The policing task and the expansion (and contraction) of British policing
| Author | Andrew Millie |
| Published date | 01 April 2013 |
| Date | 01 April 2013 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/1748895812466393 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Criminology & Criminal Justice
13(2) 143 –160
© The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1748895812466393
crj.sagepub.com
The policing task and the
expansion (and contraction)
of British policing
Andrew Millie
Edge Hill University, UK
Abstract
Over the past four decades the police service strength in England and Wales grew by nearly a
third. This was at a time when the population grew by just 10 per cent. This sustained period
of growth came to an end with the 2010 spending review which called for a 20 per cent cut in
government funding of the police. In this paper the expansion of the state police is examined,
expansion that is all the more remarkable coming at a time of increased competition and – from
the mid-1990s onwards – falling levels of recorded crime. But not only did the number of police
officers increase, so too their roles and responsibilities, reflective of Simon’s (2007) governing
through crime meta-narrative and symptomatic of the criminalization of social policy – or more
specifically the ‘policification’ (cf. Kemshall and Maguire, 2001). In this context it is argued that
enforced contraction could be a positive opportunity to reappraise what the state police ought
to be doing. The policing task is conceptualized as being either wide policing or narrow policing.
Examples are given where narrowing may be both possible and beneficial. It is acknowledged
that other agencies are facing similar cuts and may not be able pick up tasks left by the police.
However, it is argued there are tangible benefits of having a state police that is more focused.
Keywords
Contraction, expansion, narrow policing, policing, wide policing
Introduction
With the election of a Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition government in May
2010, British policing policy – and public policy more broadly – witnessed major
shifts in priorities. First, there was increased emphasis on the development of local
solutions to community problems in what Prime Minister Cameron called his ‘Big
Corresponding author:
Andrew Millie, Department of Law and Criminology, Edge Hill University, St Helen’s Road, Ormskirk, L39
4QP, UK.
Email: Andrew.Millie@edgehill.ac.uk
466393CRJ13210.1177/1748895812466393Criminology & Criminal JusticeMillie
2013
Article
144 Criminology & Criminal Justice 13(2)
Society’ project. According to the new Home Secretary, Theresa May (2010), ‘[t]he
solution to your community’s problems will not come from officials sitting in the
Home Office working on the latest national action plan’; instead, ‘the people who are
closest to the problem need to be driving the solution’. For May, the previous New
Labour government had adopted a ‘top–down, bureaucratic, gimmick-laden approach’
to policing. Certainly, New Labour had embraced new public management and asso-
ciated central targets (McLaughlin, 2007). What was proposed was a shift from top–
down to bottom–up governance of crime and anti-social behaviour problems – at least
in intention. The second shift was that there was a lot less money available. Within the
context of the global financial crisis and the country’s massive deficit, the October
2010 Comprehensive Spending Review (HM Treasury, 2010) called for major reduc-
tions in public expenditure in England and Wales, including an unprecedented 20 per
cent cut in police funding by government by 2014–2015. This was accompanied by a
freeze in police recruitment. For the police the boom years were over – when Chief
Constables could successfully ask governments for increased police numbers and
generous budgets.
Circumstances are clearly important in dictating demand for the police and in August
2011 large-scale urban rioting and looting in some of England’s major cities put extra
pressure on police resources. Both during and after the disturbances there were numerous
calls to rethink government policy on cutting police budgets. According to Simon Reed
(2011), Vice-Chair of the Police Federation, the riots demonstrated a ‘need for sufficient
numbers of police officers who can be called upon as and when they are needed’. Reed
went on to state: ‘I don’t know how the government decide what price they place on
public safety but … our view [is] that cutting the police budget is inadvisable and could
jeopardize public safety’.
There was also disquiet from within the Conservative Party, with London’s Mayor
Boris Johnson claiming, ‘This is not a time to think about making substantial cuts in
police numbers’ (BBC News, 2011a). However, the coalition remained adamant that, in
order to reduce the budget deficit, cuts were still needed – including in the police service.
Further change came in November 2012 with the introduction for the first time of directly
elected Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) across England and Wales – albeit fol-
lowing an unprecedented low turnout of just 15 per cent, raising questions over the dem-
ocratic legitimacy of the elections (Electoral Commission, 2012; Rogers and
Burn-Murdoch, 2012). The new PCCs take office at a very difficult time with the police
being asked to do more with less (Millie and Bullock, 2012). According to Her Majesty’s
Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC, 2011: 3) ‘The police service … is facing its biggest
financial challenge in a generation. This could be seen either as an opportunity to inno-
vate and refresh – or as a reason to continue as is and see services cut back’.
The focus for this article is the squeeze on police numbers in England and Wales. This
is not to discount challenges to police budgets elsewhere. For instance, in Scotland, fol-
lowing the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012, all eight police forces are merg-
ing into a single ‘Police Service of Scotland’ in the hope that this ‘reduces duplication and
creates a new streamlined structure’ (Scottish Government, 2012).1 The politics and com-
plexity of England and Wales’ 43 forces made this less of an option. For England and
Wales cuts have to be found elsewhere. In this article, rather than seeing this as necessarily
To continue reading
Request your trial