Police and Justice Bill

The Bill is revealing in what it does not include, rather than in what it does. It does not provide an opportunity for hon. Members to debate the most important change to policing in this country for more than 70 years: the amalgamation of police forces. There is great concern in my constituency that West Mercia police, despite being one of the best-performing forces in the country, will be banished to a super-force that will include Birmingham, which bears no relation to the rural policing needs of Shropshire. I accept that the West Mercia force is not perfect. Constituents write to me and telephone me to say that they would like police officers to respond more quickly, and rightly so. There are issues arising from neighbourhood policing. There is a wish to see more police officers on the beat. These shortcomings are predominantly the fault of the Government, who have created more paperwork for police officers and have caused officers to spend more time in police stations rather than on patrol, where people like to see them. In market towns such as Shifnal, Albrighton, Wellington and Newport in my constituency, constituents want to see police officers on the beat. The Government’s amalgamation plans will mean that there will be fewer police officers on the streets of rural Shropshire, and more police from Shropshire on the urban streets of places such as Birmingham and Stoke-on-Trent. Once again, the relevant legislation will be passed under secondary legislation—by order of the Secretary of State rather than by the will of the House, which is the will of the people. Is it not perverse that today we can discuss extending the powers of community support officers to pick up truants—we support such measures—yet cannot discuss, as representatives of the people who put us here, the issues that concern us most? Such issues include the amalgamation of well-performing police forces such as West Mercia. It is a perverse use of parliamentary time. It is another affront to the House, showing that the Government care more about issuing press releases than about bringing matters before the House for proper and full debate that is both transparent and accountable to the people. The Bill sets out the importance of community and neighbourhood policing—an issue on which the Minister should respond. We are concerned that police authorities will be less accountable, especially if we have strategic police authorities. I am aware that there will be a transitional period of two years, after which the Government might consider policing panels. Where are policing panels in the Bill? They are not mentioned. We are supposed to take it on trust that the Secretary of State will introduce policing panels in future. I will be grateful for the Minister’s comments on that. Part of the rationale of strategic police forces is to deal with the gap in so-called level 2 policing. Can we not deal with that through the already established taskforce? Could we not consider appointing more senior police officers within existing police forces who have experience of anti-terrorism operations? I am aware that the West Mercia police force is recruiting a senior officer, and I hope that the Government will not intervene. The recruitment will allow the police authority to appoint an officer with, I hope, anti-terrorism experience, to fulfil some of the objectives that the Government have set in their plans. I would be quite relaxed about the regionalisation of special branch. There is certainly an argument for better co-ordination of special branch officers in the region. However, we do not have to regionalise the whole of west midlands policing to deliver that end. The Serious Organised Crime Agency will fulfil many of the objectives that the Government have said they are trying to achieve through the regionalisation of police forces. It seems that the Government are fulfilling a regional agenda at any attempt while ignoring the will of the people. I call on the Minister to give an undertaking that if the people of West Mercia, through their local authorities, should ask the Government for a referendum, they will be allowed to decide whether they wish to retain the existing West Mercia force. Are the Government not aware of the importance of morale? There are hard-working police officers and community support officers who do not want to be part of a regional super-force. Morale at present is very low as a result of the Government’s proposals. It was Sir Ian Blair who asked—I do not often quote the Metropolitan Police Commissioner—during the Dimbleby lecture what was the purpose of the police. The Secretary of State has tried to answer that question today, perhaps for the first time after many months of lobbying. We need to ask also what local people believe that the police are for. What do they want the police to do? The overriding answer that I hear is that they want more local policing on the streets. They want more community policing. The measures set out in the Bill will not deliver that. On the face of it, there is much talk about it, but I doubt whether it will deliver it. That is why people are concerned.