Police reform will cause more problems than it will solve

It has been six months since the Government announced its white paper on police reform. The wide ranging proposals effectively fall into three headlines - merging police forces, scrapping effective governance by abolishing PCCs and creating a National Police Service. We were in an unusual situation in that the paper was announced without the detail of how these policies would actually be implemented in practice.

Those are currently being designed, with the legislation that was due to be tabled in July now to be published in the Autumn. Some of these issues are still to be resolved. I have been heavily involved in some of the meetings Officials are holding to design the legislation.

Officials are being diligent, open and covering all possibilities. But what Ministers are creating should cause real concerns, especially as very little is being said about reducing crime or better supporting victims.

Governance will be inconsistent, bureaucratic and ineffective

The earliest announcement of what would be in the white paper came in November with the policy of scrapping PCCs, to be replaced with new arrangements. As things stand, these will be different depending on where you live.

In Kent, you’ll get a Police and Crime Board, made up of council leaders and councillors.

In Sussex, you’ll have a new Mayor.

In Surrey, you’ll have a Foundation Strategic Authority.

In East Anglia, you’ll have one Mayor responsible for two police forces (Norfolk and Suffolk).

In Humberside, you’ll have a Police and Crime Board made up of two Mayors and council leaders, because the Force boundaries are not co-terminus.

In Staffordshire, you’ll have a Police, Fire and Crime Board.

In London, you have a Mayor with their own London Policing Board, and the Greater London Assembly.

In addition, you have different arrangements for Wales.

And whilst Mayors are accountable at the ballot box, and scrutinised by combined authorities, Police and Crime Leads will not be accountable to the public, and scrutiny of Board members will be done through council Overview and Scrutiny arrangements.

These inconsistencies will create more bureaucracy and will remove the link between the public and those who oversee the police.

Operational independence is under threat

At present, the Home Secretary sets the Strategic Policing Requirement (SPR), which PCCs and Chief Constables must consider when carrying out our functions and the threats that forces need to take action on.

The white paper goes much further than this. The reforms would give the Home Secretary sweeping powers over Chief Constables, including changing the SPR to the Strategic Policing Priorities. This would directly set the priorities that Chief Constables must act on, rather than have due regard for.

Putting policing priorities directly in the hands of Ministers (the state), not operational leaders, should be opposed. There is a clear line between Chief Constables and PCCs on operational independence that should be maintained in the new world.

There is also a risk of confusion when it comes to priority setting. In the new world, priorities will be set by the Home Secretary, Welsh Government, Chief Constable, Local Policing Body, Local Policing Area (LPA) Commander, Mayors in conjunction with LPA Commander where the boundaries align, and ward Beat Officers.

Reform will create a state of constant change

Reform is taking place across the public sector, and Andy Burnham is likely to pursue further devolution. A number of counties missed out on Mayoralties last year and may be right in believing that they could be successful under different leadership. There could therefore be a further change to police governance in the years ahead that will cause further disruption.

In 2028, Police and Crime Boards are established where Mayors don’t already exist. If a new Mayoralty is created, for example in Kent, those policing powers could move to Kent’s new Mayor (if we get one). And then by the end of the next Parliament (2034 being the latest time that could be), police forces will have been merged, changing the Police Governance arrangements again as Regional Police and Crime Boards are established.

Including PCCs, that’s potentially four different types of governance in the next eight years.

Local policing will become less local

Former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Lord Bernard Hogan Howe is currently conducting a review of police force mergers, looking at reducing the number of police forces, not whether mergers are a good idea. There have been different target sizes floated in recent months, which could see two/three neighbouring forces merged (eg Kent and Essex), or larger regional areas (eg Kent, Surrey, Sussex, Thames Valley and Hampshire). This is being done without any evidence that bigger is better.

In order to maintain local policing, the Government’s idea is to create “Local Policing Areas” (LPA) potentially aligned to local authorities. These councils will have increased in size as part of the local government re-organisation agenda. So in Kent, where we currently have eleven local policing areas, we could have just four. And the LPA Commander could be responsible for setting the local priorities across the whole council/LPA area.

To highlight what an extreme task this will be, you could have a Chief Constable running South East Policing from the Isle of Wight to the Isle of Sheppey, and a Superintendent setting local priorities from Sheerness to Dungeness.

That is not local policing.

Their savings plan is not delivering and numbers are falling

The Government was elected on a promise to create 13,000 new neighbourhood policing posts. This was made up of 3,000 extra Police Officers, 3,000 internal redeployments, 3,000 Special Constables and 4,000 PCSOs.

They have achieved the internal redeployments, although at a cost to other functions. However, Police numbers are down by nearly 2000 since the election. There are 309 fewer PCSOs and there are 922 fewer Specials.

In order to deliver the extra Police numbers, the Government was going to save £360m through better procurement and commercial activity. BlueLight Commercial (BLC) has continued the work it was already doing prior to the election and Forces have continued to make savings. However, the Home Office missed its target in 2025/6 and was reliant on Forces and BLC.

Sentencing reforms will increase crime

The Government’s sentencing reforms will come into effect shortly, although early release has rightly been paused by Andy Burnham. Chief Constables are warning that this will lead to an increase of crime in the region of 6% and there could be an operational cost to policing of £480m through increased demand. This has not been provided for and these are demands that will have to be met by policing through increased enforcement, checks and use of protective orders.

Conclusion

There are so many strands of work that are being impacted by decisions being made at the Home Office. Funding for violence reduction units being cut by a third. Reducing funding for organised crime units. Ending support for extra hotspot patrols. Cutting funding for independent custody visiting and appropriate adults.

There are solutions. Stop the force mergers, that residents don’t want. I hope that the briefings that have been made that the PM is not in favour of them prove to be true.

Ensure that there are Mayors in every region before you change the governance arrangements.

As things stand, PCCs go in May 2028. There is still time to review and change course.