make haste slowly

working in a community

Some time ago an experienced and respected Chief Constable told me that policing was not rocket science, it was about communication and people. The police service had only two aims, to keep people safe and to make people feel safe. Everything we did after that were simply tactics to achieve these two aims. He also said that a police officer was in a unique and privileged position. The majority of people in any community are only to happy to speak to their police officer. So police officers should take every opportunity to do just that. The last thing he said was interesting, 'when policing, make haste slowly'.

 

For years now chief officers of police have promised to solve crime and anti social behaviour, if given more powers and more officers. Over the years more powers and officers have been delivered by various hues of government. At the same time communities have demanded more officers on their streets. However the increase in officers, yes police numbers have risen, has not been reflected in numbers patrolling in communities. I can quote an example using actual figures. I will not mention the area as I do not want to embarrass the officers currently having to police it. Some ten and more years ago the area I refer to had, on a typical weekend night, anything from ten to sixteen officers available for community patrolling. Supported by specialist officers. Today that area struggles to muster ten officers and on occasion has been known to police with less than four and have specialist traffic officers attend calls in the community. Why is that?

Perhaps there are two main reasons: One involves the myriad of new demands placed on the police service. Sex offenders, drugs, corporate policy issues, gender issues, diversity, community planning, youth justice, community safety, management information, crime and criminal profiling, intelligence units, terrorism units, firearms and on and on. Every time the government create a new strategy demanding police action and involvement, the service reacts by diverting officers from beat duties. Somebody has to produce the action plans and keep the new direction on track. Then there are performance indicators, foisted on the service. Housebreaking detections, vandalism detections, drug convictions and more. Few of these indicators are gleaned from communities. They are usually political. Chief officers know this and put together strategies to tackle the indicators. Squads are formed, resulting in concentrated efforts to get the figures up or down, whatever the indicator demands. Chief officers are not stupid, they know what they are being judged on. However each squad or unit, set up to address the indicators, is put together by denuding communities of even more beat officers, bringing them to the centre to be managed by the CID.

The second problem is in the whole management structure of the police service. It generally is dominated by current and ex CID officers, who have spent little, if any, time in communities. They do not understand community issues and believe that policing is exclusively about detecting criminals and that by catching criminals crime will be reduced. That is patently nonsense. One has to ask, who's needs are being met by this flawed approach. They therefore skew their strategies to that end. One is not suggesting that catching criminals is not a major part of policing, of course it is, however preventing crime, one may argue, is equally, if not more important. Ask any victim.

One possible way forward would be to have an independent review of policing, including its management. In addition, Chief Constables need to be supported more as well as being made more answerable for their decisions. Secondly, the government of the day need to examine closely where all the officers are, what function each and every one of them is performing. There is no doubt that each and every officer is working hard and in many cases working above and beyond, however that does not mean that every task is actually necessary. It is only when that is understood and each position justified, or not, will we be in a position to make a valued judgement as to police numbers and deployment.

Then there is the single Scottish Police service. Oh, I have no doubt the targets and performance figures dreamt up to justify the break up of the present system and show the efficiency of a single force will succeed in doing just that. These targets and indicators are designed to do just that, they are not honest nor impartial, how could they be? Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

It is politics, it is not about communities, it is not about people. It is about centralisation. If my memory serves, a cornerstone of communism and one could ask, did that serve communities well? I would go so far as to say people are actually a bloody nuisance to modern policing, which instead of making us feel safer goes out of it's way to do the exact opposite.

The new system of a single force will only accelerate the distancing from the communities it serves. I have no doubt about that.

'If a man discovers a mistake and does not correct it, he is committing a second mistake', Confucius.