The end of the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), phasing out the National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) and the introduction of directly-elected individuals (DEIs) are key changes that will mark the “most radical police reform in at least 50 years”.

Announced in the House of Commons earlier this week, Home Secretary Theresa May set out the proposals published in a consultation document, entitled Policing in the 21st century: Reconnecting Police and the People.

Already branded by Shadow Home Secretary Alan Johnson as “infantile drivel”, the document proposes that DEIs – widely opposed by policing bodies – will be introduced by 2012 under the title ‘Police and Crime Commissioner’; that SOCA will be “transformed” into a National Crime Agency (NCA) incorporating the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre and other serious crime responsibilities with a specific Border Policing Command; officers will be “trusted to get on with the job” while members of the public become “community crime fighters”; and a national 101 non-emergency number will be implemented, despite insufficient funding terminating the prospect under the Labour government.

Mrs May said the plans will strengthen the fight against crime and the police service which has become “disconnected from the public”.

Police and Crime Commissioners

With local elections and a Police and Crime Panel expected to sit alongside them, Police and Crime Commissioners are likely to be a costly measure, although this is denied by the Policing Minister.

Mrs May said documents detailing costs will be published in “due course” but said the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners was not about saving money, but local responsibility and reconnecting the public with police.

A Police and Crime Panel will be drawn from locally elected councillors from constituent wards and independent and lay members to oversee the work of the Police and Crime Commissioner. If the panel objects to the Commissioner’s plans or budget they will be free to make their concerns public, or in cases of misconduct, to ask the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) to investigate the Commissioner.

Commissioners will also be subject to Freedom of Information requests in the interest of transparency.

Mr Johnson said that Police and Crime Commissioners do not have support anywhere in the police service and asked Mrs May how much their introduction would cost.

The Association of Police Authorities (APA) has strongly campaigned against DEIs since first proposed by the Conservative Party. APA Chair Rob Garnham said that such dramatic changes required much longer consultation than is being allowed.

“Our main concern continues to be the introduction of untested and un-costed changes to police accountability at a time when we need to be focused on driving down the costs of policing.

“We agree with our Local Government Authority (LGA) colleagues who are calling for a longer consultation period around these far-reaching policy changes. Policing is too important not to take time to get it right.”

All police authorities will be abolished in place of the Police and Crime Commissioners and panels. The Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) will be replaced by the Greater London Authority, although the area will not have an elected commissioner as it is thought to have enough local independence.

The MPA said members will be discussing details of the Government’s proposals for changing the regime of police accountability in London over the next two months.

Current chair of the MPA, Deputy Mayor for Policing Kit Malthouse, welcomed the proposals: “This is brilliant news for crime fighting in London and indeed the UK... Londoners want a say on policing in their city. With this change, the Mayor will become the unequivocal voice of London on crime issues.

“Democratic control of policing has to be at the heart of our society. Without an electoral mandate for policing, there can be no real consent or legitimacy.”

When the prospect of DEIs was first tabled, Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) President Sir Hugh Orde, warned chief officers would resign if they were introduced. Speaking to the Home Affairs Select Committee this week, he said he would not retract from his statement but that he “struggled to see how elected commissioners work”.

“What happens when a chief constable can’t achieve what a commissioner wants?”

He added: “The Government’s strong statement of commitment to operational independence is of critical importance. Chief officers absolutely understand the need to be accountable to local communities – policing’s relationship with the public we serve is the source of its legitimacy and consequently its effectiveness. We now need to examine in detail the Government’s proposals for maintaining operational independence against the practical reality of directly-elected Police and Crime Commissioners.”

Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson told the committee it was not his place to say how police officers should be governed.

“It is for government to decide who is to govern me. It is important to retain operational independence and the space to do my job. Whatever form of DEIs are introduced, they must ensure their priority is not just about the visibility of policing, but also the balance of serious organised crime and the capability to deal with it. Policing is too important to be left to police alone,” he said.

Many leading police figures have expressed concern that the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners would impact on the operational independence of chief officers; the committee said it may seek to ascertain a definition of ‘operational independence’, but Mr Herbert told the committee he believes a definition would be “problematic”.

Mr Herbert told Police Professional that Police and Crime Commissioners will not cost any more than police authorities, although there will be election costs every four years.

He said the cost of Police and Crime Panels will clearly be much less than for police authorities because they will simply fulfil the scrutiny function.

Asked who would perform the complex duties currently performed by members of a police authority, including scrutinising professional standards, airport policing, custody visiting and all the committees they attend, Mr Herbert they would be performed by the Police and Crime Commissioner with a team to support them. The consultation document said the level of support needed would be a matter for each Commissioner.

Many of the proposals will feature in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill, to be published in the autumn.

Ahead of the launch of this Bill, the Government is seeking the views of professionals on the reform programme.

Derek Barnett, President of the Police Superintendents Association of England and Wales (PSAEW) said: “These are radical and far-reaching proposals, however, it is disappointing that an opportunity has been missed to address some of the structural shortcomings of the current 43 forces and how other parts of the criminal justice system impact on the public view of policing.

“The PSAEW will play its part in seeing that the important checks and balances are in place to ensure the new crime agency is a success in tackling serious and organised crime and that, crucially, the operational independence of chief constables is not compromised by new accountability procedures, something we believe passionately about.

“Police officers and staff are the thin blue line protecting society against international and domestic terrorism, serious and organised crime and local and organised crime. We are adamant that a strong and effective police service is not an optional extra for the Government and important as these proposals will be in shaping the future, we will continue to concentrate our efforts on reducing target setting and bureaucracy and maintaining the significant reductions in crime we have delivered in recent years.”

Other key proposals include:

•Cancelling the Senior Appointments Panel, allowing chief constables to appoint their own team.
•Role of Home Office in technology and procurement – additional consultation.
•Supporting increased collaboration.
•A more independent HMIC.