Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

For all Labour's objections, one could be forgiven for forgetting that the previous Government twice proposed to democratise police authorities. So what happened? They backed down, twice. That is the difference between the previous Government and the coalition. The Opposition retreated from reform at the first whiff of opposition and we are determined to see it through. [Hon. Members: ““Give way!””] One thing is clear. Those on the Opposition Front Bench may be opportunistically opposing this reform, but we know what they really think about the need for it."““Only direct election, based on geographic constituencies, will deliver the strong connection to the public which is critical.””" Does that sound familiar to the hon. Member for Gedling (Vernon Coaker)? It should do. He said it just two years ago. Is that too long ago? Let us look at what the right hon. Member for Morley and Outwood (Ed Balls) said just two weeks ago. He told the Home Affairs Committee that ““the present accountability of police authorities was not optimal.”” What a masterpiece of understatement. If police authorities are sub-optimal, what proposals does he have for reform? None. He is silent on the issue. Today the right hon. Gentleman admitted that ““there is more we can do to deepen accountability at force level.”” What? He will not say. He is against reform of the governance of policing, but he is for it, just as he is against cuts while admitting that he would cut police budgets by more than £1 million a year. Apparently these can be delivered without losing a single police officer. That is what he said today.