The police, said the home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, in the House of Commons on Monday, is “the last great unreformed public service”. Her white paper aims to redraw the policing map of England (though policing is devolved, the other nations will feel the effects). If she succeeds, the current patchwork will be replaced by a multi-tier system. The 43 existing police forces, most serving a single county, will be abolished and replaced with a smaller number of bigger organisations.
Above all this will sit a new National Police Service – likened to a British FBI – that will take over responsibility for counter-terrorism from London’s Metropolitan police, and for serious and organised crime from the National Crime Agency set up under David Cameron. It will also take over major fraud investigations, as well as functions of the National Police Chiefs’ Council and the College of Policing. Training, standards and leadership will henceforth be under one umbrella. The leader of this organisation will be the country’s most senior officer.
Ministers know that while some violent crime has fallen – with London’s murder rate at a decade low – shoplifting and phone thefts are driving a public sense that crime is rising, a feeling exploited by the Tories and Reform UK. With this in mind, new local police areas will have to keep bobbies on the beat busy and visible. Police and crime commissioners will be scrapped and replaced by local boards. Policing by consent must remain central.
This is an ambitious, sprawling package, which, due to its long timelines, will need cross-party support. It is also incomplete, with proposals for mergers between forces still being drawn up. Of its disparate elements, the case for a new, national force is most clearly made and will be most easily grasped by voters. The Met’s national role in counter-terrorism is a peculiarity, and online and organised crime obviously do not sit cleanly within force boundaries. Indeed, sending young people across them is how “county lines” drug dealers got their name.
But while it is easy enough to see a role for a beefed-up national body, how such an organisation will maintain the local connections that underpin policing by consent is worryingly unclear. Recent events in Minneapolis provide a chilling warning about how centralised and unaccountable law enforcement can operate under certain conditions. Labour must address the fact that increased powers for the home secretary bring risks as well as benefits. Operational independence must remain sacrosanct, with strong checks and balances.
Efficiency gains are, as ever, presented as the prize of reorganisation. Lack of detail on the inevitable costs is one concern about the plans. Another is whether progress is really possible while court backlogs remain a huge obstacle in the wider criminal justice system. Ms Mahmood also needs to explain her view that bigger forces are better, since this is not supported by data on crime clear-up rates. New targets also require close scrutiny, given previous examples of the way they can skew priorities. Warnings that forces can “hit the target and miss the point” must be addressed.
Ms Mahmood is among the government’s more effective explainers and it suits Labour politically to attack the last government’s record on law and order by announcing sweeping change. But overhauls of public services often disappoint. An intensive period of scrutiny and challenge must come next.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
