Elected police chiefs

[The Large One]

One of the cornerstones of CMD's *cough* 'Big Society' is for people to be able to elect their local police chiefs. I consider myself reasonably on the ball with sort of stuff, but I am struggling with the thinking behind this one. For a start, what purpose does it serve?

I would suggest the vast majority of the public do not know the rank of the local police chief, let alone his or her name, nor what they do nor how they do it. So why should we have to go through an embarrassing charade of two or more highly qualified senior police officers approaching the public in order to schmooze them for a job which most don't understand?

Or are we talking about an elected non-police officer at the top? A politician from one of the main political parties? That would merely make the police a political prawn in the game with police operations being more directly influenced from Westminster.

And if you do have an elected police chief, what then? Who are they accountable to? The Home Office? The rank and file police officers? Or the electorate?

This doesn't make sense to me. Can someone help?

 

[beorhthelm]

Police cheifs have become too politicised as it is. need to focus more on the policing strategy side.

 

[Deleted User X18H]

One of the cornerstones of CMD's *cough* 'Big Society' is for people to be able to elect their local police chiefs. I consider myself reasonably on the ball with sort of stuff, but I am struggling with the thinking behind this one. For a start, what purpose does it serve?

I would suggest the vast majority of the public do not know the rank of the local police chief, let alone his or her name, nor what they do nor how they do it. So why should we have to go through an embarrassing charade of two or more highly qualified senior police officers approaching the public in order to schmooze them for a job which most don't understand?

Or are we talking about an elected non-police officer at the top? A politician from one of the main political parties? That would merely make the police a political prawn in the game with police operations being more directly influenced from Westminster.

And if you do have an elected police chief, what then? Who are they accountable to? The Home Office? The rank and file police officers? Or the electorate?

This doesn't make sense to me. Can someone help?

For whom do you ask these questions? Honestly now.

 

[strings]

I honestly think that it important that policing and politics remain seperate.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

If they're electable, surely they accountable to the voting public. On the plus side they would only get re-elected if they have been seen to be a success (not quite sure how you judge that though) - on the down side, it would deter them from making unpopular decisions, which is a necessity sometimes. It really boils down to what you expect from your police force - they should fundamentally be there to uphold and enforce the law, not be social workers.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

It might help to break the hold of the Freemasons.

 

[Simster]

Whenever a policy is attached to this lame "Big Society" umbrella, you know it is going to be an absolute crock of shit, poorly thought through and little more than a gimicky crowd pleaser.

Any sane person will want their police chiefs to uphold the law and be as de-politicised as possible, not spend time electioneering. You also want your best policemen at the top, promoted through the proper route, not elected by the public who are not qualified to understand what makes a good policeman.

 

[Fitzcarraldo]

Not that I am advocating it, but if they were elected it might have stop officers of the calibre of Andrew 'dodgy geezer' Hayman rising to the rank of Chief Constable of the Norfolk Constabulary and therefore the senior jobs in the MET that it led to.

 

[The Large One]

If they're electable, surely they accountable to the voting public. On the plus side they would only get re-elected if they have been seen to be a success (not quite sure how you judge that though) - on the down side, it would deter them from making unpopular decisions, which is a necessity sometimes. It really boils down to what you expect from your police force - they should fundamentally be there to uphold and enforce the law, not be social workers.

It's a nice political soundbite phrase, but what, in this instance, does 'accountable to the voting public' mean? The public would need, ideally, to be taught on all police operational matters in order to ascertain whether someone is doing a good job.

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

The insanity of such a suggestion is quite astounding. Make the poice answrable to the peanut-crunching crowd and then let's do the same with ther law courts. While being on the surface entirely democratic it will really prove the axiom that you get the government you deserve. You will end up witth police brutality, people going to prispon for the colour of their skin or their faith. If the justice system cannot stay above the burning issues of the average person then there is no hope for society.

 

[The Large One]

Whenever a policy is attached to this lame "Big Society" umbrella, you know it is going to be an absolute crock of shit, poorly thought through and little more than a gimicky crowd pleaser.

Any sane person will want their police chiefs to uphold the law and be as de-politicised as possible, not spend time electioneering. You also want your best policemen at the top, promoted through the proper route, not elected by the public who are not qualified to understand what makes a good policeman.

My point exactly. So why is it being pushed through?

 

[Deleted User X18H]

If memory serves Martin Richards is the top man in Sussex he divides his time between Lewes and Brighton.

I believe Cam is alluding to providing a localised intermediary to work with the local community and liaise with the regular Police force. Along the lines of a guardian angel.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

As I understand it, local people would elect an official who would then set priorities for the force. The chief constable would in turn be expected to meet these priorities.

The broadest job description could include overseeing other elements of local crime fighting, including the Criminal Justice Board, the body which brings together police, probation, prosecution and other agencies.

Seems to be following the US model of elected Police Commissioners

 

[Tricky Dicky]

It's a nice political soundbite phrase, but what, in this instance, does 'accountable to the voting public' mean? The public would need, ideally, to be taught on all police operational matters in order to ascertain whether someone is doing a good job.

As I said, difficult to evaluate. I would guess it would be basically "perception". That wouldn't be easy though, as they've been telling us for years that "actual crime is going down but the 'perception' of crime is going up". The obvious outcome is American stylee election campaigns for local police chiefs - not a nice thought, really.

 

[Fitzcarraldo]

If memory serves Martin Richards is the top man in Sussex he divides his time between Lewes and Brighton.

I believe Cam is alluding to providing a localised intermediary to work with the local community and liaise with the regular Police force. Along the lines of a guardian angel.

How could they ensure the 'guardian angel' would be apolitical? Surely any contact with their local party and they become a kind of policing Commissar?

 

[The Large One]

As I understand it, local people would elect an official who would then set priorities for the force. The chief constable would in turn be expected to meet these priorities.

The broadest job description could include overseeing other elements of local crime fighting, including the Criminal Justice Board, the body which brings together police, probation, prosecution and other agencies.

Seems to be following the US model of elected Police Commissioners

So it's an extra layer of bureaucracy - someone the Chief Constable has to report to?

As I said, difficult to evaluate. I would guess it would be basically "perception". That wouldn't be easy though, as they've been telling us for years that "actual crime is going down but the 'perception' of crime is going up". The obvious outcome is American stylee election campaigns for local police chiefs - not a nice thought, really.

You both make it sound like a glorified Spin Doctor's job.

 

[Acker79]

It's a nice political soundbite phrase, but what, in this instance, does 'accountable to the voting public' mean? The public would need, ideally, to be taught on all police operational matters in order to ascertain whether someone is doing a good job.

But then, what are the point of government elections? People vote who don't have a clue about economics, the justice system, education, hospital and so on. There is so much about what MPs have to decide and act on that we don't bother looking into, and rely on soundbites and manifestos.

 

[ROSM]

If memory serves Martin Richards is the top man in Sussex he divides his time between Lewes and Brighton.

I believe Cam is alluding to providing a localised intermediary to work with the local community and liaise with the regular Police force. Along the lines of a guardian angel.

So will it be more like Commissioner Gordon or Chief O'hara from Batman?

I assume that Chief O'hara will be Martin Richards and Commissioner Gordon will be elected - but judging by the fact that David Bellotti was elected and became head of the sussex police authority (just at the time, coincidentally that he needed their help from preventing naughty people telling him what they think) it does make me think that election is not the best option.

 

[ROSM]

But then, what are the point of government elections? People vote who don't have a clue about economics, the justice system, education, hospital and so on. There is so much about what MPs have to decide and act on that we don't bother looking into, and rely on soundbites and manifestos.

I think people should be asked to name at least two policies of the person they are voting for before they should be allowed to vote.

 

[User removed 4]

Whenever a policy is attached to this lame "Big Society" umbrella, you know it is going to be an absolute crock of shit, poorly thought through and little more than a gimicky crowd pleaser.

Any sane person will want their police chiefs to uphold the law and be as de-politicised as possible, not spend time electioneering. You also want your best policemen at the top, promoted through the proper route, not elected by the public who are not qualified to understand what makes a good policeman.

DO you HONESTLY think that the police force and senior officers such as Ian Blair weren't politicised under the last government ?