- Conference
- 2012 Police & Justice Conference
- Date
- 1 January 2012
- Decision
- Carried
West Midlands and Surrey Police under guidance from the Home Office have advertised £1.5 billion contracts to run Police Services in both forces. The contracts could lead to the privatisation of crime investigation, forensics, 999 call handling, custody and detention and a wide range of police support services. Most other forces in England and Wales have expressed an interest in this contract should they wish to join it later.
The scope of the OJEU notice is all encompassing with every police staff role listed. The OJEU notice stipulates that despite what is initially determined for privatisation further services could be added incrementally. Therein lies a real danger of this framework agreement, initially less contentious roles could be privatised to negate public concern – but once it goes through the floodgates could open. If this goes ahead it will transform policing in this country – it will be policing for profit and the governing factor will be what is stipulated in the contract.
These privatisation plans are wrong for the following reasons:
1) It is all about cost cutting not improving or sustaining the service to the public
2) West Midlands Police Authority has refused to provide a business case despite freedom of information requests
3) There is no evidence that the private sector provide value for money
4) Current police staff proposals on solutions to deliver cost effective services have been dismissed without reason
5) The people of the West Midlands and Surrey have not been consulted over this unprecedented transfer of police services to the private sector, as required under Section 96 of the Police Act 1996
6) They have failed to comply with Part 3 of the Home Office “Best Value and Planning Guidance” for Police Authorities and Forces 2003 by not consulting local people
7) They do not consider Police and Crime Commissioners who when elected could halt this process
8) Police accountability will suffer
9) Chief officers will lose operational control
10) The IPCC will have no jurisdiction to investigate complaints against staff in Private Sector Companies’ Control
Cleveland was the first Police Force in the U.K. to outsource more than 60% of its services and staff to a private company in 2010.
At our Service Group Conference that year we highlighted the issues surrounding the competitive dialogue process, and again in 2011 the impact on the branch structure and member representation since the outsourcing.
Since then Lincolnshire has signed a contract with G4S for provision of services and transfer of staff, with other Forces hovering in the background awaiting the outcome of the massive proposals for West Midlands and Surrey.
In the current economic climate many of these private companies, like the public sector, are facing financial cutbacks, and although the staff would be protected under TUPE they are once again feeling vulnerable.
A group of staff within Cleveland were sub-contracted to another company within the first year, then some 6 months later were transferred back to the original company. This has caused considerable concern, and highlights why the Police Service must stay within the public sector. We are there to serve the public, not to keep private companies afloat.
Conference believes that it is almost inevitable that when services are privatised users suffer and the staff providing the service suffer alongside them. The language of the likely bidders for any potential privatisation is that of business not service – with references to customers, cash solutions and business performance.
Members in other unions organising in private security firms in the UK have also faced the closure of their pension scheme, restrictions on leave, refusal to honour agreements and disputes over “no strike” agreements.
Conference further believes that where services are run for profit, terms and conditions are certain to be worsened. In other sectors where services have been outsourced, terms and conditions for the largely female workforce have been slashed, with pay cuts, shorter holiday entitlement, inadequate sickness schemes and inflexible working practices.
Women currently provide the majority of services in the police and justice sector, and will therefore be disproportionately impacted by the privatisation of police services.
Conference welcomes and applauds the actions of branches, regions and the Service Group Executive and its committees in opposing privatisation across the Police and Probation Services in 2012. Events during this year have shown that campaigning against privatisation does work and that public opinion is on our side and not on the side of the privateers in Government.
Conference acknowledges in particular the following work within the Service Group:
a) The magnificent campaign being waged by the West Midlands Police Branch to oppose the disastrous Business Partnering Proposals forced on the police service by the Home Office. The branch has set a great example to the Service Group in how to fight privatisation. They have engaged with the public through a petition taken out onto the streets of the West Midlands to shame the West Midlands Police Authority over its non-existent public consultation policy. They have worked through the Labour Link with West Midlands MPs and members of the West Midlands Police Authority to challenge the proposals at every key meeting. They have won the public relations battle via the media. They have forged an effective alliance with UNITE in the West Midlands to carry the fight to the force and police authority. They have worked with their region and the Service Group to ensure seamless campaign activity throughout the union. As a result of their efforts, the privatisation proposals for West Midlands Police and Surrey Police have now effectively been put on hold until after the Police and Crime Commissioner elections in the autumn
b) The campaign being run by the Police Branches in Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire to oppose their forces signing up to the three-force privatisation proposals to join the Lincolnshire Police G4S contract. The branches and their Region commissioned expert analysis of the forces’ privatisation proposals from the Association of Public Sector Excellence (APSE) to challenge the business case for privatisation. They have lobbied their police authorities and made a real impact in the local and regional press
c) The launch of the Service Group’s ‘Stop Police Privatisation’ campaign, with its distinctive branding, dedicated web-site, campaign materials and briefings, opinion polling and resources for branches and regions
d) Dedicated procurement training for branches and regions, tailored to specific outsourcing proposals
e) Service Group Research into police privatisation
f) Coverage of the union’s campaign on national and regional TV and in all key UNISON publications
g) The mainstreaming of the ‘Stop Police Privatisation’ campaign in UNISON’s work with Labour Link in the run up to the Police and Crime Commissioner elections
h) The Service Group’s efforts to extract key information from the Home Office, Cabinet Office and Ministry of Justice, under Freedom of Information, in relation to privatisation proposals for the Police and Probation Services
i) UNISON evidence to the Parliamentary Justice Committee highlighting the dangers of the Government’s privatisation proposals for the Probation Service particularly in relation to Community Payback
j) UNISON work with the Local Government Information Unit to promote public-public partnerships for Probation as an alternative to the Government’s privatisation mantra.
In welcoming these initiatives, Conference calls upon the Service Group Executive to:
i) Continue to work with branches and regions to seek to ensure that any privatisation proposals are robustly challenged and campaign work supported
ii) Collect on-going data and information from branches in relation to local privatisation plans, including performance data on privatisations to date
iii) Seek to make police privatisation a ‘toxic’ issue for any Police and Crime Commissioner candidates who support the Government’s privatisation agenda for policing
iv) Work with all Police and Crime Commissioners in order to keep privatisation off the agenda using our National Campaign to influence and inform any discussions.
v) Develop and expand our ‘Stop Police Privatisation’ campaign so that we can continue to respond to challenges around privatisation in the future
vi) Include in the “Stop Police Privatisation” campaign guidelines for branches not only on how to retain services in-house but also return those already outsourced back in-house
vii) Work with the national women’s committee and other appropriate bodies to raise awareness of the likely impact of privatisation on women police staff and to continue to campaign and lobby against the privatisation of police and justice services
viii) Continue to oppose privatisation in the Probation Service, by supporting branches facing privatisation locally and by seeking to persuade other probation stakeholders of the dangers of privatisation
ix) Promote the “stop police privatisation campaign” throughout the Police and Justice Service Group, the wider union and the public within communities highlighting the dangers privatisation will bring for them
x) Work with Labour Link to campaign against this current agenda to privatise police staff roles
xi) Adopt a service wide campaign to challenge privatisation in our service group
xii) Provide support, guidance and assistance to branches faced with privatisation threats
xiii) Maximize publicity to ensure the public are aware of the consequences of privatisation to their police service
xiv) Ensure local branch campaigns are integrated into our national campaign
xv) Lobby the Home Office, Scottish Government & Welsh Government, national police stake holders and prospective Police & Crime Commissionaires.