Speeches and Statements

Speech by Home Secretary to the Police Superintendents conference

This speech was delivered by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith to the Police Superintendents conference on 16 September 2008.

Can I start by saying how pleased I am to be here? You were the first policing audience I spoke to when I became Home Secretary a little over a year ago. It’s great to be able to speak to you again today.

I’m struck, reflecting on that year and on Ian’s speech just now, just how much government and the service has achieved together over the last twelve months, and how together we’ve developed new ideas and new thinking.

We’ve had the final report of Sir Ronnie’s independent review, Louise Casey has presented some vital recommendations to us all in her report and now the Green Paper has been published.

Ian, can I take this opportunity to thank you and your members personally and on behalf of the Home Office for the constructive role you’ve played in helping to shape those products.  They bear the imprint of your advice and of your robust challenge.

I absolutely agree, Ian, when you say that the “Green Paper is ”…a unique opportunity to shape the future of policing” – that was the challenge I set when announcing it here at your conference a year ago – and now we have the opportunity to deliver it.  I want to see the Superintendents Association playing a key role in doing so. The Green Paper represents a big change and one that we can only deliver together.

Like you, I want to talk today about confidence in the police and why I have placed it at the heart of the new arrangements for policing in England and Wales that flow from the Green Paper.  And, in doing so, I want to:

• explain again why I see confidence as being at the heart of a new, broader based and radical model of reform
• explain what I mean – and don’t mean – by such an emphasis on confidence
• explain why the new relationship I want to see between the Home Office and the police service  requires a different approach to local accountability

Green Paper rationale

I think it’s worth recapping on why I said some of the things that I did in the Green Paper just over two months ago.  Importantly, we published the Green Paper on the same day as the crime statistics, which showed that:

• overall crime has fallen a further 10% in the last 12 months
• offences against vehicles are down 14 per cent
• criminal damage is down 13 per cent
• violence against the person is down 8 per cent 
• robbery is down 16 per cent 
• domestic Burglary is down  4 per cent  
• violent crime has fallen by 12 per cent
• since 1995, the number of BCS violent incidents has fallen by half, representing around  two million fewer incidents

We have met the target set in 2004 to reduce crime by 15%.  Indeed, we have exceeded it; crime over that period fell by 18%.  All this means that the risk of being a victim of crime, is now at its lowest ever level since the survey began in 1981.

As I said on the day, this is a direct result of your hard work and dedication and that of the men and women you lead.  It is a tremendous achievement, rightly celebrated.

But we also need to recognise some other important statistics, some of which you brought out in your speech, Ian.  I would add to them the IPCC statistic that says that [45%] of complaints against the police [and rising] are now about ‘service quality’.  In preparing the Green Paper, we received very strong feedback from officers and staff associations (including your own) that this is a key area. 

We also know, in part from Sir Ronnie and Louise’s work, that too often local people see a gap between their expectations about local policing and their experience.  I could not agree more with your diagnosis of what people want – crime and ASB, including serious and violent crime, dealt with effectively and the barriers to your doing so removed as far as possible.

Green Paper announcements

That’s why, at the heart of the Green Paper are three key themes.

First, how we deliver a new deal for the public – who are our best weapon in fighting crime - with the police service.  Where they are clear what they can expect from local policing and how they can contribute.

• A new policing pledge to represent the public face of a new deal with the service – I am delighted that this was announced by the service, through ACPO, and is being delivered by the service.  This is a police commitment to the public, and one that I am keen to ensure we do everything to help you deliver.
• Better local information, helping people influence their policing, including through crime maps everywhere
• Greater democratic accountability – through direct election for the majority of members of each police authority, on which I will say more in a moment

Second, on open and robust performance management with the greater clarity on roles that you and others have called for:

• a stronger and more independent HMIC, acting as a fierce champion of the public’s interest
• a streamlined role for the Home Office, with the department neither setting nor maintaining top-down numerical targets for individual police forces, with the exception of public confidence that crime and ASB are being tackled locally.  Again, I shall return to this later in my speech.

Third, on helping you to succeed:

• a new fast track scheme, a Leadership College and more work on the  development of future Chief Officers, [many of whom I hope and expect are in this room today]
• better deployment and systems, including IT (with £50m and now £25m more for mobile data devices)
• pushing ahead with spreading the great work in the crime recording pilots nationally in the coming months;
• replacing the lengthy Stop and Account form everywhere by the end of this year with a requirement to record only ethnicity and
• appointing Jan Berry as a new independent advocate for reducing bureaucracy, challenging government and the service equally to play their part. Jan starts her critical work next month.

Importantly, this represents not just a set of crucial changes but the start of a new, better balanced, overall system: a system in which things get done at the right level – and where citizens are empowered to hold the police to account locally for the decisions they make.

The changes in the Green Paper spell out a clear message – a recognition that building public confidence and continued progress in tackling crime and anti-social behaviour cannot be delivered by top down performance management.  Instead, it means giving front line professionals the responsibility and power to drive improvements that people can see and feel, and that make a difference. And it means keeping the public – our most valuable tool in the fight against crime – fully informed and involved.

That means valuing and supporting frontline professionals – from police officers and staff to PCSOs and specialists – as the experts in what works.  And recognising, as your members will need no reminding, that responding to local challenges will mean working in partnership everywhere.

I will be saying more publicly later in the Autumn, when the consultation process has concluded, about how we will strengthen HMIC and change the role of the Home Office.  But these two important moves, for me, are complemented by what has proven to be one of the most controversial aspects of the Green Paper, the direct election of the majority of members of police authorities.

Directly elected police authorities

There is much that I and the LGA and APA agree on here.  We all want to see more accountability locally, the public better able to influence local policing priorities, more information for the public and police authorities strengthened in their critical role.  But I recognise that the idea of the public directly electing police authorities has prompted strong views, as it should.  And part of the point of the Green Paper is that we can have that discussion and debate.

I will of course continue to listen to all views and concerns but, so far, I have heard nothing that dilutes my determination to press ahead with the principle of direct election to police authorities.  Why do I believe it’s so important?

I do believe, as Sir Ronnie and others have emphasised, that when it comes to policing there is a crucial accountability gap at the local level.

I believe that that gap can best be filled by ensuring that the majority on each police authority is made up of individuals directly elected by their community.  Introducing directly elected crime and policing representatives creates for the first time an explicit and direct link between local people and the individuals responsible for their police service.

I believe that many members of police authorities do their level best to support local people’s concerns but, in my view, the indirect relationship between voting for a local councillor and that councillor then serving on a police authority is too distant a lever for change.

I do not believe that the answer is a ‘municipalisation’ model, as some have suggested, where the local authority is responsible for policing locally.  That would break the chain of command from a Chief Constable to a PC or PCSO that I see as vital.

Nor do I accept the argument that direct election will mean that extremists and others will dominate authorities. Democracy is always a risky business but I believe that argument rather insults the intelligence of voters, who tell us that crime and policing are among their top priorities.  And it’s precisely to avoid any risk of political interference at the highest levels that we’ve set out this model.

I do recognise the risk, with any model (including it’s worth stressing with present arrangements), that local issues may dominate an authority too much.  That’s why the ongoing role of independent members is crucial.  And why its crucial too that those of us who see it as our jobs to lead policing convey the importance of the regional and national to people at the local level.  I will return to this theme in a moment.

But, alone, this important structural change will not be enough to drive up confidence everywhere. 

Confidence

I set out in the Green Paper that I would remove all top-down targets on forces other than on confidence.  On this, I intend to set a stretching, challenging target nationally.  But I will also expect to set stretching targets for each force, agreed with its police authority, and will want to see greater improvement by the ‘poorer’ performers. 

I said earlier that the move to a single top-down target for forces is a significant reform.  I know you understand the significance of the change and have grasped the importance of it – not just the advantages it brings for police officers in their work, but the positive benefits it can have for the public and how they value that work. 

As Superintendents and Chief Superintendents, as leaders in your forces, you are well placed to be the architects of change, to champion it within your forces.  It will also be crucial to focus on this jointly and nationally, to share experiences and learning. Like many of you, I get impatient when I’m told that what works well in one force can’t by definition work in another.

Ian calls this radical restructuring of the role of the Home Office ‘leap of faith’ on my behalf.  I would only say that I always look before I leap – and after a good look round at what we could do to improve police performance, I’m convinced it’s the right move.  And it’s not so much a leap of faith as a vote of confidence – in you and your abilities.

How well you do is, crucially, now even more up to you.  Neighbourhood Policing will be key everywhere but is only part of the answer.  It must also be about some practical things that forces are already doing – re-designing businesses processes, ensuring a greater focus on service and communicating with the public in new ways.  Thinking about how you train officers, manage police station front desks and call handling, updating your communities about your successes.

It must also be about creating much greater links to the broader criminal justice system and empowering local people to get more involved. Local neighbourhood policing teams are very often the public face of the wider criminal justice system. Helping the public to understand what happens throughout that wider system, telling the story about “what happens next” once the police have played their part, acting as advocates for the good and important work that it carries out these are key contributions to improving confidence. That’s partly why, following her review on ‘Engaging Communities in Fighting Crime’, I’ve brought Louise Casey back into the Home Office to head up a new Neighbourhood Crime and Justice group. 

As you’ve already heard, Louise will be leading a campaign of action that builds on the themes from the Green Paper to improve public confidence in how crime is tackled and justice delivered. She and her team have hit the ground running.

Though this work, and these objectives around confidence, are applicable and important everywhere in the country, Louise and her team are already looking to sign up a smaller number of pioneering areas (at CDRP level) who are willing and able to go further, and faster and lead the way for others.

We expect to save agreements with our ‘pioneer’ areas in place next month and you can all expect to hear a lot more about this work.

But let me be absolutely clear about one thing.  The confidence measure is not motherhood and apple pie -  it is a hard-edged, tough measure that focuses on local people’s views about whether the police and other agencies locally are tackling the crime and ASB issues that matter to them. 

And having a single target on local confidence does not mean I am ignoring serious crime – far from it. The single target creates greater freedom for us all to focus on the most serious issues that blight our communities. And because every crime happens in someone’s community our success in driving up confidence will rely just as much on how we tackle serious crime – and those issues which are regional or national in scope – as it does on how we combat anti social behaviour and locally defined problems.It’s clear to me and to you, I’m sure, that we can only succeed on this if:

• You work in partnership
• You identify local people’s concerns
• You really tackle them, demonstrably, driving down crime and ASB in the process
• You report back to people regularly in a way they understand
• You always act in a way that treats the public with courtesy and respect
• You continue to tackle serious crime.  [After all, every serious crime takes place in someone’s neighbourhood].

Before concluding, I want to say more about this important aspect of the Green Paper.

From the neighbourhood to the national

Great emphasis is given to the local in the Green Paper but, as its title – From the Neighbourhood to the National – suggests, it also delivers an equally important message on the importance of delivering the national priorities. The Green Paper sets out a vision that sees policing delivering for the public at all levels, from the local to the regional and on to the national.

Take serious and organised crime.  There is – to borrow a phrase – a continuum of harm stretching from our neighbourhoods to the national level and beyond.  Which means we need a continuum of effective policing response; which means better collaboration and co-ordination amongst relevant partners; and that means, in turn, forces and authorities working outside and across individual force boundaries. 

Our clear expectation is that forces and authorities should work in the interests of regions and the country – and to collaborate to achieve improvements.  Collaboration, in its various forms, is having positive effects – from the work of ventures like the five-force East Midlands Special Operations Unit and Wales’ Operation Tarian in tackling serious and cross border crime in their regions, to the development of the national Counter Terrorism network in bringing together intelligence, investigative and operational activity against the terrorist threat.

This is not an ‘either/or’ Service.  There is little benefit in increasing public confidence through local policing and then undermining this with poor protective services – these may be services with less of a public face and more uncertain demand, but as you will be aware they have the potential to impact heavily on public confidence if they fall short.  As the Green Paper sets out, greater collaboration across the police service will be essential to mitigate this risk and realise the necessary improvements in protective services.  The same is true, of course, for specialist crimes [like Fraud and child protection], on which I know many of you will lead for your forces. 

Conclusion

I believe we face a unique opportunity together in the coming weeks and months.  I want to finish in conclusion with some areas on which I am determined to see progress and on which I know you will too.  I want to see:

• Greater local accountability of the police to the public they serve
• Forces, BCUs and neighbourhood policing teams learning from the best of each other
• Continued cuts in crime while we drive up confidence…
• …and maintain our relentless focus on serious crime and regional co-operation
• Superintendents and Chief Superintendents as champions of reform, as Ian put it in his speech, “down the command chain”.

We are building this work on your successes and I look forward to meeting these challenges with you.