Accountability of Policing
About ACPO - ACPO Committees - News - Policies - Annual Report - Useful links
- There is a need to enable priority setting and better accountability at neighbourhood and basic command unit level.
- It is crucial that those local priorities are not merely added to the current central priorities or existing local policing task without considering how we can increase in capacity or capability.
- Partnerships are currently disparate and have different philosophy (e.g. Local Strategic Partnerships and Crime Reduction Partnerships are led with different priorities). Success is variable and depends on personalities. A joint framework whereby all agencies and partnerships share the same aims and funding streams, with clear accountability for each partner and joint inspections and audit, would better serve our communities.
- The concept of earned autonomy seems to lead to a regulatory overload and a negative culture (e.g. one force reports 37 inspections, audits or checks in the last 12 months). A more constructive presumption would be a positive expectation of autonomy which is lost if performance does not reach the appropriate standard. Rigorous performance management would allow audit and inspection to focus on forces at the extremes of performance rather than the whole service.
- The independence of police in terms of being clearly and visibly impartial in the eyes of the public is crucial to developing public confidence. Independence does not preclude collaboration at any level, operational or otherwise, and assumes corporate responsibility to partners. Examples include internal collaboration in procurement or joint ventures, and external collaboration within partnerships as part of problem solving and response teams.
- The emergence of national codes and standards is to be welcomed alongside investment in the infrastructure to support national implementation and thus reduce public risk, for example a consistent national approach to the predatory sex offender.

