Braverman: I’ll hold police to account if they fail

New Home Secretary ‘leans in’ on forces by setting targets and planning new league table

SUELLA BRAVERMAN has pledged to “hold the police to greater account”, as sources said the new Home Secretary believed that the concept of operational independence had been taken too far.

Mrs Braverman has signalled that she will “set direction” and “priorities” for forces as she draws up plans for a league table showing whether forces are meeting a new target to cut homicide, serious violence and neighbourhood crime by 20 per cent. A government source said that the Home Secretary also intended to make greater use of elected police and crime commissioners (PCCs) in England and Wales, the vast majority of whom are Conservative, to ensure that forces are focusing on specific priorities set by the Government.

The source suggested that it was wrong for opponents to suggest that the operational independence of the police means “we can’t set direction or say what the priorities are or that these are our expectations. It just means we can’t say, ‘go and arrest this person’”.

Mrs Braverman wants to “cut the c---”, the source added.

A second government source: “Just because an organisation is independent it doesn’t mean they can’t be criticised at all. [Mrs Braverman] wants them more focused on real policing and targets.” In a video clip produced by the Home Office, Mrs Braverman said: “My priorities are clear and simple – firstly we need to fix the crisis on the Channel and second we need to make our streets safer by holding the police to greater account and supporting victims.”

Sources said that a recent letter in which she told police chiefs that the public expected officers to visit the scene of every burglary, was “symbolic” of the approach she would take. In the letter, she said officers needed to stop wasting time on “gestures” and initiatives on diversity and instead focus on “common sense policing”.

Last week, she accused Sussex Police of “playing identity politics” after the force warned social media users against making “hateful” comments towards a convicted, transgender paedophile. She said the force should “focus on catching criminals, not policing pronouns”.

This month, Mrs Braverman will address all chief constables at the National Policing Board, a panel revived by Priti Patel, the former home secretary, to help “set the long-term strategic direction for policing” and ensure forces are helping to meet the Government’s target of recruiting 20,000 additional officers by March 2023. Mrs Braverman’s stance will build on work started under Ms Patel, who set out plans to amend the Policing Protocol, which governs the relationship between the Home Office, PCCs and chief constables, to reflect a shift towards ministers “taking a keener interest in and ‘leaning in’ on policing matters (while respecting operational independence)”. The first government source said it would mark a “big difference” in the day-to-day relationship between the Government and police.

In a letter to all 43 chief constables and police commissioners in England and Wales last week, Mrs Braverman said she had been “dismayed by the perceived deterioration of public confidence” in police in the past few years.

She said there not only had to be a change in culture and standards, but also a drive to bring down neighbourhood crime and antisocial behaviour. She added: “I expect the police, working with local partners, to cut homicide, serious violence and neighbourhood crime by 20 per cent.”

The Police Federation, which represents rank and file officers, has hit out at the planned target and league table. Last week, in response to the letter to chief constables, Steve Hartshorn, the body’s chairman, said: “Crime cannot be controlled by a government-issued, headline-friendly diktat asking forces to cut serious crimes by 20 per cent or else face action. Law and order must be free from the ebb and flow of politics and although policing may have to adhere to targets, the public doesn’t – and if we focus on one crime to satisfy a target, at the expense of another, the public loses out.”