All this before you examine the really gritty stuff that is gamming up the system and making officers miserable. The current flowchart for an officer investigating a case goes something like this.
1. Conduct your investigation - don't forget that you need a DPA form countersigned by an Inspector to get information from any third party! (New policy circa 2023)
2. Arrest your suspect. Because there are so few stations, you end up at custody on the opposite side of London. Your card doesn't work and you have to get people to open doors for you.
3. Build your case using CONNECT, the MPS answer to a question nobody asked. Rebuild your case three times in one shift due to repeated crashing. Finally submit to CPS to be told that the system has not differentiated between exhibits and unused material. Oh, and the MG3 is unreadable because you accidentally included a pound sign in your fraud case, you dozy git.
4. CPS don't believe that the suspect can be remanded, so refuse to make an in custody charging decision (policy since 2020 and was meant to be a temporary summer contingency). Bail your suspect.
5. Now your suspect is bailed, DG6 comes along and gives you a wallop between the legs. You now need to prepare full unused schedules and redact all unused material and complete an Investigation Management Document setting out every line of enquiry you've pursued - before CPS will even look at it.
6. Finally submit your file. A PS who hasn't seen the inside of a courtroom in his life rejects the file because you have called the suspect a suspect, and he says this is prejudicial.
7. Submit your file and the PS approves it. CPS bounce it back because they say it's missing a key document. The file is not in fact missing that document.
8. Play file submission ping pong with the CPS for a few weeks, as each time you submit it, it takes a week or more for them to acknowledge it.
9. Finally the file doesn't get bounced. You now dont get a response for 6 months.
10. A reviewing lawyer sends the file back with a memo demanding a further statement from the victim confirming that, as so much time has passed since the incident, that they still want to go to court. The memo has a deadline set two weeks in the past. It automatically triggers an escalation to the BCU Commander who demands to know why you are behind on your memos.
11. Get a new statement from the victim who can't understand why it's needed. Apologise profusely. Resubmit your file.
12. Six months later, get a charging decision. Celebrate for a nanosecond. Send a postal charge to your defendant.
13. Draft and submit an MG5. The same PS from before bounces the file because you have referred to the defendant as the defendant.
14. Attend the first hearing. The defendant attends. The trial date is set for 2026.
15. Inform the victim of the trial date who says they no longer want to know. Summon every remaining inch of empathy to persuade them not to withdraw.
16. Trial date arrives. There is no defence barrister. Trial adjourned for another year.
17. The new trial date arrives. The courtroom roof is leaking effluence onto the dock. Trial moved to the following week.
18. New new trial date arrives and actually starts. The defendant is convicted. His barrister says his client has impregnated three women in the past year and it would be unfair to separate him from his children. Suspended sentence.
I applaud you Dom for this line: 'He should have said the Met needs to do less and do it better.' No-one will agree to the MPS, let alone their own police beyond London, doing less. So, it is left to chiefs officers presenting to their PCC or Mayor, a "line by line" audit of functions or roles. WE both know none of the chiefs have the courage to do this, let alone a PCC agreeing.
Ironically now decades ago NYPD Chief Bill Bratton was able to rebuild NYPD because his predecessor unilaterally stopped gaming aka "numbers" enforcement - which handily was a state responsibility. Yes, there were other foundations built: more jail space, merging the three police departments (NYPD, Housing and Transit), more courts and prosecutors.
For quite some time ago, probably the mid-1980's - in the USA police reform was focused on the police ONLY doing enforcement as they were the only people with that responsibility, equipment, manpower and more.
Sadly the people who are really losing out are the public in the "hot spots" where gangs proliferate etc.
Hi Don, there is so much I want to say here but for once will confine myself to a single point (do I hear cheers and a comment of ‘at last!’!😂)
I believe the die is cast already.
The Met is toast. Not because of any particular failure, I just believe an unholy coalition of politicians including right wing Tories and the left wing liberal (small ‘l’ boys, I know he is Labour,) Mayor of London want it so. Khan wants to recreate the Met in his own image and that it be used as a model for future police reform elsewhere in the UK. The Tories read too much Daily Mail and long for a more authoritarian body to do their bidding as it did in 1984/5 without quibbling, full of obedient operatives who know their place.m and would never report a middle-class motorist for driving without due care or arrest them after being in a ‘social environment’. In fairness last point largely achieved with almost no trafpol, and don’t we know it in my part of Sarf Lunnon!🤔😂
Both are likely to be disappointed in what they get.
I am not a massive fan of Rowley but he’s simply a fall guy set up to fail.
As a jobbing tax man, I find myself with feet in both the, TJIF’d camps and the increasing worry that I am now working or an organisation as outcome blind as the Post Office has proved to be.
We have always had ICL/ Fujitso baked into our operating processes and platform, dating back to when ICL was first created by Harold Wilson and Tony Benn. Run forward 20 years from that at about the time that Horizon was being rolled out on the PO, HMC&E was about to hand over all of its IT resource to ICL under at Blairite PFI , then just at the last minute ,the agreement was mysteriously put on hold for 6 months .
Internal rumour had it this was because it had been found that ICL had been deliberately misdescribing its imports on the declarations made to us, in order pay less customs duty. So, the agreement held up or so while reparations were made and any potential reputational damage was carefully walled up in the basement.
Subsequently, and for the past 20 years following the merging of IR and C&E, the new Dept has been required to follow the same mantra of doing, "the same with less" as operational efficiencies are demanded’ aka, year on year budget cuts. With the usual suspects then coming to the fore of an increased reliance on IT processes and trip-wire automatic, penalties for non-compliance covering many aspects of tax collection, including the late submission of tax returns . All introduced to scare tax payers into keeping their affairs in order so that the state doesn’t have to do it for them . In the pious hope that the money will then continue to roll in , all simply watched over by , one woman, her dog and a laptop. Which if you are an Oxbridge Blue, sitting in a warm room and you have never missed a meal , seems a very simple goal… just get it right first time and the state doesn’t bother you.
But as often happens with good intentions and big IT shiny projects, the marginalised end up being pushed further to the edges . From recent data 184,000 low earners (reduced to 126,000 after appeals) were fined by HMRC for not filing their Self-Assessment Tax Return on time for the 2020–21 tax year, despite earning less than the personal allowance threshold (£12,500 in the 2020–21 tax year) which made them exempt from paying tax. Or over the past 5 years , that 40% of HMRC’s late filing penalties are issued to people who earn too little to pay tax. https://www.taxpolicy.org.uk/2023/06/26/penalties2023/
These are the sort of people, who will not own a computer, can’t afford an accountant and most likely will be in other debt problems with the mental issues that brings. So our brown envelope coming through the door will remain unopened in the hope it goes way. And yet they are caught in the net unintended, the money doesn’t just roll it and their debts increase due to interest on a fine for the act of a failure to submit a nil return.
And on my side of the shining battlements of Camelot, those IT systems are time consuming and overly prescriptive, taking longer to clear cases that before ,with fewer staff than before and a massive unbudgeted source of work , coming from the legislation intended to whip the unwilling into line. While money flows out unconstrained from other routes due to criminal attacks , as we have removed the initial warning trip wires that used to identify these activities , as compliance checks and functions are rebranded customer services and reduced to the level of date stamping
I keep saying it but I can't see things getting better for a) The Met b) UK policing in general any time soon. The systematic dismantling of UK policing that started in 2010 under May continues with the result that capacity and capability are now at a dangerously low level. Like Russian history we are the point that when something particularly awful happens the textbook will say 'and then it got worse'.
As Urban Cohort says many of the Conservatives want a return to a police force that 'knew its place' and wouldn't arrest 'people like them'. Was this the aim of PCC's? apart from serving to distance central government from budgeting decisions I'm sure some secretly hankered for a return to the days when a quick phone call could make tricky problems for the 'great and good' disappear. That's not to deny it happens now but the risks of exposure seem greater now.
Moving on to 'community consultation' who exactly are the police consulting with? It's probably the same people who turn up to every meeting, i.e. single issue maniacs who despite being reasonably knowledgeable are often operating at the fringes of sanity. Most of them do know enough to cause you to have to do a lot of paperwork to deal with them. Community Leaders? who elects them? However community consultation will always come down to: Dog shit, Litter, cycling on the pavement and speeding (as long as it's not 'local people. 50 in a 20 is OK if you're local).
There is no doubt, as you say, that the general governance of this country is failing. Councils are going bankrupt - although massive cuts from central government do not help. One thing the government is adept at is using the media to divide the public. After all, once they convince you to hate the medical profession most things are possible. Who will they hate on next? My bet is recipients of adult social care or the SEN budget).
The outlook for the country is not good. Look at the state of the armed forces. A recruiting crisis, unable to crew ships or train pilots and senior officers at war with each other as they fight for a slice of the cake. Sound familiar?
BTW the best definition of policing for those who think policing should be sharply focused on crime is 'something is going on that shouldn't really be going on and can you make this problem go away'.
Great piece Dom... As the Brixton town centre sergeant in the 90’s I can confirm that policing by consent was a theory lost on the locals, as they tried to stop us from catching Robbers and Drug dealers , throwing stuff at us as we tried to chase them etc ..I can also confirm that during our regular meetings with traders and business owners.. they were concerned with cycling on the pavement and dog shit.. not so much the 200 street robberies a month occurring in a 1 1/2 square mile area.... that was 30 years and several reorganisations ago. .. the more things change...
All this before you examine the really gritty stuff that is gamming up the system and making officers miserable. The current flowchart for an officer investigating a case goes something like this.
1. Conduct your investigation - don't forget that you need a DPA form countersigned by an Inspector to get information from any third party! (New policy circa 2023)
2. Arrest your suspect. Because there are so few stations, you end up at custody on the opposite side of London. Your card doesn't work and you have to get people to open doors for you.
3. Build your case using CONNECT, the MPS answer to a question nobody asked. Rebuild your case three times in one shift due to repeated crashing. Finally submit to CPS to be told that the system has not differentiated between exhibits and unused material. Oh, and the MG3 is unreadable because you accidentally included a pound sign in your fraud case, you dozy git.
4. CPS don't believe that the suspect can be remanded, so refuse to make an in custody charging decision (policy since 2020 and was meant to be a temporary summer contingency). Bail your suspect.
5. Now your suspect is bailed, DG6 comes along and gives you a wallop between the legs. You now need to prepare full unused schedules and redact all unused material and complete an Investigation Management Document setting out every line of enquiry you've pursued - before CPS will even look at it.
6. Finally submit your file. A PS who hasn't seen the inside of a courtroom in his life rejects the file because you have called the suspect a suspect, and he says this is prejudicial.
7. Submit your file and the PS approves it. CPS bounce it back because they say it's missing a key document. The file is not in fact missing that document.
8. Play file submission ping pong with the CPS for a few weeks, as each time you submit it, it takes a week or more for them to acknowledge it.
9. Finally the file doesn't get bounced. You now dont get a response for 6 months.
10. A reviewing lawyer sends the file back with a memo demanding a further statement from the victim confirming that, as so much time has passed since the incident, that they still want to go to court. The memo has a deadline set two weeks in the past. It automatically triggers an escalation to the BCU Commander who demands to know why you are behind on your memos.
11. Get a new statement from the victim who can't understand why it's needed. Apologise profusely. Resubmit your file.
12. Six months later, get a charging decision. Celebrate for a nanosecond. Send a postal charge to your defendant.
13. Draft and submit an MG5. The same PS from before bounces the file because you have referred to the defendant as the defendant.
14. Attend the first hearing. The defendant attends. The trial date is set for 2026.
15. Inform the victim of the trial date who says they no longer want to know. Summon every remaining inch of empathy to persuade them not to withdraw.
16. Trial date arrives. There is no defence barrister. Trial adjourned for another year.
17. The new trial date arrives. The courtroom roof is leaking effluence onto the dock. Trial moved to the following week.
18. New new trial date arrives and actually starts. The defendant is convicted. His barrister says his client has impregnated three women in the past year and it would be unfair to separate him from his children. Suspended sentence.
Fin.
I applaud you Dom for this line: 'He should have said the Met needs to do less and do it better.' No-one will agree to the MPS, let alone their own police beyond London, doing less. So, it is left to chiefs officers presenting to their PCC or Mayor, a "line by line" audit of functions or roles. WE both know none of the chiefs have the courage to do this, let alone a PCC agreeing.
Ironically now decades ago NYPD Chief Bill Bratton was able to rebuild NYPD because his predecessor unilaterally stopped gaming aka "numbers" enforcement - which handily was a state responsibility. Yes, there were other foundations built: more jail space, merging the three police departments (NYPD, Housing and Transit), more courts and prosecutors.
For quite some time ago, probably the mid-1980's - in the USA police reform was focused on the police ONLY doing enforcement as they were the only people with that responsibility, equipment, manpower and more.
Sadly the people who are really losing out are the public in the "hot spots" where gangs proliferate etc.
Hi Don, there is so much I want to say here but for once will confine myself to a single point (do I hear cheers and a comment of ‘at last!’!😂)
I believe the die is cast already.
The Met is toast. Not because of any particular failure, I just believe an unholy coalition of politicians including right wing Tories and the left wing liberal (small ‘l’ boys, I know he is Labour,) Mayor of London want it so. Khan wants to recreate the Met in his own image and that it be used as a model for future police reform elsewhere in the UK. The Tories read too much Daily Mail and long for a more authoritarian body to do their bidding as it did in 1984/5 without quibbling, full of obedient operatives who know their place.m and would never report a middle-class motorist for driving without due care or arrest them after being in a ‘social environment’. In fairness last point largely achieved with almost no trafpol, and don’t we know it in my part of Sarf Lunnon!🤔😂
Both are likely to be disappointed in what they get.
I am not a massive fan of Rowley but he’s simply a fall guy set up to fail.
As a jobbing tax man, I find myself with feet in both the, TJIF’d camps and the increasing worry that I am now working or an organisation as outcome blind as the Post Office has proved to be.
We have always had ICL/ Fujitso baked into our operating processes and platform, dating back to when ICL was first created by Harold Wilson and Tony Benn. Run forward 20 years from that at about the time that Horizon was being rolled out on the PO, HMC&E was about to hand over all of its IT resource to ICL under at Blairite PFI , then just at the last minute ,the agreement was mysteriously put on hold for 6 months .
Internal rumour had it this was because it had been found that ICL had been deliberately misdescribing its imports on the declarations made to us, in order pay less customs duty. So, the agreement held up or so while reparations were made and any potential reputational damage was carefully walled up in the basement.
Subsequently, and for the past 20 years following the merging of IR and C&E, the new Dept has been required to follow the same mantra of doing, "the same with less" as operational efficiencies are demanded’ aka, year on year budget cuts. With the usual suspects then coming to the fore of an increased reliance on IT processes and trip-wire automatic, penalties for non-compliance covering many aspects of tax collection, including the late submission of tax returns . All introduced to scare tax payers into keeping their affairs in order so that the state doesn’t have to do it for them . In the pious hope that the money will then continue to roll in , all simply watched over by , one woman, her dog and a laptop. Which if you are an Oxbridge Blue, sitting in a warm room and you have never missed a meal , seems a very simple goal… just get it right first time and the state doesn’t bother you.
But as often happens with good intentions and big IT shiny projects, the marginalised end up being pushed further to the edges . From recent data 184,000 low earners (reduced to 126,000 after appeals) were fined by HMRC for not filing their Self-Assessment Tax Return on time for the 2020–21 tax year, despite earning less than the personal allowance threshold (£12,500 in the 2020–21 tax year) which made them exempt from paying tax. Or over the past 5 years , that 40% of HMRC’s late filing penalties are issued to people who earn too little to pay tax. https://www.taxpolicy.org.uk/2023/06/26/penalties2023/
These are the sort of people, who will not own a computer, can’t afford an accountant and most likely will be in other debt problems with the mental issues that brings. So our brown envelope coming through the door will remain unopened in the hope it goes way. And yet they are caught in the net unintended, the money doesn’t just roll it and their debts increase due to interest on a fine for the act of a failure to submit a nil return.
And on my side of the shining battlements of Camelot, those IT systems are time consuming and overly prescriptive, taking longer to clear cases that before ,with fewer staff than before and a massive unbudgeted source of work , coming from the legislation intended to whip the unwilling into line. While money flows out unconstrained from other routes due to criminal attacks , as we have removed the initial warning trip wires that used to identify these activities , as compliance checks and functions are rebranded customer services and reduced to the level of date stamping
I keep saying it but I can't see things getting better for a) The Met b) UK policing in general any time soon. The systematic dismantling of UK policing that started in 2010 under May continues with the result that capacity and capability are now at a dangerously low level. Like Russian history we are the point that when something particularly awful happens the textbook will say 'and then it got worse'.
As Urban Cohort says many of the Conservatives want a return to a police force that 'knew its place' and wouldn't arrest 'people like them'. Was this the aim of PCC's? apart from serving to distance central government from budgeting decisions I'm sure some secretly hankered for a return to the days when a quick phone call could make tricky problems for the 'great and good' disappear. That's not to deny it happens now but the risks of exposure seem greater now.
Moving on to 'community consultation' who exactly are the police consulting with? It's probably the same people who turn up to every meeting, i.e. single issue maniacs who despite being reasonably knowledgeable are often operating at the fringes of sanity. Most of them do know enough to cause you to have to do a lot of paperwork to deal with them. Community Leaders? who elects them? However community consultation will always come down to: Dog shit, Litter, cycling on the pavement and speeding (as long as it's not 'local people. 50 in a 20 is OK if you're local).
There is no doubt, as you say, that the general governance of this country is failing. Councils are going bankrupt - although massive cuts from central government do not help. One thing the government is adept at is using the media to divide the public. After all, once they convince you to hate the medical profession most things are possible. Who will they hate on next? My bet is recipients of adult social care or the SEN budget).
The outlook for the country is not good. Look at the state of the armed forces. A recruiting crisis, unable to crew ships or train pilots and senior officers at war with each other as they fight for a slice of the cake. Sound familiar?
BTW the best definition of policing for those who think policing should be sharply focused on crime is 'something is going on that shouldn't really be going on and can you make this problem go away'.
Retired
Great piece Dom... As the Brixton town centre sergeant in the 90’s I can confirm that policing by consent was a theory lost on the locals, as they tried to stop us from catching Robbers and Drug dealers , throwing stuff at us as we tried to chase them etc ..I can also confirm that during our regular meetings with traders and business owners.. they were concerned with cycling on the pavement and dog shit.. not so much the 200 street robberies a month occurring in a 1 1/2 square mile area.... that was 30 years and several reorganisations ago. .. the more things change...