Editorial Comment
The story of the Derbyshire Constabulary Male Voice Choir is a parable for our times. People look to their police to provide order on the streets and track down criminals. But those who run the forces have other preoccupations, such as equality, inclusivity and the social engineering demands made of them by governments. There is nothing wrong with this. The police should reflect the society they serve, by including more women and ethnic minorities. But the primary function of a police force is not to be a showcase for equal opportunities. In Derbyshire, however, a male voice choir has had to break ties with the police because it does not contain women.
It is tempting to dismiss this as a small matter, the product of a chief constable’s overzealous interpretation of the equality requirements placed on his shoulders. But it is emblematic of a bigger problem – a loss of direction by our police, who are often expected to be, and see themselves as, a branch of social services. The danger is that, when criminals also see the police in this way, they are emboldened to treat the streets as their own. The rise in violent crime, especially in London, is indicative of this phenomenon. There may well be other explanations – cultural, educational, generational – but the impression that the police are losing their grip is a key factor and, unlike the others, it can be rectified almost overnight.
Public confidence in their local police, once taken for granted, is at around 50 per cent according to a 2015 survey. Although he will face no charges, the arrest this week on suspicion of murder of a homeowner alleged to have killed a burglar in his home did not help matters. Nor will the growing propensity of the police to ignore burglaries, as we report today. If break-ins are not going to be investigated, there will be more of them for the simple reason the perpetrators will not be caught.
It is easy to forget that the primary function of the police – the first Peelian principle – is to keep order and prevent crimes. For decades, we were told that what mattered most was targeting hotspots and getting officers to crime scenes rapidly, when what people want is for the crime not to happen at all, if possible. The efficacy of routine patrols is often challenged by criminologists; and it is true that this can never be measured. But police officers on the streets in high-crime areas provide a deterrent to offenders and reassurance to the law-abiding majority. After all, the greatest deterrent is the prospect of getting caught in the act. It was telling that, on Thursday evening, protesters in Tottenham, north London, the scene of a recent fatal shooting, called for more police on the streets.
There is a certain irony here, since activists in such areas complain about discriminatory and heavy-handed tactics, which led Theresa May when she was home secretary to urge police not to use stop-and-search powers so freely. This led to a significant reduction in the number of stops, which has coincided with the rise in violence. It is hard to take seriously the protestations of ministers that there is not cause and effect here. Even when the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan – whose hapless response to the crime wave has been shameful – and Cressida Dick, the Met Police commissioner, both promised to increase stop and search, officers still feel constrained in using their powers.
The greater use of body-mounted video cameras, which record the interactions of officers with suspects, is intended to encourage police to use stop and search without feeling they are having to watch out for a disapproving tut-tut from a virtue-signalling politician or human-rights lawyer. It is completely wrong to pick on people because of their colour. It is irresponsible to hamper the use of a critical crime-fighting power so that politicians can burnish their liberal credentials.
On Monday, Amber Rudd, the Home Secretary, will publish the Government’s new “violent crime strategy”. What will it contain of any practical use? Many chief officers say they are hamstrung by budget cuts, and it is true that the number of officers has declined. There is a case to be made for more money for police patrols, not least when the budget for overseas aid has doubled in a decade – a set of national priorities that most voters find hard to understand. But if funding is to be increased, it must be used in the way that taxpayers want: for serious offences such as burglary to be properly investigated; for victims not to be treated as criminals; and for more police officers to be deployed routinely on the streets. That is a strategy the country could support.