Managing budgets
What connects John Reid's decision to go slow on and on ? No, not - though both decisions have. The answer is money.
91Èȱ¬ Office ministers could have given approval to the first merger of two police forces this week - but only if they'd agreed a year-on-year cost of around £13-£15 million. Peanuts in Whitehall terms, but if they'd agreed to that then everyone else might have demanded the same, leaving a hole in the police budget.
The costs of the ID card scheme are, of course, vast in comparison. So vast that the Tories think that they can make a whole series of promises simply by pledging not to spend billions on ID cards.
I am not alleging that the Treasury are behind the go slows. The 91Èȱ¬ Office budget for the next three years was agreed some time ago. No effort has been made, I'm told, to re-open it. Team Brown were not asked their view on police mergers. Had they been they would have said that they hoped spending money now would produce long term savings.
My suspicion is that the home secretary - who unveils his reforms of the 91Èȱ¬ Office next week - is looking for things that will restore confidence in his department in the short term, and to postpone rows that are costly - not just in political terms but in financial terms too.
This may be the first example of a minister in a very high profile department having to get used to living on budgets that are much tighter than they've been at any time since Labour came to power.
I'm 
Comments
In my view England (certainly) and the UK (possibly) would benefit from a national Police Force. A united force could make the phrase "joined-up working" a practical reality. National computer systems would allow all the existing disperate forces to use the same common intelligence and produce staff with transferrable skills.
My belief however is that (as usual) politics will dominate, and those Chief Constables & senior officers happy in their own 'empires' will fear and resist mergers that threaten their current positions. If mergers were introduced gradually I can't see why there would be any justification for significant additional funding. I'm suspicious of anything that can't be quantified, especially if the "costs" are in fact incentives for existing staff to retire early and make way for the change.
What's this? John Reid steering away from a row. Has he become a wimp all of a sudden? Or are there things that has convinced him to shut up and stop creating a fuss? Maybe there's a change in the air.
Interestingly though, both the ministers involved, Read as 91Èȱ¬ Secretary and Brown as Chancellor, sit for Scottish seats. Once again we see that the matters under discussion, in this case police force mergers in England and Wales, which were proving unpopular with both the authorities and the residents who would be affected, would not apply in the ministers own contituencies, ie Scotland. With the increasing awareness in England of the effects of the now famous "West Lothian Question", I wonder how much avoiding another round of media angst about the powers of Scottish MP's and ministers over English affairs has come to play behind the scenes. Labour are increasingly vulnerable on this issue, and if they really want to court Middle England, they will have to do something to sort it out before the next election.
ID cards, of course, are a whole other can of worms, cost or no cost. I bet they are sorry now they started it!
I'm sure that the thought of annoying Charles Clarke must have been running parallel to the budgetary issue... ;-)
As usual, an interesting and subtle approach to analysis.
I think this may be a case of 2 u-turns for the price of one. Both ID Cards and police force mergers were interesting ideas that have turned out bad. There are a couple of police force mergers that make sense, but certain constraints have led to seriously bad proposals on the table and a lot of grass roots opposition in the forces and local authorities. With ID cards, the very idea is flawed, and the implementation was a disaster waiting to happen. Those inside or around the IT industry were looking on in horror as the project was doomed to fail spectacularly from the beginning - from a technical and structural point of view.
Personally, I'm just pleased that ministers have finally come to the conclusion that both ideas really didn't work. However, I don't think that's a sign of failure. The ideas have been weighed, found wanting and then abandoned. I have no problem with that whatsoever.
There is of course, a purely political dimension to this, but both projects were heading this way inexorably. The political angle, in my view, has governed the timing of announcements, not the decisions themselves.
However, what do I know? :-)
So many things could be seen to link these two items. Personally I plump for plain old incompetence.
It's been clear since the very beginning to anyone who works in software development that the ID cards scheme is just too grand and cutting edge.
Government has an appalling record with IT projects and this, the biggest and most ambitious project conceived, was about to catch up with them.
The only chance ID cards have are if a watered down scheme is introduced as hinted at in the leaked emails. Considering that the original scheme was not actually going to help fight terrorism, immigration or identity theft, what chance for a watered down card.
I actually find it refreshing that the 91Èȱ¬ Secretary has decided to get the 91Èȱ¬ Office to cope with its own existing workload rather than seeking out new work in the form of ID cards and police mergers; to administrate, rather than legislate.
I also find it interesting that the 91Èȱ¬ Office can't afford to fork out for financial assistance for the police mergers considering the mergers are in part designed to save money. Has the bottom fallen out of those "business cases" as well as the Above Top Secret ones for the National Identity Register?
Yet again the Government has to rush things through. Rumours say its to do with European intervention, other say its down to Government stupidity. If European lead, lets have a non repayable grant for the National Merger to occur.
What people forget is that the NHS used to be National with no trusts, but due to the nature of policing, its essential to keep things the way they are force wise. Merging wont increase staff on the road.
So where does Mr Blair's non-committal remark now leave police forces who have been trying to plan for the future despite a lack of definitive steer from the 91Èȱ¬ Office throughout this farcical process? Initially the police were supposed to be told of their fate in January 06, then March, then September and now this. How can we expect the police to do their jobs properly when they are left dangling as to their futures by the powers that be?
Your last paragraph begs the BIG question - where is all the money going?
I agree, Nick. I have noticed a distinct slowdown in the amount of money being either spent or promised since the last election. It's as though the government have been living on the never-never for the last 9 years and are now barely able to keep up the repayments!
To add to this feeling of "whoops, where's the budget gone?", is the missing Gordon Brown. He could always be relied on to spurt out stats and figures to show how well the government were doing, but since the general election he has almost disappeared!
Personally I have a feeling Gordon's predicted tax receipts have been a lot, lot lower then he anticipated whilst Tony pinned far too much on his costly NHS reforms.
Is this the beginnings of a 91Èȱ¬ Office that is starting to look at the true merits of initiatives and pulling in the reigns where the business cases don't stack up? Surely not.
Nick
Surely the answer to the question is simply 'gross incompetence' from a dying Government?
Indeed ID cards will never happen because the cost would be astronomic. A pity the case against based on civil liberties can not win the day, only the cost will kill ID cards. Then given an authoritarian government and a shifty opposition a win is a win
John Reid is too canny to get into pointless fights. He does stand his ground but one of the first things that he did at health was make peace with the consultants where Alan Milburn had taken his toys home in a huff.
I obviously do not know what Pete Lawrence's background is (post 1) but he is sadly mistaken in proposing a national Police Service.
The very bedrock of policing in the UK is that it is locally delivered by locally accountable officers using citizens locally appointed and having their authority from the Crown. Without this local involvement in the setting and monitoring of policing priorities, the Police service would risk losing the support it has from the vast majority of the citizens.
One has to accept that the world is changing and the risk from terrorist and other major incidents is very real. Having said that, the service has both mutual aid arrangements in place to deal with such incidents as they arise (The largest terrorist attack on this country was Lockerbie and Dumfries and Galloway - one of the smallest police forces in the UK - were able to deal with the matter thanks to the support of neighbouring forces).
In addition we now have the Serious Organised Crime Authority (SOCA) who transcend traditional boundaries.
There is, of course, scope for the realignment of boundaries in line with changes in local policitical boundaries, just as there were in 1974, but moving away from the 'local' element of policing and, presumably abandoning the ethos of commumity service, is a disaster waiting to happen.
Nick,
You, I and everyone with a functioning brain knows that the first thing anyone does in a new job is try and deliver some quick wins. Merger of the police and ID cards are polar opposites to that, slow costly projects that may end up as perceived failures, given the organised and vocal opposition to them.
So it's not exactly a complete shock if Reid is seeking some headline grabbing successes to bed himself in and create some good headlines for the government for once, is it?
Policing must always be on the basis of consent with the local community. Larger or national forces remove that accountability and undermine the principle of consent. I am glad that another erosion of our democratic society has been halted. Perhaps John Reid, unlike others, understands these basic principles
"This may be the first example of a minister in a very high profile department having to get used to living on budgets that are much tighter than they've been at any time since Labour came to power"
Come off it Nick - haven't you used the NHS recently?
Yesterday this government called the NHS managers incompetent because of their deficits. Does the same apply to this government? It's been painfully obvious to me that this 'government' is desperately short of money and becoming more so. Most of us know where the money is being wasted. I also find it amazing that a party with a massive deficit in its own funds can be trusted with the nation's money.
Of course the police force mergers made sense. The Health Service just got on with theirs, and any large private company would not waste time worrying over a few pounds on the rates in one area (and a few pounds less to their neighbour). This government has lost its nerve, and the bleating of over-paid police authority members and clerks scared to lose their sinecures, along with a few chief constables (not the majority), means a sensible proposal long over due has been put on the back burner.
What is bemusing is why a Labour government loses its nerve in taking on the powers that be, but continues to treat the rest of the population so badly. Another example of a shambolic pathetic mess, I'm afraid.
I applaude any level of Ministerial incompetence and waste thT contributes to once and for all destroying any ID card plans.
Perhaps the one thing that could really bring these two subjects together is the Database. A lot of money has been spent on getting the Police National Computer accurate (a database that really unites police forces). Why not use this investment to be the base for ID cards? Wouldn't law abiding citizens be willing to allow their details to be kept on a system that has so much scrutiny?
Are we clearing the decks for a snap election under Gordon Brown? Is that the real reason for the sudden changes on ID cards, police force amalgamation, and wheel clamping? And now gongs for bungs crops up again big time!
It's not as newsworthy as abandoning force mergers, but the agency set-up by the 91Èȱ¬ Office to provide national IT and telecoms to the Police is also in the process of being broken-up. The Police IT Organisation made valiant efforts to bring some coherence to the needless variety of IT systems chosen at will by the Forces.
£13 - £15m IS ONLY MARGINALLY MORE THAN THE COST OF DESIGNING THE NEW WIMBLEDON UNIFORMS.
hi nick i throught david cammeron scored a knockout blow on blair over ID cards, police mergers and and 2 jags lol the phases where he accaused mr blair of "wasting police time" calling 2 jags a "cowboy" really must have felt like a kick the head to him
when will play learn it is him who is the answer the question PMQ's is not the time for david cammeron to layout what he supports and what he doesn't
nick i will like your comments on what happened the commons after the debate this afternoon on the natwest 3 in US. i have never seen a seen like it mps finishing early in protest
in my view there should have been a proper motion to be put to the vote in relation to what the lords did last night now i know we have to wait till october for the actaul bill to come back but surely mps could have done something today
Any idea that ID Cards will be abandoned is a non-starter.
Don't forget that in all this time, Gordon Brown has been a keen supporter of them..and has the money to finance them.
If he withdraws from the idea of ID Cards now then this will be an admission that he...the Golden Boy..has got it all wrong.
That will never happen.
I.D. cards are dead in the water as far as I am concerned I would not mind carrying an I.D. if it were issued free but I certainly would not Pay £93 as is being suggested they would cost. But then I suppose the people advocating I.D. cards would get them issued free as a perk of the Job.
> In my view England (certainly) and the UK (possibly) would benefit from a national Police Force. A united force could make the phrase "joined-up working" a practical reality. National computer systems would allow all the existing disperate forces to use the same common intelligence and produce staff with transferrable skills.
No chance on a UK force - remember, Scotland has a competely seperate legal system.
Not to mentiont that the UK includes Northern Ireland...
Maybe we should have two types of police - local and national without any feeling within the police themselves that one is superior to the other. I am sure that the local police would be more appreciated by the populus.
And as for ID cards - they should never have been considered. They would be bound to be open to forgery in due course which would make them worthless anyway.
Two bad ideas in the bin in one week - things are looking up!
The best ID card that could be introduced would be a large one, permanently and prominently worn round the neck of every Labour minister (past and present), simply saying "INCOMPETENT IDIOT".
A brief reply to Ashley - Post No. 16:
Whilst I did serve in the Wiltshire Constabulary for just over a year, the lure of the IT industry (and the cash) encouraged me to change my career path. This means I can't claim to have any real in depth experience of policing. Having said that I do know that whilst "local policing" is a nice concept it is a fact of life that officers are moved regularly even within a county force.
No officer is "appointed locally" as you join a county force, unlike the USA where local Sherrifs are elected. Reciprocal agreements are fine in theory, but IMHO a national force with guarantees of all the specialist skills (firearms, serious fraud, drug control, siege/hostage situations, riot control etc.) is more realistic and cost effective.
ID Cards: As usual the 'bogey man' has been let loose regarding ID Cards, and I'm more than willing to acknowledge that this is a very serious matter that needs a lot of in depth consideration. However, the following might lead to a broader debate. In the UK we already have a need to prove ID. i.e. passports, driving licences, cashpoint & credit cards (PIN & CHIP,)and the various ID Cards for building access (I use one daily). The uses for a reliable source of ID are legion with everything from benefits claimants, Police Officers, Child Care workers, Taxi drivers carrying children to school, etc. benefiting from a reliable source of ID. Identification Cards can be very beneficial i.e. auto-completion of forms, Medic-Alert type identification, on-line authentication (Smart Cards) and much more. Yes all systems are open to forgery and abuse. However, whilst ID Cards won't solve all the the problems they are a vast improvement on (for instance)my Driving Licence (no way to prove that it is mine just because I have it in my possession; my passport (just a very poor picture of someone who I'm sure is older and balder than I really am!). I don't want to rant, but the media does seem incapable of comprehending the fact that ID cards do have advantages.
The most serious aspect of police force mergers is not budget or efficiency but keeping back the police state. In my opinion the independence of Chief Constables in administering the law is the principle barrier to a police state we have.
Politicians always wish to use the police for their own purposes, policies and sometimes simple convenience. With 43 Chief Constables there is a good chance that many, with luck a majority, are at a stage in their career where they have neither wish nor incentive to kow tow to politicians. If they are reduced to 20 the chances are obviously reduced and I suspect in a complex manner such that their independence would be reduced substantially. I am suprised why Nick and others do not pay more attention to this primary aspect of the matter.
I supported ID cards originally, then I was opposed for a good while, now I am reassured that they serve a good purpose, as explained on the 91Èȱ¬ Office website. Nobody who uses a switch card can complain about "tracking." Nobody who uses a credit card can complain about "verification." I will back the government on this PROVIDED:
1. they give us a written constitution where the database info. is delimited and restricted to what is mentioned on the 91Èȱ¬ Office website.
2. they give us a constitutional court to back up the constitution.
3. Absolutely no personal data should be held on the card itself except your full name and gender.
4. The cost at 30 quid is OK.
5. Nobody should be charged money to register a new address.
6. The extra details you may request included on the databse must include the right to refuse the dissemination of personal data to marketing companies.
ID cards will mean LESS hassle from the police as the innocent will acquire additional possibilities for electronic alibis.
"I don't want to rant, but the media does seem incapable of comprehending the fact that ID cards do have advantages."
Because no advantages have been pointed out. Make no mistake, the reason for ID cards/National Identity Register is not terrorism/benefit fraud/illegal immigration/whatever excuse the government comes up with, it is to monitor and control the British public.
The ID card would be used as the sole method of "proving you are who you say you are" (which by the way eliminates the innocent until proven guilty principle). So if it was lost, stolen or destroyed you would be up a certain creek without a paddle.
Also, Gerald Smith, if you believe the lies and misrepresentation on the 91Èȱ¬ Office website, I feel sorry for you.