Government plans for police merger spark accountability concerns among experts and communities alike

The UK government is contemplating a significant restructuring of police forces in England and Wales, potentially reducing the current 43 forces to around 12. According to Craig Smith, a Lecturer in Law at the University of Salford, while this has been described as a major overhaul aimed at cutting bureaucracy, saving money, and addressing serious and organised crime, the move deserves scrutiny. He warns that large-scale mergers might weaken accountability without confronting the underlying causes of policing issues.

“The government’s proposal to reduce the number of police forces in England and Wales from 43 to around 12 has been framed as the most significant reform of policing in decades,” he remarked. Smith points out that the backdrop of systemic issues within the criminal justice system, such as overcrowded prisons, court backlogs, and declining public confidence, suggests that these proposed changes may not offer lasting solutions. Instead, he argues, they may resemble “institutional firefighting” rather than a comprehensive strategy addressing the ingrained problems facing policing.

Centralisation, which proponents argue could alleviate inconsistencies and inefficiencies, may not tackle the root causes of policing failures. Smith highlights critical factors such as resourcing gaps, training deficits, and weak oversight as primary contributors to issues like investigative errors and misconduct. He suggests that merging forces could potentially diffuse accountability rather than enhancing it. “Merging forces does not automatically resolve these issues,” he states, emphasising the complexities involved.

Additionally, the government’s assurance that “where you live will no longer determine the outcomes you get from your force” is deemed overly optimistic by experts who contend that many elements influence criminal justice outcomes, including socio-economic conditions and local legal resources. The impact of these factors suggests that simply reorganising police structures would not eliminate existing inequalities.

The tension within these proposals is further illustrated by the contrast between the government’s emphasis on restoring public trust through neighbourhood policing and the potential drawbacks of larger “mega-forces.” According to Smith, the relational nature of trust in policing is cultivated over time and heavily influenced by local engagement, which could be jeopardised by a centralised model.

Historically, similar proposals have emerged, notably under Charles Clarke, but were often abandoned due to insufficient results. Scotland’s experience with a single national police force serves as a cautionary example, revealing the risks related to centralisation, such as tensions around local accountability. With the current announcement leaving many details ambiguous, concerns arise regarding the preparedness and coherence of the proposed reforms.

For effective reform, Smith argues for approaches that connect policing with other components of the criminal justice system, such as courts and victim support, to create a systemic solution rather than simply displacing pressure within a beleaguered system. He notes, “Without clarity, capacity, and trust, it is not reform, it is rearrangement.”

Commenting on the implications of these reforms, Andrew Smith, Managing Partner at Corker Binning, pointed out that the incorporation of fraud into the remit of the proposed National Police Service (NPS) reflects a necessary shift. He states, “As fraud is increasingly committed online, and as both the perpetrators and victims are usually spread across numerous counties, it makes sense to centralise its investigation into a single national body with appropriate technical expertise.” However, he cautioned that to truly combat the “fraud epidemic,” the NPS must possess the capacity to act swiftly on international cases as well.

In summary, while the government’s proposed reforms may aim to centralise policing, experts are urging caution, highlighting accountability and systemic issues that require more profound consideration

Copyright & permissions