The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Yvette Cooper) With
permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will update the House on
Monday's verdict in the trial of Sergeant Martyn Blake, on the
accountability review into police use of force, and on confidence
in policing. Chris Kaba was killed in Streatham two years ago. His
parents and family of course continue to experience deep grief and
distress. A year ago, Sergeant Martyn Blake was charged with
murder, and on Monday, the...Request free trial
The Secretary of State for the Home Department ()
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will update the House on
Monday's verdict in the trial of Sergeant Martyn Blake, on the
accountability review into police use of force, and on confidence
in policing. Chris Kaba was killed in Streatham two years ago.
His parents and family of course continue to experience deep
grief and distress. A year ago, Sergeant Martyn Blake was charged
with murder, and on Monday, the jury returned its verdict and
Sergeant Blake was acquitted. It is imperative that the jury's
verdict is respected, and that Sergeant Blake and his family are
given the time and space that they will need to recover from what
will have been an immensely difficult experience for them during
both the investigation and the trial.
For an armed police officer to be prosecuted for actions taken in
the course of their duties is very rare, so of course this case
has raised considerable concerns for the public and for the
police. The decisions made on any individual case, be it by the
police, the Independent Office for Police Conduct, the Crown
Prosecution Service, the courts or a jury, are rightly
independent of the Government, so it would not be right for me to
comment further on the details of the case. However, the case has
happened against a backdrop of wider and long-standing concerns
about accountability, standards and confidence—a backdrop in
which police officers and forces have raised long-standing
concerns about the way in which the accountability system
currently operates, particularly in cases of specialist policing
such as firearms and driving, where we ask officers to do
incredibly difficult and dangerous jobs to keep us safe, and a
backdrop of fallen community confidence in policing and the
criminal justice system across the country, with, as the
Metropolitan Police Commissioner said this week, lower confidence
among black communities.
The British policing model relies on mutual bonds of trust
between the public and the police. For our policing model to
work, it is essential that the police have the confidence of the
communities they serve, and that officers have the confidence
that they need to do their vital and often extremely difficult
job of keeping us all safe. Too often in recent times, both
elements of that confidence have become frayed. The Government
have made it a mission to put confidence back into policing.
As part of that work, I want to update the House on new measures
that we will take forward in response to the accountability
review and following ongoing work to respond to issues raised by
the Angiolini and Casey reviews. That will be a package of
reforms to rebuild confidence for police officers and for
communities, to tackle the unacceptable delays and confusion in
the system, and to ensure that the complexity of specialist
operations is considered at an early stage and that the highest
standards are upheld and maintained.
Twelve months ago, the previous Government launched a review into
the accountability systems for police use of force and police
driving. The previous Home Secretary set out an interim response
in March, which the Labour party supported, and I welcome his
work. The review was not completed by the election, and although
we have continued to draw on evidence from police and civil
society organisations, we were unable to say more publicly in the
run-up to the trial, so today I will update the House.
The accountability review found that the current system for
holding police officers to account is not commanding the
confidence of either the public or the police. Accountability and
misconduct proceedings are too often plagued by delays stretching
for years, which is damaging for complainants, police officers
and police forces alike. The system has become more complex, with
confusion over multiple thresholds for different investigations,
and a lack of clarity, especially on specialist capabilities.
There are also wider concerns about the misconduct system. The
focus when things go wrong can end up being entirely on the
decisions of the individual officer, so system failings such as
poor training, unmanageable caseloads or wider force practices
are not sufficiently considered or followed up, meaning that too
little changes. At the same time, as we saw following the Casey
and Angiolini reviews, in cases where someone is not fit to be a
police officer, it is too hard for forces to remove them, and
communities feel that no one is held to account. The public must
be able to expect that when officers exceed the lawful use of
their powers or fail to meet proper standards, there will be
rapid and robust processes in place to hold them to account.
Police officers who act with integrity and bravery to keep us
safe each day need to know they have strong public support. If
officers lack the confidence to use their powers, following their
training and the law, public safety is put at risk.
Let me turn to the policy measures. First, we will take forward
the three measures proposed by the previous Government in March
to strengthen and speed up the system. We will align the
threshold for the referral of police officers from the
Independent Office for Police Conduct to the Crown Prosecution
Service to that used by the police when referring cases involving
members of the public. Currently the threshold is lower for
police officers—that is not justified. We will allow the IOPC to
send cases to the CPS where there is sufficient evidence to do
so, instead of having to wait for a final investigation report.
And we will also put the IOPC victims' right-to-review policy on
a statutory footing to ensure that there is an appeal mechanism
for bereaved families when a decision is made not to seek a
charging decision.
Then we will go further. When officers act in the most dangerous
situations on behalf of the state, it is vital that those
officers and their families are not put in further danger during
any subsequent legal proceedings. We will therefore introduce a
presumption of anonymity for firearms officers subject to
criminal trial following a police shooting in the course of their
professional duties, up to the point of conviction. We will also
ensure that the highly specialist nature of particular policing
tactics and tools is reflected in relevant investigative
guidance. That includes ensuring that in investigations of
police-driving incidents, evidence from subject-matter experts
and in-car video footage is considered at the earliest possible
opportunity, and, more widely, that an officer's compliance with
their training and guidance is appropriately taken into account
in investigative decision making.
I also have established a rapid review of two specific areas
where recent legal judgments have meant that we now have
different thresholds for criminal, misconduct and inquest
investigations, adding complexity, confusion and delay to the
system. In particular, that review will consider the legal test
for use of force in misconduct proceedings, and the threshold for
determining short-form findings of unlawful killing in inquests.
The independent review will be conducted by Tim Godwin and Sir
Adrian Fulford, and will report jointly to me and the Lord
Chancellor by the end of January.
I have asked for further work to be done on timeliness, standards
and misconduct procedures as part of our wider policing reforms.
My right hon. Friend the Attorney General has invited the
Director of Public Prosecutions to examine the CPS guidance and
processes in relation to charging police officers for offences
committed in the course of their duties. Following calls from
civil society organisations, we will ask the College of Policing
to establish a national “lessons learned” database for deaths or
serious injuries arising from police contact or police pursuits,
so that when tragic incidents occur, there is a responsibility to
ensure that lessons are incorporated into the development of
police training and guidance, and to prevent the repetition of
such events.
To rebuild public confidence in the wider standards regime for
policing, we also need to ensure that there is faster progress in
responding to the findings of the Angiolini and Casey reviews on
vetting and standards. We will therefore take forward in this
parliamentary Session previously agreed proposals to ensure that
officers convicted of certain criminal offences are automatically
found to have committed gross misconduct; to create a presumption
of dismissal where gross misconduct is found; and to change
regulations to enable chief constables to promptly dismiss
officers who fail their vetting—there has been a glaring gap in
the system there for far too long. We will go further to ensure
that standards are upheld: we will ensure that there is a
statutory underpinning for national vetting standards, and
strengthen requirements relating to the suspension of officers
under investigation for domestic abuse or sexual offences.
Finally, we need wider measures to restore confidence in policing
and the criminal justice system across all communities. That must
include further work to take forward the Met's London race action
plan, on which action has already been taken, though the Met
commissioner and the Mayor for London have made it clear that
there is much more work to do. We need progress from the National
Police Chiefs' Council on the national police race action plan.
The Government are also determined to take forward further
measures, ranging from the introduction of neighbourhood policing
to new police force performance standards, to strengthen
confidence in policing in every community across the country.
The measures that I have outlined are practical steps to rebuild
confidence, tackle delays, provide clarity and ensure that high
standards are maintained. For almost 200 years, policing by
consent has been the bedrock of British policing. The Government
are determined to take the necessary action to strengthen public
confidence in the police, and to strengthen the confidence of the
police when they are out on the street every day, doing the
difficult job of keeping us all safe. Those are the twin goals
that we must all work towards. I commend this statement to the
House.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call the shadow Home Secretary.
1.47pm
Mr (Braintree) (Con)
I thank the Home Secretary for advance sight of her statement,
and for the recent Privy Council briefing that I received from
her.
I very much welcome what the Home Secretary has set out. I agree
with almost all of it and disagree with almost none of it. As a
society, we demand that our firearms officers put themselves in
dangerous and difficult situations to protect others. Every
firearms officer in the UK is a volunteer, and although we
rightly value having have a predominantly unarmed police force,
we do of course need a cadre of armed police officers across the
country.
I have had the privilege of visiting the police firearms training
centre in Gravesend, and I have seen at first hand just how
rigorous that firearms training regime is—not just in
marksmanship, but in the use of judgment. Split-second
life-or-death decisions must be made, often in circumstances in
which the risk picture is incomplete and the cost of not acting
is considerably more severe than the cost of acting. In all our
debate and conversation about the use of force by police, that
fundamental truth should be at the forefront of our minds.
As the right hon. Lady said, we rightly expect that all officers
will act with restraint and professionalism at all times, but we
cannot allow circumstances to be created in which officers are
disincentivised from being decisive, or become unwilling to take
the right action for fear of trial by media or a long period of
suspension under investigation.
I am grateful to the Home Secretary for acknowledging in her
statement that when my party was in government—under my
predecessors and led predominantly by my right hon. Friend the
Member for Croydon South () —we initiated a review of the
use of force by police officers and the accountability regime. I
am genuinely grateful that, under the Home Secretary's
leadership, the review is continuing. As she says, giving
confidence to police officers, so that they can act in accordance
with their training and not be penalised for those actions, is
absolutely key. Simultaneously ensuring that the public have
confidence that police officers still have an appropriate
accountability framework is equally important. She made the point
that both those aims are being pursued in the accountability
review that she is taking forward.
The commitment that such investigations will be more speedy is
key. Specifically, it is important that the Home Secretary
continues with the Conservatives' proposal to allow the IOPC to
refer cases to the CPS earlier. Prolonged periods of uncertainty
undermine the confidence of both police officers and the public
they serve. I am pleased to see that the Government are
continuing with our reforms to ensure that when police officers
act in accordance with their training, and in the line of duty,
they are not subject to a lower threshold for prosecutions than
members of the general public. I ask the Home Secretary to
seriously consider ensuring that training in those roles forms a
legitimate part of the defence of officers if and when criminal
prosecutions are brought forward.
I particularly welcome the move to introduce a presumption of
anonymity for firearms officers subject to criminal trial
following a shooting. We now know that Chris Kaba was involved
with a violent gang, and that Sergeant Blake and his family
had—and still have—a well founded fear of violent reprisals. That
fear was amplified when Sergeant Blake's name was put in the
public domain.
In the light of the review by Dr Gillian Fairfield, what further
recommendations is the Home Secretary minded to take forward?
Does she recognise that in the era of social media, all people of
public profile, including Members of this House, should be very
thoughtful and careful about making public statements when facts
are unknown or contested? The police should know instinctively
that they will have the backing of both their chain of command
and the politicians involved in their governance, at all levels,
when they do the right thing at our behest, and that they will be
backed by their chain of command even if those actions are not
popular or convenient. We have too often seen police leadership
bend to inappropriate levels of public pressure.
In conclusion, I welcome the statement from the Home Secretary,
and her commitment to taking forward the reforms of the police
accountability review. Conservative Members will work
constructively with her to ensure that the appropriate balance is
struck to reinforce confidence in policing, and the confidence of
police.
I thank the shadow Home Secretary for his response. I hope that
there will be widespread agreement on both sides of the House on
the importance of these issues, which go to the heart of the
British tradition of policing by consent. All of us want to know
that there is proper accountability for decisions that police
forces and officers make, but also that the police have the
confidence to take what are sometimes the most difficult
decisions of all to keep the rest of us safe.
The shadow Home Secretary is right that firearms officers have to
deal with some of the most difficult parts of policing, sometimes
having to make split-second decisions in fast-moving and
difficult circumstances that none of us would want to be in.
Frankly, if any of us were in those situations, we would want to
know that there were firearms police officers there to protect
and support us.
In the UK, police officers discharging firearms is very rare,
particularly compared with other countries. That reflects the
nature of our unarmed policing tradition, as well as the
professionalism and training of the police, and the different
ways in which they manage often very difficult situations, but of
course they need to know that when they follow their training and
operate within the law, they will have our support for the
difficult decisions that they have to take, and will not find
their lives upturned as a result. The anonymity provisions are
important, and I hope that they will have support from the whole
House. The Government want to bring in the presumption of
anonymity in the forthcoming crime and policing Bill.
The shadow Home Secretary also raised the issue of training. I
want that to be looked at when the investigative guidance is
updated; that way, it can be addressed relatively quickly to
ensure that issues around police driving and training more widely
are taken into account in early investigative decisions before
cases are pursued.
On the Fairfield review, we are taking forward further measures,
and will look, in wider policing reforms, at how the IOPC needs
to work. It is important that we continue to have an independent
process. That has to be set against the backdrop of the wider
policing reforms that are needed to ensure that we strengthen
confidence for both officers and communities. That is how we will
maintain for the new generation the proud British tradition of
policing by consent.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call the Mother of the House, .
Ms (Hackney North and Stoke
Newington) (Lab)
First, I express my sympathy for Chris Kaba's family and his
mother. Whatever he was or did, he was her son, and she deserves
our sympathy and respect. I also acknowledge my hon. Friend the
Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (), who has worked hard to
support the family in challenging circumstances. In the past few
days there has been an avalanche of information about Chris Kaba,
but I say to those who are asking why that information was not
made available to the jury: that was the decision of the judge,
and they should put their complaints to him.
The Home Secretary will know that over the years there have been
a series of deaths at the hands of the Metropolitan police that
have led to deep unhappiness and even riots. One death that comes
to mind is that of Cynthia Jarrett in 1985, who died of a heart
attack when four policemen burst into her house, and whose death
triggered the Broadwater Farm riots. Does the Home Secretary
accept that nothing could be more damaging for police-community
relations than if the idea took hold that in some way the police
were above the law?
I thank my right hon. Friend for her points. I know that she has
worked on and addressed these issues over many years, and how
important she sees them as being. She is right to raise concerns
around incidents where lives are lost, and to recognise the
distress that will be felt by Chris Kaba's mother and family. I
also recognise the work that my hon. Friend the Member for
Clapham and Brixton Hill () has done to support the
family in difficult circumstances.
My right hon. Friend makes an important point: at every stage in
the process, these decisions have to be for the independent
judiciary, the courts and the police prosecutors. Our role in
this House is to provide the framework within which those
individual decisions are then made, but I also agree that
ultimately, all these measures have to have the confidence of
communities across London and across the country. If they do not,
that proud British tradition of policing by consent is lost,
which is deeply damaging for police officers and policing, as
well as for all our public safety.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.
(Hazel Grove) (LD)
I also thank the Home Secretary for advance sight of her
statement.
Any case in which a young person's life is cut short is a
tragedy, and my thoughts are with all those who are impacted by
this awful situation. It is crucial that we in this place respect
the judiciary and their right to make decisions without political
interference. However, a case like this one does not happen in a
vacuum—we must remember the wider context. As Baroness Casey said
in her review, black Londoners are “under-protected and
over-policed”. A huge and radical step is required to regain
police legitimacy and trust among London's black communities.
Those findings cannot and should not be ignored, which means
working together to rebuild community relationships and trust in
the police, something that is vital to the very fabric of
policing by consent.
With that in mind, I welcome the Home Secretary's commitment to
pick up the accountability review. When it comes to firearms
officers' accountability when operating under enormous pressure,
ambiguity benefits nobody—not police officers, and certainly not
our communities. I would, however, welcome more details from the
Home Secretary about how those communities with the least trust
in the police, especially ethnic minority communities, will be
consulted in this review. These questions extend past the Met, so
will other police forces—including my own Greater Manchester
police—be involved in the review, and will the Home Secretary
commit to commission an independent review of the implementation
of the Casey review's recommendations? Rebuilding trust in the
police has got to be our priority, for the sake of our whole
community and for ethnic minority communities, and for the
officers who are working hard to keep us safe in difficult
circumstances.
I thank the hon. Member for the important points she has made.
She is right that lack of clarity, uncertainty, and the long and
damaging delays that we have had in the system benefit no one,
but she is also right to say that part of the sensitivity around
this case—part of its long-standing backdrop—is the much lower
confidence in policing among black Londoners and the different
levels of confidence around race. That was highlighted as part of
the Casey review, and it is why the Met police have set out a
race action plan, but both the Met commissioner and the Mayor of
London have been clear that there is significant additional work
to do. If any measures do not have the confidence of all
communities that the police serve, that will ultimately undermine
the crucial principle of policing by consent.
We continue to work to ensure that some of the measures
recommended by the Casey review that have national implications,
as well as the Angiolini review, are taken forward as part of
this package. Those include issues with vetting and misconduct
processes—it is important that we make progress on those
measures, as well as on some of the issues that arise from the
accountability review. We will also ensure that all communities
are involved in the way in which measures are taken forward.
(Clapham and Brixton
Hill) (Lab)
The fatal shooting of Chris Kaba caused pain to his family and
considerable fear and anger, not only in my community but across
London. This House must understand that the concerns being raised
are not anti-police, but pro-accountability. We must respect our
legal processes, and it is extremely rare that police officers
ever face such prosecution. The Home Secretary clearly agrees
that while police officers work under exceptional pressures, any
loss of life following police contact must be properly
investigated, so is she concerned by comments from the
Metropolitan police commissioner regarding disciplinary
processes, including that firearms officers should be exempt from
criminal charges over fatal shootings? That would do nothing to
rebuild broken trust and confidence, particularly within the
black community, who have been disproportionately impacted.
Following the Angiolini and Casey reviews, is less accountability
the route that the head of the Met should be asking for?
I thank my hon. Friend for her question—as I said, she has worked
hard to represent her communities. It is clear that there must be
a proper framework for legal accountability for police forces and
individual officers. There must always be investigations where
there is loss of life following police contact—that is always
appropriate. Although we want investigations to take place much
more swiftly, all the police chiefs whom I have talked to as part
of this work feel strongly that there must be a clear
accountability system, which provides confidence to communities
and to police officers who make difficult decisions in the line
of duty. Police, Parliament and the public will recognise that we
need to have the confidence of communities, as well as police
officers who are confident that they will be able to do their
job.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
I call the Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee.
Dame (Staffordshire Moorlands)
(Con)
I thank the Home Secretary for her statement and for advance
sight of it. Although the measures that she has announced are
welcome, many of them will take time to introduce. In the
meantime, what is she doing to ensure confidence throughout the
system, and will she ensure that the Home Affairs Committee is
kept updated on progress in making these welcome changes?
I thank the Chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee for those
important points. We are working at pace: we have set out planned
legislation in the King's Speech—the crime and policing Bill—and
there are a series of areas where we believe these measures can
be taken forward as part of that process. In some areas, we may
be able to make progress through regulations; in others, it is
simply about changing the guidance. We have set out some
timetables as part of the briefing, which will be made public.
Everybody who wants more detail on the individual measures will
be able to find that information on the Home Office website. This
afternoon I will ensure that all those details are sent to the
Home Affairs Committee.
(Vauxhall and Camberwell
Green) (Lab/Co-op)
I thank the Home Secretary for her statement, and I also commend
my hon. Friend the Member for Clapham and Brixton Hill (). Shortly after the
tragic shooting, she organised a meeting with the family of Chris
Kaba. No matter what we think about an individual, we must
remember that for any parent, burying their child is tragic; I
met Prosper and Helen, and the pain in their eyes at what had
happened will not leave me. I also pay tribute to our officers
across Lambeth and Southwark, who work very hard with our
community to build community relations. In our borough, often
some of the issues are caused by police officers who come in from
outside, but the police officers who know our patch work very
hard. Against the backdrop of longer-standing concerns about
accountability, and following the Casey review's findings on the
issue of institutional racism, will the Home Secretary continue
to hold the Met police to account for their progress on the race
action plan?
My hon. Friend makes an important point: we need to see progress
on the Met police's race action plan, which responds to serious
findings in the Casey review. That review raised wider issues as
well, but it is essential that that action is taken. Both the
Mayor and the Met commissioner have made strong commitments to
ensure progress continues to be made, and I know that London MPs
will also want to see that action taken. We cannot have reports
released without follow-up.
Sir (Stone, Great Wyrley and
Penkridge) (Con)
I very much welcome the Home Secretary's statement. There is a
lot of concern in my constituency about the fact that Sergeant
Blake was prosecuted in the first place. We are all conscious of
the amazing work of our wonderful police to keep us safe every
day, so will the Home Secretary set out in more detail what
additional protections will be introduced to ensure that our
police are protected as they go about their job of protecting
us?
I thank the right hon. Member for his question. Under the reforms
that we have set out following wide examination of the different
evidence, where there are investigations—and there will need to
be investigations in individual cases—they can happen much more
speedily. The threshold for referring cases from the Independent
Office for Police Conduct to the CPS is no longer lower than it
is for members of the public when they are investigated for a
crime. That is not justified or appropriate, and it is right that
that threshold should be brought back in line.
We also want to ensure that issues of training and specialist
capabilities are taken into account at a very early stage in
investigations, and we will be revising the guidance for
investigations to ensure that happens. The Attorney General has
asked the Director of Public Prosecutions to review CPS guidance
on charging in cases where officers use force in the line of
duty, as I said in my statement. There is a series of areas where
we are ensuring that the system can work more effectively, but,
crucially, this is about raising confidence for the public as
well as for police officers.
(Liverpool Riverside)
(Lab)
I thank the Home Secretary for her statement. I also send my
condolences to the family, friends and loved ones of Chris Kaba,
particularly this week while the media are using racist gang
tropes to justify his killing.
Some 1,900 people have died in police custody since 1990. The
police have protections, while our black communities are
over-policed and under-supported. Will the Home Secretary give
assurances that we and our communities will be kept safe and that
the police, who already have the protections they need, will not
be given extra protections?
The framework I have set out is about ensuring a proper system of
accountability for police forces and police officers—I think that
all police officers will support it as immensely important—for
how they use their powers. However, we also must tackle the
hugely long delays, and the complexity, in the system. The
different thresholds and the concerns that specialist
capabilities, such as driving and firearms, are not taken into
account at an early stage in investigations, end up with serious
problems much later, as firearms officers or other police
officers feel that they do not have confidence or clarity about
their responsibilities or how they can use their powers. Equally,
communities must not feel that they are being let down because
they do not have timely investigations, and conclusions and
answers, to their concerns.
(Ashfield) (Reform)
Sergeant Blake has gone through two years of living hell for
simply doing his duty and keeping the British public safe. Will
the Home Secretary join us at Reform UK in commending his bravery
to send out a clear message to all our brave police officers that
this place has their backs?
Police officers, who do immensely difficult work across the
country every day to keep us safe, deserve our strong support.
They often show huge bravery in the most difficult circumstances.
I have attended the police bravery awards every year for 14 years
to recognise and support the work that police officers do, often
in the most difficult of circumstances. I think those officers
all believe it is important that we have a system in which
communities can feel confident in the work that police officers
do, and that they as officers can continue to do that work to
keep us safe every single day.
(Telford) (Lab)
I pay tribute to the majority of police officers, who go to work
and do a decent job. Often, police officers themselves are as
disgusted as the general public when misconduct takes place in
police forces. Does my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary agree
that there is a connection between the delays in police
investigations, the delays in the criminal justice system and the
delays in misconduct hearings, and that these things have to be
taken in the round? In my community, we had the case of Dalian
Atkinson, who was killed by a police officer who is now serving
time in prison after using a Taser. Will the review look at the
use of Tasers as part of its work?
We want the College of Policing to be able to set up a lessons
learned database to make sure that action is taken when, for
example, there are deaths or serious injuries following police
contact. Even when such cases are investigated and reforms,
measures or recommendations are made, too often those are not
followed up and are not actually implemented. As a result,
bereaved families can feel badly let down. It is important not
only that we have a clear framework of standards, but that when
things go wrong, a proper system is in place to ensure that
lessons are learned and things can be improved for the
future.
Sir (New Forest East) (Con)
I am sure most fair-minded people will feel that the Home
Secretary has got the balance exactly right, particularly as she
has now brought in the presumption of anonymity. May I draw her
attention to a surprisingly detailed report by the courts
correspondent of the Evening Standard? He seems to have had
access to police intelligence reports about a £10,000 reward
being offered by gangs to identify, and presumably wreak
reprisals against, the sergeant concerned. What is concerning to
me is that a Metropolitan police spokesman says:
“This was investigated and protective measures taken. The
investigation is now closed.”
I would have thought that, if there were intelligence indicating
that a hit was being arranged, the investigation should not be
closed until the perpetrators were themselves arrested.
I thank the right hon. Member for that question. It is clearly
important that police officers who face threats or risks as a
result of the job they do and the difficult situations they find
themselves in because of their work to keep us safe have strong
protection and support. He will know that I cannot comment on an
individual case and certainly not on an individual investigation.
Those are rightly independent operational decisions for police
forces. However, I think more widely that everyone will want to
make sure that officers who do difficult jobs do have the support
that they need.
(Rother Valley) (Lab)
The balance between ensuring that our police have the powers and
tools they need to keep our streets safe and ensuring that they
are not above the law is a delicate one. In that light, I welcome
the Home Secretary's statement, and indeed the response of the
shadow Home Secretary. Does the Home Secretary agree, however,
that some of the comments in the media yesterday—and, indeed,
from Members of the House such as the right hon. Member for
Newark ()—are unhelpful? We need to
consider all the evidence carefully, in a constructive and calm
way, when considering this really important issue, and should not
rush to conclusions on the back of media reports.
My hon. Friend makes an important point. It is an important
British tradition that we respect the rule of law, which means
that individual decisions are made by the police, prosecutors,
the courts and juries independently of anything that the
Government do and independently of anything that politicians do
or say. We all operate within legal frameworks, as you reminded
us at the beginning of the statement, Madam Deputy Speaker. I am
sure all of us would want to respect that, but also to support
all of those independent institutions in the complex and
challenging work that they do. We can set the framework, but they
have to take the individual decisions.
(Eastbourne) (LD)
When I first started my work supporting young people in London to
get out of crime and gangs, 75% of violent crime in London was
committed by people aged under 30 and people in that age group
were four times more likely to be victims of crime themselves.
For the police to get on top of this, there must be restored
confidence between young people and the police, which has been so
eroded in recent years, but we must also invest in community
policing, which was cut so much by the last Government. What will
the Home Secretary do to rectify those things and to give young
people the trust in the police that they need and deserve?
The hon. Member makes an important point, because often when we
talk about trust and confidence for communities, young people,
who are frequently those who have the most contact with the
police, feel left out of those discussions. It is important that
they, too, have confidence in the police to keep them safe.
Restoring neighbourhood policing and having back in our
communities police officers who know the local area, and whom
young people can get to know, is one of the most important and
powerful ways to rebuild trust and make sure that everybody has
confidence. That is also how we prevent crime and damage in
communities.
(Dover and Deal) (Lab)
It is important that such officers remain anonymous until
conviction, and I fully back this statement. As the Home
Secretary will know, it is not just the officers facing trial who
have to go through intimidation and threats, but their families.
Justice is essential, as is protecting our brave officers. Will
the Home Secretary join me in acknowledging the huge toll that
these policing roles can take not just on officers, but on their
families?
I agree. Families often face some of the most challenging burdens
and pressures, and we hear from police officers that their
concern about the impact on their families often affects them
strongly. That is why the presumption of anonymity to the point
of conviction is really important to support families, as well as
officers.
(Boston and Skegness)
(Reform)
First, I put on the record my support and gratitude to all our
frontline police officers in the firearms departments for the
difficult, challenging and high-pressure work that they do,
including Sergeant Blake and his family. There is much to commend
in your statement, Home Secretary, so I welcome it, particularly
the anonymity for officers facing investigation and the timeline
for the review, which is really important.
Two critical words came up in your statement: “confidence” and
“accountability”. There is a lot of concern that confidence in
the Independent Office for Police Conduct and in the Crown
Prosecution Service is falling. In fact, among police officers,
particularly those in the firearms departments, confidence is
frankly collapsing, and that is not a good place to be. Even the
jury in the Chris Kaba case wrote a letter to the judge—they
wanted it to be read out, but he decided not to—in which they
expressed astonishment and a lack of confidence in the IOPC and
the CPS. The point about accountability relates not just to
police officers, but to the IOPC and the CPS. Does the Home
Secretary still have confidence in the leadership of the IOPC and
the CPS, or should that be changed?
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
Order. Before the Home Secretary responds, I remind Members that
when they use the word “you”, they are speaking to the Chair.
Please be short and sharp, Home Secretary, so that we can get
everybody in.
Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. The accountability review found
that the accountability system does not currently have confidence
among communities or policing. That is why we are setting out
very practical reforms. It is important that the work of the IOPC
and the CPS is done independently of politicians, police officers
and communities. They have to take decisions within the law and
within the framework that Parliament sets. That is why this
review and this announcement are about how we amend that
framework so that they can do their jobs.
(Portsmouth North) (Lab)
Last Saturday in my constituency of Portsmouth North and
Paulsgrove, I held a joint coffee morning with the local police
to give residents an opportunity to raise concerns directly with
officers and to encourage people to sign up to the Let's Talk
platform, which allows Portsmouth police to share information and
concerns directly with the public. Does the Home Secretary agree
that one way to rebuild public confidence in policing is to
restore visible local patrols and rebuild the community policing
that has been eroded over many years?
I agree with my hon. Friend. Neighbourhood policing has to be at
the heart of restoring or rebuilding the confidence of
communities in policing.
Dr (Bexhill and Battle)
(Con)
I welcome much of what the Home Secretary has said. The police
officers we are talking about, including Martyn Blake, are often
deployed to protect local communities from violent criminal gang
members, as he was doing. Does the Home Secretary agree that for
a local MP to describe one such violent gang member as a
“well-loved” member of the community, and for the Runnymede Trust
to describe as unaccountable a police officer who was subject to
a full court hearing and process undermines, rather than builds,
community confidence?
It is really important that we have the full confidence of
communities in the police and the confidence of police to be able
to do their jobs. Decisions on individual cases are rightly for
independent organisations, whether that be the courts or the
misconduct process, but those have to operate within a framework
and it is our responsibility to make sure that the framework is
right. It is currently not right and that is why we have set out
the reforms within which those organisations need to take
decisions.
(Pendle and Clitheroe)
(Lab)
I thank my right hon. Friend for her timely and important
announcement. My former colleagues in the police service up and
down our country run towards danger on the public's behalf,
pursue dangerous criminals on the public's behalf and—very
rarely, as we have heard today—have to use lethal force on the
public's behalf. Does the Home Secretary agree that if our police
officers do not have the confidence to do those things, the
law-abiding public will ultimately suffer?
My hon. Friend is right. We must maintain everyone's
confidence—the police must have confidence, as must communities.
Ultimately, if communities do not have confidence, policing is
undermined, but if police officers do not have confidence, our
public safety is undermined, because it means that they cannot do
their job. That is why we have put confidence at the heart of our
mission for safer streets.
(Weald of Kent) (Con)
I, too, welcome the Home Secretary's statement and plan. Firearms
officers are highly skilled specialists, and my constituents are
concerned that cases like this one will disincentivise our brave
police officers from taking the additional responsibility of
carrying firearms. Will she comment on what she is hearing about
the recruitment and retention of firearms officers, so that we
can reassure the public that armed police officers will be
available, should we need them?
The hon. Member makes an important point. As part of the
accountability review, concerns were raised around recruitment
and retention, especially from people concerned about the impact
on their families. That family issue is so important. That is why
we have the presumption of anonymity to the point of conviction
and some of the wider reforms, which will, I hope, maintain
confidence among communities and police officers.
(Doncaster East and the Isle
of Axholme) (Lab)
An armed robbery was reported at our new Thorne banking hub last
week; I send my warmest thoughts to the staff who endured that
terrible event. Will my right hon. Friend join me in thanking the
officers who responded to the situation? Does she also agree that
public confidence in policing will grow with more patrols in
neighbourhoods in the future?
I agree with my hon. Friend that people feel more confident if
they know who their local police officers are. That builds a
sense of confidence, which also helps to prevent crime.
(Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Secretary of State very much for her statement and
for the confidence that she is clearly putting in her police
officers. We all admire their courage and bravery in what they
do. Policing is devolved in Northern Ireland, as she knows, but
the ramifications of this decision could be far-reaching. Last
week, I had the opportunity to speak to the Chief Constable of
the Police Service of Northern Ireland, and this issue was part
of our conversation.
Every police officer in Northern Ireland carries a weapon because
of the high threat levels from terrorism. Their lives are on the
line every day they are on the beat—that is the life of a police
officer in Northern Ireland—so it is very important that we
recognise the threats. Will the Home Secretary have discussions
with the Chief Constable and the Policing and Finance Ministers
in Northern Ireland about how we can move forward on these issues
to protect our police officers? That is critical.
I thank the hon. Member for the question. Interestingly, some of
the accountability issues are very similar or the same for
England and Wales and for Northern Ireland, but there are
differences in some areas. We have looked at those and I hope
that they will be looked at further as part of the ongoing work
and reviews that I have raised. However, this is all
fundamentally about how we make sure that we raise standards and
raise confidence across the board, including for officers and
communities.
(Rugby) (Lab)
Does my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary agree that the
overwhelming majority of police officers are a credit to our
communities and our country? In my constituency of Rugby, I have
always found that the commitment of senior and rank-and-file
officers to protecting the public and taking on criminals is
matched by their understanding that they must be held to the
highest standards. Does she agree that our responsibility as
politicians in this House and in our constituencies is to help
all involved in achieving both those important and interlinked
objectives?
I agree. Police officers across the country do a totally amazing
job. It is often a difficult job: they keep us safe, and they
have to face difficult situations that none of us would want to
be in. They also believe in high standards, which is why so many
police officers and police chiefs want to ensure that the system
is more effective at rooting out those who badly fail those
standards and who should not be serving in the police.
Police officers want to maintain high standards, but they also
want to know that where officers are doing their duty to keep us
safe and operating in line with their training and the law, they
have our strong support. We must ensure that confidence works
both ways: that we have confidence in policing and that the
police have the confidence to do their difficult job of keeping
us safe.
(Barking) (Lab)
rose—
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms )
Order. The hon. Member was not here for the absolute beginning,
but she made it just in time for the opening statements, so I
will call her.
I am grateful, Madam Deputy Speaker. Building trust and
confidence in the police requires time and honest reflection
about the challenges, alongside meaningful steps to improve
things. Often, when there are high-profile incidents, there is a
knee-jerk reaction and a national debate is sparked. Does the
Home Secretary agree that we must avoid knee-jerk reactions, that
there needs to be a long-term commitment to building trust and
confidence, and that trust and confidence are built through
effective policing not just for serious violent crime, but for
so-called low-level crimes such as antisocial behaviour and
theft?
I agree that some of the issues around confidence are actually
about the responsiveness of police and about having neighbourhood
policing and a local response. My hon. Friend is right. We need
to respond to major reviews such as the Casey review and the
Angiolini review, which found failings around standards, systems
and vetting, for example. We must ensure that everything we do
responds to those broader reviews, as well as recognising
difficult individual incidents, to boost confidence.
|
