Review of police structures

Report: 4
Date: 3 February 2006
By: Chief Executive and Clerk

Summary

This report sets out the response of the Authority and the Metropolitan Police Service on the Home Office Review of Police Structures, from a Londonwide perspective.

A. Recommendations

That the report be received.

B. Supporting information

1. At its meeting of 6 December 2005, members discussed the issues arising from the MPS presentation on the review of police structures in London which was given on 2 December. It resolved to defer submission, to the Home Office, of the preferred option for reorganisation so that the draft could be approved by the Authority 6 January 2006.

2. On 7 December, the Home Office agreed that the 23 December was no longer the absolute deadline for submissions, draft submissions were still required by that date. With this in mind, and taking into account views expressed by members, the response at Appendix 1, signed by the Chair of the Authority and the Commissioner, was submitted on 15 December. It remains only an interim submission and it is open to the Authority to make any supplementary comment.

C. Race and equality impact

There are no direct implications in this report but diversity issues will arise if any merger proceeds. In that event they will be identified and resolved as part of the merger and will be addressed in the reports that update the Authority on progress.

D. Financial implications

There are no direct implications in this report but financial issues will arise if any merger proceeds. In that event they will be addressed through Finance Committee.

E. Background papers

• MPA/MPS Initial Submission on Police Force Reorganisation
• ‘Closing the Gap’, HMIC

F. Contact details

Report author: Keith Dickinson

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Appendix 1: Letter to J W Giffard, Chief Constable, Director – Police Structures Review Unit

Police Structures Review

Thank you for your letter dated 9 November 2005 in connection with the police structures review.

Following your encouragement to develop further the three options we put forward in our outline submission on 28 October, we have been engaging with City of London Police and Authority, with the British Transport Police Authority and with the Department of Transport. There are, however, as you acknowledged in your summary of the options for London, complications that do not apply in the rest of the country – especially the requirement for primary legislation to effect any significant change of policing governance in the capital - which tend to push us outside the parameters of the current review process.

A meeting has taken place between the Commissioner and the Secretary of State for Transport, Alastair Darling, at which it was agreed that we should work closely with his officials in connection with their development of options and models for the future, and the Metropolitan Police has made a written submission to the DfT review.

We have also been co-operating closely with our City of London colleagues to help them with the development of their case to demonstrate an acceptable independent capability to deliver protective services, and have been giving consideration to the likely outcomes of the Attorney General’s review of fraud investigation, which we understand to be due to report towards the middle of 2006.

We propose therefore that we should not now submit detailed cost-benefit appraisals in support of our options, but will instead set out here our preferred outcome and the concise rationale for it.

Our preferred outcome is for strategic merger with the City of London Police and British Transport police. We are however, very sensitive to the wishes of our policing partners in London each to retain their own independence and want to see all options fully considered.

Our case for strategic merger would revolve around three principles:

• Clarity
• Accountability
• Increased operational cohesion and effectiveness

The nature of policing the capital changed fundamentally and irreversibly on 7 July. While we fully acknowledge the effectiveness of the co-operation arrangements in place following the bomb incidents then and on 21 July, co-operation is not the same as a single operational command. London cannot afford to risk having gaps in its counter-terror defences. A single command and control system, a single communications system, a single infrastructure and a single line of accountability are all critical to achieving a safer London. The Olympic games is the second significant driver for a fully integrated single police force for London. To be properly prepared for the Games in 2012 we would need to be merged by the time the detailed planning phase starts in 2010. This implies taking over from BTP the policing of the London Underground network (including those few stations outside London) plus the policing of all overground rail services within the London area.

We remain open to the two options submitted in respect of our relationship with the City of London Police, and understand their preference for further collaboration rather than strategic merger. If the decision is nonetheless to go for merger, the following model is designed to preserve much of the unique identity of the City of London Police as a Metropolitan Police Operational Command Unit while anticipating that the Attorney General’s review of fraud investigation will recognise the expertise the City has developed in this specialist area of policing.

• MPS should take over territorial policing in the City, with current service provision being red-circled and part-funded, as now, by the Corporation of London
• MPS should take over specialist policing in the City, with the exception of some specialist economic crime investigation
• City should adopt MPS systems, including CRIS, CRIMINT, AWARE, METCALL and MPS command & control systems
• City should have special responsibility for economic crime investigation (this is expected to be in line with the outcome of the Attorney General’s review of economic crime investigation), a ceremonials unit (which could easily be a bolt-on to the territorial OCU) and, possibly, an economic sector protection unit, reflecting investment in technology, international contacts and good practice, and which could be extended to protect the Docklands economic sector as well as the City.

Strategic merger with either or both the City of London and the British Transport Police is dependent on ministerial support for what will be a disruptive and, in some quarters, very unwelcome, process. Whatever the final decisions in either respect we want jointly to give an assurance that we will work closely and transparently with our colleagues in both forces and both authorities to ensure that operational effectiveness across London is maintained and that the excellent professional relationships that exist are not damaged.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback