National Police Air Service Announced

A new National Police Air Service (NPAS) could be up and running within the next 18 months if police authorities rubber stamp the plans, ACPO has confirmed today.

Under a radical blueprint, the current air support cover supplied by individual forces would be amalgamated and would operate across force borders throughout the UK.

The current 29 bases and 33 aircraft would be reduced by around a third – with 20 bases and 23 aircraft operational and a further three held back as spares.

The plans would see Sussex and Surrey reducing to a single aircraft and relocating to a new base at Dunsfold, while cover in Merseyside, South Yorkshire and Cambridge would be withdrawn to allow other bases in the area to provide the coverage.

Hampshire Chief Alex Marshall – ACPO Lead for the NPIAS – told PoliceOracle.com that the new structure would be the first national collaboration venture of its type.

He believed the new model would save in the region of £15 million – 23 per cent – compared with the status quo and would introduce greater flexibility and efficiency.

CC Marshall added: “While the current service is capable of doing its day job, artificial boundaries have meant that helicopters are restricted to operating in their own force area.

“A national service will ensure effective coverage of both urban and rural areas. We expect to be able to reach 97 per cent of the population within 20 minutes, giving 24-hour support coverage with the roll out beginning in 2012.”

Under the new structure, the NPIA would take ownership of the aircraft, which would later be passed to the new National Crime Agency when it is formed.

Calls for assistance would be made through a local air support contact, with British Transport Police given responsibility for the scrambling and despatch of aircraft.

“We felt that this would be appropriate as BTP is already a national Police Force,” said CC Marshall. “Clearly with the reductions in airframes, we are going to have fewer pilots and fewer of our people involved. Police officers will be redeployed and we may see a small number of redundancies among staff.”

CC Marshall said that he would now be seeking approval for the move from police authorities. If given the green light, the NPAS could be operating a shadow service – with forces operating their own air support assets but as if they were working nationally – next year.

DCC Nick Gargan, acting Chief Executive of the NPIA, shared the enthusiasm for the introduction of the new initiative. He said: “This will be a truly national policing service that will be at the heart of improving public safety.

“The NPIA has played a substantial role in helping to set up the new service, which will bring operational efficiencies and allow for the introduction of innovative contracts that offer better value for money for the service and the taxpayer.”

Article courtesy of www.policeoracle.com

CSR: Police Funding Reduced 20%

Over the course of the Spending Review period, the Home Office will reduce overall resource spending by 23% in real terms, and capital spending by 49% in real terms.

The police service must play their part in reducing the nation's deficit. Central government police funding will reduce by 20% in real terms by 2014-15. If Police Authorities were to choose to increase precept, part of council tax, at the level forecast by the Office of Budget Responsibility, the SR settlement means that on average police budgets would reduce by 14% in real terms over the next four years.

The department’s central administration budget will be reduced by 33% in real terms over the same period.

The Home Office will manage these reductions by focusing spending where it matters most – protecting the public, and ensuring the security of our border.

The reforms we are introducing will make police forces more efficient and more effective. We will drive out wasteful spending and increase efficiency and productivity in the back office. We will end central bureaucracy and targets, such as the Policing Pledge, reduce the reporting requirements for Stop and Search and scrap the 'stop' form in its entirety. We will also modernise pay and conditions.

By cutting out costs and scrapping bureaucracy we are saving hundreds of millions of pounds and hundreds of thousands of man hours – so this settlement should not lead to any reduction in police officers visible and available on the streets.

The introduction of directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners will make forces truly accountable to the communities they serve and ensure that resources are properly targeted to where they are needed most.

We will ensure that the UK retains its capabilities to tackle the terrorist threat. Counter-terrorism specific policing will be protected with a smaller percentage cut than overall police funding of 10% in real terms and we will ensure the right funding is in place to deliver a safe and secure Olympic Games in 2012.

The UK Border Agency’s budget will be cut by up to 20% over the next four years. The agency will save around £500 million in efficiencies by reducing support costs; improving productivity and value for money from commercial suppliers. It will also invest in new technologies to secure the border and control migration at a lower cost. An increasing proportion of the costs of controlling immigration and securing our border will be met by migrants and visitors to the UK.

We will abolish the National Policing Improvement Agency saving at least £50m. Some of its functions will be absorbed into the National Crime Agency which will lead the fight against organised crime, protect our border, and provide services best delivered at a national level.

In addition, the department will be adopting two ideas suggested by the public through the Spending Challenge process. We will make it possible for employers to share CRB checks, reducing the need for multiple checks. We will also ensure police forces can make procurement savings by acting together when buying goods and services.

The Home Secretary, Theresa May, said: “My absolute priority, as Home Secretary, is to ensure that the UK retains its capabilities to protect the public, secure the border and tackle the terrorist threat. We also have a responsibility to reduce the budget deficit and the Home Office must play its part in this.

“I believe that by improving efficiency, driving out waste, and increasing productivity we can maintain a strong police service, a secure border and effective counter terrorism capabilities whilst delivering significant savings.”

Article courtesy of www.policeoracle.com

Police Facing 'Deep Cuts' To Frontline Officers

Britain's police forces are expected to have to make deep cuts in officer numbers after a Treasury decision to protect Home Office spending on counter-terrorism above all else, the Guardian has learned.

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, is believed to be very close to a final settlement on her budget that protects counter-terrorism funding from immediate cuts, though not from the effects of inflation over the next four years.

Police forces have been drawing up cost reduction plans in anticipation of next week's comprehensive spending review announcement. So far the chief constables of West Midlands, Lancashire, Hampshire, Kent and North Wales have indicated to their authorities that they plan to cut a total of 6,467 police jobs over the next four years.

The decision to protect counter-terrorism funding follows reports in July that Scotland Yard's counter-terrorism chief, John Yates, had told a private gathering of chief constables that "eyewatering" cuts of £150m to the budget to fight terrorism could imperil national security.

It is expected that the decision to exempt counter-terrorism from the cuts of up to 25% demanded by the Treasury will mean deeper cuts in other parts of the £10.2bn Home Office annual budget.

May has dismissed Police Federation claims that up to 40,000 police jobs are at risk as "pure speculation". She has also said that back office, bureaucracy and procurement costs rather than frontline policing should be the first source for savings.

But a CSR submission leaked by the Association of Chief Police Officers to the Home Office says the scale of the 25% indicative savings envisaged can only be delivered by "a significant reduction in headcount of police forces".

The document says "undue emphasis" has been placed on uncontroversial areas such as procurement, which account for only 10% of police budgets. "Even an optimistic 10% saving [in procurement] could not realise more than an overall 1% budget reduction," it argues.

The chief constables have also told the Home Secretary that the "new economic reality" will make a number of forces unviable – "some sooner than others" – and the issue of police mergers will be back on the table. ACPO suggests that guidelines for the move from 43 police forces in England and Wales to a "smaller number of strategically sized forces" is needed.

Most forces have already imposed recruitment freezes. Police officers are currently protected from the risk of redundancy by statute. Legal advice obtained by several chief constables, however, has cleared the way for them to compulsorily retire officers after 30 years' service. Regulations say officers can be "required to retire" after 30 years if their continued employment would not be in the interests of efficiency. Already 250 officers in North Wales have been told they may be "retired in this way" and the Police Federation fears it could open the floodgates to thousands of officers – often among the most skilled and working in specialist units – leaving the police service.

Paul McKeever, chairman of the Police Federation, yesterday renewed his plea to ministers not to "throw the bobby out with the bathwater".

Graham Maxwell of ACPO said it was a fallacy to claim that the required savings could be realised without any impact on frontline services. "The sums simply do not add up," he said. Acpo has warned that there is a doubt over the future of specialist units such as those covering domestic violence, rape, hate crime and child protection.

Danny Alexander, chief secretary to the Treasury, said: "Senior people in the police service should know better than to make irresponsible statements like that on the basis of information that hasn't been settled yet, in terms of how much money they are going to get."

Article courtesy of www.policeoracle.com

Christmas for Criminals

Paul McKeever, Chairman of the Police Federation of England & Wales
A plea for the future of policing from Federation Chairman Paul McKeever....

http://thinbluelineuk.blogspot.com/2010/09/christmas-for-criminals-impassioned.html --- (NB. This is not a "live" link. Please copy & paste into your browser)

We are distributing this across the police forums and blogs. I’ve also reprinted Pauls e-mail below.

Worth a read, he's spot on. Feel free to distribute as you think fit.

Supplied courtesy of Steve Bennett

‘CHRISTMAS FOR CRIMINALS’

It has struck me that many people seem unaware that although the Governments Comprehensive Spending Review is published on the 20th October, budgets are actually starting to be set now in some government departments. The Treasury ‘Star Chamber’ that will sit and decide departmental budgets is chaired by George Osborne (Con) the Chancellor, with Danny Alexander (LibDem) First Secretary to the Treasury, sitting as his deputy. William Hague, Francis Maude and Oliver Letwin will all be full members of the ‘Star Chamber’. As each minister agrees their departments budget with the Treasury that minister then joins ‘The Star Chamber’ to sit in judgement on their peers who are yet to set their budgets. So if you are a minister there is an incentive to settle your budget early.

It is thought that the Home Office won’t agree their budget with the Treasury until towards the end of this month, or maybe even later at the Conservative Conference at the start of October. Either way, there is little time left to pursued and influence in relation to the cuts.

So, it looks like those that care about the British way of policing have got a month to save the public from impending peril and to prevent the police service from facing meltdown

The questions and points that haven’t yet been put or asked are

· The first duty of any government is the protection of its citizens

· Any government that fails in their duty is unfit to govern

· Why isn’t the police service being given priority treatment by the government in the same way that the NHS and Education departments have been prioritised? We recognise the government has got to make cuts but they have clearly decided that some areas are more important than others. So why does it appear they care so little about crime and anti-social behaviour when it is given such a high priority by the public? Is the government badly advised, or out of touch with the world ordinary people live in? We think they’re badly advised.

· Public Safety is at real risk due to the proposed 25% - 40% cuts. Those at greatest risk will be the most vulnerable in society.

· The government risks putting the public at substantially greater risk of experiencing violent crime, anti-social behaviour, a rise in crime generally and a dramatically reduced policing service. This position is compounded by the apparent desire of Ken Clarke, Justice Minister, to empty the prisons and deal with serious criminals through the failing community service orders.

· There are examples emerging across the country that indicate the size of what is to come if nothing changes. Mersey-side Police is set to lose 800 officers, Kent Police 500. Dr Tim Brain has estimated the police service will lose 60,000 if the cuts are implemented.

· Police professionals throughout England and Wales recognise that if the cuts go ahead at the proposed level many forces will be offering a very basic service and some forces might actually fail. There is no doubt that the public will be put at much greater risk. Yet very few members of ACPO appear ready to question the cuts. It appears they are following the same line as the story about the Kings new clothes. However, we know privately that many chief officers are talking about what amounts to the destruction of the British Police Service as we know it

· The government appears to unwittingly be creating a very volatile mix that can be described as ‘Christmas for Criminals’

· Nick Herbert, the police minister is a man who we like and respect but the government seems to believe completely the very poor advice emanating from some think tanks, chief constables and business gurus about how savings can be made without any detrimental effect on policing. Those of us who work in the real world rather than within think tanks, no matter how brilliant the minds employed there, recognise the risks. Therefore, it is our duty to do something about it because ACPO, a private limited company, won’t. The Police Federation doesn’t want to see a government with good intentions sunk through the absence of any-one telling them of the peril they face. We are police officers, we are expected to tell the truth and we will do that. ACPO’s extraordinary ‘solution’ to the conundrum of budget reductions is simple but crude and totally unrealistic; reduce costs by destroying the pay and conditions of police officers (but not ACPO officers). How the CABAL within ACPO, the so called leaders of the service could show such disregard for their own officers is beyond belief, especially when they seem intent on ensuring those holding ACPO rank won’t experience any of the pain their own officers will be facing.

· I fear that if the government doesn’t step back from the precipice they will be answering some very difficult questions from their constituents in the next few years as the consequences of their actions start to bite them very hard indeed.

It’s one month to save the police, or it will be ‘Christmas for Criminals’

Paul McKEEVER

Met Police Chief is "Rather Fond Of Villains Going To Prison"

The Metropolitan police commissioner, Paul Stephenson, has waded into the debate about Britain's prison population by opposing government proposals to lock up fewer criminals.

Stephenson also expressed his support for handing out short-term prison sentences for offences such as burglary, contradicting the justice secretary Kenneth Clarke's recent comments that it was "virtually impossible" to rehabilitate offenders on short-term sentences.

The government has launched a review of sentencing policy, with Clarke indicating that he favours a greater emphasis on community sentences rather than putting more criminals behind bars.

Asked if he agreed that fewer people should go to prison, Stephenson told radio station LBC 97.3: "Don't forget what my mission in life is: save life, prevent crime. I'm rather fond of villains going to prison. I rather like it.

"I've said on many occasions, I think I've said it on this show before, that before a burglar burgles a house, he should anticipate a period of imprisonment if and when he's caught.

"I'm a fan of that and I also think that victims of serious crime would actually think that prison works."

Burglary can carry sentences of less than a year.

In comments that provoked discomfort on the Tory right, Clarke said: "Banging up more and more people for longer without actively seeking to change them is what you would expect of Victorian England."

He called for a "rehabilitation revolution", with sentencing policy focused on targeting the causes of reoffending.

Stephenson said there was a need for a "balance between retribution and rehabilitation" in the justice system. "I believe in both," he said.

Stephenson's predecessor as Met commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, is taking part in an inquiry examining short-term prison sentences, set up by Make Justice Work, which hopes to find workable alternatives to locking people up.

Clarke's comments directly signalled the abandonment of the "prison works" orthodoxy, launched by the former home secretary, Michael Howard. The justice secretary faces mounting pressure to halt Britain's £4bn prison-building programme, the largest in Europe. Howard said he was "not convinced" by Clarke's position and that "serious and persistent criminals need to be put in prison".

The Tory MP Philip Davies said many Conservative supporters would be disappointed by the justice secretary's plans.

"Disappointed because I think lots of them will feel that it's the wrong thing to do but also disappointed because many of them voted for the Conservative party at the last election on the basis that we would send more people to prison, not fewer."

Article courtesy of www.policeoracle.com

Police Federation: Cuts Could Endanger Officers

The chairman of the Police Federation’s Constables Central Committee has warned ministers of severe knock-on effects with personnel if Forces cut staffing levels to the bone.

In a speech promoting the Federation’s Real Policing Pledge in London, PC Paul Lewis stressed that assaults on police, increased sickness levels and a far less flexible service to the public are likely outcomes should the front line be hit.

And he warned both chief officers and politicians that they risked a serious situation if they did not consider the bigger picture when deciding where cuts should fall.

PC Lewis added: “Looking ahead we know that money is tight – very tight.

“But we would also warn the government against acting in haste – they may find that if they act in haste, then they will be repenting at their leisure.”

While accepting that politicians had difficult decisions to make, PC Lewis said a joint report by HMIC and the Audit Commission published this week had identified that £1 billion of funding could be made without harming service.

The report had suggested that more collaboration, shared procurement and a reduction in back room costs could make the savings – but also warned that cuts of more than 12per cent would impact on the sharp end of policing.

But PC Lewis said it was “infuriating” that commentators failed to focus on these practicalities and insisted instead on talking about cuts to officer numbers.

He added: “More infuriating is when Chief Officers’ jump to this all too easy solution for fear that looking at other moves to make savings should prove too difficult.

“We know that with 80 per cent of the police budget going on staff costs there is a temptation for the axe to fall on personnel. But in past years officer sickness records have improved and any decline in numbers is likely to see rates increase again.

“The level of assaults on police is still high – it is a difficult and demanding job that we do. That is why we must ensure we have sufficient police officers, with the appropriate safety equipment and training not only to protect the public but to protect and support each other.”

PC Lewis said that the Federation needed to work with politicians as well other organisations such as ACPO and the Superintendents’ Association to ensure that any financial decisions did not have a detrimental impact on the public.

He concluded: “It is all very well saying that we need to do more for less, but should that equate to more work with less officers, the strain on those at the sharp end will be immense.”

Article courtesy of www.policeoracle.com

Police Recruits "Should work for free"

At first sight I thought this must be a joke from April Fool's Day. However, it is a deadly serious prospect as you will gather from reading on. Thank God I am retired. I would never be recruited today!

Chief Constables are planning to introduce a national scheme that would see people wanting to become police officers working for free before they can join the force.

The move is part of their response to the large budget cuts they will have to make as part of the government's slashing of public spending.

The Association of Chief Police Officers has asked the National Policing Improvement Agency for guidance on a scheme to be introduced across all 43 forces, senior sources have confirmed.

Critics say it means policing on the cheap and could deter recruits from poorer backgrounds. Police chiefs believe it could save £40m-£50m.

ACPO held its annual conference last week in Manchester, where police chiefs discussed in public and private how to maintain their ability to fight crime while coping with the biggest budget cuts in recent history. Police chiefs believe they can build support for the changes, and bypass or neutralise opposition from within the service, by selling it as a move towards greater professionalism.

They will also argue that it puts aspiring police officers on the same footing as other public sector professions, such as nurses, who are expected to fund their training themselves unless they can win a bursary.

Three models for a national scheme are being studied. One is operated by Lancashire police, in which those wanting to join the force first have to attend a university offering a two-year course. This teaches recruits law and policing in diverse communities. During the course, students work as special constables. Only after completing it can they apply to become full police constables.

Lancashire accepts the scheme has helped cut its training costs. There is no guarantee of a job at the end of it.

Scotland Yard is proposing to introduce a scheme that was passed by its watchdog last week. Potential recruits would have to work for up to a year as special constables before being allowed to apply to Britain's largest force.

The third model is that operated by Surrey police, which sees recruits pay £700 for training. Mark Rowley, Chief Constable of Surrey police, said it does more than save money: "We are getting better recruits, because they have committed their own time to learning and progressing further their career in the police."

Rowley said the scheme means once people join his force they have "better practical skills than before".

Simon Reed, vice-chair of the Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, said: "We're not convinced. We may find the cost of it deters people from ethnic minorities and from working-class backgrounds, people we want to see joining. It is putting another barrier in their way. We hope they will not replace police officers with specials."

He said people from the armed forces are not allowed to serve as special constables, so they could in effect be barred from joining the police. Reed added that some police forces were not recruiting, meaning people who work for free or pay for training courses could end up having wasted their time and money.

In London, Labour is opposing the Metropolitan police scheme. Joanne McCartney, a Labour member of the Metropolitan Police Authority, said: "If the Met can get this through, then other forces will follow suit. It's unfair and will disadvantage anyone with caring responsibilities, anyone already in work, and anyone who can't afford to work unpaid for a year or more.

"We know this is a financially driven decision and not one taken in the best long-term interests of the Met. Specials are an invaluable asset, but they are an addition to full-time officers. They do not offer the same resilience as they can't be compelled to work, and nor should they."

The Policing Minister, Nick Herbert, spent three days – an unusually large time for someone in government – at the ACPO Conference. He told the Guardian that money could also be saved by buying items centrally, such as information technology systems.

Herbert said the days of 43 forces in England and Wales doing their own thing, regardless of cost, were over. "There have been 43 fiefdoms and when money was around that could go on. Money is much tighter and we cannot be relaxed about inefficiency."

Article courtesy of www.policeoracle.com