The Case Against ACPO - A Critical Look At The Association Of Chief Police Officers
acts as the de facto national lead police force and its Commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, as the country’s lead police officer and adviser to the Home Secretary.
ACPO – the power behind the throne
The Association of Chief Police Officers is a powerful and independent body consisting of Chief Constables, Deputy Chief Constables and Assistant Chief Constables. It has a major role as the primary coordinator of policing policy, encouraging the 43 forces in England and Wales to adopt the policies it promotes:
Few understand that ACPO is a private company, which happens to be funded by a Home Office grant and money from 44 police authorities. ACPO has the ear of the Home Secretary and this, in combination with its influence over senior officers (and those wishing to become senior officers), means it is a prominent voice in determining policy. There is now a widespread belief that ACPO is the main party persuading forces to adopt particular policies.
ACPO is the driving force behind policy, and the Home Office succumbs, either because of its own autocratic instincts or because ACPO are exceptionally good at pushing through the things they want.
This focus of ACPO on national policy means that individual Chief Constables are left focusing on administrative matters and equipment choices. In fact this situation should be reversed: ACPO could take a useful national lead on administration and interoperability while Chief Constables focus on their forces’ operations.
The Home Office – a Faustian pact with ACPO
Given the roadblock that ACPO and the 43 forces have presented, the Government has sought to centralize and mandate, subject to ACPO’s agreement. The 1964 Police Act enabled central government to take many powers from local government in the name of fighting corruption.39 The 1996 Police Act enabled the Home Secretary to set national policing priorities, leaving power resting almost exclusively between the Home Secretary and Chief Constables.
Since 2001 the Home Office has conducted a sustained campaign to take control of policing decisions. The Home Office published three National Policing Plans along with a variety of supporting documents, and established new agencies. Through these, the Home Office took responsibility for setting the priorities for police forces, for setting many of their performance targets, and for key questions of operational management. The result of this process was a considerable uniformity of activity across England and Wales, directly in line with the Home Office’s intentions.
44
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53