UK's biggest police force to axe 1,700 officers and staff despite funding boost
The UK's biggest police force will cut 1,700 officers and staff, despite receiving funding increases from central and local government.
The Metropolitan Police said it also needs to axe services including the Royal Parks Police, a decision described by one council leader as a 'huge mistake'.
Scotland Yard admitted the move to plug the £260 million budget shortfall would put an 'extraordinary stretch' on its staff.
A spokesperson for the force, which currently has more than 33,200 police officers and 11,300 staff, said: 'We are very grateful for the additional funding we have received from the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) and the Home Office.
'While this new funding decreases our original funding gap from £450 million, it leaves us with a £260 million shortfall and we will have to make substantial tough choices, reducing our size by over 1,700 officers, staff and PCSOs and therefore our services.
'This places an extraordinary stretch on our dedicated men and women.
'The Commissioner is incredibly grateful and humbled by what they achieve with increased demand and a rapidly shrinking Met.
'Over the coming months, we will be working with the Home Office, Mayor and MOPAC through the Spending Review to put the Met on a financial footing which enables a sustainable workforce plan.'
Richmond Council expressed deep disappointment over the decision to cut the Royal Parks Police, and said it raised serious concerns about the future safety of Richmond Park, Bushy Park and other green spaces in London.
Officers in the dedicated unit, which has patrolled the capital's 17 royal parks since 2004, have 'specialist training and experience', the council said.
Council leader Gareth Roberts said: 'At a time when residents are already concerned about the visibility of policing, this decision will do nothing to reassure them.
'The loss of the specialist policing team would leave them more vulnerable to crime and anti-social behaviour.'
'This is a huge mistake,' he added.
The cuts are also likely to see the removal of dedicated officers from schools and restrictions on counter opening hours, despite a record £1.16 billion for the Met from City Hall for the coming year.
Mayor of London Sir Sadiq Khan blamed the funding crisis on the previous Conservative government.
'The previous government chronically underfunded the Met,' he said in a statement.
'That's why I'm announcing a record £1.16 billion annual investment in the police from City Hall.
'This historic increase will protect neighbourhood policing in our communities and significantly reduce the level of cuts the Met had been planning.'
Sir Sadiq said he was 'under no illusions about the challenges ahead'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
SIMS: CBC set to get more money and power
Canada's government news organization is set to get fatter and more powerful. In the middle of the election campaign, Prime Minister Mark Carney vowed to pay the CBC more money, waving around about $150 million in fresh taxpayer cash. CBC covered that big scoop with a headline calling the CBC 'underfunded.' Think about that scene. Imagine being a CBC employee asking questions at a news conference during the election, with Carney saying that, if he won, the CBC would get more money, while Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre said he would defund the CBC. The CBC covered this funding story in the middle of the election. That's a conflict of interest so big it would dwarf Godzilla. Journalists should not be paid by the government and that scene in the election is a perfect illustration of why. In the speech from the throne, the Carney government announced: 'The government is determined to protect the institutions that bring these cultures and this identity to the world, like CBC/Radio-Canada.' To get an idea of what that protection could look like, consider the federal government report delivered on Feb. 20, before the election. Former heritage minister Pascale St-Onge said the government should nearly double the amount of money the CBC gets from taxpayers every year. 'The average funding for public broadcasters in G7 countries is $62 per person, per year,' St-Onge said. 'We need to aim closer to the middle ground, which is $62 per year per person.' If the government funded the CBC that way, the CBC would cost taxpayers about $2.5 billion per year. That amount would cover the annual grocery bill for about 152,854 Canadian families. St-Onge also pushed for the CBC mandate to be expanded to 'fight against disinformation.' 'I propose to anchor in CBC-Radio Canada's mandate its role in helping the Canadian population fight against disinformation and understand fact-based information,' St-Onge said. Carney's Liberal party platform pledged to 'fully equip them ( CBC) to combat disinformation, so that Canadians have a news source they know they can trust.' What does this mean? Will the CBC play a role as an official 'fact-checker' in Canada, or is this just clunky language urging the CBC to be more fact-based? What is clear is that the federal government is planning to hand the CBC more money and enshrine its funding into law, taking it out of the annual budget vote and clouding transparency. CBC hasn't improved its accountability after years of scrutiny from Canadians. Former CEO Catherine Tait was being paid about half a million dollars per year. New CEO Marie‑Philippe Bouchard has started her new role where Tait left off, as she is also set to be paid between $478,300 and $562,700. After years of criticism over executive bonuses, the government media company finally said it would get rid of the bonuses but hike the salaries of the executives instead. With so many Canadians struggling to pay for the basics, the CBC needed to read the room and end the bonuses and knock the CEO down a few levels in pay. Taxpayers are forced to spend a lot of money on the CBC, but only a tiny fraction of them choose to watch it. For CBC News Network's flagship English language prime-time news program, the audience is 1.8% of available viewers, according to its latest quarterly report. That means more than 98% of TV-viewing Canadians chose to watch something else. The CBC is a waste of taxpayers' money. Nearly nobody is watching it and it is a severe conflict of interest for journalists to be paid by the government. The CBC doesn't need more money from taxpayers; it needs to be defunded and raise money based on its work.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
What Washington can learn from a legendary London meltdown
In a city where allegiance and proximity to power is everything, the leader's closest adviser portrayed himself as an outsider. He began the year by hiring a bunch of 'weirdos and misfits' and ordering them to rip up the entire 'rotten' system of government. The adviser loved to put noses out of joint and 'own the libs,' while building up his profile in the media as the real power behind the throne. Then, having realized that his easily-distracted and impulsive politician boss wasn't actually committed to building a tech-heavy, libertarian future, the disillusioned adviser quit — dedicating himself to publicly destroying his former employer. If you're British, watching the collapse of Donald Trump and Elon Musk's uncomfortable marriage has echoes of the end of the relationship between Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Chief Adviser Dominic Cummings in 2020. How that psychodrama played out in the UK could have lessons for the US — not least because Cummings eventually succeeded in undermining Johnson's political career, ultimately defenestrating the prime minister through relentless briefings and leaks. When someone who was inside the room and was perceived to be central to a political project says it's all a sham, the damage can be significant. For those who don't know, Cummings was the chief strategist of the successful Brexit campaign in 2016 but then largely disappeared from view when it came to actually defining what Brexit should look like. Unlike Musk, Cummings was a lifelong political operative, albeit one who cultivated a reputation for actually reading books. Three years later, with his political standing inflated by a film in which he was portrayed by Benedict Cumberbatch as an insane genius, Cummings returned to maneuver Johnson into Downing Street. Once inside government, Cummings broke all the standard operating procedures of the British state to finally 'get Brexit done' and sever the UK's relationship with the EU in January 2020. When I look back at my occasional text exchanges with Cummings from that era, usually while trying to check stories about the funding of the Brexit campaign or his desire to defund the BBC, they mirror what he said in public. He held a seemingly sincere belief that most of the British media was fake news, that the British state was not fit for purpose, and that the political party he was nominally working for, the Conservatives, was little more than a helpful vehicle for an insurrection. One ally approvingly described the chief of staff of a Conservative government to the BBC as a 'Leninist.' Ultimately, both Musk and Cummings believed that you can run the government as a high-performance start-up and that the defining failure of past civil service reforms was that they hadn't smashed enough things quickly enough. Both also have the fatal flaws of being undisciplined, delighting in picking public fights and getting bored easily. Their independent means also meant they were not as beholden to their political masters as other advisers. Cummings might not have Musk levels of money but he was wealthy in British terms (his father-in-law Sir Humphry Tyrrell Wakefield, owner of a 13th century castle, would write letters in support of his proto-DOGE policies) and connected (his wife was deputy editor of the right-wing Spectator magazine). The overwhelming impression Cummings gave was that politicians were the useful idiots who should give him the runway to remake the state. Iconoclasm was the point. When Cummings quit he took to publishing lengthy Substack posts portraying Johnson as a broken supermarket 'trolley' who veered all over the place based on the last thing someone said to him. Even more effectively, Cummings helped to leak stories about Johnson's pandemic lockdown-busting in a scandal known as Partygate. In an echo of what's happened with Musk, left-wingers who previously thought Cummings was the devil incarnate began cheering him on as he stuck the knife into Johnson. The attacks rang true among Tory MPs and Johnson's ratings never recovered, ultimately leading to his early departure from politics. Many people leaked against Johnson and his circle, but when Cummings did, the pair's previous closeness gave it the ring of truth. Musk and Cummings got opportunities because they went in to bat for fundamentally untrustworthy but opportunistic politicians, in the hope that they would be given the freedom to enact policies with limited scrutiny. The two men have even exchanged notes and acknowledged the similarity of their programs. Ultimately, these were political shotgun marriages — the very thing that made the attachments so powerful at a particular moment in time was ultimately their undoing: In each case, the leader learned that there was no real love there. As Cummings and Musk found, if you hitch yourself to an anti-establishment hero who eschews patronage and loyalty then it's only a matter of time before you find yourself the target. There is a case that a less bellicose, less in-your-face flavour of DOGE could work better — and that such changes are easier when they're not associated with a controversial figure. In the UK, Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour government, elected last year, is pinning its hopes on widespread use of AI technology to improve productivity, for person. And there are even people in Downing Street who quite envies the idea of taking a Musk-style wrecking ball to parts of the state; Health Secretary Wes Streeting recently abolished one of the main administrative levels of the National Health Service in an overnight raid. Attempts by the insurgent, right-wing populist Reform party — headed by Nigel Farage, who has courted Musk's funds — to launch a 'British DOGE' and find excess spending in local government have hit the rocks. Announced on Monday, the program's first leader had quit by Thursday. Cummings said in November that he was hopeful Musk could make the US government operate like Silicon Valley. Cummings was long on diagnosis but short on prescription, the London-based Institute for Government think tank wrote in November 2021. It sought to fill the gap with ideas of its own for civil service reform.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Our politicians are the least serious in history – and that includes you, Nigel
This week an appalling case reminded us just how broken Britain is. We learnt that a 15-year-old boy killed elderly dogwalker Bhim Kohli while a female friend, aged 12, filmed it on her mobile phone. Both were laughing as the beloved grandfather lay dying in the street. How on earth can it have come to this? The case is emblematic of everything that has gone wrong – and continues to go wrong – in our fragmented, seemingly lawless society. We are led by complete incompetents: from police administering two-tier justice right the way up to our Prime Minister. It is little wonder there is a university course running in France on why the UK is such a failure. And Mayor of London Sadiq Khan's answer to our capital's woes, despite knife and other crimes soaring? Decriminalising cannabis. We knew Labour were not fit for purpose before they even took office, but this latest example of idiocy from City Hall really does sum up the problem with having hapless, careerist socialists anywhere near the levers of power. And now Reform UK appears to have imploded. Having abandoned the Conservative Party after an inept 14 years of governance, which left us with higher bills, higher taxes, higher NHS waiting lists and higher immigration, voters had hoped that Nigel Farage and his motley crew might bring the salvation Britain so desperately needs. Reform was meant to represent the alternative to 'uniparty' politics by ripping up the political rule book and restoring good old fashioned common sense. What we have learnt in the past 24 hours, however, is that the one thing uniting all four major parties in the UK (and I'm including the ludicrous Liberal Democrats in this, with their clown of a leader Sir Ed Davey) is just how thoroughly unserious they all are. Westminster currently resembles a cross-party circus act; what has the electorate done to deserve this? Let's take them one by one. We currently cannot believe a word slippery Starmer says after a string of Labour lies on tax, winter fuel, defence spending, relations with the EU, the Chagos Islands, immigration – you name it. They promised 6,500 more teachers with their vindictive VAT raid on private school fees and this week it was revealed teacher numbers are actually down since they took office. Millionaires are leaving, businesses are folding, more tax rises are on the way. We've got an Attorney General who wants to defend terrorists like Osama bin Laden's right-hand man while the justice system imprisons mothers like Lucy Connolly for 'hurty words' on the internet. The Left accuses Reform of being amateurs – and then run the country as if it's a university student union staffed by drop-outs. Yet the Right-wing opposition appears equally as childish. This week, we have had the shadow chancellor Mel Stride denouncing Liz Truss's premiership with some weasel words about the Tories 'never again undermining fiscal credibility by making promises we cannot afford'. The former prime minister – once famously compared to a lettuce – hit back with an excoriating statement on the political playground that is X, accusing Sir Mel of being a 'creature of the system' by siding with 'failed Treasury orthodoxy'. In what world does this blue-on-blue infighting help Kemi Badenoch as she struggles to cut through? Equally infantile was the typically boyish intervention of her former leadership rival Sir James Cleverly with a demand that the Conservatives stick to net zero – despite it being among the main reasons the party is now facing its own climate emergency. He's been invisible for months and then emerges with this sort of unhelpful Ed Milibandesque claptrap? Read the room, for pity's sake. All credit to Robert Jenrick for trying to find some grown-up solutions to some of the country's problems – like fare dodging, notwithstanding the self-serving nature of his attention-grabbing social media endeavours. Badenoch is trying her best to be a serious politician, with thoughtful rather than knee-jerk interventions on issues like our membership of the ECHR – only to have MPs in her ranks like Kit Malthouse spreading anti-Israel slanders like his declaration this week that Gaza is 'an abattoir where starving people are lured out through combat zones to be shot at'. Along with other Tories, he's also been calling for the Prime Minister to recognise a Palestinian state. Harebrained student politics are clearly not just confined to the Labour Party. We had hoped Reform, led by streetwise Nigel Farage, a man of political wisdom and experience, might rise above all this. But even he has been dogged by infantilism. If Rupert Lowe's 'more people watch my X videos than Nigel's' bravado wasn't bad enough, Reform now has been badly damaged by the similarly petulant flouncing out of party chairman Zia Yusuf. I like Zia and think he deserves credit for all the hard work he has put into professionalising the party over the past 11 months. But what on earth was there to be gained from such a public tantrum? Just leave quietly, don't blow the whole thing up with spiteful talk of working to get the party elected 'no longer being a good use of my time'. Similarly juvenile was the language he used to describe Reform MP Sarah Pochin's Commons call to ban the burka (which provoked laughter from the front bench: that's the state of public discourse in this country, folks). Responding to Katie Hopkins, of all people, on X, he wrote: 'Nothing to do with me. Had no idea about the question nor that it wasn't policy. Busy with other stuff. I do think it's dumb for a party to ask the PM if they would do something the party itself wouldn't do.' At the age of 38 and having worked at Goldman Sachs and established his own hugely successful business, he should know this is not the way to behave in the public eye. Reform remains a party that cannot even govern itself, let alone the country. This simply isn't good enough. The Government is useless, the Tories are a busted flush; if Reform seriously wants to break the doom loom of despair then it cannot be part of the problem. The party must get its act together – and fast. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
