Response 385058529

Back to Response listing

Risks

1. Does the Policing 2026 strategy identify and acknowledge the main risks, challenges, opportunities and demands likely to impact on policing over the next 10 years?

Please select one item
Yes
Ticked No
Not sure
We would welcome any view you have.
Para 4 on page 5 states, "We must build a police service that meets the ambition of police reform....." It is strange that the ambition of police reform should feature first in this sentence, the only people being so ambitious being the Government. There was no clamour for such reform from either the public or the police service. This one sentence therefore belies the fact that the whole strategy is to suit Government and not the public. Furthermore, throughout the document the Government buzzword 'wellbeing' is used liberally. It is a non-word, means entirely different things to different people and organisations, and is entirely unmeasurable. The main risks going into the future are dubious. What is not addressed is the main risks that have manifested themselves in a botched and hurried merger of 8 professional forces. The risks of de-localisation, reduction in control rooms, the dreadful 101 service, the loss of visibility on the streets and a loss of professionalism in terms of investigative capabilities at a basic level, i.e. detective roles, coupled with the obvious signs of less professionalism - officers not wearing hats, hi vis jackets on motorways (yes it happens) and standing with hands in the pockets, all leads to an impression that senior officers have not cared to deal with the basic issues that the public see all too often and base their opinion of the force thereon. No strategy will ever deal with such a loss of public confidence unless the service realises and reacts to it most recent past failures.

Focus

2. Do you agree the main areas of focus proposed within the Policing 2026 strategy are the right ones to deliver an enhanced policing service?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Mostly agree
Ticked Not sure
Mostly disagree
Strongly disagree
Please tell us why you think these are the right or wrong areas of focus?
I cannot disagree with any of the five points. That said however point 1 assumes that risk assessments are going to be specific and that policing services will no longer be shared evenly across all communities....or to put it bluntly if the police assess no risk, then no service. You police by consent, not discrimination. Point 2 assumes you are taking on the weight of the world. Prevention is about ensuring safety and security, preventing and detecting crime. Tackling inequality and enduring problems facing communities is the job of Government. Points 1 and 2 also sadly seem to reflect services that will be afforded to victims of detected crime. There is no mention of dealing with vulnerabilities caused by the failure to prevent or detect crimes such as housebreakings. Point 3 should be point 1. Focus on local communities full stop. In my own personal experience when my house was broken into in East Kilbride the detectives came from Airdrie. Someone needs to explain to me how local that is Point 4 - I'm lost! That's what training and experience is about! Point 5 to a layman, yeah, yeah, yeah. Stuff that goes on in the strategic background, the public expect but really couldn't care less. The reality is that if this were true Police Scotland would never have been born based upon years of experience.

Methods

3. Do you agree the methods proposed within this strategy are the right ones to deliver an improved policing service?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Mostly agree
Not sure
Ticked Mostly disagree
Strongly disagree
Please tell us why you think this is the right or wrong approach?
Your purpose - again mentions the dreaded wellbeing word, but in a nutshell, do the public understand this jargon? Do they care? They know the can no longer see you so how do you achieve this? Your vision. The word sustained implies an already achieved level of excellence which you wish to maintain. You need to prove what you have already achieved. With rising crime figures this past year the word sustained is perhaps the least appropriate in terms of protection. In terms of how you will achieve your strategic objectives, the second point of strengthening effective partnerships should be the last point. If you fail to strengthen partnerships the following four points all fail. Point 1 - There should never have been a point where you feel the need to improve contact. The 8 Police services were always excellent at this...what's gone wrong that we now need to reinvent this by 2026? Point 2 - dealt with above Point 3 - shouldn't need to be said unless there has been a massive HR failure Point 4 - i6 was a great success, what's its being replaced by? Should have been dealt with before a rushed merger. Point 5 - Agree. An ongoing but expensive necessity. Point 6 - Again, should have been done before a rushed merger, and why has it not been done in the 4 years since the merger????

Performance

4. The Policing 2026 Strategy states that public confidence will be a key measure of success and the effectiveness of Police performance. Do you agree with this approach?

Please select one item
Ticked Strongly agree
Mostly agree
Not sure
Mostly disagree
Strongly disagree
We would welcome any views you have
A very obvious statement which is the backbone of policing - so why is it here? My only issue - and its a strongly personal one - is that as a retired police officer who has been the victim of, and a witness to, crime since I retired, I have sadly absolutely no confidence in the ability of the police nowadays to either respond to crime or investigate it appropriately .

Workforce

5. The Policing 2026 strategy highlights that we will need to re-shape our organisation with a workforce focussed on having the right skills and capacity to meet future challenges. Do you agree with this approach?

Please select one item
Strongly agree
Mostly agree
Ticked Not sure
Mostly disagree
Strongly disagree
We would welcome any views you have.
This is a very 'wooly' objective. On page 26 you state, "With the potential for four generations within our workforce over the coming decade.............while making the the right decisions about the roles most suited to the workforce at different ages." Excuse me, but as a retired Chief Inspector I dealt with 3 generations at the one time and always made, in consultation with the employee, the best decisions for their future trajectory. Despite the constant cackhanded interventions of supposed HR professionals whose personal targets appear to be more important than actual individuals lives. The police will continue to suffer unless they address a long term problem. 30 years, and perhaps longer now are spent on investing millions of pound in individuals training , talent and potential, only to allow everybody to walk out the door with their pension, their vast experience, and a paper certificate saying you've done your time bye, bye. What a waste of public money. There must be a programme put in pace for retired officers to return as part-time, not necessarily expensive, consultants, to pass on their skills and experience to younger officers. I can personally think of a huge number of areas where myself and ex-colleagues acquired a vast amount of knowledge, skills and experience in specialist areas that simply walked out the door with us and where such policy areas have now gone backwards.

Clear & Understandable

6. Is the strategy presented in a clear and understandable way?

Please select one item
Yes
Ticked No
We would welcome any views you have.
My first impression upon reading the document was that it had been written by a policy Redacted text and that a real police officer had not been within a million miles of it. Having read and re-read numerous times my opinion has not changed. The continual use of the word 'wellbeing' is appalling. The OED definition is. "the state of being healthy, comfortable or happy." How does this relate to general policing? And how do you measure how healthy someone feels after an interaction with the police unless they've just been smashed in the face by a thug that the police have no idea how to detect?!! It is a ridiculous cut and paste of other strategies that the authors have had access to. It is also a serious indictment of the quality of Executive Officers in the force who think this is an appropriate way of speaking to their customers - the public , not Government Ministers.

Other views

7. We would welcome any additional views you have on our strategy and how it will affect you, or any other person.

We would welcome any views you have.
I have serious concerns about partnership working and CCTV in particular. There seems to be an unwritten assumption throughout the document that partner organisations will happily work with the police to achieve the aims and objectives of the police without financial incentive. Partnership unfortunately come at a cost. On page 38 PC Sophie Robertson's story states that at 1830-1845 she called the local CCTV operator. Whoever wrote this is either niaive or ignorant of the facts surrounding CCTV coverage in Scotland. Local Council CCTV is only available in some areas, There are far too many disparate systems, owners and operators - including the police - across Scotland. There is an urgent need for a national CCTV strategy in Scotland, but despite several years of trying there is a complete lack of engagement by the Scottish Government, presumably because an awful lot of money will be required to integrate and update systems. The issue for the public however is that the benefit of CCTV systems to the Police and Crown - in terms of reduced costs through early guilty pleas, etc., - and the consequent increase in feelings of community and personal safety, can be easily quantified. The danger for the Police is that if they expect CCTV providers to produce video evidence procured through public or commercial investment for free, that service may not be willingly forthcoming. The police pay some CCTV providers an annual grant - that does not cover the level of service provided - but if this was to cease, or not be uprated - then the police may need to consider the possibility of having to enter into even more expensive commercial contracts with CCTV providers. It is therefore imperative that the Police need to drive forward the need for a National CCTV Strategy, not only for their own benefit but certainly for the publics.

About you

10. Are you responding as an individual or an organisation?

Please select one item
(Required)
Ticked I am answering as an individual
I am answering on behalf of an organisation