FED COMMENT ON- FALL IN POLICE NUMBERS
31st January 2008 Reacting to publication of the police service strength report published today, Jan Berry, Chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, says:
“We are bitterly disappointed that, despite assurances of record numbers, we saw a fall of 647 police officers in England and Wales during the six months to September 2007.This at a time when ring fenced funding for CSO’s was extended for another year, and we saw an 80% increase in CSOs between October 2006 and September 2007. We had predicted this, but take no pleasure being proved right.
“However the real kick in the stomach comes from our chief officers, who instead of demanding no decline in police officer numbers, trumpet an increase in police personnel. They may be prepared to sell police officers down the river, but we will fight to ensure that the politically independent multi-skilled police constable remains at the heart of policing.”
ACPO: OVERALL POLICE PERSONNEL NUMBERS UP 0.8%
31st January 2008 Commenting on the release of police service strength statistics for England and Wales, ACPO President Chief Constable Ken Jones said:
“The snapshot on police service numbers released today shows an increase of 1,796 (0.8%) on police personnel for the six months to 30th September 2007. 21st century policing is a collective effort involving police personnel, local government, and a range of other partners. This approach has allowed us to introduce neighbourhood policing across the UK. Effective policing is delivered through placing staff with the right skills in the right jobs and these figures reflect the valuable contribution that PCSOs and police staff are making alongside sworn officers.
“Within the overall pattern of growth individual forces, as ever, continue to experience fluctuations in service strength as they adjust to the financial settlement over the next three years.
“Looking ahead, forces will continue to seek efficiencies and savings in all areas, reducing service numbers often as a last resort. While the demands on policing continue to rise and over 80% of force budgets are spent on costs directly related to headcounts, it remains the case that reductions in both police staff and officers may occur in some forces as they adjust to a tighter financial settlement over the next three years.”
February 1, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Amazing how two responses are different on the same story, ACPO, be ashamed of yoursleve, you ARE selling your officers short.
February 1, 2008 at 8:12 pm
As ever, with the political masters or the Police statments from the senior managers, will always continue to promote the brand and try to create the picture that they are delivering the public better than ever before, making real progress and a high quality and professional service delivery without blinking even one eye.
The facts of what is happening with recruiting is deemed to be negative and they never dwell on this, they turn it around to what they want your perspective to be. They are experts at this, have training on how to focus on what they want to focus on and not get sidetracked over what they consider as irrelevant issues.
We’ll be getting a senior Government minister to visit and see how well PCSOs are doing when we have taken all of the PCs out of the area next so we can prove a point.
Promote the brand at all costs. Anyone brave or stupid enough to say anything to the contrary is a traitor to the cause.
February 2, 2008 at 2:46 am
I sometimes wonder if the bosses just see us cops as a distasteful part of their job that they have to put with.
Our CC got a right earchewing over staffing levels a year ago by cops during his visit to our division and he promised to sort it out.
It has got worse.
Fedreps have tried to shaft the bosses over poor levels of staffing via H+S, all to no avail.
My wife has instructions that should I receive a right kicking or worse due to the poor staffing levels, (ie. no backup for miles) she is going direct to the national press.
February 2, 2008 at 9:24 am
Bobby
(2005-02-02 @ 0246)
One hopes that such a situation never comes about.
But if so, your wife shouldn’t just go to the national press, she should go to her lawyer and make a claim against your Chief Officer under Health and Safety Legislation.
Michael
February 2, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Frontline response numbers are woefully short due to the constant removal of numbers for other targets. There are serious risks involved to response on a regular basis. Luckily & thankfully the system is made to work by those at the sharp end. How long will this continue to be the case. Those that put the policies in place claim the high level of professionalism and committment of those who cut corners and rush to keep the ship afloat. Someone will drop in the cacky and the professional standards regiment will get a chance to do some Police work when they do their own brand of investigation. The wheel has not come off very often, but for the grace of god……….
February 3, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Which end bites, then we are traitors.
February 4, 2008 at 5:12 pm
“21st century policing is a collective effort involving police personnel, local government, and a range of other partners.”
Why is it that whenever I hear the word “partners” in this context I want to reach for my revolver? Oh dammit, not allowed one any more. Just as well, I suppose.
February 5, 2008 at 2:04 am
Red Admiral,
I agree with you on the word ‘partners’.
It ranks alongside words such as ‘community’ and ”robust’.
I am fed up of bosses continually using these words, tis all wa*kspeak. I know I don’t speak for all, but when I am looking for ‘partners’ to work with me in ‘partnership’ at 0400hrs during a weekend when I am trapped watching a mental health case or juvvie needing an appropriate adult – I never seem able to get hold of those partners we supposed work so well with.
I fell out big style with a doctor this week. I took a mental health type to his hospital, he wanted to know what I wanted to do with the patient. I told him that it was his patient, not mine. The patient had not committed an offence and thus I was not going to lock him up as the good Dr wanted. I told the good Dr that he was now responsible for the patient and that I would not be taking the patient to any mental health ward for the Dr. I had kept my end of the bargain by taking him to a place of safety, the rest was up to him.
He didn’t like that.
February 5, 2008 at 6:15 pm
Bobby, I took a mental health case to our local A&E a litle while ago, same circs really. we found the guy sleeping rough, pos ID’d him and confirmed that he was missing from a mental health ward oop north somewhere. At the mental hospitals behest we walked the guy to A&E where the mental hospital had arranged for him to be picked up in a few hours, all he needed to do was to sit in a seat and wait for the minibus, instead of under a bridge in the pissing cold in the middle of winter under a binbag. I had not uttered more than “Hi doctor, this guy is a mental hea…” when the A&E doc said “we’re not a place of safety as per the mental health legislation, he’s your problem you’ll have to take him to the police station”
After interupting me again I finally explained that all we needed them to do was not kick him out of the department and it was another hospital that asked us to take him there and so he was already under the guidance of the NHS. The doc finally referred us to his consultant who very very kindly gave the guy a spare bed in an empty ward, a wash and some freebie clothes and a hot meal, he then got some warm kip and went back to his mental health unit in the morning.
There was no partnership agreement to follow, just good old fashioned kindness and making the situation work, something seriously lacking nowadays on behalf of some of our partners (accept paramedics and generally all other A&E staff – they rock)
I think our bollocks mottos (like “working together for a safer london”) should be changed to “Aut viam inveniam aut faciam” which means “I shall find a way, or make one” Seems considerably more appropriate to what we actually end up doing.
February 6, 2008 at 2:52 am
Metcountymounty,
you so right there. It beggers belief how poor a service some of our so called partners dish out. Poor guy needed MH care, the doc weren’t interested as in his own words, ‘it was rather difficult’ to sort out
I echo your sentiments about medics/A+E staff – great folk.
Why do we cops always end up at the bottom of the pile dealing with everything that is too difficult for the right people to deal with ?
February 7, 2008 at 12:35 am
I cannot see what the issue is here with PCSOs. The comments that the Fed ‘saw the increase in CSOs coming’ made me laugh. They must be psychic, or perhaps they occasionally read the HO press releases stating that they will be 16000 PCSOs by 2008. Of course they saw it coming, it was never hidden!
I also cannot understand the complaint now that the HO decided to employ 16000 rather than 24000, the initial figure. Surely the Fed should be jumping for joy for the slash in PCSO numbers!
February 7, 2008 at 12:09 pm
You miss the point. These numbers were supposed to be in addition to sworn police officers. What is actually happening is that they are starting to replace them and this is the prediction that they saw coming. Instead of a fully trained omnicompetent constable with a PCSO supporting them the public now only get the supporting act instead. ACPO would sell their family members for a sniff of brownie points from the Home Office. The ACPO view will always be different as many of them haven’t done a full days frontline police work outside of their first two years in the whole of their service which speaks volumes about their ability to make policing decisions.
February 7, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Just a cop says, “ACPO would sell their family members for a sniff of brownie points from the Home Office.” I don’t know whether they would sell their immediate family, but they might sell their grandparents. I do think they would selll their subordinates though. The only way is up for them!
February 7, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Is there another Bloggs?
February 8, 2008 at 9:44 pm
The fact that the Home Office seems to think that an relatively untrained PCSO can be used on the street to replace a trained Police Officer speaks volumes about the ignorance and arrogance of the Government. A sort of ‘Send off three cereal packet tops and become a Police Officer.’ situation.
If putting untrained persons into a job that needs trained personnel is such a good idea, why is there is not a PCSO equivalent in the Fire Brigade or the Ambulance Service?
There will not be any redundancies even if Police numbers have to be cut. In the next couple of years all the Officers who joined in the large recruitments of the late 70s early 80s will retire…
February 8, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Blue Knight (and the other bloggers), when those who joined in the 70’s and 80’s retire, leaving a shed load of PCSOs, then you’ll find it won’t be this Government’s fault. They know that they may win one more election but will lose the next. They are therefore leaving as big a mess as possible for the next lot to sort out. They couoldn’t give a stuff about ‘the people’ as they will be sat behind their walled enclaves with their inflation proof obscene pensions and company directors salaries (just look at that war criminal Blair as an example. As a further example, try finding out how many Labour MPs have properties abroad. You may be surprised (if you can obtain the answer).It will be left to the next Government to try and recruit more Police (at enormous expense) while trying to make thousands of PCSOs redundant (at even more expense). Society will be screaming for a tough Government thus leaving the door open for the extreme parties. The reason why this Government is treating the Police so badly? Bigots have long memories and they will have been brainwashed about the brave miners who went on strike and were cruelly cut down by the fascist Police. Plus there is the survey carried out by the Labour party which reavealed that the majority of Police officers tend to vote Tory. How can they allow such people to keep order? I retired several from the Police years ago and am waiting for my youngest child to finish in University then my wife and I are off to Cyprus to live. I wanted to do my bit to benefit society but in this country today it’s like trying to bail out the Titanic with a teaspoon.
March 21, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Does anyone wonder why we all leave the job when:
1. The Home Secretary refuses to pay us.
2. The Public thinks we’re there to support the Government. (We aren’t, trust me… See point 1).
3. We get the blame when one underclass steals another underclass’ child and we don’t find it within 24 hours.
4. We can’t use our discretion because of Government targets.
5. Our management calls the punters “Customers” as if they have a choice as to which Crime prevention / Detection / Social service they use.
6. Canada hands out guns to Police.
7. Australia hands out guns to Police.
8. New Zealand hands out guns to Police.
9. [insert any nation's Police in the world] hands out guns to Police.
10. People in this country think that the Police handling of the Miners was anything other than an honest attempt to uphold the law.
11. Courts and Management don’t trust Officers originally employed in a position of trust. (We hear endless comments about our integrity, but are never trusted…)
I am personally sick of it. When the last Professional Police Officer leaves the country, please leave the lights on for the PCSOs, Civilian Investigators and Home Secretaries left behind to muddle through and prattle on about their great policies.
March 3, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Hello webmaster
I would like to share with you a link to your site
write me here preonrelt@mail.ru
March 28, 2009 at 11:39 pm
Hello!
Very Interesting post! Thank you for such interesting resource!
PS: Sorry for my bad english, I’v just started to learn this language
See you!
Your, Raiul Baztepo