Northamptonshire Chief Constable welcomes sacking powers as record number of officers suspended
A leading police officer has welcomed new rules which will see officers who fail background checks automatically sacked - at a time when suspensions in his force are at an all-time high.
Northamptonshire Police Chief Constable Ivan Balhatchet said there were currently more than 20 officers suspended from his force., but he felt the new measures would help rebuild trust in policing.
Measures introduced by Parliament on Wednesday will make it a legal requirement for serving officers to pass vetting procedures.
It will also mean police chiefs will be able to get rid of officers unfit to serve from next month. The move comes after the head of the Metropolitan Police Sir Mark Rowley accused officials of dragging their feet on giving police chiefs stronger powers to sack officers.
Mr Balhatchet said he "absolutely" welcomed the rules, saying since taking over from his disgraced predecessor Nick Adderley he had made it a priority to remove those officers not fit to serve.
"We do unfortunately have more suspensions for police officers than we ever have done before, but that's been done on purpose, because actually there's people who don't belong in the organisation," said Mr Balhatchet, who has expanded the force's professional standards and counter corruption unit.
"The vast majority of our officers and staff are great people, but there's some who shouldn't be here.
"We have been frustrated ourselves in Northamptonshire Police in trying to deal with some who we don't think should be in the organisation, so I do welcome this in terms of the changes to vetting that have been announced today, which come into effect the middle of next month."
Northamptonshire Police currently has more than 20 officers suspended from duty, he said. Mr Balhatchet said the new powers could be a way of getting some officers off the books.
He said the new law would give forces "some extra tools, used appropriately" to deal with officers "who cause concern to us".
Mr Balchatchet could not give an exact figure as to how many of those 20-plus officers would be affected, but said he did not believe the new legislation would impact morale.
"Whenever I talk about misconduct, it's always with the caveat that the vast majority of officers and staff are doing an amazing job," he said.
"There is a tiny minority, though, who don't belong in the organisation. It's those people who we look to deal with and actually exit from the organisation or deal with appropriately."
The new rules will come into force almost a year after Nick Adderley was sacked as Chief Constable of Northamptonshire Police for gross misconduct for lying about his military record.
A report into how he was able to get away with his lies revealed the force's "very significant failings", including a failure to ask for basic corroboration or keep records of his application for the £176,500-a-year job.
Adderley had claimed to serve in the Falklands War, despite it ending when he was just 15 years old, and said that he attended the prestigious Britannia Royal Naval College for four years, when it was later proven his application was rejected.
He had also been wearing a Falklands War medal - implying he had served in the war - which was deemed to be "110% fake" by a Ministry of Defence medal expert.
Mr Balhatchet said this was something that would never be allowed to happen again.
"What I have done since then though is made sure that our most senior officers have hard copy checks of military record and educational qualifications, so that never happens again," he said.
He said the new rules would help rebuild trust in both Northamptonshire Police and wider UK policing.
Police officers who fail vetting to be automatically sacked under new rules
Mr Balhatchet was speaking as he unveiled his new policing plan for the county.
He described his strategy as "ambitious" and designed to make the county the safest place to live in the country. In addition to growing police and community support officer numbers, he said building trust was key to achieving that.
"Trust and confidence is a key thing I want to achieve. Trust and confidence in policing nationally is low," adding he wanted to drive that up by "making sure our standards are the highest and how we treat victims of crime".
"Confidence in Northamptonshire Police was below 40% which nobody wants to be," he said. "It has improved over the last six or seven months, which is which is really positive."
Speaking of recent high-profile dismissal of officers including one who 'took indecent images of himself in uniform' on police premises and another dismissed for sending sexual messages to a vulnerable 14-year-old girl he said rootig out those officers were part of re-establishing trust.
"This is a challenge and I haven't shied away from it," he said. "I've grown our professional standards department, so it's the biggest thing it ever has been; I've grown our counter-corruption department again so it's the biggest it ever has been.
"Vetting standards have grown within our force, and we have made sure that we given people routes to report, whether openly or confidentially, so we can actually deal with those people who shouldn't be in the organisation."
"We do have more suspensions than we ever have done before. We do have more gross misconduct hearings than we ever have done before but actually, that's about sending a message.
"Dealing with those who shouldn't be in the police service and actually supporting those who every day coming to work to do the very best for the public and show the highest standards of integrity."
Speaking about the new measures Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: 'It is simply not acceptable that officers who are clearly unfit to serve or pose a risk to their colleagues cannot be removed. That's why these new rules are essential and it is why this government has been working closely with forces to overcome these barriers to restore confidence in policing.'
Sir Mark Rowley said: 'The ability to hold a vetting clearance is the most basic indication of whether someone can be trusted to hold the extensive and often intrusive powers that police officers are given.
"It was never right that an officer could lose their vetting, but not lose their job."
The reformed police dismissal system will come into force from 14 May.
The Home Office also plans to introduce further safeguards to improve vetting national standards later this year, including stronger requirements to suspend officers under investigation for violence against women and girls.
Officers convicted of certain criminal offences will also be automatically found guilty of gross misconduct.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
36 minutes ago
- The Sun
Britain's £100billion benefits timebomb that no one is brave enough to defuse
TO the hand-wringing Labour MPs plotting to torpedo the government's £5billion in welfare cuts, some facts. Even with that squeeze, we are still hurtling towards a £100billion sickness benefits bill EVERY YEAR by the end of the decade. 4 4 That is roughly equivalent to the entire size of Slovakia's economy — or the annual output of the City of London. It is more than the combined yearly budgets of the police, prisons and courts — and twice that of what we spend on defence. You could buy every Premier League club several times over and then some. And that is before you even scratch the surface on public money for jobseekers and the elderly. Britain is a nation that looks after people — at ease with the language of safety nets, support and compassion. But we have to be honest about what we have become: a nation hooked on handouts that is driving our economy on to the rocks. Painfully clear A creaking welfare state — with a price tag no government can control and no taxpayer can sustain — is ready to burst. The parliamentary bill to reform it — introduced yesterday by Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall — was meant to be the moment Labour got serious. It tightens eligibility for Personal Independence Payments (PIP), slashes Universal Credit for new claimants and freezes it for existing ones. On paper it is a package designed to 'make the system sustainable' and save the Treasury £5billion a year by 2030. Five key changes to PIP & Universal Credit as Labour's benefits crackdown unveiled But when you actually read the figures, it becomes painfully clear just how little difference it will make. Britain is still projected to spend £100.7billion a year on health and disability benefits by 2029–30 — up from £64.7billion just last year. That is a 55 per cent rise in just six years, driven largely by soaring costs in working-age sickness and disability payments, with PIP fuelling the surge. Once meant to help those with serious long-term physical and mental conditions live independently, PIP is now claimed by more than 3.7million people — and demand is only accelerating. The number of new applications has shot up by 70 per cent since 2018, with more than 1,000 new claims A DAY thudding on to DWP desks. The bill for PIP alone has already ballooned from £12billion in 2019 to more than £21billion today, and it is predicted to hit an eye-watering £42.3billion by 2028–29. Driving this explosion is a marked rise in claims linked to mental disorders — now the main condition for nearly 70 per cent of new applicants under-35. Combined with long Covid, chronic fatigue, and musculoskeletal complaints such as back pain, we have arrived at a staggering projection: that by 2030 nearly one in 12 working-age Brits will be economically inactive due to long-term sickness. International comparisons lay bare just how much of an outlier the UK has become. We now spend more on working-age disability benefits as a share of GDP than almost any other advanced economy. Most European countries — including France, Germany and the Netherlands — have seen their incapacity benefit caseloads remain steady while ours is still climbing. Is it any wonder why critics start to mutter about the UK becoming the ' Sicknote Man of Europe '. But far from marking a moment of unity for Labour, the new bill has lit the fuse on a major rebellion and split the party in two. More than 100 Labour MPs are squeamish about the proposals, and many have already threatened to vote it down when it comes to a vote in the next few weeks. Supporters of the reforms say the real betrayal would be pearl-clutching backbenchers pretending the current system can continue. One Labour insider told me: 'You can't call yourself progressive if you ignore a system that's spiralling out of control. This isn't about cruelty. It's about honesty.' The internal row gripping the party was not unexpected — but the scale of it was. A far tougher package was meant to be unveiled at March's Spring Statement to lance the boil in one fell swoop. But after internal leaks and pushback from Labour left-wingers, No10 blinked. 4 The result? A lightweight version, rushed out early and designed to placate mutinous MPs. One senior Government figure admitted to me a few months ago: 'We had one shot to fix this, and we bottled it. These are half-measures. They won't be enough.' The deeper danger now is not just the cost but the fact political will to act is slipping away. We are an old population, with flatlining productivity, who have very few babies. We cannot have a generous welfare state and a national social care service, and a massive in-work support system Backbencher Some inside the party get it. They know the writing is on the wall: an ageing population, low birth rates, flatlining productivity and soaring demand on every part of the state. Commons humiliation As one influential backbencher put it: 'We have to get serious about reforming the state. "We are an old population, with flatlining productivity, who have very few babies. We cannot have a generous welfare state and a national social care service, and a massive in-work support system. 'We need to change expectations about what Government does in a radical and sustained way. I do not see us being serious about that right now.' Behind the scenes, the whips are in damage control mode, trying to keep a lid on the rebellion. Abstentions might help Labour avoid a Commons humiliation but they will not solve the underlying dilemma. This is not just about one benefit, or one Budget line. It is about what kind of state Britain can be in the 2020s and beyond — and how much we can afford. For too long politicians have ducked the debate, layering new promises on top of old ones without ever confronting the trade-offs. Now, the bill is landing and it's not just a financial one, it's political, too. Labour may win the vote but its bigger test is yet to come: can it finally level with the public, not just about what needs cutting, but what kind of country we want to be? 4
The Independent
38 minutes ago
- The Independent
Tougher sentences for criminals who abuse LGBT people ‘vital step forward'
Tougher sentences for violent offenders who hurt people based on their sexuality would mark a 'vital step forward', a Labour MP has said. Jacob Collier called for new aggravated offences as part of the Government's Crime and Policing Bill, as he warned many LGBT+ people 'don't feel safe in reporting hate'. More than 100 cross-party MPs backed the proposed amendment, originally put forward by Rachel Taylor, which would create the new offences if violent crimes are motivated by hostility towards a person's sexuality, transgender identity or disability. Home Office minister Dame Diana Johnson has vowed to broaden the framework for aggravated offences. Mr Collier said: 'I know what it means to think twice how you walk down the street, to pause before holding somebody's hand, to wonder whether that shout from across the road is something you can ignore or something you can't afford to. 'And I know that I'm not alone in that. 'I've spoken to my constituents and people from far beyond who tell me that they don't feel safe in reporting hate when it happens. They don't believe that they'll be taken seriously and there's a profound failure of trust, and one that we in this House have a duty to repair.' The Burton and Uttoxeter MP also told the Commons: 'I think it's also fitting that we are introducing this amendment in Pride Month, and in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling which has caused so much anguish amongst the trans community.' He said the move 'represents a vital step forward in the protection of some of the most marginalised people within our society' and added: 'Too many victims still believe that the system is not on their side and this new clause gives us the opportunity to change that. It gives police and prosecutors a clear route to charge and convict offenders in a way that truly reflects the nature of these crimes.' Mr Collier said the proposed change was 'about dignity, about recognising that whether you're a trans teenager being punched in the park, a gay couple being spat on on the Tube, or a disabled man being harassed on his way to work, all people deserve the full protection of the law'. Aggravated offences would also offer 'vital protection for disabled people, who often remain far too invisible in the public conversation around hate crime', he added. The law already provides for aggravated offences, if they are motivated by hostility towards a victim's race or religious group membership. 'That discrepancy cannot be right. We cannot as a society say that some forms of hatred are more evil than others,' Ms Taylor told the Commons. The Labour MP for North Warwickshire and Bedworth added she was 'at university when section 28 was introduced', part of the Local Government Act 1988 which banned town halls from promoting or teaching 'the acceptability of' homosexuality in schools. 'I remember it vividly, it was more than the law, it was an attack on the right of people like me to live openly,' she said. 'It stigmatised lesbians, gays and bisexual people, it pushed us out of public life. 'I got into politics to fight that cruel law and everything it represented.' Ms Taylor said her amendment would be 'an important step forward for equal rights'. Marie Tidball, the Labour MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge who also backed the amendment, said the proposal 'would foster respect and equality for all by ensuring justice for disabled victims of hate crime'. Responding to the debate, Dame Diana branded these crimes 'disgraceful', and said the increase in hate crime towards transgender people 'cannot be tolerated'. On the proposed new clause, Dame Diana said: 'The Government supports this change, as set out in our manifesto last year. 'And I can confirm to the House that we will bring forward a suitable Government amendment to give effect to this commitment in the Lords at committee stage.'
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Notting Hill carnival in danger without ‘urgent funding', says leaked letter
The future of the Notting Hill carnival could be in jeopardy without 'urgent funding' from the government, according to a leaked letter from its organisers. The carnival's chair, Ian Comfort, has written to the culture secretary to request public money, the BBC reported on Wednesday. It follows a review of the festival in west London, which began in 1966, identifying 'critical public safety concerns' that needed additional funding to address, the letter said. Comfort wrote that the money was 'essential to safeguarding the future and public safety of this iconic event', but did not state a figure. The independent safety review, whose findings and recommendations have not been made public, was commissioned by the carnival's organisers and paid for at a cost of £100,000 by the Greater London Authority (GLA), Kensington and Chelsea council and Westminster city council. In the leaked letter to Lisa Nandy, Comfort also referred to a separate report published in April by the London Assembly. He said the research highlighted the increasing strain placed on the Metropolitan police during large-scale public events. 'Limited resourcing has restricted the police service's ability to respond to growing operational pressures,' Comfort said in the letter. He went on to say that increased investment in stewarding and crowd management was 'now essential to allow the police to focus on their primary role of crime prevention and public protection'. Comfort added that a failure to secure immediate additional funding 'risks compromising public safety and jeopardising the future of the carnival'. The carnival chair said that although the GLA and the two councils had provided 'substantial support' for stewarding during past festivals, they could no longer 'meet the growing operational requirements identified in the review'. Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion The Met police's assistant commissioner, Matt Twist, previously raised concerns of a 'mass casualty event' at the carnival due to crowd density. Giving evidence to the London Assembly police and crime committee last September, Twist said: 'While we acknowledge that crime often gets the headlines, the thing that worries me most is the crowd density and the potential for a mass casualty event.' The carnival, second only to Brazil's Rio Carnival in size, attracts about 2 million people over the August bank holiday weekend. This year's event is scheduled to take place on 24 and 25 August. The Met had about 7,000 officers on duty for last year's festivities, drawn from local policing teams and specialist units. The organisers of Notting Hill carnival have been contacted for comment.
