The Petition of residents of Stalybridge and Hyde and the Greater Manchester area,
Declares that the proposals made in the second part of the Winsor Review will have devastating effect on the morale of frontline officers, and risk a detrimental effect on the quality of service the Police provide to the public.
The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons urges the Home Secretary to reject the recommendations contained within the Winsor Review.
And the Petitioners remain, etc.—[Presented by Jonathan Reynolds, Official Report, 16 July 2012; Vol. 548, c. 812.]
[P001103]
Observations from the Secretary of State for the Home Department:
The petition from the residents of Stalybridge and Hyde raises concerns about the impact that proposals in the second part of the Winsor Review will have on frontline policing in their area. As the recent report from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) sets out, the frontline of policing is being protected overall and service to the public has largely been maintained. The proportion of officers on the frontline is increasing, crime is down, victim satisfaction is improving and the response to emergency calls is being maintained.
It is important to note that one of the key objectives of these reforms is to reward those officers who work on the frontline. Indeed, the Winsor Review’s terms of reference asked for an analysis of how remuneration and conditions of service could be used to maximise officer and staff deployment to frontline roles where their powers and skills are required.
Existing police pay and conditions were designed more than 30 years ago which is why Tom Winsor was asked to carry out his independent review. Police officers and staff deserve to have pay and workforce arrangements that recognise the vital role they play in fighting crime and keeping the public safe, and enable them to deliver effectively for the public. These recommendations are about reforming pay and conditions so that they recognise the hardest-working officers and reward professional skills and continued development.
As the majority of the policing budget is spent on pay, we must ensure that pay and conditions are fair and sustainable for both officers and the taxpayer. The whole country has been affected by the downturn, with a public service-wide pay freeze, and jobs lost in both the public and private sectors, including in police forces. However, police officers do difficult and often dangerous work, and cannot strike. The Government are committed to ensuring that this important role is recognised, by treating officers fairly and paying them well.
The total savings from Part One of the Review will be around £150 million per annum once fully implemented, or around 2% of the total police officer pay bill. This money will be ploughed straight back into policing for chief officers to use as they see fit, reducing the need to find savings from elsewhere, and helping to protect frontline service to the public. The proposals in Part Two would not reduce the overall pay bill in the short term.
Police officers will continue to earn more than other emergency services, to retire earlier than most in the public sector, and to benefit from pensions that are among the best available.
With the exception of the recommendation regarding the normal pension age for police officers, no decisions have yet been taken on Tom Winsor’s Final Report, but the Government have said that it provides a good basis for discussion and consultation, including through the formal police negotiating machinery. We remain committed to constructive engagement with the service throughout this process.