James Barlow

The Conservative Party stands for three core ideals:

1. A Smaller Government
2. Lower Taxation
3. Personal Responsibility

Well, that's the theory anyway. Like it or not, British politics is oriented toward London, and all career politicians have an implicit bias toward centralisation and control. For example, The National Curriculum (micro management of individual lessons) and Rate Capping (micro management of local government finance) were both instituted by the Thatcher government - not a group typically remembered as being wishy-washy socialists.

I'm not aware of any London administration that has significantly reduced the centralisation of society, but there are some interesting policies being generated by the current Most Loyal Opposition that might get us closer to that goal. I quite like David Cameron - I only think half of what he and his team say is questionable*, whereas practically everything coming out of the current government is a a load of tosh.

As a country we need a "bonfire of controls". Politicians and Governments are often falsely credited with creating economic success, when in fact the best outcome to which they can aspire is to not muck things up too much. We really need our elected representatives to stop fiddling with society - no matter how good their intentions - and let private enterprise and individual entrepreneurs work the magic to make us all healthier, wealthier and wiser.

One potential line of policy which I want to develop relates to the structure of the police service here in Bristol. From 1974 through to 1996, our city was administratively part of the now-defunct County of Avon. Although Avon is no more, it still lives on in various local services that are still organised and funded regionally. For example the Avon Fire & Rescue Service and the Avon & Somerset Constabulary (formerly 'AvSom.police.uk).

The two governing bodies for these services are the Avon Fire Authority - about whom I have recently blogged - and the Avon & Somerset Police Authority. Both of these organisations are constructed from democratically elected councillors, which gives a suggestion of accountability. But the authority of the Authorities is somewhat diffuse.

Consider the Avon & Somerset Police Authority. As a local voter in a ward in Bristol, you will - every four years - be offered the chance to elect two representatives, for a total of 70 councillors in the City. 2 of those councillors will be appointed to the 16-strong membership of the Police Authority. Therefore as a voter and tax payer, your proxy-representation on the council is almost nothing - let's call it half a percentage point of the constitution of the Authority.

The core business of the Police Authority is "to set objectives, approve the local Policing Plan and set an annual budget for the force." But how? The enormous breadth of the Constabulary's operations means that at best the members can give a nudge in the desired direction, and maybe tweak the strategy in response to another Criminal Justice Bill (3,000 new crimes and rising) or Whitehall dictat.

The official mission of the constabulary is:

“Make the communities of Avon and Somerset feel safe and be safe.”

which does implicitly acknowledge the difference between "being safe" and "feeling safe". And their vision?

"The communities of Avon and Somerset will have the highest levels of confidence in our delivery of policing services.”

Have a look at this, and tell me if you feel you are getting your money's worth from the Police:

What about if we analyse the Police like any other moribund service organisation? Then the answer is clear: Break it up into smaller parts, so that each is responsive to its customers.

The structure of British Policing supports a decentralised approach - constabularies are organised as Districts, also known as Basic Command Units (BCUs) coterminous with Local Authority boundaries. (Interestingly Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabularies chops and changes a bit in the way they refer to Bristol's structure, and has separate BCU reports for North Bristol, South Bristol and Central Bristol).

"Bristol" is one of the largest BCUs in England & Wales, with (at last report) 944 (Full Time Equivalent) Police Officers and 176 (Full Time Equivalent) Civilian Staff, operating in smaller teams.

Chopping out the bit of the constabulary covering Bristol would mean taking the BCU staff, and grafting on the appropriate number of plainclothes detectives, boffins, dog handlers and other support services.

Would this be Easy? Nope: Council Tax funding only accounts for 30% of the budget of the current Constabulary, the rest coming from a mix of Business Rates (locally collected, centrally disbursed) and other Whitehall Taxes. There are such things as "Non-Home Office Forces" - for example MOD Plod - but they don't have access to the same funding lines. On the other hand, a new "Bristol City Constabulary" under the same regime of central control could be just as unresponsive to local concerns, delivering the same identikit mix of CCTV and debased coppers. In the absence of some major reform of the UK tax system, or clever negotiations with Whitehall, fully funding a City Constabulary on the same basis as today would cost a Band D taxpayer about £500 a year, on top of the bill from the local council and fire service.

If it can be made economically viable, this idea would not be a panacea for our city's problems, but I believe it would lead to the Police becoming more responsive to ordinary Bristolians and in the long term a better quality of life for Bristolians. It's not the only area for consideration, though. The prosecutorial function of the Crown Prosecution Service may also need review. And our front line police officers are constantly chasing paper, due to legislation that assumes they are fundamentally untrustworthy (another legacy of the Thatcher Government, I'm afraid).

But let's sort out one problem at a time.

*To forestall the "So why are you standing for the Conservatives then?" comments, may I suggest you Google "Ideological Purity".