logo
Policing is broken, top officers warn Reeves

Policing is broken, top officers warn Reeves

Telegraph3 days ago

The police service is 'broken' and forces are shedding officers because of funding cuts, Rachel Reeves has been warned.
In a joint article for The Telegraph, the heads of the two bodies that represent regular officers and superintendents say police morale has been left 'crushed'.
As the Chancellor prepares to set police budgets in her spending review, the pair warn that underpaid and overworked officers are leaving in droves, while forces are being left with no choice but to cut their numbers to save money.
The last-minute intervention piles pressure on Ms Reeves, who remains locked in negotiations with Yvette Cooper over the Home Office budget, which includes policing.
On Wednesday, Ms Reeves will reveal the outcome of the spending review, which will set three years of departmental budgets after months of tussles with Cabinet ministers.
Angela Rayner, the Communities Secretary, finally settled her negotiations with the Treasury on Sunday night after pushing for more house-building investment, leaving only Ms Cooper still in talks.
The Telegraph understands that the policing budget will get a real-terms increase in each of the next three years, in a move that Ms Reeves will frame as a boost for tackling crime.
But police sources warned that 'the devil will be in the detail', stressing there could still be a drop in the number of total officers in the years ahead if not enough money is granted.
Nick Smart, the president of the Police Superintendents' Association, and Tiff Lynch, acting national chairman for the Police Federation of England and Wales, have co-written an article for The Telegraph.
In an unusual joint intervention, the pair write: 'The service is in crisis. When a young constable looks down at their payslip and wonders how they'll make rent this month, something is deeply wrong.
'When experienced detectives walk away from decades of service, broken by the demands placed on them, it's the police service itself that's broken.'
They add later: 'Police forces across the country are being forced to shed officers and staff to deliver savings. These are not administrative cuts. They go to the core of policing's ability to deliver a quality service: fewer officers on the beat, longer wait times for victims, and less available officers when crisis hits.'
They also deliver an explicit warning aimed at the Treasury, saying: 'It is against this backdrop that the spending review arrives. This is the moment where political rhetoric must meet practical investment. It is not enough to talk about 'tough on crime'. There must be the funding to match.'
It is just the latest intervention from police leaders, who have launched into a public lobbying effort to try to secure more funds amid fears of cuts in the spending review.
Police chiefs have said that Labour's election pledges to halve violence against women and girls, tackle knife crime and rebuild neighbourhood policing will be at risk without proper funding.
Sir Mark Rowley, head of the Metropolitan Police, said that cuts would mean some crimes have to be ignored.
On Wednesday, Ms Reeves will hand out £300 billion more in public spending than the Tories had planned, having raised taxes by £40 billion last autumn and changed her fiscal rules to allow for more borrowing to invest in capital.
Her proposals are expected to include £30 billion for the NHS, which, along with the Minister of Defence, is the biggest winner, as well as an extra £113 billion for infrastructure projects.
But day-to-day departmental spending is still being squeezed.
In the next three years, annual spending will rise in real terms by 1.2 per cent, down from 2.5 per cent in the last two years, meaning real-term cuts for unprotected departments. A post-Brexit farming fund is to be cut in a further blow for the struggling agriculture industry, while Ms Rayner and Ms Reeves had a bitter dispute over money for social housing.
Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, also clashed with the Treasury before seeing off an attempt to significantly reduce the size of his £13.2 billion warmer homes fund for upgrades to housing stock.
Observers fear the Home Office has been among the departments most squarely in the Chancellor's crosshairs.
The total number of police officers in England and Wales peaked at 149,000 in March 2024. It is expected to fall this year, despite Labour putting in an extra £1.2 billion.
The Metropolitan Police is reducing its police officer headcount by 1,500 this year, even with the extra investment, as pay increases take up much of the funding.
The England and Wales policing budget for the financial years 2026/27, 2027/28 and 2028/29 will be unveiled on Wednesday. It is understood that it will rise quicker than inflation, meaning a real-term increase.
However, that alone will not guarantee there are no reductions in officer numbers in the years ahead as police forces struggle to retain staff and win over new hires.
A police source said: 'There are two types of settlement. One involves a paper exercise that just about scrapes over the bar in terms of inflation, while the other is a genuine funding settlement that seeks to solve the structural issues, restore trust and confidence in the service and back those on the frontline.
'We very much hope that it is the latter, but the devil will be in the details and we will wait to see what the Government announces.'
'Heed the warning, we are not crying wolf'
Chris Philip, the Conservative shadow home secretary, said: 'Despite hitting the British public with the biggest tax rise in a generation, we are now seeing police numbers under Labour falling.
'They have chosen to prioritise spending on Ed Miliband's mad green projects, on inflation-busting pay rises for their trade union paymasters and spending £100 billion a year – five times the police budget – on debt interest payments.
'Labour have got their priorities wrong and need to urgently consider. As policing minister, I delivered record police numbers last year. But Labour are recklessly putting all that at risk and endangering the public by doing so.'
Mr Smart later elaborated on his comments in the joint article.
He said: 'Our message is 'heed the warning, we are not crying wolf'. It is crunch time for the Chancellor. If you give billions to the NHS, education and defence but ignore policing, then the consequences will be felt by the public.'
Spokesmen from the Treasury and Home Office did not issue a comment when approached on Sunday.
In a separate development, secondary school pupils will be taught skills in artificial intelligence as part of a drive to put the technological power 'into the hands of the next generation', Sir Keir Starmer will announce on Monday.
Some one million students will be given access to learning resources to start equipping them for 'the tech careers of the future' as part of the Government's £187 million 'TechFirst' scheme, Downing Street said.
Our morale has been crushed by a broken system
By Nick Smart and Tiff Lynch
A row at the heart of government is coming to a head – and the consequences will shape the future of policing in Britain.
And there's no mistaking that this future is unclear. The service is in crisis.
When a young constable looks down at their payslip and wonders how they'll make rent this month, something is deeply wrong.
When experienced detectives walk away from decades of service, broken by the demands placed on them, it's the police service itself that's broken.
When chief inspectors and superintendents – often the most senior officers on duty overnight across entire counties – are battling burnout and crushing stress, it becomes a national emergency.
Despite this, police are being asked to do more with less – again – as pressure mounts on already overstretched budgets.
Why? Policing faces a £1.2 billion shortfall. This is before it is asked to deliver the ambitious pledges of the new government.
Police forces across the country are being forced to shed officers and staff to deliver savings.
These are not administrative cuts. They go to the core of policing's ability to deliver a quality service: fewer officers on the beat, longer wait times for victims, and less available officers when a crisis hits.
Let us cast our minds back to the summer of 2024. Police officers turned out to protect amid riots and disorder. But there were no additional officers to pick up the day jobs. We need resilience.
Ministers have pledged to halve violence against women and girls, to tackle knife crime, and to rebuild neighbourhood policing. But policing is much more than this.
These ambitions cannot be delivered without sustained, long-term, stable investment in the service. Further cuts will not simply stall progress – they will reverse it.
It is well known that the wider public sector is broken. As a result, every day, the police are picking up the work of others when they become overwhelmed, effectively becoming society's sticking plaster.
Officers are responding not just to crime, but to the vacuum left by other public services – from mental health to social care.
The job has become a catch-all for the sharp end of state failure, a failure that spends 80,000 police hours a year supervising patients awaiting mental health treatment rather than preventing, detecting and solving crime.
Since 2010, police officers of all ranks have faced wave after wave of mounting pressure. Real-terms pay has fallen by over 20 per cent.
Morale has been crushed. Retention has plummeted. More than 9,000 officers left the service last year – the highest figure on record. Forces are losing experienced personnel faster than they can replace them. Year after year, this is ignored by government.
The new recruits who do arrive are bright and brave. But they are stepping into an environment where the strain is immediate, the workload relentless, and the support too often inadequate. It is a self-defeating cycle: we train the next generation only to burn them out before they reach the ranks where experience matters most.
A new constable earns less than £30,000. After deductions, many take home barely more than the Living Wage. And the problems continue further up the ranks, too. Senior officers are regularly asked to effectively work 24 hours at a time, breaching the very laws put in place to protect them.
They cannot strike. They are held to the highest ethical standards and under a constant microscope of scrutiny. And they continue to serve, even as pay stagnates and pressures grow.
It is against this backdrop that the spending review arrives. This is the moment where political rhetoric must meet practical investment. It is not enough to talk about 'tough on crime'. There must be the funding to match.
What the police service needs is sustained investment in structures, people and new technology, so that chiefs can plan long-term and deliver a service that is fit for purpose. It needs:
A fair, independent pay review system not bound by Treasury limits, nor instructed in what is allowed to consider.
Immediate action to raise starting salaries, so policing is a viable, long-term career, not a financial sacrifice.
A long-term funding settlement that reflects genuine investment and allows chief constables to plan.
Real investment in officer wellbeing, not just words.
And a commitment to a defining purpose so that the police police, rather than doing the work of other public bodies.
If the Government is serious about halving knife crime, protecting women, and restoring public confidence in the criminal justice system, it must first invest in the people responsible for those outcomes and fund a police service that can be designed around today's demand.
The Government says it's committed to law and order. If that's true, it must start by supporting the people who uphold it.
The public rightly wants visible patrols, faster responses, and safer communities. So do the police.
Now is the time to act on promises and use this Spending Review to commit to funding a police service that can deliver.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How the assisted dying debate is dividing doctors as politicians prepare to vote on bill
How the assisted dying debate is dividing doctors as politicians prepare to vote on bill

Sky News

time33 minutes ago

  • Sky News

How the assisted dying debate is dividing doctors as politicians prepare to vote on bill

There are few issues more controversial, more divisive. Assisted dying polarises opinion. But it's a difficult conversation that needs to be had because ultimately death affects us all. Even if you are fortunate enough to never be directly impacted by an assisted death you will almost certainly be indirectly affected if the End of Life Bill passes into law. It would be the biggest social change to British society many of us would ever see in our lifetimes. And after patients and their immediate families, it's the country's doctors who will be the most affected by any change in the law. Like society, the medical community is divided on the issue. One senior doctor said: "It's like Brexit, but worse." Another told me: "Emotions are running high". These are the milder, reportable comments. There is bitterness and mistrust. The deep-rooted anger leads to each side accusing the other of deliberately spreading misinformation, "what-iffery" and "shenanigans" in the lead-up to the final vote next week. We asked two senior doctors to share their views on assisted dying with us and each other. Dr Mark Lee is a consultant in palliative care. "I have worked in this field for 25 years and looked after thousands of patients at the end of their lives. I am against the assisted dying bill because I believe it poses risks to patients, to families, to doctors and to palliative care." 'We can get this right' Dr Jacky Davis is a consultant radiologist and a campaigner for assisted dying legislation in this country. One of the arguments put forward by opponents of assisted dying is that Britain ranks highest among countries in its delivery of palliative care. And there is no need for such a radical change in end of life care. It is not an argument Dr Davis accepts. She said: "The status quo at the moment means a number of people are dying bad deaths every day. 300 million people around the world have access to assisted dying and more legislation is in the pipeline and no place that has taken up a law on assisted dying has ever reversed it. So we can learn from other places, we can get this right, we can offer people a compassionate choice at the end of life." Most deaths in palliative care 'peaceful' Dr Lee accepts palliative care has its limitations but this is a result of underfunding. This national conversation, he argues, is an opportunity to address some of those failings and improve end of life care. "I think the NHS currently is not resourcing the situation enough to be able to provide the patients with the choice that they need to get the care that they needed and that is because they are not getting the choice and because palliative care is patchy. But in my day-to-day work, and I've worked in palliative care for 25 years, normal death is peaceful, comfortable, and does not involve people dying in pain." "I absolutely agree with Mark," Dr Davis responded. "The vast majority of people will die a peaceful death and do not have the need for an assisted death. And I absolutely am with him that palliative care in this country has been treated abysmally. Nobody should have to hold a jumble sale in order to fund a hospice. That's terrible. "What I didn't hear from Mark is, while the vast majority of people will die a peaceful death and have got nothing to fear facing death, there are people who have diagnoses where they know that they are likely to face a difficult death and will face a difficult death. "What are you offering to the people who aren't going to die a peaceful death? And what are you offering to people who are so afraid that that's going to happen that they will take their own lives or will go abroad to seek an assisted death?" Concerns about pressure on NHS One important voice that has been missing from the national assisted dying debate is that of the NHS. Senior leaders will not speak on the issue until the fate of the bill is decided. And its understandable why. It is not clear what role the health service would have if the bill passes. 0:32 Dr Lee warned that his NHS colleagues were "extremely worried", going further to say assisted dying would "break the NHS". He added, that the country's already under-pressure hospice sector would struggle to cope with staff "walking away from the job if they are forced to be involved in any way". Dr Davis refuses to accept these warnings, arguing that the challenge to the health service is being overstated. "I think it's really important to take a step back and say this would be a very small number of deaths. And this is very small in terms of the other things that are coming through big drug discoveries, big new surgeries, all the rest of it this would be very small in terms in terms of money." The two doctors did agree on one thing. That every patient is entitled to a pain free and dignified death. 1:12 Dr Lee said: "I look at the whites of the eyes of people every day with that. I stand in that place every day. And that is shameful that anyone in this day and age should die in that position. Jacky and I can agree on that. That is unacceptable. But it still doesn't justify the response that we meet suffering with killing someone, rather than addressing the needs that are in front of us." Dr Davis responded by saying: "You say you've looked in the whites of patients' eyes at the end, and I'd say looking into the whites of patients eyes and listening to what they're asking for when they've been offered everything that you can offer them and they're still saying, 'I've had enough', then we should follow the example of other countries and say, 'we will help you'." These are the two very divided opinions of two NHS doctors, but these are the same arguments that will be taking place in hospitals, hospices, offices, factories and living rooms across the country. In about a week's time, it will be down to the politicians to decide.

Ballymena riots: Families flee 'locals' venting their feelings
Ballymena riots: Families flee 'locals' venting their feelings

Sky News

time40 minutes ago

  • Sky News

Ballymena riots: Families flee 'locals' venting their feelings

Here we go again. It was not long after 8pm when a police announcement over a tannoy mounted on their armoured vehicles reverberated around for all to hear. "Force is about to be used against violent individuals," blasted from the speakers as locals, some masked, stood waiting for action. "You better be filming this," one man said as we captured the scenes for Sky News amid a growing sense from locals that the police were being heavy handed in their tactics. And then officers, holding their shields, surged forward as people edged back. The move seemed to further anger the residents who had gathered, almost goading them as tensions ran high. The pace of clashes was slower on this, the third night of conflict. But it was nevertheless just as ugly and messy. Eyewitness: It is hard to see where the violence will end Soon came the baton rounds, the firebombs, the water cannon. Those pelting the police seemed unfazed as they were battered with plastic bullets in return. The watching crowd cheered the rioters on. Police chiefs earlier defended their operation. A senior officer insisted he did have "a grip" on the unravelling situation when questioned by Sky News. The increased presence of officers was felt on the ground and was clear to see. The soundtrack of sirens swirled around this town once again as police lurched from incident to incident as pockets of violence flared up. Officers are on their way from Scotland, England and Wales to help bolster resources. And they won't be short of work. A leisure centre 25 minutes away in Larne came under attack on Wednesday evening after it emerged some of the foreign families fleeing the Ballymena chaos were being temporarily held there. A short drive around Ballymena's one way road system takes you on a journey through housing estates where people have flooded the streets with union jack flags and stuck yellow A4 sheets to their windows with the words, "LOCALS LIVE HERE". These colourful displays are being seen as a public noticeboard of the nationality of the occupants inside each home. A deterrent to make the angry mob to look elsewhere. And those failing to advertise whether they are a 'native' or not seem to be paying a price. I witnessed an upper floor flat with a window smashed, the guttering on fire and the ground outside ablaze. An older neighbour fled her home downstairs in her dressing gown. Earlier in the day two Romanian women were frantically examining their phones down an alleyway as their kids played on the trampoline in the garden. They were terrified and were bundling their belongings in the car and leaving for good. A sizeable chunk of people born in Ballymena are angry. They do not like the talk from police and politicians that taking to the streets following an alleged sex attack on a teenage girl equates to them being "racist thugs". They see this as an act of venting their feelings. And they are hellbent on continuing this campaign of carnage across Northern Ireland to ensure they prove their point.

NHS, houses, nuclear submarines: Labour sets out its spending plans
NHS, houses, nuclear submarines: Labour sets out its spending plans

The Guardian

timean hour ago

  • The Guardian

NHS, houses, nuclear submarines: Labour sets out its spending plans

The last few weeks have proved difficult for Rachel Reeves. In public, the news has been dominated by Labour's U-turn on the winter fuel allowance. In private, the Treasury has been caught up in wrangle after wrangle with ministers, all negotiating what their departments would receive in the spending review. Reeves' speech to parliament on Wednesday announcing the review was a chance to tell a more positive story – particularly for a government accused of lacking direction and ambition. As economics editor Heather Stewart reports, there were some big winners: health, defence, and housing. Yet at the same time, day-to-day spending for some departments – such as local government or the environment – seems very tight. So, asks Helen Pidd, will Labour allow those services to come under even more pressure, or will Reeves have to eventually raise taxes to fund them too?

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store