§ 9. Mr. Michael Jack (Fylde)What assessment he has made of the impact on police numbers in Lancashire of his projected financial allocations to the county's force for 2000–01. [99684]
§ The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Jack Straw)The provisional funding allocation for the Lancashire police authority for 2000–01 is £185.3 million. That is an increase of 3.9 per cent., which is more than the average increase for England and Wales of 2.8 per cent. Within the overall budget set by the police authority, it is for the chief officer to determine staffing levels.
§ Mr. JackI am grateful to the Home Secretary for his response, as is the Lancashire force for the additional money it is to receive for next year. However, as a Lancashire Member of Parliament, the right hon. Gentleman will be aware that the additional money will barely cover the additional costs—increases in pay, prices and the police pension fund—that the force has to bear. There is no guarantee that the crime-fighting fund will provide Lancashire with guaranteed extra resources to expand the force and recruit new officers. In the light of that financial position, will the right hon. Gentleman spell out to his home force how it is to recruit additional police officers to carry out its duties?
§ Mr. StrawI will take lectures on resources for the police service from almost anyone other than those who supported the previous Administration and who now support the current Opposition Front-Bench team. I remind the right hon. Gentleman that he cannot say one thing in Lancashire and another down here. He and his right hon. and hon. Friends on the Front Bench have criticised and damned our spending as reckless, but they speak with a forked tongue on the issue of police funding.
Let me give the right hon. Gentleman the good news regarding Lancashire police spending. First, figures with which I was provided before coming into the Chamber state that officer numbers in Lancashire are now at an all-time record level. Secondly, thanks to excellent work by the chief constable and her colleagues, crime in the area fell by 10.1 per cent. compared with a national average of 1.4 per cent.—a record that many forces would do well to emulate. Thirdly, to answer the right hon. Gentleman, I can do no better than quote the chief constable, Mrs. Pauline Clare, who said:
An increase of 4 per cent. is more than we expected and should be sufficient to match anticipated increases in pay and inflation. It should also help us to maintain police officer numbers.
§ Mr. Simon Hughes (Southwark, North and Bermondsey)Although the figures show a small real-terms cash increase for Lancashire police, next year, the people of London and of Gloucestershire face a cut for the fourth year in a row—
§ Madam SpeakerOrder. I respectfully draw the hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that the question is about police numbers in Lancashire. Therefore, he must speak only about Lancashire, not about other areas.
§ Mr. HughesIt was just how I started. Although there is to be an increase for Lancashire police for the coming year, there are many other forces that will not receive that increase and, indeed, some that will experience a fourth cut in four years. Given that the Police Federation estimates that the crime-fighting fund will not even replace countrywide—
§ Madam SpeakerIn Lancashire.
§ Mr. HughesIn Lancashire and countrywide, those who are retiring will not be replaced. Will the Home Secretary make sure that the Government concentrate less on ending the north-south divide and more on ending the divide between what they promise and what they do?
§ Madam SpeakerI do not require the Home Secretary to answer a question which is not related to the Question on the Order Paper. The Question is about Lancashire. We shall move on.