Computer problems put police back on paper trail

GREATER Manchester Police is having problems with its troubled computer system again.

A source has claimed that there have been instances of officers having to revert to using ‘paper records.’

GMP has confirmed that it is currently working to resolve a problem, which is ‘intermittently’ affecting some elements of the iOPS system.

Assistant Chief Constable Rob Potts said: “Greater Manchester Police and suppliers are currently resolving a problem which is intermittently affecting elements of iOPS - one of our computer systems.

“This issue is not affecting the recording of calls from members of the public, our response to those calls or access to critical information.

“We have tried and tested procedures in place to minimise disruption including contingency plans which, when required, were successfully implemented force wide.

“GMP’s priority is protecting Greater Manchester and I would like to stress that that remains unchanged and unaffected by this problem.”

Problems with the system, which was introduced last July at a cost of £27m, have been well documented. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) told the force earlier this year that issues with the IT system had potentially exposed hundreds of vulnerable people to ‘potential risk of harm.’ Inspectors went into GMP in October and November to look at the backlog of open crimes that had built up since iOPS had been introduced three months earlier, in order to assess the risk levels within the queues and the impact on the force.

They found a huge drop-off in referrals for vulnerable children and adults, as well as ‘inconsistent’ communication with council social services departments.

“Therefore, the force can’t be confident it has identified and appropriately referred all people at risk to partner agencies,” a subsequent report read.

Chief Constable Ian Hopkins insisted that people were always protected, also saying ‘policing is done by human beings, not by computers’ and continued that ‘where the public were ringing us and we were made aware of incidents where there was significant harm or likelihood of risk to individuals or communities, we were still turning up.’