HC Deb 17 January 1986 vol 89 cc1411-8

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Sainsbury.]

2·34 pm
Mr. Colin Moynihan (Lewisham, East)

The House will regret the absence of my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham (Mr. Conway). He had the good fortune to draw today's Adjournment debate on the special constabulary. Regrettably, his younger child has fallen ill, and rightly, he is with his family. I am sure that all hon. Members will wish his baby a speedy recovery. My hon. Friend's views on the subject are well known and respected by hon. Members. He is wholly committed to a growing role for the special constabulary, and seeks a clear sign of political will from his colleagues to support it in its present and future role to uphold law and order. Although it may be unusual, it is a mark of my respect for him and of the importance of the subject that I have chosen the same title for my Adjournment debate.

The special constabulary receives all too little credit for the service it provides to both the public and the regular forces. It is a very British idea. Only recently it celebrated the passing of the Special Constables Act 1831, 155 years ago. We ask ordinary members of the public to give some practical help to the police, and we give them the same powers as regular officers. That sounds a concept fraught with dangers and difficulties, but it works.

For years specials have been carrying out the duties asked of them without giving civil liberty activists the slightest cause for complaint. I suspect that those activists share the general public's ignorance of the contribution and, even, the existence of the special constabulary. I share the views expressed in the House by my hon. Friend the Member for Thanet, South (Mr. Aitken), who said in a similar Adjournment debate—too much time has elapsed since we discussed the subject in detail— My purpose in initiating the debate … is to call on the Government to expand, strengthen and revitalise the specials, so that they can be built up into an effective and well-trained police reserve with roots in their local communities. … The priorities for the specials are more training and more recruitment. Neither priority should be all that difficult to achieve, provided the political will exists, because there are such solid foundations to build on within the existing structure of the special constabulary."—[Official Report, 31 July 1981; Vol. 9, c. 1410.] Those words are equally true today.

I recognise and applaud the fact that the long decline in the number of special constables has been halted since those words were uttered. However, I find it hard to believe that only 15,000 or 16,000 men and women are willing to give a few hours a week to this important work when 45,000 were employed in 1964. Is enough being done to inform potential applicants, and to make the work attractive? I fear that the answers may be No. I am looking for answers to those questions from the Government Front Bench today. I seek an assurance from the Government that the specials are being taken seriously. I am confident that my hon. Friend the Minister will give me that assurance, but I hope that he will go on to describe the role within the police service that the Government seek for the special constabulary.

Is enough being done to inform the public about the specials, and to encourage recruitment? If any hon. Member conducted a survey of his constituents he would find that the majority would not know of the existence of the special constabulary. Even most of those who have heard of the specials will have little idea of what they do. Some constituents would be surprised and alarmed to discover that for a few hours every week their next-door neighbour or friend down the road had all the powers and privileges of a regular constable, and used them. They would be even more surprised to learn that special constables had existed for 155 years.

Cannot we make greater inroads into that widespread ignorance? From time to time in the national newspapers I see advertisements for regular officers and for other voluntary national bodies, such as the Territorial Army. I cannot remember seeing any advertisement for the special constabulary. Yet that could be the subject matter, particularly for local newspapers. There are human interest stories that could be sensibly written up by such excellent local papers as the Lewisham Star, Mercury and the South London Press, to mention only those in my borough. I would welcome such an initiative.

There is great difficulty in recruiting special constables, even in London. Catford has one divisional officer, one sub-divisional officer and 11 special constables, but it would need 40 to 50 officers. Lewisham has one divisional officer, one sub-divisional officer and only five special constables; it could do with about 30 to 40 constables. Divisional Officer Jenkins of Lewisham has given outstanding service to the force and to the country for about 21 years. He has a bar to his long service medal, which I understand means that he has served for a minimum of 19 years. He is competent, responsible and has great experience. He is much liked in the force and in the community that he serves, and I pay tribute to him and to his colleagues.

Why do I say that human interest stories are involved? During the past year, Lewisham special constables, who work voluntarily, have done duty at Millwall, have patrolled regularly in pairs and have helped elderly folk. The sight of the policeman out of the panda car and on the beat is important in removing the fear of crime, which is larger than the incidence of crime, among the population, They also participated in Brave Defender, on the security side, patrolling Biggin Hill 24 hours a day for three to four days. Their role in ceremonials, including the Easter parade, is well known to all who follow their work in London, but I fear not to the majority of the population. I emphasise that the critical part of their work is the removal of the fear of crime by their presence on the streets, in the estates and especially among the elderly and responsible citizens, who like to see officers patrolling the streets on foot and who like to know their officers personally.

There are other ways in which police forces could bring the existence of the special constabulary to the notice of local residents. I should be glad if my hon. Friend would say something about the methods used by forces and how successful they are. I should be interested to know what the Government do at national level to increase the size of the special constabulary.

On the important subject of relations with regular officers, it is possible that the Government take specials seriously. It is possible that senior police officers are clearly aware of the value of special constables. But I wonder whether that view is shared all the way down the line in the police force? If we are to use the special constabulary to its full potential, we must be certain that there is no friction with regular officers. Specials must be fully integrated into the force. I have heard it said that some regular officers do not view the efforts of the special constabulary as important. I have also heard of resistance from regular officers to the extension of the special's work into more vital areas of police activity. But if there is a lack of trust between specials and regular officers elsewhere than in Lewisham and Catford, where it does not appear to be a problem, it will be difficult for the Government to make progress. There must be a clear understanding on both sides of the limits of the role of the special constabulary. Will my hon. Friend tell us whether there is a problem here? if so, what is he doing about it?

I mentioned the extension of the specials' work. Ordinary men and women will not wish to devote their spare time to the police service unless they get some reward. I am not talking about a financial reward, although I shall say something about that later. I am talking about gaining satisfaction from the work and feeling that they are making a contribution to the force. If we use specials only for the dull, undemanding tasks which regular officers do not wish to undertake, we cannot reasonably expect them to attract recruits or to keep them once they have been attracted. People will not be moved to apply by the prospect of standing in the rain every November to line the route for the Lord Mayor's show. they will, understandably, decide that they have better things to do. Surely we can offer them better things within the special constabulary.

One area where specials could play a useful role is in crime prevention. It is the soft end of policing, but it is just as important as the hard end—public order policing—for which specials are clearly not qualified.

Much has been done recently to help people to help themselves. The specials have a foot in both camps. They are part of the community as well as part of the police force. Most are deployed in the area in which they live. If they are more involved in neighbourhood watch schemes in their area, other local residents might find it easier to identify with them and might be more ready to turn to them. People might find it easier to get into contact with a special constable who is also a local resident than with a beat constable who lives at the other end of the borough.

I know that in London, and in my borough of Lewisham in particular, the Metropolitan police have made some progress in involving the special constabulary in crime prevention work. I should be interested to learn from my hon. Friend the Minister whether other forces have taken similar steps and whether more work could be done on the important neighbourhood watch schemes which have done so much good in terms of upholding law and order, certainly in London and, as I understand, throughout the country.

If specials are to perform more duties in the mainstream of police work and if they are to do so in a way that attracts the respect of regular officers, they must be properly trained. They cannot just pick it up as they go along. They have important powers to exercise and they must be taught how to use them.

I recognise that there are problems in providing training for part-time volunteers. It is difficult to plan a programme when one cannot be certain who will attend, and when, but the problems are not insuperable. Anyone who has a commitment to the police service—which every special must have—will be prepared to make the effort to ensure that he is equipped to do the job properly. It is not unreasonable for the specials to give up the occasional weekend.

It is in the specials' interest not just to ensure that they can carry out the work with knowledge and confidence but to provide a wider and more fulfilling range of tasks. The training that they are given must not be superficial. The training given to regular officers is unsuitable for specials, but the courses that specials undertake must be just as professional. A member of the public will be upset when a constable misuses his powers whether he is a regular or a special. I seek an assurance that the special constabulary is being taken seriously.

Earlier, I mentioned the need to provide a reward for the time that specials devote to the service. I was talking about a sense of personal satisfaction. Such a reward is most important to special constables. However, we should not assume that a financial reward in unnecessary. At the moment, specials receive various allowances but no remuneration. I know that the question of making some kind of payment, perhaps along the lines of the Territorial Army bounty, has been considered. I can see that there are arguments on both sides.

I am interested in having more special constables. The only question that interests me is whether a payment would persuade more public-spirited members of the community to offer their spare time to help the police. As specials are not paid, I assume that the Government think that the answer to that question is no. They may be right, but the question still needs to be asked from time to time. It is important to many special constables. To some it may seem as though a lack of payment is a measure of the 'value that the Government place on their work. I am sure that they are wrong, but I should be grateful for some light on the Government's thinking.

This is a secondary issue compared to that of job satisfaction, and I believe that the vast majority of special constables take the same view. However, we should note the benefits of a formal payment along the lines of the Territorial Army bounty.

My hon. Friend may make a fair point about paying special constables—that even without payment forces are finding it possible to attract recruits. I leave aside the question whether a payment would attract more. I wish the House to consider the fact that without the promise of a financial reward, and at the cost of their spare time, men and women are prepared to offer their services to help the police with the heavy burden that they carry on our behalf.

It is generally recognised that the prevention of crime and the maintenance of law and order are the responsibility not just of the police but of the community as a whole. There are people to whom this idea is not part of the small change of political debate on the police but a principle which they are prepared to put into practice.

We do not hear much about them, and we probably fail to recognise them when we see them, but every time a police force is under pressure, we can be sure that ordinary men and women are being called from their homes to keep routine police work turning over while the regular officers are diverted to deal with the crisis, whatever it may be—an important sporting event. a royal visit or a riot. The men and women of the special constabulary all over the country deserve our gratitude for the contribution that they are making to the police service. More than this, they deserve our support.

I am glad to have this opportunity to raise various questions with the Minister about the policies that the Government and the chief officers of police are pursuing. All right hon. and hon. Members can help the specials. All of us can do more to make the public more aware of the work that the special constabulary performs. We can all do more to encourage people to put their own spare time at the disposal of the police service. The police are more than ever under pressure and more than ever in need of our support. I sometimes hear people say that the police are too cut off from the public. Tell that to a special constable. There may be many suitable, public-spirited people who would be prepared to give practical assistance to the police service. Let us find them.

I hope that my hon. Friend does not think that my recognition of the general responsibility of us all to help the special constabulary means that I do not acknowledge his particular responsibility. I do. I look forward to his replies to the questions that I have raised in this debate.

2·51 pm
The Minister of State, Home Office (Mr. Giles Shaw)

The whole House will be delighted that my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, East (Mr. Moynihan) has had the good fortune to take this debate, even though my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham (Mr. Conway) was unable so to do. I sympathise with him in the decision that he had to take. However, my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, East has made this, as it should be, a special day. It is a rare event when the House has time to discuss the special constabulary. I know that the men and women of the special constabulary will be particularly delighted with my hon. Friend's speech, he has demonstrated not only his substantial knowledge of the problem but his enthusiasm for their cause. The way in which he has presented his case shows a professionalism, a commitment and a detailed knowledge of this problem which I envy. I am most grateful to him.

The contribution that the special constables make has already been set out by my hon. Friend, but let us be quite clear about this. There is no way in which the police forces of this country can continue to sustain some of the major events that they have to sustain without the service of the specials. Specials in many forces worked long hours, far beyond their normal contribution, in order to ensure that the level of service to the public was not reduced by the inevitable diversion of regular officers to police, for example, the miners' dispute. That is a classic example of how important the specials are.

But the specials have another value. We all recognise that effective policing depends upon the support and co-operation of the public, and my hon. Friend was right to draw attention to that point. What more practical and valuable form of support is there than giving some of one's time to sharing the burden of the police service? What better way is there of ensuring that the police know what the public want of them and that the public know what problems the police face in meeting their wishes? I am happy to join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the work of the men and women of the special constabulary within the police service.

My hon. Friend referred to the number of special constables. They have declined steadily from the very high wartime peak of about 100,000 to just under 15,000 at the end of 1981. I am happy to say that there has been some recovery since then. At the end of 1984 the numbers stood at just over 16,000. We are at present collecting information on the position at the end of 1985. This informaton will be available next month. I hope that it will show a further upward trend.

However, we should not be too anxious about the recent decline in numbers. A significant proportion of the loss has resulted from the weeding out of inactive members and the introduction by most forces of a retirement age of 55. That has played an important part. At the same time, forces have made efforts to improve and extend the training of specials. My hon. Friend drew particular attention to that point, to which I shall return in a minute. Let me assure him that we believe that the forces are moving in the right direction. We have now a special constabulary that is smaller than it was in the past, but in general it is younger, better trained and more active. The position varies considerably from force to force, and I certainly do not suggest that we have all the specials that we need.

The special constabulary is not a national force, which may be part of the reason why my hon. Friend queried the scale of its operation. It is based on individual forces, and, under the Police Act 1964, individual chief officers have responsibility for appointing special constables. Experience has shown that local recruiting campaigns are a better way of attracting members than national recruiting by, for example, the Home Office. The Home Office did undertake national advertising campaigns for several years, but they were less successful than local campaigns. Therefore, I should prefer recruitment of specials to take place through local campaigns, and my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary and I are very willing to lend our support to local recruitment initiatives.

There are obvious reasons why local recruitment activities are likely to be more successful. Specials more than regular officers, identify closely with their local force. National recruitment initiatives for regular officers are a different matter, as that job involves a professional commitment to a service that can carry a person from one force to another or from one branch of the service to another as the opportunity presents itself. By definition, special constables are local residents. That is their strength and value. Probably the most effective method of recruitment is still personal contact with another special or a regular officer drawn from the location. Local events can be used to bring the special constabulary more immediately to the attention of local people.

We should not underestimate the importance of recruitment. The local force of my hon. Friend the Member for Shrewsbury and Atcham—the West Mercia police—has recently increased the number of special constables by more than 50 per cent. It has applied a number of interesting methods to achieve that.

My hon. Friend raised the question of possible difficulties in the relationship between regular officers and specials. That has been a problem, and we understand that a special constable must not be seen, and would not wish to be seen, as a cheap substitute for a regular officer. There will always be many duties that can be carried out only by properly trained regular officers. However, I accept what my hon. Friend said about the need for the role of the special constabulary to be significant. Deployment of the specials on tasks of interest and importance should play a major part in the commitment to join. Correct training for staff is important and is seen as such. I assure my hon. Friend that there has been considerable development in training in that area during the past few years. A working party of the Police Advisory Board, which reported in 1981, recommended a more extended and structured training programme for specials, to include a great deal of practical work. I assure the House that all forces have taken steps to implement those recommendations, together with the recommendation of an earlier working party that specials would benefit from residential courses.

We now have a special constabulary that is not only younger and more active, but better informed, better prepared and better able to take on a more demanding role. What should that role be? The duties of specials traditionally have been on some of the peripheral functions to do with traffic, lining the roads and supplementing the police presence at local events. However, there has been a growing recognition that that is not the most effective use of specials. The police service cannot expect to attract and retain volunteers unless they can be offered more rewarding activities. The specials can contribute in areas such as traffic control, patrol duties, manning police stations and administrative duties within police stations. Indeed, most chief officers now reckon that that is the sort of role that they should provide.

There are some duties for which special constables are especially well equipped, and crime prevention activity is certainly one example. They are a bridge between the police and the community and they are well placed to participate in community-based crime prevention activities.

My hon. Friend referred to neighbourhood watch schemes. There are about 8,000 such schemes and I am sure that chief officers will be using specials to ensure that neighbourhood watch schemes, though they are selected and established by the regular crime prevention officers of the force concerned, are maintained enthusiastically. Continuity will be maintained by the activities of special constables, who can play a valuable role in that direction.

I understand that in Rugby the local crime prevention panel maintains a caravan for crime prevention publicity and information, which is manned by the Warwickshire specials. I understand also that in Bedfordshire, specials, as well as regular officers, give talks on crime prevention to schools and youth clubs. In London, in which my hon. Friend has a particular interest, members of the Metropolitan special constabulary run a series of self-defence courses for women. In all these activities, specials act in support of regular officers and under their direction. I cannot emphasise too strongly that the extension of the duties of specials is not intended to encrouch on the activities of proper regular officers.

My hon. Friend talked about the payment of a bounty. It is an issue that arises from time to time. My hon. Friend has experience of the Territorial Army Volunteer Reserve, which pays such a bounty. The specials are divided on this issue. It is one that is considered regularly but the conclusion has always been that the payment of specials would not necessarily improve the recruitment of volunteers who were prepared to give long-term service to the force. The last formal review was undertaken by a working party of the Police Advisory Board, which reported in 1981. The special constabulary was represented on it and it was consulted. The working party gathered information from a number of voluntary bodies, including the Territorial Army, and it came to the firm conclusion that those which offered a financial reward faced exactly the same problems of recruitment and wastage and seemed no more successful in recruiting volunteers or keeping them.

The cost of paying a bounty would not be enormous, but before we add even slightly to the costs of police authorities we must be certain that the money would be well spent. At present, the evidence is not especially persuasive.

I have been speaking mainly about what chief constables are doing and I shall turn now to what the Government can do. At national level, our aim is to strengthen the special constabulary to ensure that it receives appropriate training and to encourage its effective use. In the end, it is chief officers who will decide whether to recruit additional specials, and it is they who will recruit and train them. We seek to provide chief constables with encouragement—they need very little—to pursue the objectives I have mentioned and to support them in doing so. This we do partly through our own commitments as Ministers by making it clear in public how important the role of the specials is. In the Metropolitan police district we have direct responsibility by virtue of the role of my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary as the police authority. In the provinces, our main means of providing support and encouragement to chief officers is through Her Majesty's inspectors of constabulary. It is with our full backing that the inspectors, in their annual inspection visits to provincial forces, provide professional advice to chief constables on their efforts to recruit special constables and to deploy them more effectively.

I hope that I have not sounded complacent, because that would be far from the truth. I trust that what I have said is encouraging to my hon. Friend, who raised the issue, deployed effective arguments and emphasised the importance of the service. I hope that my remarks have been encouraging to the specials. We have a more important role for them. We have a body of men and women whose dedication and volunteer spirit we much admire. We have an adjunct to the professional police service and it is one that is becoming increasingly important. It has proved itself extremely valuable under critical conditions in recent times. It is a voluntary service and we respect those who serve in it. We admire what they do and we trust that we shall give them every encouragement in future to fulfil their part in helping the police and the community from which they come.

Question put and agreed to.

Adjourned accordingly at three minutes past Three o' clock.