
Warnings that police £1.2bn funding shortfall will continue to grow
A projected £1.2 billion shortfall in police funding will continue to grow, leaving forces facing further cuts, police leaders have warned.
Key figures in the service in England and Wales painted a bleak picture after the Chancellor outlined plans for an average 2.3% rise in police spending per year.
Chairman of the National Police Chiefs' Council Gavin Stephens said: 'It is clear that this is an incredibly challenging outcome for policing.
'In real terms, today's increase in funding will cover little more than annual inflationary pay increases for officers and staff.
'Whilst we await further detail on allocation to individual forces, the amount falls far short of what is required to fund the Government's ambitions and maintain our existing workforce.
'A decade of under-investment has left police forces selling buildings, borrowing money and raising local taxes to maintain what we already have, with forces facing a projected shortfall of £1.2 billion over the next two years, which is now expected to rise.
'This is against a backdrop of increasing crime rates, with new and escalating threats from organised crime and hostile states, and more offenders being managed in the community as a result of an overstretched criminal justice system.
'Cutting crime isn't just about officer numbers, we need specialist skills and people, supported with the right systems and technology, to better protect communities.
'We fully support the Government's drive to cut crime and grow officer numbers, but for these to succeed, investment in policing must live up to the ambition.'
Speaking to journalists on Wednesday afternoon, Norfolk Chief Constable Paul Sanford said police forces have increasingly relied on borrowing money to balance the books, and the cost of debt is expected to go up by 49% in the next three years.
The 2.3% announced by the Government covers last year, which includes national insurance contributions and pay awards already granted, leaving a 1.7% increase in funding for this spending review period, he said.
It will be decided in December how the money will be shared between the 43 forces in England and Wales, and the pay settlement to be given to officers is also not yet known.
Mr Sanford, who is head of the finance co-ordination committee of the National Police Chiefs Council, said he is concerned that some forces have underestimated the cost of pay for the coming year.
He added: 'It will be incredibly difficult for the commitment to deliver the additional 13,000 neighbourhood police officers to be delivered within this funding envelope.'
Acting national chairwoman of the Police Federation, Tiff Lynch, accused the Chancellor of failing to listen to police officers or the home secretary in the lead up to the review.
She said: 'This spending review should have been a turning point after 15 years of austerity that has left policing, and police officers, broken.
'Instead, the cuts will continue and it's the public who will pay the price.
'As rank-and-file officers kit up for night duty this evening, they'll do so knowing exactly where they stand in the Government's priorities.
'It is beyond insulting for cabinet ministers to call on police to 'do their bit' when officers are overworked, underpaid, and under threat like never before.
'They are facing blades and bricks, managing mental health crises while battling to protect their own, and carrying the weight of trauma and financial stress home with them every day.'
The Police Federation claims that police pay has fallen by more than 20% in real terms since 2010, while the number of crimes allocated to each officer has risen by a third.
'We will lose 10,000 experienced officers a year to resignation by the end of this spending review period, driven out by poor pay and unacceptable working conditions,' she added.
'This Chancellor hasn't listened to police officers. She hasn't listened to the home secretary. She hasn't listened to the public's concerns about community safety.
'We await the Government's decision on police pay in the coming weeks.
'But with this spending review, the signs are deeply worrying; the consequences will be even more so. And those consequences sit squarely on the shoulders of the Chancellor and the prime minister.'
Roger Hirst and Joy Allen, who are joint leads for funding for the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, said the funding settlement is not enough to meet government targets to reduce crime and called for changes to the current formula used to decide how much each force gets.
Mr Hirst said there is no funding 'to meet the challenges of evolving threats and the need to invest in more officers and new technologies', and in some areas forces will have to rely on council tax hikes to maintain officer numbers.
Ms Allen said: 'With a lack of capital investment, many forces are still working from ageing buildings, managing vehicle fleets beyond their operational life and relying on outdated digital infrastructure that no longer meets the demands of modern policing.
'While the ringfenced funding for neighbourhood policing is welcome, the broader settlement does not yet go far enough to support delivery of the Government's ambitious policing priorities – halving knife crime, tackling violence against women and girls, and embedding the neighbourhood policing guarantee.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Sky News
15 minutes ago
- Sky News
MPs to vote again on Assisted Dying Bill - will it pass and what has changed?
Why you can trust Sky News A monumental decision for MPs that has been looming on the horizon is now approaching at speed. The Assisted Dying Bill, which would give some terminally ill adults the right to end their lives, is back in the Commons for votes on amendments, with the final vote likely to come next week. There are not many issues like this - literally a matter of life and death - that require MPs to search their consciences and make a personal decision with profound and irreversible consequences. When the Commons first voted on the legislation back in November it passed with a 55 majority. That may seem reasonably comfortable but delving into the numbers reveals that it is flimsier than it first appears. Firstly, it would take just 28 MPs to switch from for to against to bring the bill down. And some of that initial support is quite soft with a significant number voting in favour simply to move the bill to the next stage, have the debate, raise the profile of the issue and make progress on the detail. Now that the final vote is drawing near, they may decide it's gone far enough. There are also the abstainers who could go either way if they do choose to vote at third reading. All this makes the outcome unpredictable, but Sky News has been speaking to MPs to get a sense of where the parliamentary arithmetic is headed. Ahead of the latest round of votes, 20 have confirmed to Sky that their position has changed and although there is movement in both directions it shows that the momentum is mostly one way. Taking this snapshot of MPs, the first time round nine voted for, nine abstained and three voted against. Based on how they say they will vote at the third reading, the numbers are very different - with just four in favour, one abstaining and 15 against. Among those are two ministers, Sir Chris Bryant and Ellie Reeves who are swimming against the tide by declaring that they will now vote in favour. Sir Chris told Sky News: "I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate. I have listened to a lot of the debate… "I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the bill." Of the many more MPs who have withdrawn their support, Conservative George Freeman is one of a handful who have spoken out. He told Sky: "I want to see a law change, I think Kim [Leadbeater]'s done us a favour… "I think government needs to come back with a properly thought through, properly consulted on, possibly by royal commission. This is a big change, so I want to see law change, but I'm no longer going to vote for this bill." And skewing our figures slightly is Labour MP Emma Hardy, who voted both for and against at second reading but has now settled on against. Just that small number of switchers would still see the legislation over the line, but with a reduced majority of 38, and many believe the vote will be much closer. The main issues that are concerning undecided MPs are, firstly, protecting patients from being forced or coerced into ending their own lives. At the beginning of the parliamentary process it was suggested that a high court judge would sign off every assisted death. That has now been changed to a panel of experts, and some MPs are worried that this represents a watering down of safeguards. Kim Leadbeater, who is behind the law change, says this will actually make it safer. Others point to the way the legislation has been brought to parliament, as a private member's bill, which some argue reduces its robustness. They would like to see it return with the full weight of government behind it. And finally, changes to the timeline have raised a lot of eyebrows with the maximum implementation period extended to four has raised concerns that the bill could be passed in this parliament but not delivered, and would become a divisive issue at the next general election. Despite all this there is still a huge amount of support and all eyes will be on the House of Commons as more debate and votes on amendments get underway, giving us the best sense yet of whether this once in a generation legislation still has a chance.


The Herald Scotland
20 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Politics overshadow pain of cuts at Alexander Dennis
This is all the more so when it comes to manufacturing job losses in Scotland, perhaps because of the extent to which this sector has dwindled over the decades. The news that up to 400 jobs are at risk at Falkirk bus manufacturing firm Alexander Dennis is first and foremost a massive blow to the people directly affected. It means there is a very real prospect of hundreds more people joining the ranks of the unemployed in an area hit hard by the closure of Scotland's only oil refinery at Grangemouth, with the loss of around 400 job losses. It is always disheartening when concerns over widespread job cuts come a distant second in the minds of those seeking to score political points from corporate decisions taken to reduce workforces. Yet, coming so soon after further job cuts were announced by oil and gas giant Harbour Energy in Aberdeen, a move blamed by the company on the UK Government's energy profits levy, the proposed cuts at Alexander Dennis have led to an impression of decline in Scottish industry. Opponents of the Scottish Government have been quick to assert that events at Alexander Dennis are yet more evidence of the administration's flawed strategy and failure to protect industry and jobs. These critics repeatedly point to the delays and cost over-runs in the delivery by the nationalised Ferguson Marine shipyard of two ferries to serve the west coast and the time it has taken to find a buyer for Prestwick Airport, which was taken into state ownership in 2013, in justification of these claims (even though Prestwick is now regularly making profits and beginning to build a lucrative air freight operation). The Scottish Government has also come under for fire failing to deliver the amount of "green" jobs in the transition from oil and gas production to renewable energy that ministers forecast. Read more: But in the matter of Alexander Dennis, which has been part of NFI Group since the North American company acquired the firm for £320 million in 2019, any culpability on the part of the Scottish Government seems hard to discern. Winnipeg-based NFI, which is listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange, looks simply to have assessed its costs and concluded that it can save money by consolidating its UK bus body building operations into a single site. Unfortunately for Scotland, the site selected for this work is in Scarborough, not Falkirk. Euan Stainbank, the Scottish Labour MP for Falkirk, said the Scottish Government should have done more to support Alexander Dennis by ordering more buses from domestic manufacturers to serve local networks. He said Greater Manchester had bought more than five times the amount of buses from Alexander Dennis than had been purchased to serve the industry in Scotland. But ultimately in Scotland it is down to private bus companies to decide which manufacturers they wish to buy their vehicles from – not the Scottish Government. Naturally, those fighting to prevent the proposed cuts in Falkirk are urging Scottish ministers to do all they can to stop or limit the amount of redundancies during the consultation period that is now under way. Perhaps there is some financial incentive that can be offered to entice NFI to change its mind, but it is hard to be optimistic. Paul Davies, president and managing director of Alexander Dennis, hinted at the limitations of UK policy when the proposed cuts were announced on Wednesday. 'While stakeholders have been sympathetic of the situation, the stark reality is that current UK policy does not allow for the incentivisation or reward of local content, job retention and creation, nor does it encourage any domestic economic benefit,' he said. 'We have warned of the competitive imbalance for some time and would like to see policy and legislative changes that incentivise the delivery of local benefit where taxpayer money is invested. We strongly believe funding that supports public transport should lead to investment in local jobs, domestic supply chains, technology creation and a recurrent tax base.' There is a certain, painful irony to the situation too. While the Grangemouth refinery was declared by Petroineos to be no longer financially viable in the face of global competition and the drive to net zero, the Alexander Dennis site in Falkirk has been involved in the production of buses powered by electrical batteries and hydrogen, in other words at the cutting edge of modern transport technology. As veteran Scottish politician Kenny MacAskill, leader of the Alba Party, noted, it is 'perverse when Scotland is awash with renewable energy and is the base for the UK's green hydrogen that a company specialising in hydrogen buses is forced to relocate elsewhere'. Sadly, past experience in Scotland suggests that once a company decides to close operations, there is no going back. Petroineos could not be persuaded to change course at Grangemouth, and back in 2009 Diageo proceeded to shut down its Johnnie Walker plant in Kilmarnock despite significant protests at the time. It looks for all the world that the proposed cuts at Alexander Dennis are destined to become another sad chapter in Scottish industrial history, and one that will be especially poignant given the company's proud and long manufacturing legacy.


The Independent
22 minutes ago
- The Independent
Move faster on firms' public contracts ban, Grenfell survivor urges Government
Efforts to ban companies linked to the Grenfell fire from public contracts must speed up, a survivor of the fire has said ahead of the eighth anniversary. Bereaved and survivors of the blaze will gather on Saturday in west London for the annual commemoration of the disaster which claimed 72 lives. It is likely to be the final anniversary which takes place with the tower still standing in its current form, as demolition work could begin in September. Former tower resident Edward Daffarn, who had previously raised safety concerns and predicted a 'catastrophic event' at the tower seven months before the fire, said this year's memorial will be 'all the more poignant' for that reason. But Mr Daffarn is hopeful a new documentary about the blaze, due to air on Netflix next week, will spur Government efforts to take action against companies linked to fire. He told the PA news agency: 'One thing that this documentary needs to do is it needs to put pressure on the Government to ensure that the companies involved are not able to access public funding, and I'm hoping that this documentary will accelerate that process.' The Cabinet office confirmed in February that seven companies were facing possible bans – cladding firm Arconic, insulation firm Kingspan, former Celotex owners Saint-Gobain, fire inspectors Exova, design and build contractor Rydon, architect Studio E and subcontractor Harley Facades. It is understood investigations were launched into all of them in March, looking into whether any engaged in professional misconduct for the purposes of the Procurement Act 2023, potentially leading them to be debarred from public contracts. No timeline has been given for how long it might be before outcomes are known. The final Grenfell Tower Inquiry report, published in September, concluded victims, bereaved and survivors were 'badly failed' through incompetence, dishonesty and greed. The west London tower block was covered in combustible products because of the 'systematic dishonesty' of firms who made and sold the cladding and insulation, inquiry chairman Sir Martin Moore-Bick said. He called out 'deliberate and sustained' manipulation of fire-safety testing, misrepresentation of test data and misleading of the market. Mr Daffarn said the documentary will be the first 'that truly exposes and brings into people's living rooms' the 'cowardice of the corporates and how profit was put before people'. He said; 'I hope that people who watch the documentary come to understand that although Grenfell happened eight years ago, there's a lot that still hasn't been resolved and, as a consequence, the companies involved with Grenfell just seem to want to brush everything under the carpet and carry on making money. 'And I think the documentary clearly exposes how little these companies and individuals have been held to account for their roles in Grenfell.' On Government efforts, which Sir Keir Starmer first announced last September, to debar companies, Mr Daffarn said the process is 'too slow' and bereaved and survivors are 'still waiting' for companies to face consequences. He said anyone left angered by the documentary could avoid buying products from companies criticised in the report to 'make sure that those companies understand that there is a consequence of their actions'. Bereaved and survivors have long campaigned for criminal charges to be brought over the disaster. Police and prosecutors have previously said investigators would need until the end of 2025 to complete their inquiry, with final decisions on potential criminal charges by the end of 2026. The near 10-year wait for justice has been described by families as 'unbearable'. The decision to bring the tower block down was confirmed earlier this year and prompted mixed reaction, with some people feeling their views had not been properly taken into consideration. Sharing his own opinion, and acknowledging the difficulty others feel in seeing the tower regularly, Mr Daffarn said: 'I think the anniversary is made all the more poignant by the fact that this is the last time that we will meet with the tower in situ. 'We haven't got justice yet. It feels wrong to be pulling the tower down while so much remains unresolved.' The Government said while some had hoped the building could remain in place as a reminder of what happened, others had reported this would be 'too painful'. The demolition process is expected to take around two years. A Government spokesperson said: 'As we approach the eighth anniversary of the Grenfell Tower tragedy, our thoughts remain with the bereaved families, survivors and the immediate community. 'This government remains committed to ensuring that what happened at Grenfell is never forgotten, and to delivering the change needed so it can never happen again.'