Police: The Coalition’s new Tripartite System of political interference.

Police and Crime Commissioners, Tom Winsor announced as favourable Chief of HMIC, is the Home Secretary really improving policing accountability?

With the elections of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCC’s) taking place in November and the recent controversial announcement by Home Secretary Theresa May wanting to appoint Tom Winsor as Chief of Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC), there is apprehension across forces in England and Wales that politicisation will soon have a stronghold over policing.

The current Tripartite System of policing accountability has long been criticised for its imbalance, particularly Police Authorities who it has been described are invisible and their roles unknown to the public. Furthermore the Coalition Government felt that the role of Chief Constable remained unaccountable by the public and changes were required to re-balance the accountability structure of policing.

(Current policing tripartite model)

This led to the development of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act, the Home Secretary’s new radical reform strategy that would see the abolition of Police Authorities and have them replaced by a single elected Police and Crime Commissioner.

IPSOS MORI announced during the ACPO Conference in Manchester that 40% of the general public are aware of PCC elections in November. I strongly question the statistical strength of this figure, whilst the public it seems may be aware of the elections I query the depth of knowledge by the public as to what changes these elections could have on the structure and future of policing.

A single elected PCC’s duty is to develop a Police and Crime Plan and hold the Chief Constable of each force to account in his/her duties across England and Wales. Current Police Authorities have a similar task to develop a Strategic Policing Plan, constructed and agreed by the full 17 members, consisting of 9 local councillors and 8 independent members, one of whom must be a Magistrate.

A recent publication of standing PCC candidates highlights that an overwhelming majority are from political parties, arguably over 95%. This has raised a number of concerns. The main being ‘Operational Independence and Discretion’ for Chief Constables:

Lord Denning described operational discretion as "No Minister of the Crown can tell him that he must or must not keep observation on this place or that; or that he must or must not prosecute this man or that one. Nor can any Police Authority tell him so. The responsibility of law enforcement lies on him. He is answerable to the law alone.”

PCC’s are obliged to develop a police and crime plan, the Home Secretary may also guide electorates on areas that need to be included in that plan. With the likelihood of party members becoming PCC’s and the Home Secretary’s guidance, it is difficult to determine how this process will not be detrimental to the operational independence of Chief Constables. In comparison, it appears that the current 17 member Authority system whilst perhaps slower due to the higher numbers and decision processes, ensures a wider safety catchment when considering a crime plans impact on policing independence.

Further issues in the lead up to and during the election stages may also arise. Firstly is the transitional period between the dissolution of Police Authorities and the new PCC’s and how long it will take a newly elected Commissioner to ascertain the overwhelming wealth of knowledge required to perform effectively, and how whilst developing this knowledge they are expected to create a policing plan at such an early stage in their role. How much time Chief Constables will have to spend providing this knowledge to the very people who hold them to account is also questioned, particularly whilst having to implement numerous reforms to their forces including budgetary and officer cuts.

Politicisation also comes under scrutiny, with the London Mayoral Elections earlier this year the public were provided with a number of televised and radio debates, which in most cases diverted away from the very remit of the roles they were standing for and became defamatory attacks on personal and financial livelihoods of the candidates. Questions arise as to how this form of election would be healthy for the future of policing, and how the debates expected to occur prior to the November elections could draw crucial focus away from the decisive matters of policing.

Additional politicisation fears occurred amid the controversial decision by the Home Secretary to announce Tom Winsor as her favoured candidate for the role of Chief of HMIC. Despite his announcement in front of the Home Affairs Select Committee today that he left the Labour Party in 2006, it appears hard for senior police members to support Mr Winsor considering it is his report that has led the very officers he could be representing having to implement numerous redundancies and changes to their forces, a report that ties in very comfortably with Coalitions’ policing reforms despite his political affiliation denials.

Tom Winsor, former rail regulator and lawyer could be the first Chief of HMIC not to have served as a police officer since its creation in 1856. Reports suggest that two serving Chief Constables were not considered for a role that primarily focuses on operational proceedings within the police. This has elevated fears of politicisation in that Chief Constables now not only face the Home Secretary, who has the potential to influence and guide single elected PCC’s, but also has influence over a non police experienced HMIC Chief.

A number of previous Metropolitan Police Commissioners and senior officers have raised their alarms over the Home Secretary’s HMIC decision, expressing that Chief Constables should have senior policing support not only in their duties, but at times of crisis from the HMIC by strongly experienced ex-serving officers.

(Diagram showing how the new political changes are likely to effect policing operational independence and accountability)

The new Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act was assembled to re-balance the tripartite policing structure of accountability, considering the numerous changes however and the politicisation risks associated with them, it appears that the role of Chief Constable has been removed from the tripartite model altogether, instead making them accountable to an ever increasing political movement that is inevitably going to interfere with operational independence.

In previous weeks the Coalition has made numerous U-Turns in its policies, including its no U-Turn policy. Reported estimates of PCC implementation and election costs have ranged from £100m up to over £300m for the four year electorate term, funding it is argued could be used to provide forces with extra police officers or could have been used to improve the visibility of Police Authorities thereby balancing the tripartite model by less intrusive and invasive means.

This new model of political control could see Chief Constables being kept uninformed on crucial policing matters and reduce their abilities to communicate information effectively due to the inexperience of the fundamental outside roles that will soon govern policing.

By Mathew Martin

Twitter: #M_Martin2