New Local Government Network » Crime and justice

A Fair Cop? Elected Police Commissioners, Democracy and Local Accountability

editor — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 00:01:20 +0000

Proposals to make new elected Police Commissioners more accountable to broader local democratic government and their local communities are published in a new NLGN paper.

The New Local Government Network has drawn up a list of proposals and safeguards to create better working practices between the Commissioners and Police and Crime Panels (PCPs), the body established to hold the new elected post to account. Amongst them include:

Imposing a duty on Police Commissioners to regularly engage with partners
Giving elected councillors, through PCPs, a role to influence the budget-setting process
Allowing PCPs the power of veto, requiring a two-third majority, over certain key decisions, such as setting the budget and the appointment of chief constables
Handing over Police Commissioner powers to newly elected city mayors
Allowing chief constables to appeal to PCPs should they feel their operational independence is threatened.

The Coalition Government has promised to transfer power “back to the people” – through the direct election of ‘Police and Crime Commissioners. Their powers will include setting local policing priorities; holding the Chief Constable to account and setting the policing budget.

The report also warns against greater politicisation of local law enforcement. Author Olivier Roth said:

“While directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners should improve police visibility and give citizens a channel through which they can address their concerns, there is a risk that electoral considerations could influence the actions and focus of Police and Crime Commissioners, and that these will become too politicised. As a repository of local democracy, and a link to partners responsible for tackling the broader drivers of crime, Police and Crime Panels should play an important part in this process, and have their functions commensurately increased”.

The report also argues that:

“Police and Crime Commissioners will therefore have to work in partnership with local authorities and other public bodies, with citizens and communities, and with the newly created National Crime Agency in order to deliver positive policing outcomes. Police and Crime Commissioners should not be able to circumvent these partnership workings, many of which tackle the drivers of crime, and should therefore be required to consult and work with these entities on a regular basis. This engagement should provide further opportunities for neighbourhoods and citizens to participate in the improvement of crime outcomes.”

Stronger Together: A new approach to preventing violent extremism

editor — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 05:01:23 +0000

The Government’s flagship scheme on tackling extremism is alienating Muslim communities and should be scrapped according to a new report. The New Local Government Network (NLGN) think tank is calling for the £45million scheme to focus on tackling all extremism – including far-right extremists – rather than just focusing on Islamic extremism.

The Government set up the Prevent scheme in 2006 to help local councils to tackle violent extremism at a local level. Currently 94 local authorities receive funding from the scheme. NLGN’s independent report argues that whilst the scheme has helped in some areas, overall it risks alienating some local communities and particularly Muslim communities.

The report calls for the Government to allocate resources to tackle all extremist ideologies, arguing that the recent increase in far-right extremism is as much of as a challenge for local communities as Islamic extremism. In July this year Scotland Yard warned that far-right extremists are planning a “spectacular” terrorist attack in Britain to try to stoke racial tensions and that more resources need to be targeted to tackle this form of extremism.

It also calls for reform of the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC) to allow an expert on ‘home-grown’ terrorism to sit on the Committee. It suggests that the Communities and Local Government department should have a permanent seat on the JIC alongside the seven other government departments on the Committee and that experienced local authority Chief Executives should be consulted when assessing potential security risks.

Author of the report, Anna Turley argues that reform of Prevent is vital to rebuilding confidence within local communities:

“While Islamist extremism remains a very serious threat to our security, this kind of extremism is not the only threat to the stability and security of our communities.”

“Prevent is too prescriptive from the centre, undermines broader community cohesion objectives and lacks sufficient integration with police and security services at local and national level. Concern has also been acknowledged over the agenda’s impact on relations with Muslim communities and whether it unfairly stigmatises an entire community.”

While it is too early to assess the success of the Prevent agenda in terms of outcomes, the lack of support from within the Muslim community, as well as the changing threat of wider extremist voices mean that it is time to review whether the separation of the Preventing Violent Extremism approach from wider community cohesion approaches is still relevant.”

Gangs at the Grassroots: Community solutions to street violence

editor — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 23:01:39 +0000

A new report warns the Government to avoid using centralised policies to tackle gang violence and knife crime. It argues that a focus on Whitehall-driven targets does not take into account the diverse nature of many gangs and that local areas should be able to introduce interventions based on local factors.

The New Local Government Network says that councils should be given control over local neighbourhood policing and have the freedom to develop their own strategies to tackle gang violence. It also suggests that local citizens could have greater influence over community sentences for gang-related crimes. This would allow judges to discuss with the local community how a convicted gang member should be punished under a community sentence. The report also calls for greater pre-emptive investment in severely affected neighbourhoods and for a more creative approach to the use of youth mentors to support people in danger of becoming influenced by gangs.

Tackling gang violence has become a major political issue and some police forces have made it their number one crime priority. In London alone, upwards of 169 separate gangs have been identified, with more than a quarter involved in murders. One-fifth of youth crime in London is attributed to gangs.

Director of the NLGN, Chris Leslie said:

“We know that gangs exist for varying reasons; some driven by drug-dealing, some by geographical territorialism and some for mutual protection, therefore different local problems demand differing local solutions. We have seen a litany of Whitehall-led initiatives to tackle gang related violence, from the Violent Crime Reduction Act; gang and gun summits in No 10; the Tackling Gang’s Action Programme and this week’s youth crime plan. Whilst these have undoubtedly highlighted some of the real issues around gang violence, they have not promoted greater local flexibility to tackle local problems. By giving elected council leaders control over local neighbourhood policing, communities would have a direct say over where gang-related issues are tackled and how successfully police are in stopping it”.

The NLGN report Gangs at the Grassroots: Community solutions to street violence points towards innovative projects in Lambeth, Manchester and Islington as evidence that local authorities can develop successful responses to gang violence. These projects bring together innovative, multi-agency solutions not only to reduce violence but to promote education and employment. The report argues that it is vital that where schemes have been proven to work, they must remain funded. The report is also critical of a lack of funding for local interventions, suggesting that just £20 million has been spent on local multi-agency interventions, whilst since 2004 the Government has provided only £1.75 million to local community groups to support specific gang projects.

Author of the report, Anthony Brand argues:

“Top-down responses and nationwide ‘crack-downs’ on youth crime can do little to address the underlying drivers of gangs and their criminality. Local, multi-agency frameworks are key to addressing gang violence. We know that effective solutions must simultaneously deliver a range of interventions across education, health, policing, youth-work, community engagement, economic development, regeneration, skills and training and family support, all tailored to the specific communities and context in which different gangs operate. This puts local authorities firmly on the front-line in tackling this issue, bringing partners together under a common vision and coordinating services across an area.”

Your Police or Mine? Delivering local police leadership

editor — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 23:00:40 +0000

A new paper from the New Local Government Network calls on Home Secretary Jacqui Smith to scrap police authorities and return their powers to elected Council Leaders. It claims that the changes would not only save millions of pounds which could be pumped into front line policing but also give local people greater influence over local policing.

The future of police authorities has been uncertain following the announcement by former Home Secretary John Reid that plans to merge police forces across England and Wales had been dropped. The decision was proposed after concern that smaller forces were failing to cope with high profile investigations and counter-terrorism operations.

The report argues that Home Office targets for local police forces are still to heavy-handed and can distort a concentration on local priorities that may be different to the national focus.

Your Police or Mine?, written by Anthony Brand, argues that central control can leave some communities feeling that local police are not dealing with their concerns and targeting the wrong areas.

The report does praise a number of Government proposals to bring local citizens closer to police, including the introduction of Community Support Officers and Community Safety Partnerships. However it argues that if local political leaders have little control over policing policy, citizens will continue to feel alienated from an unaccountable local police force.

It also rejects the recent Conservative Party proposal of introducing elected police sheriffs arguing that it is better to coordinate local policing strategy with other local service priorities with Council Leaders visibly responsible, rather than have a separate free-standing elected lead.

In the report, Anthony Brand argues:

“The modern police force has become detached from society, bogged down with bureaucracy and responsive to central policy rather than local need. Central Government crime targets can distort priorities and have little impact on altering the behaviour of policing on the ground”.

“Rather than introduce a new layer of bureaucracy and potential political conflict, we can use existing agencies and models of accountability to strengthen the role of local authorities and local Leaders in policing”

“Leaders and local councils are directly accountable to their electorate and so their performance (or lack of it) has a tangible outcome – re-election. This ultimate accountability ensures that communities are consulted and that policy responses meet local concerns, something that the public feel is too often missing from the existing police structure”.

Download this Paper

Reducing Re-offending: Creating the right framework

editor — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 08:51:01 +0000

Government plans to centralise offender management risks re-offending rates according to a new think tank pamphlet.

The New Local Government Network (NLGN) has said that the Offender Management Bill, which is debated in the House of Lords on Tuesday, “risks being insensitive to local needs” and may exclude the local knowledge of councillors in commissioning probation services.

In a pamphlet published today the think tank argues that local guidance and expertise is vital in reducing rates of reoffending, particularly given that “the vast majority of crime is committed in the offender’s local area”. The think tank points to evidence in Sheffield that 50% of crime committed happens within two miles of the offender’s home.

The Offender Management Bill will introduce greater contestability into the probation service by allowing private and voluntary sectors to run contracts. The reforms will also establish Regional Offender Managers (ROMS) to commission and map offender management.

Whilst the pamphlet, Reducing Reoffending: Creating the Right Framework does not argue against greater contestability, it questions the rationale for moving responsibility from a local to regional level and argues that local government should be given a stronger role in managing offender reduction.

It also develops a framework for ROMS to be integrated within local authority Local Area Agreements and to introduce a duty on new Probation Trusts to co-operate with the local authority, which would help to ensure that offender management was embedded in the strategic planning of all local services.

The pamphlet argues:

“The current proposals draw accountability upwards to national government, through the National and Regional Offender Management Services. No effective argument has been made for this centralisation of responsibility”

“Local authorities have a unique understanding of, and sensitivity to, community needs and attitudes through their responsibility for engaging public opinion. They are thus best placed to create a consensus on policy, and explain where public money is being spent and why”.

“Local government should be given a stronger role in reducing re-offending. It offers transparent and accountable leadership. Rather than looking upwards to national government, offender management should be more locally accountable”.

Download White Paper