Police and Crime Commissioners
| Published date | 01 March 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461355717748974 |
| Author | Barry Loveday |
| Date | 01 March 2018 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
Police and Crime Commissioners:
Developing and sustaining a new
model of police governance in
England and Wales
Barry Loveday
University of Portsmouth, UK
Abstract
This article considers th e progress of the new system of pol ice governance in England an d Wales. It assesses the
responsibilities and powers of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) and examines local initiatives undertaken by
some PCCs that have proved to have national ramifications. It evaluates the accountability of PCCs between elections and
highlights the limited powers of Police and Crime Panels. It considers the convention of police operational independence
in light of two controversial police investigations, and the potential need for PCC oversight of future publicly high-profile
investigations. It provides an initial assessment of an important and recent High Court ruling (R vPolice and Crime
Commissioner for South Yorkshire, 2017) which, by making the PCC responsible for all police operational activity,
questions the tradition of constabulary operational independence. It is argued that enabling the PCC to bring a chief
officer to account for all police operations might mean that potentially challenging and fruitless investigations can be
avoided in the future.
Keywords
Police and Crime Commissioners, Police and Crime Panels, local Police and Crime Plans, operational independence,
Operation Midland, Operation Conifer
Submitted 24 Oct 2017, accepted 28 Nov 2017
Introduction
In what might be seen as one of the most significant indi-
cators of central government commitment to localism,
expansion of the role of Police and Crime Commissioners
(PCCs) continues to develop. Latterly, this has taken the
form of extending PCC responsibility from the police to
include local fire and rescue services. The continuing inter-
est in the local delivery of services exhibited by govern-
ment has also been reflected in the introduction in 2017 of
directly elected Metro Mayors to six cities and combined
authorities in England and Wales, each of which will be
immediately responsible for spending on health, transport
and other strategic services in their respective areas.
In terms of policing, these developments are in remark-
able contrast to the earlier centralised model of governance
within which national priorities assumed precedence and
which were enforced by centralintervention, nationaltargets
and an intrusivepolice inspectorate. In finallyrejecting all of
this and re-establishing local responsibility for police ser-
vices, the 2011Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act
provided a launchpad for greater innovation and local dyna-
mism in a world no longer subject to a plethora of national
performance targets. However, problems remain to the
extent that four years into their life, PCCs are still yet to
fully engage with the public. Although this situation is
changing, there is further to go in embedding the principle
of local direct election within the political culture.
Corresponding author:
Barry Loveday, St George’s Building, 141 High Street, Portsmouth PO1
2HY, UK.
Email: barry.loveday@port.ac.uk
International Journalof
Police Science & Management
2018, Vol. 20(1) 28–37
ªThe Author(s) 2018
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1461355717748974
journals.sagepub.com/home/psm
To continue reading
Request your trial