Way of theworld Michael Deacon

When shoplifters are caught stealing food, should the police arrest them – or have a heart, and let them go? Thanks to the cost of living crisis, this has become a major topic of discussion. In my view, however, the whole debate is irrelevant – for a very simple reason.

Which is that, even if you think the shoplifters should be arrested, there’ll be no one around to do it. Because the police will all be working from home.

That, at any rate, seems to be the way things are going. As we know from the report in Friday’s Telegraph, several police forces now have official “hybrid working” policies, which allow officers to investigate crimes from the comfort of their own homes. Including, apparently, murder.

Now, I’m not opposed to WFH per se. Certain jobs – such as, to pluck an example at random, the writing of whimsical newspaper columns – can easily be done at home, because they require no specialist equipment, teamwork or face-to-face contact with other people. In certain other jobs, however, leaving the house is an essential requirement.

And the public might have assumed that policing was among them. It seems, however, that we were wrong, and a detective’s work can be done perfectly well from home after all. Soon, no doubt, television crime dramas will be updated to reflect this revolutionary development. “Quick, mon cher Hastings! Let us move! We have not one moment to lose!”

“But Poirot, where are we going?” “To the drawing room! Pointless is about to start, and I never miss an episode!”

I suppose the public will get used to it eventually. But I think it would be easier to accept the police working from home if only burglars and muggers did, too.

Then again, this isn’t just about the police. Almost every profession is in the grip of the WFH craze, now that employees have seen how much money can be saved by forgoing the daily commute. Only yesterday, the former chief inspector of hospitals called for medical consultants to be allowed to work from home. We can only guess who will demand it next. Undertakers. Rugby players. Longdistance lorry drivers. And if you want to add an extension to your house, your builder will construct it in his own front garden, and then tell you to come and collect it.

Still, there is at least one upside. Railway unions are threatening to stage the biggest train strike in modern history this summer. But since the entire country will be working from home by then, no one will notice.

In February 2021, the UK chairman of KPMG caused controversy by dismissing unconscious bias training as “complete and utter c--p”. A mere 24 hours after his comments were reported in the media, he resigned. Now, just over a year later, all 15,300 members of KPMG’S UK staff are being made to undertake unconscious bias training – or face having their bonuses slashed.

This of course comes as no surprise. In the corporate world, unconscious bias training has become desperately fashionable. By teaching employees how to avoid being racist, sexist or transphobic, even by accident, it enables multibillion-dollar global corporations to show the world how caring and progressive they are.

In this particular case, though, there seems to be a curious twist. According to reports, KPMG staff won’t just be taught about the evils of prejudice in the workplace. To promote inclusivity, they’ll also be taught not to chat about their skiing holidays or their children’s private schools – because doing so can “isolate” those who are unable to afford such expensive luxuries.

Perhaps it can. But surely not at KPMG itself. After all, KPMG is one of the world’s biggest accounting firms. It provides advice on wealth management to very rich people, and helps them with their taxes. So if you’re the sort of person who gets upset when confronted by evidence of other people’s superior wealth, you wouldn’t apply to work at KPMG in the first place. It would be like Morrissey applying to work at Mcdonald’s.

Still, if some staff do get upset in this way, it isn’t just their colleagues who will have to refrain from flaunting their wealth. Their clients will, too. Perhaps, to avoid making their accountants feel isolated, the rich should pretend to earn far less money than they actually do. Film stars, for example, should pretend that their latest Hollywood blockbuster only paid them minimum wage, and Premier League footballers should pretend that Manchester City pay them in free Hobnobs.

That way, their accountants won’t feel upset, and the rich will get to pay less tax. Everyone wins.