New Met police video

[Fedster + 1,307]

Quote

The Shadow Home Secretary speaks to PoliceOracle.com about her approach to the role and is 'absolutely confident' she will get the chance to deliver.

"I’m always happy if any of your readers want to invite me to their area, or their force, or see what their specialist activity is.

"That’s an open invitation to readers of Police Oracle."

Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott wants to speak to more police officers.

And while the woman who wants to be in charge of policing policy would like to hear more from the frontline, policing and home affairs are policy issues she has followed closely for decades, having started her career with the Home Office before working for the National Council of Civil Liberties, now known as Liberty.

"Police forces up and down the country have cut police numbers and that must necessarily lead through to the frontline. I saw some figures about response rates in Birmingham, they were getting longer and that’s obviously going to be the case if you cut police numbers," she told PoliceOracle.com at her office in Westminster.

So what would she do about this?

"Overall the Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour Party is not in favour of austerity. The cuts in policing are part of George Osborne’s austerity and we would be looking at investing in the public sector not making cuts which are often counter-productive."

But when asked again how this would be done, the answer is not made clear. Later, when questioned on whether the party fully backs the continued existence of police and crime commissioners, she said policy is undecided: "We’ll see what Labour says in its next manifesto but that won’t be till 2020, all things being equal."

Following that election she is "absolutely confident" that she will be a minister shaping government policy. She puts Labour’s low standing in the polls down to last summer’s political infighting, which she says has now "quietened down".

“I have every expectation we will narrow the gap and overtake the Conservative Party,” she adds.

Another area she offers thoughts on is officer safety. And it seems boosting numbers and ending austerity would be her tactic rather than other measures, like an increase in tasers for frontline officers – which the MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington opposes.

“We need to be sure sentencing is fit for purpose. It is not for me to dictate to judges but we need to shine a light on that. And I’m concerned that government is not keeping accurate figures on assaults.

“Police are on the frontline and need protecting,” she adds.

On that note, does she agree with the Sadiq Khan’s intervention to delay the introduction of spit guards in the Met and order a review of their use?

“I think it’s right that the mayor has a review. We need to understand how many policemen are encountering spitting because the danger of spitting is the danger of infection. We need to have some analysis as to what the adverse effects are.

“But we also need to have some analysis of the extent to which spit hoods modify behaviour, improve behaviour, of the suspect, or make behaviour worse.”

She adds that she has been told their use sometimes appears “degrading”.

"It should not be the purpose of policing to humiliate and degrade people unnecessarily so let’s see what the review finds."

The level of tasers issued to officers is “about right” at present, she says, while the issuing of firearms to all frontline officers, in her view, would lead to too many deaths.

Former Met Police officer Peter Francis named Ms Abbott as one of the politicians who he was tasked with keeping information on while working undercover for the Met.

The politician who was the first black woman elected to Parliament, and has long campaigned for a reduction in stop and search use, says she will be involved in the statutory inquiry chaired by Lord Justice Pitchford.

Asked if she has faith in the process, she says: “Perhaps it’s not appropriate for me to comment except to say that one of the things that undermines community confidence in the police is the idea that the police are spying on people, people who have not committed any crime, like Doreen Lawrence, who just wanted justice for her son, and then find the police were spying on them.

“I’m hopeful that the Pitchford Inquiry will come up with conclusions which will stop this stuff happening again but we’ll have to see,” she said.

So how much will her personal experiences shape her approach to being Shadow Home Secretary?

“I think the experience of my constituents shapes the way I approach my job. On the one hand my constituents are very concerned about crime and police numbers but on the other hand they have a concern about the police misusing their powers, my constituency experience informs my views in both ways.”

One of the final thoughts offered in the interview, in which she also called for more BME officers to be hired at senior level and more to be done to tackle online crime, is on what she considers makes effective policing.

“An effective police force is one that has the confidence of its communities and you can’t currently say that the Met has the total confidence of the community where it works. Things are better than they were 30 years ago but they’re still not good.

“We saw after the 2011 disturbances that some young people in London said they behaved the way they did because of how the Metropolitan Police treats them. If we want an effective police force we have to have a police force that has the support of its community.”

 

View On Police Oracle

[JulietAlpha1 + 515]

There would only be 'too many deaths' if the deaths were unlawful. If the shooting is found to be justified then it's a good result in my book.

[Milankovitch + 3,445]

I wish people would stop holding up sentencing as a way of protecting police officers. It doesn't stop you getting assaulted. Being adequately backed up, trained and equipped can though.

23 minutes ago, JulietAlpha1 said:

There would only be 'too many deaths' if the deaths were unlawful. If the shooting is found to be justified then it's a good result in my book.

I think that is a bit of a one dimensional view in all honesty. There could be a lot of perfectly lawful shootings and a problem can still exist, be it issues with training, deployment practices or any number of other factors. I doubt Diane Abbott was thinking like that but it isn't quite as simple as you make it out to be. 

[JulietAlpha1 + 515]

2 hours ago, Milankovitch said:

I wish people would stop holding up sentencing as a way of protecting police officers. It doesn't stop you getting assaulted. Being adequately backed up, trained and equipped can though.

I think that is a bit of a one dimensional view in all honesty. There could be a lot of perfectly lawful shootings and a problem can still exist, be it issues with training, deployment practices or any number of other factors. I doubt Diane Abbott was thinking like that but it isn't quite as simple as you make it out to be. 

It is one dimensional, but what are we basing our judgements on? What is too many? The other week there was a report about PAVA/CS in custody, saying that it's being used too often. It's either justified or it's not, if it's unjustified then it's being used too much. 

[Milankovitch + 3,445]

20 minutes ago, JulietAlpha1 said:

It is one dimensional, but what are we basing our judgements on? What is too many? The other week there was a report about PAVA/CS in custody, saying that it's being used too often. It's either justified or it's not, if it's unjustified then it's being used too much. 

It is difficult to answer with what too many would be but looking at it from a point of justified or unjustified is rather simplistic. I think something can be perfectly justified but overused where alternatives may exist. That could be anything from a training need to extra equipment.

 

To give an example I'm lead to believe that spit hoods were issued in my force off the back of some work done from the use of force forms that were submitted by officers. Officers were using various methods to prevent people from spitting that were quite justifiable in the circumstances but arguably completely avoidable if a spit hood had been available. If you just looked at it from the point of justifiable or not we'd lose sight of the fact that there are alternatives that can reduce injuries to officers and custodies.

 

It was much the same when leg restraints were introduced, prior to that I think it was fair to say we had to use more force to control particularly violent custodies that was perfectly justifiable in the circumstances. Again if you look at it from the simplistic "justified or not" point of view and don't learn from that then we're putting officers at risk by not giving them alternatives to use.

[Zulu 22 + 4,638]

It is Diane Abbott who has said everything and yet nothing has any substance. I can only speak on my own behalf but, I would not want to talk to her as to do that you have to had some respect for the person.  She blames the government and austerity, well who caused the situation where austerity was essential. There was no austerity call when the MP.'s were having a huge pay and expenses increase.

When the Winsor report was going through, Officers Pay being slashed and Pensions being stolen, where was this woman then. I do not recall her having any regard then, or speaking out.  If she believes that Labour will be in power after the next election the woman is deluded.

[Techie1 + 2,024]

A number of posts on this topic have been removed as they don't fit with our standards of behaviour. 

These can be found via this link: http://police.community/terms

[Cathedral Bobby + 1,174]

I am not convinced Labour in its current manifestation offers much to the police service. I am still trying to come to terms with the idea of having a Prime Minister who is a pacifist. No risk there then. But I was totally bemused when Diane Abbott was appointed to her current role. She isn't exactly known for supporting the police, or the concept of law and order more generally. Strange times we live in.

[Hades + 1,693]

On 19/01/2017 at 13:34, JulietAlpha1 said:

There would only be 'too many deaths' if the deaths were unlawful. If the shooting is found to be justified then it's a good result in my book.

I think that might be a bit simplistic to be honest.  there have been police shootings in the UK which have been ruled as lawful, but where it's clear that different tactics would have significantly minimised the risk to the subjects, whilst still achieving the overall strategy.  Chandlers Ford is a good example where the deployment of Rifle Officers, together with the known MO of the criminals made it almost inevitable that they'd be shot.

Subjects have to feature in our risk assessments and we need to consider the risk that is posed to them by armed officers as a result of their actions too.  Article 2 and all that!