Policing review - accountability

Report: 6
Date: 6 December 2007
By: the Chief Executive

Summary

This report outlines a draft MPA position on the police accountability strand of the Sir Ronnie Flanagan Review. Members are asked to consider the arguments set out below which are based on numerous discussions Members have had since the MPS/MPA away day in May 2007, and agree a position for the Chair of the Authority to submit to the Review by the 15 December. Members agreed the joint response of the MPS and MPA on the three other strands reducing unnecessary bureaucracy, neighbourhood policing and resources earlier this year. It is also proposed that this response be copied to the Home Office team working on the Policing Green Paper and that further round tables be set up in the New Year.

A. Recommendations

That

1. members consider the position and agree changes; and

2. agree that the Chair submit an agreed position on behalf of the Authority to the Flanagan Review team by the 15 December 2007.

B. Supporting information

1. In his interim report, Sir Ronnie Flanagan writes:

“The Review will produce a set of principles for the actions which support local accountability, with a clear framework of good practice which local areas can adapt to their own specific circumstances. This will set some standards around required levels of, for example, fairness, efficiency and effectiveness, in relation to the quality of policing services, community consultation and engagement, oversight and accountability.

This approach recognises that there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution for delivery, and that different communities have different needs. Each area will have, for example, its own unique challenges and opportunities in engaging communities, such as urban or rural considerations, different ethnic composition, differing levels of income and social capital, different local administrative arrangements (for example whether there is a local two tier, unitary, or borough authority), and different approaches to and opportunities for community engagement.”

Adopting a position

2. The MPA welcomes the distinction made by Sir Ronnie Flanagan between engagement and cooperation (responsiveness), answerability and accountability in the interim report but believe there is still some thinking required about how to connect these whilst maintaining the distinct functions of the agencies involved.

3. Since the beginnings of policing the very question, ‘who is going to police the police?’ has been debated and accountability has personified this debate. But what do we mean when we talk about accountability?

4. The MPA believe that this question should be clearly addressed in the review. To this end, the Authority point to the principles of accountability set out in Lord Patten Review on Policing for Northern Ireland conducted in 1998. Here fundamental questions are posed that directly translate to the current debate across the policing community in England and Wales:

“Many of the problems facing the policing service in NI are similar to those facing democratic societies. How can the police be properly accountable to the community they serve if their composition in terms of ethnicity, religion and gender is vastly dissimilar to that of their society? How can professional police officers adapt to a world in which their own efforts are only a part the overall policing of a modern society?

There is no perfect model for us, no example of a country that, to quote one European officer, ‘has yet finalised the total transformation from force to service’.”

5. Perhaps most significant to this debate is the agreement that:

“...policing structures and arrangements are such that the police service is professional, effective and efficient, fair and impartial, free from partisan control; accountable, both under law for its actions and to the community it serves; representative of the society it polices, and operates within a coherent and cooperative criminal justice system. Which conforms with human rights norms…consistent to foregoing principles.”

6. Arrangements for accountability as defined above are more or less set out within the current statutory arrangements for police authorities the IPCC and NPIA in England and Wales. However, during the review questions have been raised about how current arrangements work to engage with local communities and local authority partnerships. In short how can local authorities and communities be given more input into local priority setting and localised oversight? This has been termed by some as local accountability. However, the MPA would argue strongly that this term is incorrect and the concerns expressed are not a matter of local accountability but rather arrangements for local answerability, cooperation and community engagement. For accountability to function effectively it must have a clear statutory framework. Blurring these lines by presenting what should be local ‘answerability’ and engagement as local accountability would be counter productive risking, inefficient oversight, extra layers of bureaucracy inhibiting delivery at a local level and an increased partisan control of policing. If the review advocates such a dramatic shift then a radical review of the constitutional arrangements for policing in England and Wales is required.

Engagement and Partnership

7. The MPA recognise the need to strengthen co-operation and community safety partnerships working at a local level and the need to extend a citizen focus approach to policing. This, it believes, is at the heart of the ‘accountability’ debate in the policing review. Community safety is not exclusive to the police and the MPA are absolutely committed to transforming community engagement to help Londoners secure a more locally responsive police service.

8. The MPA and MPS Community Engagement Strategy defines engagement as:

“The proactive harnessing of the energies, knowledge and skills of communities and partners not merely to identify problems but also to negotiate priorities for action and shape and deliver solutions”

9. In real terms this means building a more responsive police service requires through a partnership between the police service, police authority and local communities to:

• identify and bring forward local crime and disorder problems,
• provide access to, and holding the police to account in a public and transparent environment,
• negotiate and influence local policing priorities and actions;

10. During the MPA’s annual Community Safety Conference in 2006, the Authority in consultation with Londoners set out its vision of best practice. In particular, borough based engagement and partnership has undergone significant process of reform. The Authority has moved towards an increased level of involvement on Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships in holding all local statutory partners to account on behalf of community members with a specific team of officers deployed on borough to support members in their day-to-day partnership activity. It works to support the roll out of 630 safer neighbourhood panels and provide mechanisms for panels to engage with CDRPs and authority sponsored community engagement groups, or CPCGs. Critically as a strategic police authority borough based working provides a clear link for local communities and partnerships into the centre, allowing local matters to influence priorities and actions.

11. In response to the Review of Policing and the Home Office Green Paper, this professional approach to engagement and partnership work is at the heart of increasing community ownership of its policing service. Building trust and confidence through partnership is central to delivering effective, efficient and responsive policing. Counter Terrorism: The London Debate alongside the MPA’s work to hold the MPS to account for its counter terrorist functions demonstrates that even at the highest level of policing communities are at the heart of delivering an effective policing strategy. From this work, it is clear that building strong relationships with communities and working with local partners both in local authorities and voluntary sector is absolutely essential for the future of counter terrorism policing. This initiative is an example of encouraging greater public involvement in policing issues, driven by the unique position of a police authority with the mandate to hold the force to account on behalf of Londoners whilst also having direct access to local communities and community safety partners.

Governance: The London Dimension

12. The MPA is the strategic Police Authority for the Metropolitan Police Service. It is the largest Police Authority in England and Wales with 23 Members, 32 London boroughs, an elected Mayor and a Greater London Assembly. From July 2008 the Mayor will have the power to either sit as Chair or appoint the Chair of the MPA and Deputy Chairs from the membership of the Authority. The Mayor also sets 25% of the precept but has no formal powers of direction (a proposal specifically rejected during the Drafting the of the GLA Powers Act 2006). In such strategic environment, governance and accountability of the MPS can prove to be a crowded field. In response to the Review of Mayoral powers the MPA and MPS explained:

“The democratic framework in London, with its various bodies and lines of accountability, has a number of unique features. Some of these relationships are complex and not easily understood by the general public. The MPA and the MPS welcome any proposals that clarify the lines of accountability but consider that the key improvements will be made not through legislative changes increasing the Mayor’s directive powers, but through the continued development of the positive working relationship between the MPA, MPS and the Mayor.”

13. The MPA therefore has serious concerns over the possible expansion of ‘local accountability’ models in London. A strategic force requires strategic oversight and any move towards micro management by 32 London Boroughs may severely inhibit the ability of the MPA and the MPS to provide a policing service from neighbourhood policing to specialist crime and counter terrorism for the Metropolis. As a strategic Authority, the MPA must ensure that all levels of policing link up effectively whilst ensuring close working with partners and communities. It has therefore been essential that the MPA expand and professionalise its partnership, cooperation and engagement work across London’s democratic structures, ensuring that local priorities and local communities have an effective voice into how London’s policing service is delivered. It is fully committed to developing this work and transforming how Londoners can engage fully to deliver the most effective and efficient police service for all our communities.

C. Race and equality impact

Accountability of the police service has significant equality and diversity implications. Trust and confidence in policing is based within an effective system of open and transparent oversight and accountability.

D. Financial implications

There are no direct financial implications to this report however the MPA secretariat budget will be affected long term by increased moves towards partnership working.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Sally Benton, MPA

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback