I think that can be achieved through the police commissioner working with crime and disorder reduction partnerships, which are at the community level. They represent the varied communities in the area, and they are the delivery partner to crack down on crime and to deliver on the crime prevention initiatives, which are a key aspect in the creation of the safer communities we all want.
However, I disagree with the Government approach to accountability in that I take issue with their proposal for crime and policing representatives, and with the Liberal Democrats' approach in their apparent proposal for a two thirds elected, one third councillors, plus a top-up, arrangement. Under the Government's plans, elected people would sit alongside other elected representatives on police authorities and, importantly, would chair crime and disorder reduction partnerships. If the Government think this solution will provide clarity to the public and bridge the accountability gap, they are fooling themselves—as are the Liberal Democrats in terms of their proposals—and they also risk undermining the effectiveness of CDRPs.
The Government are right that local councils should provide the primary leadership behind CDRPs as the mechanism to deliver local community engagement and crime reduction. The problem is that at the moment many are police led rather than council led. Police officers are effectively taking the lead and running the initiatives. When so many of the services come through local councils, primary care trusts and other such agencies, that cannot be the most effective way to deliver on the ground the initiatives that can help make a difference in those communities. If the crime and policing representatives are intended to chair the CDRPs, it is difficult to see how that structure could possibly encourage councils to take a leading role, as the Government appear to be suggesting. It looks more like a recipe for confusion, chaos and division.
Rather than yet another cosmetic exercise, we believe that we need a fundamental change of thinking. We need active citizens, not overactive Government. We need stronger communities, not stronger central control. We need Government to be on our side, not on our backs. The public have an essential role in the fight against crime, that is without doubt, and to return to Peel's nine points of policing,"““The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police actions.””"
Policing and the public go hand in hand.
Fighting Crime (Public Engagement)
Proceeding contribution from
James Brokenshire
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 6 November 2008.
It occurred during Debate on Fighting Crime (Public Engagement).
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
482 c413-4 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:30:36 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506615
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506615
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_506615