Policing in the UK

Systemic Failures

It would seem that policing in the UK is a dog's breakfast, and even that's putting it kindly.  We have been shocked by revelations of British police systematically ignoring horrendous crimes and criminal gangs out of political correctness and the values of multi-culturalism.  Apparently the grooming and systematic rape of young girls is a traditional cultural practice in Pakistan, so British police have turned a blind eye to its manifestation in the UK.

But the problems are far deeper and more systemic than we might realise.  The first problem is the prejudice against preventive policing in favour of "fire-brigade policing" (by which we mean attending actual crimes in progress).  Preventative policing now has enormous bureaucratic hurdles.  Take, for example, the bureaucratic morass that clings to the simplest prevention policing action--the issuing of a caution to a petty offender.

James Bartholemew, writing in the Daily Telegraph in July 2001, described the bureaucratic cobweb through which an officer must struggle if he dares to do so much as issue a caution to a suspect.  After making the arrest, he must "call up transport", then queue for space in the station "custody suite", with an average wait of twenty-five minutes.  Then there is the "booking in", the reading of rights, and logging of possessions--another twenty minutes.

Then a solicitor must be found, a process that can take hours.  If the suspect is drunk or injured, he must be seen by a "forensic medical examiner". These are not instantly available.  If the suspect is a juvenile, an adult must be found who can accompany him.  The suspect must be read his rights again in the presence of this "appropriate adult".  No medical examination or interview can take place until the adult is there.

The constable must also write up the arrest according to the elaborate codes of practice in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, knowing that any error could rebound on him in a career-wrecking complaint.  The process is still not over.  The case must gain be referred to senior officers for their judgement on whether a caution is appropriate.  Bartholomew concluded:

the police officer, knowing that five hours of his time could be taken up with bureaucracy if he makes an arrest, has a strong incentive to ignore minor crimes.  That means that there is no chance of getting the much touted "zero tolerance" policing in Britain.  The police just have not got enough five hours to arrest people who write graffiti, vandalise telephone booths, cycle on the pavement and so on.  They have only got time for the big stuff.  The small stuff is "completely tolerated". 

This is one of the reasons why, as the Audit Commission concluded, working a beat of any kind is "close to the bottom rung of the police status ladder".   [Peter Hitchens, The Abolition of Liberty: the Decline of Order and Justice in England (London: Atlantic Books, 2003), p. 108f.]

The perverse outcomes are two-fold: firstly the bureaucratic requirements make an arrest--even for the most minor of offences--so complex and time consuming that there will never be sufficient police resources to deal with all crimes.  Secondly, preventative policing never gets a look in.  This has led  to policing in Britain becoming almost exclusively "fire-brigade policing", by which police focus almost exclusively on interdicting and solving actual crimes in progress.

Police masters and politicians argue against foot based neighbourhood policing focusing upon prevention and community engagement to prevent and report petty crime on the grounds that preventative policing rarely ever interdicts a crime-in-progress.  Police masters are guilty of clapping the telescope to the blind eye.

Modern chief constables, too, often argue that patrolling officers almost never interrupt a crime in progress.  This assertion reveals a complete failure to grasp the beat's deterrent purpose.  You might as well criticise the British nuclear submarine fleet for never having fired its missiles. [Ibid, p. 110]  

Today there are far more police per thousand people than one hundred years ago.   But this vast army is now involved in layer upon layer of bureaucratic compliance, which, in turn, has led to a vicious circle where more resources must focus upon fewer crimes, ignoring petty crime and crime prevention disciplines, leading consequently to more and more criminal offending.  Small crimes grow into big crimes, and big crimes kill.  Meanwhile, government budgets, already stretched by the vast overreach of spending on health, education, and welfare, simply cannot keep up. 

The government that governs most, governs worst.