Everyone seems to accept now that there will be significant cuts in public spending as the country tries to break the shackles of recession.  Everyone that is, accept the politicians who appear more worried about jockeying for a position ahead of a General election next Spring. 

Most people connected with the Public Services would privately acknowledge having concerns over the effect these cuts will have on their ability to serve the community. Regrettably most of those whose views if openly expressed would make others sit up and listen are reluctant to do so for fear of upsetting their political paymasters. Instead they rely upon on the well worn mantra of best value- “We must try to find ways to achieve the same or an even better service for less money”.

But is anyone fooled by that kind of spin anymore?  It is increasingly common to hear ‘Joe Public’ complaining about the service or lack of it, afforded by their police, hospitals or schools. Of course there are ‘good news’ stories –the politicians ensure we never miss them! But the sad reality is that they are hugely outnumbered by the bad. People aren’t silly-whilst they’ve never really had a say in what the priorities should be, experience has led them to adjust their expectations of what will happen when they call police, are admitted to hospital or visit their council office. As a result what would have previously been seen as a ‘bad’ experience has now just become the norm.

No one doubts the commitment, industry,  willingness  and desire of all those working within the public services, including my members, to maintain quality in the face of an ever mounting squeeze on resources but  people are beginning to question just how good the ‘service’ they pay for actually is. 

We must of course face reality -the black hole that has appeared in the country’s finances has to be plugged somehow- cuts in public spending are inevitable. Taxpayers have a simple choice, pay more or expect less. What concerns me is the lack of strategic direction provided to date by the Westminster politicians and in the case of our own service, the Met Police Authority -around how the unavoidable cuts are best achieved whilst preserving as far as possible our core functions, i.e. the ones the public value most . They seem far too busy seizing opportunities to publicly criticise and apportion blame mainly it seems to score a political point, preferring to stir up controversy rather than being the steady hand on the tiller we so badly need in order to negotiate these troubled waters.

For too long our Police Authority have been far too willing to condemn us whilst at the same time being reluctant to accept their responsibility for events, rather than ensuring, as they should be, that we have ‘an effective and efficient police service for all London’s communities.’  They seem to singularly forget that the Police Federation also have a statutory duty to work for and towards the ‘efficiency of the service’. However it is only very recently that have they started to consult with us in a meaningful way and they still have some way to go until we feel truly valued for our contribution.  They seem to perceive us more as trouble makers rather than potential solution provider s. We understand the pressures of making difficult and unpopular decisions but our plea to them is allow us to work with you to find workable solutions that best serve Londoners and our members.

By way of example -during the 80’s & 90’s the Police Service and the MPS in particular seemed to happily accept responsibility and the associated funding for an increasing range of what I consider to be ‘Off Piste’ – non-core activity. I have repeatedly voiced our concerns that as this additional funding has reduced or even disappeared,  these peripheral roles are being maintained to the detriment of the values espoused in the ‘Primary purpose of Police’.

To that end in 2005 I asked the MPS if they had any idea of the multitude of ‘weird and wonderful’ jobs being undertaken by the inspecting ranks in the ‘Met’. I challenged them to conduct a proper review of all the positions held in the hope that it may identify some slack within our operation that could then be redeployed for the benefit of uniform and CID colleagues on the front line -those with an acute responsibility for providing London with a 24-7 emergency service. At last I’m pleased to report that just such a review is now being conducted and we are pleased to have been asked to contribute to it.

In these difficult times our priority must be maintain core functions. The public will understand if some of the ‘pink and fluffy’ bits of policing get parked for a bit. They will be a lot less sympathetic if we aren’t able to respond effectively when they really need us.