Moving police work to the private sector brings ‘a clear risk of ad hoc, unprincipled outsourcing being unleashed’ according to the Independent Commission into the future of policing. For its full 225-page report, titled ‘Policing for a Better Britain’ click here. For the report in brief with its recommendations, click here.
As for what should be out-sourced to the private sector, the report was not specific and instead spoke in terms of principles. It said ‘functions that rely on trust and legitimacy should normally be carried out by the public police’ and the ‘use of the legal powers of the warranted constable should only be exercised by the public police’. The report said: “The private and third sectors have important and indispensable roles to play in reducing crime and providing security. But in this context, there is a vital public interest in shaping the overall pattern and coherence of policing services that has to be recognised and protected. The state must be the democratic anchor of plural policing provision.”
According to the commission, there is a risk of outsourcing key aspects of policing to the private sector in an ad-‐hoc and unprincipled manner. The commission accused the Government of having made the ‘wrong calls’ and of outsourcing being done as ‘a matter of political choice, not of necessity’. As for crime and disorder reduction partnerships, that came in under Tony Blair, the Commission described them as a success and recommended that the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 needs to be built upon.
The commission did describe public police as one part of what it termed a ‘wider policing system’ including private security guards. The commission made two points regarding private industry. “One is the rise in the numbers employed to provide security in quasi-‐public spaces, such as late night venues and shopping centres, as well as in and around private buildings. The other is the growing number of functions provided by the public police that have been ‘outsourced’ to the private sector. Outsourcing has intensified as budget cuts have forced chief constables to look for ways of making efficiencies. Moreover the government argues that the private sector should be more routinely involved in the provision of policing services. This is a very contentious issue.”
The report asked whether a line can be easily drawn around what should be provided by the public police and what can legitimately be undertaken by the private sector.
Among other parts of the report to do with the private security sector, one of the commission’s members, Baroness Henig, pictured, the former SIA chairman, detailed (on page 121) the Chartered Security Professional qualification (CSyP). While the commission and its report is in the name of Lord Stevens, the former Met Police Commissioner, most of the commission’s hearings were chaired by the Labour working peer Baroness Henig; and a Lib Dem peer, Baroness Harris of Richmond (patron of ASIS UK). The commission also met private firms including G4S (the guard firm’s ‘fiasco’ over the London Olympic security contract shortfall was aired in the report) and KPMG.
Besides, the commission saw potential for private security people in public policing to become associates of the recently-launched College of Policing. Likewise, the Commission thinks that a police officer and police staff (as well as private contractors working for the police) should appear before a professional practice committee for failures in their standards of policing.
For the report in full visit – http://independentpolicecommission.org.uk
