest to him in person that we can make neighbourhood policing even more interactive and involve the community much more, not at the expense of police authorities’ budgets, but in other ways. That would get everyone in the community involved in helping the police to tackle and reduce crime by providing them with intelligence.
10.48 am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Vernon Coaker): It is a privilege to serve under your chairmanship, Mr. Hood. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford (Mr. Kidney) on securing the debate. If he does not mind me embarrassing him, may I also say that, as normal, he introduced his subject in an intelligent and thoughtful way? That gives enormous power to his arguments. I know that he works assiduously for his constituents, not only in respect of neighbourhood policing, but on a whole range of different matters, and I congratulate him on that.
Before I respond to the hon. Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Ruffley), I shall deal with some of the other points raised. This was a very intelligent debate and discussion, and hon. Members raised matters of importance. They were concerned with how to improve the delivery of neighbourhood policing in every area. The debate was not about the principle of it, because we all know that what people want is a visible uniformed presence on the street, but about how we can make that as effective as possible and how we ensure that local people can influence those officers in a proportionate way.
The hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. Field) was right to say that issues other than neighbourhood policing are important. It is for local police forces to achieve a balance in relation to that, which is something that we should not lose sight of. I was pleased that he and others highlighted the role of PCSOs. Given some of the publicity about them, it is important to say again that the Government and the vast majority of hon. Members think that they do an outstanding job in our communities. The introduction of PCSOs has been a major reform and has led to considerable improvements. We should consistently acknowledge that. When I and many other hon. Members travel around the country or are in our constituencies, we pay tribute to the role of PCSOs. I am grateful for his support on that.
The hon. Gentleman also mentioned the role of specials, and it is right and proper that we recognise their role in delivering neighbourhood policing. It is not just the number of specials that is important, but
19 Mar 2008 : Column 244WH
the number who are active in communities, which is a point that is often lost. A change was made in the past few years and the police work hard to ensure that specials are properly integrated into neighbourhood policing teams, and that they are active and working hard in those teams, rather than simply being numbers in a book. There has been considerable improvement in that and integration has been an important factor.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Oxford, East (Mr. Smith) talked about neighbourhood management, which is a particularly important point—in fact, it is crucial. Neighbourhood policing cannot be delivered without being part of neighbourhood management. He made that point when he talked about the reduction in crime in his area, brought about by a neighbourhood management approach. The role of PCSOs was also important and, again, he highlighted the difference that they have made.
The hon. Member for Banbury (Tony Baldry) talked about a subway in his area where a tremendous difference has been made by the local authority—or Network Rail or whoever was responsible—painting out some graffiti. That is not a policing function. In many respects, it is the function of the local authority or whoever is responsible. Painting out graffiti containing homophobic hatred or other types of graffiti means that when people walk down the subway, they will feel the benefit of the actions of those who take a pride in the community. Sometimes the simple measures that people think should be done—and they cannot understand why they are not done—make a real difference. In all our constituencies, fixing a broken streetlight or sign makes a huge difference. That is not part of a policing response, but part of neighbourhood management, in which the police play an important role. I think it would be a shock if I—a Labour Minister—turned up in the middle of Banbury, and we would perhaps have some fun if I did so, but, on a serious note, I will consider visiting.
Mr. Andrew Smith rose—
Mr. Coaker: Of course, I will go to Oxford at the same time.
Mr. Smith: My hon. Friend could come to Oxford, East on the way to Banbury. The hon. Gentleman made a point about the career structure for PCSOs and the opportunities for progression. Does my hon. Friend have that matter under review or have further proposals on it?
Mr. Coaker: The next thing I have written on my notes is not to forget to say that on the way to Banbury, or on the way back from Banbury, I will, of course, call in at Oxford. Just in case I have missed anyone out geographically, I should say that it is important for Ministers to go to different constituencies and parts of the country. I have been to Burton, Stafford, Copland in Cumbria and other places to see the work that is going on.
Hon. Members will know that the Association of Chief Police Officers has asked the National Policing Improvement Agency to review PCSOs and career development will be considered as part of that. On the transfer or movement of officers from Thames Valley and, indeed, other forces into the Metropolitan force,
19 Mar 2008 : Column 245WH
officers recruited after 1 April 1994 in south-east forces receive an additional allowance of £2,000 per annum and £1,000 per annum in Bedfordshire and Hampshire. We have been asked to revisit that allowance and to uprate it to deal with inflation. We recently heard the views of Sara Thornton, the chief constable of Thames Valley, who has made representations on that issue. It is a matter for the Police Negotiating Board, but I know that it is under consideration.
My hon. Friend the Member for Burton (Mrs. Dean) made an important point about neighbourhood management and the role of neighbourhood watch. There is a need for neighbourhood watch to extend its role and to develop the way in which it works in a modern police setting. There is certainly an important role for neighbourhood watch.
The hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington (Tom Brake) talked about local priorities and the points he made were right. One of the tasks for neighbourhood policing is to ensure that local people feel that they can influence the priorities and have a real say. That should not mean that police operational independence is compromised, but if there is to be true neighbourhood policing in an area, surely it is only right and necessary for people to have some influence.
On CCTV and accessibility, when I have been to different parts of the country, including the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Copeland (Mr. Reed), I have visited control rooms where they change the direction of CCTV cameras all the time. However, I will consider the hon. Gentleman’s point. If it is appropriate, I will write to every hon. Member present with the answer to his question so that it is on the record. As I have said, it is not something that I have heard before, but I will take up the point.
I genuinely welcome the support of the hon. Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Ruffley) for neighbourhood policing. I also welcome the other points that he made. We are trying to get empirical evidence on neighbourhood policing. However, it is fair to say that every police force that we have spoken to says that neighbourhood policing has led to reduction in crime—and importantly a reduction in the fear of crime—as happened in Hammersmith and Fulham, to which he referred.
19 Mar 2008 : Column 246WH
The hon. Gentleman will also know that all the Flanagan review’s recommendations are being considered by the Government, including those that he highlighted. Part of that is about reducing bureaucracy. We know that forms are being reduced in size across the country and my hon. Friend the Member for Stafford gave examples of that. As I say, we will push that matter forward. One of the ways in which we will do that is through mobile data sets, although I cannot give him a commitment on that this morning.
Mr. Kidney: Really.
Mr. Coaker: I am sure my hon. Friend is not surprised. I cannot give the commitment because it would drive a coach and horses through the bidding system. We have heard his plea for Staffordshire in relation to the funding for that and we will consider it.
The hon. Gentleman mentioned maintaining police numbers and referred to the point made by the Flanagan review. Obviously, we intend to maintain police numbers. We have invested record amounts in the police service and there has been a huge increase in police numbers. PCSOs have been introduced and there has been a massive increase in the number of police staff who have taken on roles previously undertaken by warranted officers.
Obviously, the Government must consider the Flanagan report, but we have not come to a conclusion on it. However, the point that Sir Ronnie makes is whether the mix of staff numbers is right. That links to the point made by the hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington. Clearly, one of the reasons we reduced the funding for PCSOs from last April was because the Association of Chief Police Officers asked us to. Similarly, surely the mix of police staffing, staff numbers, PCSOs and uniformed officers is a matter for local police chiefs. Sooner or later, Parliament will have to make up its mind across the board about whether it wants to issue national diktats to local police forces or have local decision making, even if that sometimes means taking an easy political hit. With respect to the police, we must decide whether we want effective policing determined locally or yah-boo politics dictating what is an appropriate public policy. That is something on which we need to reflect. The Flanagan review has made its recommendation, which the Government will consider in due course.
|
