How responsive should policing be to community priorities? Nigel Fielding Department of Sociology, University of Surrey, UK ESRC Public Policy Seminar.

How responsive should policing be to community

priorities?

Nigel Fielding Department of Sociology, University of Surrey, UK

ESRC Public Policy Seminar

House of Lords

12 February 2009

Themes of talk

Responsiveness at individual officer level Role of police discretion in regulating responsiveness by

officers

Responsiveness at policy and organizational level

Policies to promote responsiveness: lessons from community policing research

Responsiveness at the constitutional level Implications of evidence that the public values fairness and

engagement above effectiveness

Outline of talk

Community priorities: icon or symbol? Constitutions and histories Doctrine and discord Taking community responsiveness to its

illogical conclusion Discretion and its discontents Legitimacy versus effectiveness alias

Tony Benn versus Wal-Mart

Reassurance Policing and Neighbourhood Policing

The ‘reassurance gap’: statistics vs perception

RP and NP: public, police & partner agencies diagnose crime ‘signals’ to inform priorities

Symbolic reassurance: process of problem definition + co-producing police interventions

Only 6 forces doing more than pre-NP norm

Bittner on police and force

‘The police are nothing else than a mechanism for the distribution of situationally justified force in society.’ (Bittner 1980: 39)

Egon Bittner (1980) The functions of the police in modern society, Cambridge MA: Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain.

The democratic bind

‘To the extent that government in general has been established as guardian of collective social interest, an implicit denial of the ... democratic principle has been made. All government officials may be tainted as enemies of democratic society to some extent.’ (Potts 1982: 13-14)

Government must balance its function as servant of the public with its function as coercer of the public.

Police must serve the whole society by enforcing general norms and serve individuals demanding mobilisation of the law.

L. Potts (1982) ‘The limits of police community relations programmes: a cross-national perspective’, Police Studies, 5 (2), 10-20

Coercive approach

Policing serves ruling class interests Policing involves coercion, manipulation

and surveillance Emphasises protests, strikes, disorder

and counter-terrorism Underplays ‘mundane crime’ and

community-based action

The responsiveness approach Local character of the office of constable Common law origin of police powers - ‘an office

relatively indistinct from the citizenry’

(Jefferson and Grimshaw, 1984)

Police subordination to the judiciary a ‘general factotum of community administration, assuming

responsibility for the maintenance of highways and bridges, drainage and other ancillary mattersD (Oliver, 1987: 13)

Not so much consent as ‘grumbling dissent’ (Brogden 1982)

T. Jefferson and R. Grimshaw (1984) Controlling the Constable, London: Frederick Muller

I. Oliver (1987) Police, government and accountability, London: Macmillan

M. Brogden (1982) The Police: autonomy and consent, London: Academic Press

Rowan and Mayne’s compromise

Are police for crime control or for maintaining public order?

The first Met commissioners believed the prime duty of the police was to maintain ‘public tranquillity’

Police need public cooperation before they can enforce the law

Community and Association

Tonnies’ distinction Community is persons within a geographic area having one or

more additional ties An association is a ‘group organised for the pursuit of a

[single] interest ... in common’ (Rex 1981, page 52) Geo-local ties

Declining importance Vary by socio-economic and demographic factors: stronger for

older people, the disadvantaged, those with mobility problems Others are better seen as acting on interests that divide them

from others living in same space F. Tonnies (1955) Community and Association, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul

J. Rex (1981) Social conflict, London: Longman

Populist policing

Wildly erratic changes Decisions hostile to minorities Unworkable for large organisations Could stimulate paedophile witch hunts,

pressure for corporal and capital punishment, and openings for racists

Discretion and constabulary independence

‘Police discretion’ is customary resolution of coercive/responsiveness balance

Coercive power of the State is controlled by ‘constabulary independence’

Police discretion as ‘practical politics’

‘In order to enforce your law you end up with ... £4 million worth of property burnt to the ground. You may think youD re being efficient in enforcing your laws ... but look at it, the place is burning around you ... I mean, do you enforce the Litter Act in the Mile End Road the same way as you would do in Belgravia?’

(former chief constable John Alderson, quoted in Kinsey and Young, 1982: 121).

‘To argue against the prosecution of ganja smoking in Brixton does not mean that demands for racial discrimination in working menD s clubs in Leeds are to be met’ (Kinsey and Young 1982: 122).

R. Kinsey and J. Young (1982) ‘Police autonomy and the politics of discretion’, in D. Cowell et al (eds), Policing the Riots, London: Junction Books

Training for discretion

Training for work with community isolated in curriculum

Officers struggle to define what it involves

Training effective for technical skills like weapons and vehicle handling but not interpersonal and verbal communication skills

R. W. Glenn, B.R. Panitch, D. Barnes-Proby, E. Williams, J. Christian, M.W. Lewis, S. Lerwehr, D.W. Brannen (2003) Training the 21st century police officer: redefining police professionalism for the LAPD, LA: RAND

New powers

Over 3,000 new offences since 1997

E.g. powers to arrest suspects without warrant and to apply stop and search powers to designated areas without reasonable suspicion

E.g. range of actions warranting ASBOs was extended in 2003

New summary measures

E.g., Fixed Penalty Notices and Penalty Notices for Disorder

E.g., Conditional Cautions introduced in 2003, with power of arrest for breach since 2006

Pilot project on discretion

Leicestershire, Staffordshire, Surrey and West Midlands forces

Encourage use of discretion rather than invoking formal proceedings

The wider perspective

Obama, the War on Terror, surveillance and community intelligence

Official reminders of difference: the ‘plight’ of the white working class

Fiscal crisis: decent policing or discount policing?

CAPS

The Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy Integrating police, housing and social services Involving the public Training in diagnosing local crime problems

and hotspots One page City Service Request Form Public concerns: graffiti, public drinking,

vandalism, truancy, loitering, begging, noise

CAPS effects

Crime/disorder problems fell 7 percent

Property and street crime index fell from 40% to 31%

Perceived police responsiveness to community concerns rose 20%, from below 40%

Effects disproportionately reached black population

No gains amongst Hispanics

‘Most in need’ + ‘and able to respond’

Legitimacy and effectiveness

Legitimacy reflects public assessment of how police use powers

Legitimacy is independent of perceived effectiveness of crime control

Perceived responsiveness not a direct result of intervention but of enhanced engagement and visibility

Benn’s 5 questions

1. What is your power? 2. For what do you use it? 3. Who put you in this position? 4. To whom are you accountable? 5. How do we get rid of you?

The governance of responsiveness

Police-based discretion, professional expertise, applied

management principles

Politics-based formal accountability via Home Secretary, Home

Office, Police Authorities, directly-elected mayors

Public-based local priority setting via consultation meetings,

community intelligence-gathering, partnership work

Compliance, legitimacy and responsiveness

People comply with the law because: the criminal justice system carries legitimacy institutions with legitimacy have authority authority earns compliance

Legitimacy comes from fair procedures and outcomes

Fairness and justice are more important than effectivenessM. Hough (2004) ‘Reassurance policing: the wrong words for the right strategy’, Plural Policing conference, Church House, Westminster, 28 October 2004