Police Commissioners: Power to the People?

On November 15, the results of the Coalition Government's reforms to the police will become clear for all to see. Elections foe the role of Police and Crime Commissioner in 41 Constabulary areas in England and Wales outside London will take place for the first time, and the effects the results and the institutions themselves will have upon the affected communities remains to be seen. However, there is some cause for concern when the details are examined.

The institution of Police and Crime Commissioner was established in order to foster greater direct accountability over the police according to the Coalition, yet they structure may reveal certain risks. Power of the operational priorities and budget of the police will be placed in the hands of one individual who would have been elected largely thanks to a political agenda of his or her political party. This replaces the old system of Police Authorities; multi-member panels that have reflect the political spectrum in order to achieve a balanced, consensus outcome to policing policy.

Directly electing Police Commissioners could lead to the debate surrounding law and order becoming more populist and short-sighted in tone, focussing on who can punish crimes more effectively instead of looking at why crimes are committed in the first place. An effect on Police policy could be that those elected would only care about the concerns of those who voted for them, which in a climate where political parties tend to have concentrated support, could lead to whole areas and communities being sidelined in order to ensure re-election.

This could be damaging for BME communities in these Constabulary areas. The voices of BME communities that air unique concerns around issues such as stop and search could be drowned out by the concerns of the majority for whom policy is formulated in order to retain votes. Indeed, focusing on particular policy areas may actively harm BME voters, with a focus on more punitive policing causing more alienation between police and BME communities.

Another cause for concern is the conduct of the election campaign. In order to save taxpayer's money (while spending at least £75million on these new positions) free mail shots explaining the candidates' positions have been scrapped in favour of a website that people would actively have to look for, automatically leading to less awareness and as a result, the turnout is feared to be as low as 15%, the lowest for a national election in recent history.

This could have an effect upon the candidates who are elected. Many candidates are former MP's and an overwhelming majority are white men. Only in North Yorkshire is the Commissioner guaranteed to be a woman and of the 13 BME candidates for office, only 4 have been endorsed by one of the three major parties.

Most worryingly, the far-right English Defence League have put up a candidate for the election in Bedfordshire, which includes Luton, where the EDL's activities first started, damaging inter-community relations in the process. The combination of poor diversity and poor turnout could directly lead to the election of candidates whose policies directly lead to alienation between police and BME populations, a trend which these policies sought to reverse.

Everyone should hope that installing elected Police and Crime Commissioners will improve accountability over the police and improve relations between the police and BME communities, but there is much to be apprehensive about as polling day draws near.

Robert Austin