Public are tired of virtue-signalling police, says top officer
THE public are “fed up” with police officers’ virtue-signalling rather than locking up burglars, one of Britain’s most senior police officers says today.
In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Stephen Watson, the new chief constable of Greater Manchester Police, said officers’ impartiality was being jeopardised through “making common cause” with campaign groups by, for example, taking the knee or wearing their pins, badges or rainbow shoelaces.
He said “woke” policing was past the “high water mark” of public tolerance and needed to be rebalanced. Asked if he would take the knee in uniform, he said: “No, I absolutely would not. I would probably kneel before the Queen, God, and Mrs Watson, that’s it.”
Mr Watson set out his views in his first major interview since being appointed to turn round a force excoriated by inspectors for its poor performance.
He pledged to restore confidence by sending officers to every burglary, investigating every crime however “minor”, banning the practice of “screening out” weak cases and prioritising neighbourhood policing.
He said empathy and engaging with the public was a key part of policing but the way it has been done has been “cack-handed”.
“Impartiality is in danger of being upset in our urge and desire to demonstrate that we would like to make common cause from time to time with people whose agenda is very difficult to disagree with,” he said.
“I do not think that things like taking the knee, demonstrating that you have a commonality of view with the protesters that you’re policing is compatible with the standards of service that people require of their police.
“Officers could put themselves in a difficult place because if you demonstrate you’re not impartial, and you then have to make an arrest, how on earth do you assist the courts to come to just judgement as to you having executed your powers of arrest in an appropriately impartial professional manner?”
It is why he does not want to see officers “adulterating their uniforms” with pins or badges and why he spurns social media except as a medium to explain what the police are doing to answer the public’s concerns rather than promoting his own profile.
He said: “I think we’re past the high watermark. The public are getting a little bit fed up of virtue-signalling police officers when they’d really rather we just locked up burglars.”
‘Officers could put themselves in a difficult place if they demonstrate they’re not impartial’
Chief Constable Stephen Watson has a simple philosophy: he wants every crime investigated, however minor, and he spurns “virtue-signalling” that might distract from that mission.
He has taken on one of the toughest jobs in policing: to revive the fortunes of Greater Manchester Police (GMP), one of Britain’s biggest forces, after it was castigated by inspectors for ignoring a quarter of all reported crimes, prompting the departure of its former chief constable.
Mr Watson’s track record suggests he can do it: he took over South Yorkshire Police when it was on its knees before his “back to basics” approach and reintroduction of neighbourhood policing transformed it into what HM inspectors rated as the most improved police force in the country three years on the trot.
The 53-year-old starts from the principle that the significance of any offence is not whether it is categorised as “minor” but its impact on the victim.
Cases he cites would be a plumber whose tools are stolen from their van or a corner shop owner facing persistent shoplifting, both of which are business-threatening events.
“Another classic example is when somebody drives off a petrol forecourt having taken some windscreen washer fluid worth £10 and we somehow conclude that’s not very significant,” he says.
“Call me old fashioned, but the sort of people who do that can commit lots of other crimes.
“In those circumstances, we have CCTV footage of the individual plus their number plate.
“I just find it an anathema to me and it is an anathema to the public if we do not get on the end of those investigations and lock people up.
“Because the one thing that the police are uniquely empowered to do is to arrest criminals and if we’re not doing that then nobody is, and that is a problem.”
These “minor” crimes are ones that might have previously been “screened out” – a practice he regards as an “inappropriate method to manage demand”, and one that accounts for the declining burglary and theft detection rates.
“I simply will not accept that. And that’s why I’ve sort of banned the phrase ‘screening out’ on the basis that it becomes misunderstood,” he says.
It means that every burglary victim in Greater Manchester will now receive a visit from an officer and forensic investigator “wherever appropriate”, he promises.
He knows resources are not “limitless” but even with crimes where there are no witnesses, CCTV or forensic evidence, he says the public should still expect a desk-based investigation and “quality of communication” that leaves them “feeling satisfied we’ve tried our best in those circumstances”.
When he took over at South Yorkshire Police, neighbourhood policing had been decimated due to concerns it was too expensive.
It left the force in a cycle of “reacting” to crime instead of proactively preventing it. It now has 600 officers on the beat and has reduced crime demand by 23 per cent.
“What you come to discover is that far from being a luxury that we cannot afford, I believe neighbourhood policing is something you cannot afford not to have,” he says.
However, it requires beat officers to really know their areas, be able to solve problems in conjunction with other agencies and root out criminals rather than purely being about “reassuring visibility and getting involved in kids’ face-painting competitions”, says Mr Watson.
It is a no-nonsense approach that underpins his criticism of the “cack handed” way police forces have sometimes tried to demonstrate their empathy with communities that risk undermining their impartiality.
“Whether it be through adulterating
‘I will not take the knee. I would only take the knee before the Queen, God and Mrs Watson ... that’s it’
the uniform with pins and tabs and badges or whatever, and having all manner of florid social media accounts.
“These are all things which I think leave the public cold, and I just personally don’t think they have a place in policing,” he says.
While the GMP is “embracing and engaging” Manchester’s vibrant LGBT community, Mr Watson draws the line at “police officers putting rainbows on their epaulettes and wearing rainbow shoe laces.”
“The public are getting a little bit fed up of virtue-signalling police officers when they’d really rather we just locked up burglars,” he says.
It is why he would not “take the knee” while in uniform: “No, I absolutely would not. I would probably kneel before the Queen, God, and Mrs Watson, that’s it,” he says.
As a senior police officer, he accepts his role is to uphold the laws laid down by Parliament.
But he is concerned the police could be overwhelmed by the creation of new “hate crimes” which “sought to criminalise what people think about difficult social issues, as opposed to what they do”.
“I know it might sound at first blush like a relatively outlandish comment but you know it is not an offence to be a misogynist, it is not an offence to be a racist,” he says. “What is an offence if in holding those unfortunate beliefs, you act them out in such a way as causes harm to another.
“If you take misogyny, for example, within the current criminal code if, as a misogynist, you harass another, there is an offence called harassment aggravated by your misogyny. If you lay hands on another, it’s a criminal
‘I would not take the knee ... I would probably kneel before the Queen, God and Mrs Watson, that’s it’ assault in statute, aggravated by the fact that you’re a misogynist.”
He warns that any legislative attempt to get behind that “originating thought” will be “very difficult” and could end up “populating your crime records with literally thousands and thousands of additional crimes.”
He says officers would be “chasing their tails in ever decreasing circles” which would “detract” from their core role of tackling not only “higher” crimes such as child sexual exploitation and organised crime groups but also locking up burglars, robbers, car thieves and “thugs who decide to thump you” in a drunken rage on a night out.