My Lords, first, I apologise for not being present at the start of the discussion. I was delayed on a train.
I support the amendment. Throughout our discussions on the Bill I have expressed concerns about chief officers being able to appoint their senior team. I realise that the Government have a theoretical model in which a chief officer appoints his team and the chief officer is then responsible to the elected commissioner. There is a purity and simplicity in that approach, but recent events and past history suggest that there is great strength in bringing others into the consideration of and recommendations for chief officer posts. That adds legitimacy and the possibility of national concerns about leadership being incorporated into local decisions. I realise that it challenges some of the purity of the Government’s modelling on this issue but I urge them to think through the notion that no one other than the chief constable or the commissioner should be responsible for these senior appointments other than in an informing role. I think that in the public interest something more than informing is desirable.
Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Condon
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 20 July 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c1361-2 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 17:40:53 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_764443
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_764443
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_764443