Leading article: How not to cut corners in the police

Tuesday 25 October 2011 13:11 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

If there is one institution which ought to be transparently accountable to the public it serves, it should be the police. Yet, as we report today, there are thousands of "private" officers, hired from security companies who do not come under the official watchdog, the Independent Police Complaints Commission. Some chief constables ensure that "private" staff are covered by IPCC jurisdiction. Many do not.

The loophole has come to light, as most loopholes do, because of a pattern that started to emerge when things went wrong. Several investigations into injuries in custody, for instance, turned up the involvement of "private" officers over whom the IPCC has no authority.

If the use of what are essentially agency workers by the police were a temporary phenomenon, or one clearly in decline, then the situation would be serious enough. But the numbers are expected to rise because of the spending cuts faced by police forces. One way chief constables try to cut costs, while keeping sufficient numbers on the front line, is to outsource specific tasks or take on agency staff to help with particularly demanding investigations.

A similar trend can be seen in the NHS, where agency doctors have increasingly been used to cover nights and weekends, and "nurse assistants" and agency workers routinely supplement permanent staff on hospital wards. Something similar affects teaching, where the number of teaching assistants and supply teachers continues to rise. In all these services, the use of temporary or less qualified staff, means that fewer better-paid professionals are employed.

While such practices may save money in the short term, it is ever more apparent that there are serious downsides, which include falls in accountability and professional standards. What is more, lower efficiency and ballooning agency fees can mean that savings become illusory. As chief constables seek to cut costs without jeopardising public safety, they must be required at the very least to bring all those they employ, even indirectly, under the jurisdiction of the IPCC. Leaving the accountability loopholes in place is a betrayal of the public, as well as a false economy.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in