On the beat | Privatising the police

"We are all in it together!" in times of austerity, say the Tory-led coalition government but with David Cameron chillaxing at Chequers, in reality, it is the public sector workers who are facing the brunt of the cuts and the radical pace of reforms to the services that they provide.

On Wednesday 16 May 2012, the Home Secretary gave her speech at the Annual Conference of The Police Federation of England and Wales.

It was no surprise that Ms May would receive a hostile audience by the thousand or so Federation representatives from across all forces as the police service, as part of the public sector is also facing cuts. A 20 per cent cut has been proposed to its work force which will see 16,000 police officers lose their jobs by the end of this Parliament. The numbers are high but so is the police budget which stands at £14b a year.

The Police Federation agree that cuts need to be made to the police service as the public expenditure on policing is now unsustainable, but their grievances lie with the fundamental changes the Windsor report will bring once implemented.

The reforms will create a new culture of policing, ending the job for life ethos towards a more professional outfit by raising the level of qualifications for those joining as a Constable and introducing a direct entry scheme for talented individuals from the business sector.

However, the level of opposition to such changes during Ms May’s speech is likely to have bruised - if not broken - the special bond between government and police for the first time since 1918, when 10,000 Metropolitan Police Officers went on strike due to poor pay and conditions. The National Union of Police and Prison Officers founded by ex-Inspector John Syme in 1913 and reorganised in 1917 called the strike which led to improvements in pay and conditions.

The enactment of the Police Act in 1919 following the second strike banned the Union and with it the right to strike. The government laid down the law and since 1919 there has been no direct challenge to lift the ban.

But should that change now? I think so, as the challenges faced by policing in the twenty-first century need to be addressed, especially as the government has become fixated with privatising the police which could give private companies 10 to 25 per cent control over police services.

Although, Surrey Police, who are taking part in the Business Partnership Programme, along with West Midlands Police have called for a pause in the timetable to allow for a public consultation to take place over the summer, the shortlist for bidders is still going ahead this Friday.

There does not seem to be a desire to abandon the plans even though the public have already voiced their concerns and now serious questions have been raised over the human rights record of some of the bidders. Do we really want to give the company who built the cell blocks at Guantanamo Bay a stake in our police service?

Under such circumstances no one would criticise the police service if they wished to consider alternative routes to challenge government proposals. Collective action, the traditional weapon of the trade union movement should be an option that is explored. And if a National Union of Police Officers is the answer then a challenge to overturn the ban should be made.

I appreciate that the right to strike would be a last resort for many police officers but that should not deter those who feel that they should have a stake in the future of policing.

If the government is serious about protecting the Office of Constable then instead of privatising the police it should allow the holders of that office the ability to challenge it on an equal footing. The limitations of the Police Federation are evident and as long as there is a ban on Unions, the police service will remain at a disadvantage in negotiations with the government.

The advance of privatisation is a real threat to the future of policing and if the police do not challenge this now they may see that their rights are curtailed even further.