As an association, we have previously written to Mr Brunstrom personally about policing issues and we received bland, evasive responses from him which did not give effective answers to our questions. (See talks and issues 2003/2004)
Following a resolution from our Residents’ Committee the following letter was written and delivered to Mr Gareth Thomas MP on the 2nd March 2004, asking him to deliver it to the police authority and to the Home Office.
All the statements were evidenced and the document contained 50 pages of evidence.
The letter is a criticism of Chief Constable Brunstrom with reference to various issues which call his credibility into question in our opinion. Credibility is so important for someone in such a high position in society who can raise a precept from the community.
Since the letter was written, other issues have arisen which call his credibility into question. Nothing has happened. Police authority and police minister have not listened. They did not want to hear.
The answers from the police authority and Hazel Blears the Minister of State for policing matters are attached.
The way in which the Authorities have handled the whole issue is an indictment on Chief Constable /Police Authority / Home Office accountability in our opinion. The Home Office, Police Authority and the Chief Constable each appear to have their own agendas. The public has no say even though it pays the bills and suffers the trauma of inconsistent police cover at ground level.
Our Association supports the police in every way possible but recognises a significant shortfall in officer availability and not just in our area.
Technology available to the police is very good; we have no issue with Arrive Alive or with other significant technology improvements such as ANPR.
The shortfall exists in our towns and villages and is being masked in the drive to have CBMs and CSOs in every Ward. These officers are not available regularly because they work 10 hour shifts, (hence 4 days a week). Added to that is leave and course commitments (This is agreed by Mr Brunstrom in his reply /Talks and issues 2003 / 4)
The Old Colwyn Policing team were all on leave over the Christmas 2005 period.
The Old Colwyn Policing team were all on leave over the Christmas 2005 period.
The overall cover is provided by the Response Officers. This overstretched and undermanned body of officers is being depleted in the drive for the CBM / CSO in each Ward. We are all the losers as problem groups learn what they can get away with and what period of time they have before an officer attends, often travelling long distances.
The Local Policing Team concept will never be properly effective without a significant increase in the RESPONSE OFFICER TEAM. They form the thin blue line, TOO THIN.
The Local Policing Team concept will never be properly effective without a significant increase in the RESPONSE OFFICER TEAM. They form the thin blue line, TOO THIN.
There is no political reason for the action that we have taken; it is merely an issue of doubting the Chief Constable’s credibility. It is apparent that whenever he talks to any group. Mr Brunstrom appears to talk at everyone but does not listen to anyone who does not share his views. We are regularly told how passionate he is about a range of issues.
He has made some really poor decisions in our opinion which reflect on his overall credibility. We wish for a strong rational person at the helm of the police force and feel that some of Mr Brunstrom’s decisions fall below the standard expected. The Police authority and Home Office stand behind him and Hazel Blears points to North Wales Neighbourhood Policing as a template for British policing.
He has made some really poor decisions in our opinion which reflect on his overall credibility. We wish for a strong rational person at the helm of the police force and feel that some of Mr Brunstrom’s decisions fall below the standard expected. The Police authority and Home Office stand behind him and Hazel Blears points to North Wales Neighbourhood Policing as a template for British policing.
The letters are appended for you to read, for your information
David Curtis (secretary)
The Old Colwyn (East) Residents’ Association
David Curtis
2nd March 2004
Gareth Thomas MP
LL29 8NB
LL29 8NB
Dear Sir
Submission from the Old Colwyn East Residents
We have prepared a letter which has been signed by the committee. It details the concerns of our Association about the credibility of Mr Brunstrom as Chief Constable, following several recent high profile press statements and television broadcasts and other issues.
We ask for it to be actioned by you through the appropriate Home Office Department and the Police Authority not the Police Authority alone.
The accompanying documents detail our talks at various times with members of the Police and a Police Authority member.
We respectfully ask to be kept updated on the progress of the matter as in due course we have to update our members.
A resolution was passed last night at a Committee Meeting, to progress the matter confidentially for the time being.
Yours sincerely
David Curtis
Secretary
The first letter to the MP Gareth Thomas
The Old Colwyn (East) Residents’ Association
Secretary
David Curtis
2nd March 2004
Gareth Thomas MP
LL29 8NB
LL29 8NB
Dear Sir,
I am a retired police officer and as such have always been and remain supportive of the police officers working to make a difference in society. I am the secretary of the Old Colwyn (East) Residents’ Association. This Association is a properly constituted organisation which regularly has between 40 and 80 members at its monthly meetings.
It has an interface with the Police and the Local Authority. The minutes of the Association and Constitution of Association can be made available if required.
I submit a file for your attention. It proves that we have had meaningful communication with the police since our Association was formed in June 2003. There are minutes of talks by senior police managers and a member of the Police Authority where matters have been addressed. There is a letter to and a reply from Mr Brunstrom. There are also a number of other exhibits that evidence the statements made in this letter. This file also shows that this is no off-the-cuff letter but the culmination of work to try and influence matters in a supportive way. There is also a letter and reply taking issue with the lack of detail in a telephone survey. The police have agreed that there should be more detail.
In this submission, I seek to substantiate our honestly held belief that Richard Brunstrom neither holds nor justifies credibility and total support as Chief Constable with the vast majority of the community of North Wales, with whom he has shown no rapport. The majority of members that I represent as secretary of the Residents Association hold this belief. It is also apparent from speaking to people across the region and from newspaper and other reports, some of them detailing the views of other senior police officers nationally, that this is a widely held belief.
It is our honest belief that a case exists for the Police Authority to censure the Chief Constable and that a vote of no confidence is justified. Mr. Brunstrom in some of his bizarre expressions speaks only for himself, not his police force. A Chief Constable has a corporate image to support and he should always bear that in mind.
The Police Authority is widely based. It is not easy for them to debate these issues even if they have the facts. We believe that they should do so now before any further damage is done to this police force. The matter of his credibility needs to be looked at as a whole, rather than each of the issues being studied alone which has happened so far.
The major issues, as we see them are:
1. His recent televised views on Dragon’s Eye, that there should be legalised open sale of heroin.
2. The present ongoing threats to investigate the members of the Police Authority in seeking the person who released confidential information to the press.
3. The televised press release against Mr William Shaw, the speeder who criticised Mr Brunstrom.
4. The centralisation of custody in the Central Division.
5. The apparent misrepresentation of the Community Beat Manager concept to the public as old style local policing.
Officers in the position of Chief Constable are in an extremely powerful position. They are answerable only to the Police Authority except in operational issues and to some extent to the Home Office. Mr Brunstrom is always untouched by public censure. On the Dragons Eye program, we saw him dismissing media reports as ‘gutter’ together with his command team. He always claims huge public support for his views usually based on surveys.
Mr Brunstrom is a leader of a large body of people. Leadership is based on vision and he has shown that he has a vision. Leadership is based on communication and he has shown that he has the speaking manner to convey his ideas and ideals to an audience. True communication however is a two way medium; it is in the listening skills area that he is apparently lacking.
The final leadership issue is credibility. A leader must have credibility with his or her staff and in the case of a public organisation such as the police, with the public. Credibility is defined as worthy of belief.
We believe that in stating his views about the legalisation and open sale of heroin on television in the Dragon’s Eye program, he undermined the position of the officers whom he manages in the North Wales Police Force. He also seriously undermined his own credibility. Mr Brunstrom expressed in the most high profile manner possible, his view of legalisation and selling of heroin on the street corner and in shops, as with alcohol
and tobacco. He further stated that it is not a very dangerous drug. What message is that to convey, to young people, in particular?
This view, expressed as it was by a senior police manager is deplorable and brings into focus his ability to consider any complex issue properly. In formulating a televised press release, which the program was, he should have, at the very least thought of all the likely options stemming from his statements. The public require policing from a senior police officer not sensational debate. He has channels through which he should communicate his views to government. His communication style is headline grabbing. He quotes the results of surveys a lot to justify his arguments “I have received a great deal of support for…..” is a favourite comment that he says in his speeches.
The public of North Wales has a point of view and it is expressed time and time again. One can regularly pick up a newspaper or turn on the news to hear of a new controversy surrounding the Chief Constable of North Wales. Mr Brunstrom has never made any secret of his views on legalising drugs and each time he raises the issue, it causes a storm of protest. To be fair it also raises support from various quarters, most of this support however distances itself from Mr Brunstrom’s open sale agenda. They are quite often kind and say that Mr Brunstrom is raising necessary debate.
In his ‘legalise drugs’ lectures, for that is what they are, he speaks of, after legalisation, making the drugs socially unacceptable, as with drink-driving. At present, they are unlawful which makes them socially unacceptable. Legalisation of heroin would simply cut the work that police officers have to do, perhaps...… As with all social engineering, there are inherent risks and society is not best placed to manage them all.
Much of the information about local drugs traffic that our Association passes on to the police is not actioned, because of low police resources locally.
The present ongoing investigation to seek the person who released confidential information about the Brereton enquiry is a situation which again calls his reasoning skills into question. There have always been leaks at local level as in government. Does it really justify all the money and resources being applied to a quest with a non guaranteed outcome, even if all the Police Authority members agreed to be DNA tested and fingerprinted?
Police managers regularly have to make such decisions about cost efficiency versus probability of detection. Why does the Chief Constable throw money at such an issue? One could be excused for thinking that he does not want Mr Brereton to return to policing and had possibly authorised the leak himself and is now creating a smokescreen. It would be unforgivable for that to happen. No Chief Constable with good reasoning powers would do that. The question that arises is ‘does Mr Brunstrom have good powers of reason?’ based on some of his decisions and publicly stated views.
Mr Brunstrom publicly humiliated Mr William Shaw a respected member of the community, on television and in the press, in an unprecedented public attack and criminalised him for daring to question police evidence on a speeding charge. He was reported by Mr Shaw to the Police Authority Professional Standards Committee for his actions.
After the meeting, police authority clerk Kelvin Dent said “The committee carefully considered Mr. Shaw’s full and detailed submission and at Mr. Shaw’s request viewed the full unedited video of the press conference. The committee decided this was not a matter which warranted a formal investigation.” Mr. Dent added: “However, the committee had concerns about the principle of convening a press conference in this instance and decided to discuss with the Chief Constable a protocol to cover the convening of press conferences or public meetings in relation to named individuals in future.”
Mr Brunstrom got away with a shameful decision to launch a public vilification of Mr Shaw on television. Mr Shaw had dared to confront Mr Brunstrom. It may not have warranted investigation but when viewed in conjunction with other issues questions his objectivity.
The next issue that I introduce is the Central Division Custody suite in St Asaph.
In July 2003 our Association wrote to Mr. Brunstrom. We specifically questioned the logistical nightmare of transport of prisoners over the long distances involved, particularly in summer traffic. It goes deeper however. Parents of detained juveniles have to attend custody suites, prisoners have to return to their homes after release and so on, the list is endless. The sheer distance from, say Llanrwst to St Asaph is bound to dissuade a Police Officer from arresting a criminal, in some situations which warrant an arrest. This will undoubtedly be compounded by lack of other officers to police the district while the arresting officer is away.
We have received a reply from local managers to this point, as the Chief did not address it in his letter of reply. It was said, that officers in outlying areas have always had these decisions to make. Modern facilities should improve old issues not spread them to more areas.
Here again we seek to make the point that the Chief Constable has apparently not examined the logistical effects of the centralisation of Custody for Conwy and Denbighshire to St Asaph or that he has ignored or accepted the problems.
Finally, I introduce the Community Beat Manager issue
Mr Brunstrom and the Police Authority appear very close. Of course they need to have a close working relationship. The Authority has a duty to ensure that the North Wales Police is efficient and effective. At times this should necessarily bring disagreement. There rarely appears to be disagreement with Mr Brunstrom’s views, however forthright.
The Police Authority Policing Plan has as a priority, an increase across the Force of approximately 150 more Community Beat Managers to a total of 300, one for every local authority ward. The post profile of these officers is as follows:
To provide public reassurance within any given beat area by providing;
A highly visible police presence.
A focus upon reducing incidents of crime & disorder.
A means of addressing community safety issues by acting as a focal point for partnership working.
The officer will achieve this through the adoption of the North Wales style of Problem Oriented policing and Partnership working.
The CBM concept is heralded as a return to the old style of community policing.
It is not old style policing. Where a CBM is required to provide response to an incident due to the unforeseen and temporary commitment of the Area Car officers, the Control Room staff has to obtain the permission of a Sergeant. The CBM’s only attend incidents where absolutely necessary, where it cannot be prioritized for a Response Car to attend.
Also significantly, the CBM apparently does not carry the case load of crime for the beat. That is managed by the response officers who attend the incidents. Under the old system, the local officer had ownership of all the local problems including the crime.
The Community Beat Manager is not then a patrolling Police Constable per se. As the name suggests, the role is a managerial one. On the Chief Constable’s instruction, apparently a CBM is paid an allowance of £1200 per annum from April 2004 for the extra responsibility.
Any first response to incidents by a CBM is handed over to another officer when they arrive.
The CBM role is, primarily liaison being high profile to reassure the public.
Part of the CBM duty involves maintaining a database of public contacts whom the Chief calls ‘movers and shakers’ in the community. The Chief finds this database ‘very exciting’ to use his own words at a public meeting , which is surprising as it is just a computerised list which can be updated and viewed by management. It shows what community meetings the officer visits and what was discussed.
The CBM’s work a four day week of ten hour shifts. They are supposed to be flexible to cover the problems of their area.
When the CBM is off duty, the only cover apparent is Response Officers in cars. We are told that other CBM officers can assist during absence but this is not evident. Old Colwyn has now had another CBM assigned to the village which will be a shared beat we are told.
In Old Colwyn in particular, both verbally and by our Association minutes, we have been informing the police for months of a gradually worsening antisocial behaviour problem involving large gangs of youths. Despite the area being a ‘hotspot’ and in a Dyna Ddigon (That’s Enough initiative) area as well, we have not seen any major clampdown on the groups. It is fair to say that the success or otherwise of a style of policing has to be measured on results.
Dyna Ddigon raises expectations in the public of police response that the police locally apparently cannot meet.
Police Response Officers are stretched. They attend all dynamic incidents as they are prioritised by Control Rooms. There are too few of this group of officers who carry the crime case load. It is this Response Cover that either gives reassurance or otherwise to the public when someone calls for help and all too often, the public has to wait for a very long time for attendance.
A recent quote from Chief Supt Sandham, Divisional Commander of the Central Division said “We need more constables in the response function as the Community Beat Managers, who obviously provide a valuable resource that we will make the most of, are not the remedy to the situation.
The Chief Constable says that ‘the Public want to see more police on the streets and are prepared to pay for them’, evidenced by a survey. What questions did that survey ask? Did the people that were asked to complete a survey, know that they were voting for an officer who did not attend incidents as a normal rule. We think not, otherwise they would have been asking questions. The real question is where are all the police officers? Even police officers are asking that question.
The Chief Constable is now actively pressing the Local Authority to employ uniformed Community Support Officers to walk the streets. They will have limited power to detain someone but the Response Officers will be the ones backing them up and they are hard pressed now to cope with their present duties. They cannot respond to a majority of issues seen by CCTV cameras.
It is obvious to informed observers that there are insufficient Response Officers. This again calls into focus the Chief Constable’s reasoning to press on with 150 more CBM’s without reviewing his policy to consider that there should be more response officers instead, and advising the Police Authority accordingly.
The large staffing of the Corporate Development Department and other police officer led projects is evidenced by the car parking problem in the roads near Police Headquarters. It is said anecdotally that the Chief Constable will offer to trial any initiative where he can secure extra funding from the government, such as the electronic recording of stop check details and in-force probationer training. The staff for these projects has to come from somewhere. They are not replaced on patrol as fast.
Information on the disposition of the establishment of the force is not available as it used to be. If it is sufficient and properly managed, why should the information be guarded with such secrecy? It used to be shown in the Chief Constable’s Annual Report. Secrecy breeds distrust. Members of the Police Authority have expressed surprise at the number of vehicles in the Force in Corporate Development meetings.
The police have many computers; some are hand held PDA’s to work remotely with mobile phones. In North Wales, there are environmental problems and mobile phone cover is patchy in some areas. Again, anecdotal evidence which is the best available says that they are not as effective as they were heralded to be, at great cost.
Many people say that the Chief Constable is very intellectual and we would not seek to say otherwise. His decisions must speak for themselves. We honestly believe that a case exists for the Police Authority to censure the Chief Constable and that a vote of no confidence is justified. Some of his bizarre displays of a lack of judgment should have prompted strong action from the Police Authority but the Chief enjoys the backing of the Chair who is on record as saying that he likes the fact that the Authority has a Chief Constable who is brave enough to speak his mind. He also said that there are times when ‘Richard should choose a less controversial route, but this just isn’t in his character.’
We believe that the Police Authority should debate the issues now before any further damage is done to this police force.
Officers are experiencing negativity from the public on a scale never experienced before. Some of this is directly attributable to the Chief Constable and his views and decisions. Any changes to policing such as for example speed cameras need to carry public support to succeed. The high profile and confrontational style of the Chief Constable with respect to public feelings does not do justice to the police force which we believe he brings into disrepute.
We ask that you consider speaking to the Home Office and the Police Authority on this issue and consider pressing our call for action which we believe is important in the long term best interest of the North Wales Police. Our focus is on the good of the community of North Wales.
Signed
D.J. CurtisSecretary
Emyr Owen / Chair…………………………………………………..
Members of Committee all signed the original
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer from the Police Authority (Text scan)
Awdurdod Heddlu Gogledd Cymru
North Wales Police Authority
Em Cyf lOur Ref PB/AKH 27th April 2004
North Wales Police Authority
Em Cyf lOur Ref PB/AKH 27th April 2004
Gareth Thomas MP/AS
Clwyd West
House of Commons
London SWIA OAA
Clwyd West
House of Commons
London SWIA OAA
Dear Mr. Thomas,
Thank you for your letter dated the 10 March addressed to Councillor King in connection with media and press coverage of the force and chief constable.
Councillor King has asked me to apologise for the time taken to reply to your letter. The Chairman has given this matter very careful consideration and has asked that the following points be communicated to you.
The Police Authority I know will be pleased to receive your endorsement for the many good policing initiatives now in place on the ground. In fact the Authority’s performance review committee met today and congratulated the force on the big improvement in burglary reduction and detection together with violent crime detection rates. Let us hope the press, who were present, will make appropriate use of what is an improving picture across North Wales. But of course there are still areas for improvement such as improved detection rates for vehicle crime and improvements in call handling, issues, which the force is addressing, head on. The key point is one of balance in reporting upon matters relating to the force; this is not always the case as far as the North Wales police force is concerned with some issues taken out of context or with unhelpful and sometimes sensational headlines.
The chief constable is a forthright public figure who leads from the front and believes passionately in the cause of safer communities. His views, on some issues, do not always enjoy popular support but at least people know what he stands for. He is strongly committed to up holding the law and equally committed to providing the people of North Wales with the best policing service possible.
Turning to a more specific example the case of William Shaw raised a number of issues not least a complaint from Mr. Shaw which was fully investigated by the Police Authority. The outcome is that the chief constable has agreed a protocol with the police authority to consult over issues which may be of public interest and affect individual members of the public. This should avoid a repetition of the Shaw case.
The chief constable does have full operational command of the force and is required to exercise great judgments in discharging this duty, which sometimes will need press and media involvement. The chief constable is ably assisted in this regard by a fully staffed and experienced force media liaison unit.
In expressing his view with regard to policy and in particular the drugs debate the Authority’s position is it does not support the legalisation of heroin but it does support the chief constable in asking for a wider public debate, possibly a Royal Commission, to fully explore the underlying reasons for drug abuse and how society wish the problem tackled in the future.
Turning to the national policing scene the chief constable has the A.C.P.O. portfolio for road safety. He is energetic and strongly committed to making our roads safer for all. Speed does kill and the impact of safety cameras and ‘Arrive Alive’ in particular are contributing to fewer road casualties. This stance — to protect life and limb — does not always fully accord with the views of some in our society as to the most appropriate method to enforce the traffic laws. On occasions the press and media have exploited this divergence of view. Again all we can expect as consumers of news is a fair and accurate representation of fact which is balanced and unbiased.
The chief constable’s personal engagement with the public to explain policy and policing issues has begun with a long series of public meetings across North Wales and which stems from a genuine desire on his behalf to provide ordinary members of the public with the opportunity to ask questions about policing in their areas.
The Police Authority does monitor press coverage of the force both locally and nationally and, if it is appropriate to do so, will call for reports from the chief constable on operational issues or to discuss with him issues, which may impact, on public opinion and perception.
sincerely
Peter Bolton
for
KelvinDent
Clerk to the North Wales
Heddlu Gogledd Cymru Police Authority
Glan y Don Glan y Don
KelvinDent
Clerk to the North Wales
Heddlu Gogledd Cymru Police Authority
Glan y Don Glan y Don
Second letter to the MP
The Old Colwyn (East) Residents’ Association
Secretary
David Curtis
Gareth Thomas MP
LL29 8NB
LL29 8NB
Letter 2. Please read in relation to our first letter on the file dated 2/3/2004
Dear Mr. Thomas
Submission to the Home Office from the Old Colwyn East Residents
regarding the Chief Constable of North Wales
Thank you for your letter dated 6th May accompanying a reply from the police authority. Your involvement in this matter on our behalf is much valued.
We are unhappy with the response from the police authority. The letter is below the professional standard that we would expect from such an organisation.
The Authority has not mentioned several of our issues at all and has introduced unrelated matters instead.
We wish you on our behalf, to take the original file, together with all correspondence, and deliver it to the appropriate person(s) in the Home Office, where it can best be dealt with. We are aware that the Chief Constable is answerable to the police authority for the efficiency and effectiveness of the police force. We believe that in North Wales, the term efficiency appears to equate to business efficiency, not efficiency on the street when people have problems.
We have raised issues, which impact on local policing and which the police authority has within its’ mandate as the controlling body which agrees the finance for the schemes. These two points were not referred to at all by the authority in its’ reply.
1. The Community Beat Manager Policy This forms part of the police authority plan being a part of Mr Brunstrom’s vision of future policing in North Wales. We have highlighted our concerns in the report about the poor guidelines for the deployment of these officers. The principle is good where the response function is fully staffed. This is not the case in North Wales. We are however constantly being told that crime is going down and antisocial behaviour is being reduced. This does not accord with reality and is therefore, in our opinion “spin”. Earlier in the year, officers were taken from Response and put into the CBM role to make up numbers for the end of the financial year, apparently, a political move.
2. The Centralisation of Custody to St Asaph for the whole of Conwy and Denbighshire. This issue was realistically commented upon in our report. The police authority did not address our concerns at all in its’ reply. Chief Superintendent Sandham was recently quoted as saying that the centralisation was part of the Chief Constable’s vision of policing over the next 10 to 15 years.
What it does apparently show is a retrenchment from local policing to centralisation. We will have the vehicle mounted officer with a computer who will be available from time to time to take complaints. The response officer shortfall is the weakness apparently not being addressed, in favour of forcewide CBMs who have narrower terms of reference.
It is our considered view that all constables, including the C.B.M should be charged with responding to incidents as a necessary part of the job. The liaison function of the CBM with the community is a secondary function. Liaison is important but the CBM should be available as first response whilst there is so much criminal antisocial behaviour about. This is not the case at present.
The Police Authority and Police Establishment do not hear this call. We must have a voice because we have a view about the community. We, as a Residents’ Association are supposed to be a partner of the police in the fight against crime and disorder. Someone has to talk reality instead of the constant stream of “positive spin” which we hear. Statistics do not relate to reality on the ground and hence the reason for our report. The Authority is now intending to employ a media consultant.
The concept for the revolution in policing in North Wales belongs to Mr Brunstrom . It is fair and right that we should question his views, which we oppose, following consultation both inside and outside the police force.
The police authority has merely distanced itself in the reply from his televised views on the open sale of drugs to those that want to use them. It does not support legalisation but does not criticise Mr Brunstrom for undermining his officers by his statements.
Please ensure that our view on the five issues mentioned in the report, is looked at and considered seriously, hopefully some guidance to the Chief Constable and or the Police Authority will come as a result.
Yours sincerely
David Curtis (secretary)
Reply from Hazel Blears
Home Office
Hazel Blears MP
MINISTER OF STATE
50 Queen Anne’s Gate, London SWIH 9AT
Hazel Blears MP
MINISTER OF STATE
50 Queen Anne’s Gate, London SWIH 9AT
Gareth Thomas Esq, MP (Clwyd West)
House of Commons
London
SW1A OAA
JUL 2004
Reference: M7022/4
Your Reference: GT/JT/O 1003-
Dear Gareth
Thank you for your letter of 26 May 2004 on behalf of Old Colwyn (East) Residents Association.
I note from the file of correspondence you forwarded onto me that you have already been in contact with North Wales Police Authority in relation to this matter. I hope the fact that the Police Authority and North Wales Police have developed a protocol for handling sensitive cases will help to reassure both you and the residents association. Should the resident’s association wish to pursue the matter further they should either take it up with the Chief Constable or the North Wales Police Authority, as they are the appropriate authority to respond to their concerns.
I also note that the residents association expressed concerns about use of Anti-
Hazel Blears
Further letter to Gareth Thomas MP
The Old Colwyn East Residents’ Association
David Curtis
To Gareth Thomas MP
LL29 8NB
David Curtis
To Gareth Thomas MP
LL29 8NB
Dear Mr. Thomas,
Later, I will deal with the issues of our letter and report to you dated 12 March 2004 which questions the credibility of the Chief Constable. I would like to take a moment to thank you for your support, acting as our channel of communication, in our search for action about our genuinely held concerns. Your actions and advice have been exemplary and we thank you for that.
I now continue with regard to your letter dated the 12 July 2004 enclosing a letter from Hazel Blears MP, Minister of State, Crime Reduction, Policing and Community.
Our committee has had an opportunity to see the response and frankly when we look at it alongside the pathetic response from the Police Authority we were offended that public officials can read a report such as ours and fail to deal with the issues raised, in a systematic and logical way. We are insulted by their condescension.
We have acted as we intended in an honourable manner, not resorting in the first instance to the press and media. We have expressed our views in a responsible and cogent fashion together with supporting evidence in a file which containing 50 pages of relevant material.
You have supported us by sending the file first of all to the Police Authority Chair. We received a reply which failed to deal with our issues and raised and dwelt on its own subject of Arrive Alive which we purposely did not mention.
Hazel Blears MP similarly passed over all our issues and introduced her own about Anti-social behaviour legislation. She then referred us back to the Chief Constable and the Police Authority.
Later, I will deal with the issues of our letter and report to you dated 12 March 2004 which questions the credibility of the Chief Constable. I would like to take a moment to thank you for your support, acting as our channel of communication, in our search for action about our genuinely held concerns. Your actions and advice have been exemplary and we thank you for that.
I now continue with regard to your letter dated the 12 July 2004 enclosing a letter from Hazel Blears MP, Minister of State, Crime Reduction, Policing and Community.
Our committee has had an opportunity to see the response and frankly when we look at it alongside the pathetic response from the Police Authority we were offended that public officials can read a report such as ours and fail to deal with the issues raised, in a systematic and logical way. We are insulted by their condescension.
We have acted as we intended in an honourable manner, not resorting in the first instance to the press and media. We have expressed our views in a responsible and cogent fashion together with supporting evidence in a file which containing 50 pages of relevant material.
You have supported us by sending the file first of all to the Police Authority Chair. We received a reply which failed to deal with our issues and raised and dwelt on its own subject of Arrive Alive which we purposely did not mention.
Hazel Blears MP similarly passed over all our issues and introduced her own about Anti-
My question on behalf of the committee is “Why do people not read the letter and deal with the issue contained in it?”
The issue we raised is about the credibility of the Chief Constable. Nobody has any degree of control over him and he continues with the full backing of the Police Authority and the Home Office, despite having enacted some of the most flagrant breaches of good judgment.
We ask, “Who is in control? The Police Authority: The Home Office: The Inspectorate:
or the Chief Constable himself?”
We are often told that our Residents’ Association is a partner, in an age of partnerships. As a partner under the Crime and Disorder umbrella of partnerships, are we not to be allowed a voice?
We expect that the public bodies responsible for the supervision of the Chief Constable of the North Wales Police take note of our concerns and reply and act in a responsible manner.
We are not reassured that the Chief Constable and the Authority have a protocol for handling sensitive media releases in the future. If the Chief Constable had the foresight and judgment that he is paid to exercise, the matters would not have happened in the first place. He is still the same person with the same apparent autocratic style of management.
With great respect to you for your responsible management of our complaint, please refer our full file to the Home Office and the H.M Inspectorate of Constabulary. If the Police Authority has still failed to return the original file to you, I will supply you with a copy file fully annotated as the original was.
Yours sincerely
The issue we raised is about the credibility of the Chief Constable. Nobody has any degree of control over him and he continues with the full backing of the Police Authority and the Home Office, despite having enacted some of the most flagrant breaches of good judgment.
We ask, “Who is in control? The Police Authority: The Home Office: The Inspectorate:
or the Chief Constable himself?”
We are often told that our Residents’ Association is a partner, in an age of partnerships. As a partner under the Crime and Disorder umbrella of partnerships, are we not to be allowed a voice?
We expect that the public bodies responsible for the supervision of the Chief Constable of the North Wales Police take note of our concerns and reply and act in a responsible manner.
We are not reassured that the Chief Constable and the Authority have a protocol for handling sensitive media releases in the future. If the Chief Constable had the foresight and judgment that he is paid to exercise, the matters would not have happened in the first place. He is still the same person with the same apparent autocratic style of management.
With great respect to you for your responsible management of our complaint, please refer our full file to the Home Office and the H.M Inspectorate of Constabulary. If the Police Authority has still failed to return the original file to you, I will supply you with a copy file fully annotated as the original was.
Yours sincerely
David Curtis
Secretary
Letter handed to the Prime Minister
Old Colwyn (East) Residents’ Association
5th December 2004
Telephone 01492 514338
The Prime Minister
The Rt. Hon. Tony C.L. Blair. MP
10 Downing Street,
London
SW1A2AA
Dear Prime Minister
My visit to Number 10 Downing Street ~ 6th December 2004
The Association, of which I am secretary, is formally constituted. The Association is wholly supportive as a partner of the police and the Conwy C.B.C. working to improve community life.
I respectfully ask that you help in the case of a report that our Association submitted to Mr Gareth Thomas MP for Clwyd West in March 2004. The eight page letter covers five issues and is accompanied by 50 pages of evidence. It calls into question the credibility of the Chief Constable of the North Wales Police, Mr Richard Brunstrom, in the light of certain policies, decisions and statements that he has made which impact unfavourably both on local and national policing.
Our letter which is critical of the Chief Constable was first of all submitted on our behalf by Mr Thomas to the Chair of the Police Authority. The Assistant Clerk to the Authority, after a long wait wrote back a wholly inappropriate response not dealing with any of the issues. Next, it was submitted to Hazel Blears MP, Minister of State for policing. The reply which we received from the Minister was dismissive and did not deal effectively with our issues. We feel that our Association was treated with disrespect in both cases.
We have now asked Mr Gareth Thomas to deliver the letter to the Home Office and H.M. Inspectorate of Constabulary.
The North Wales Police is judged by Inspectors to be generally efficient and effective. In nine months since our report was submitted, each of the issues remains current. One issue, the centralisation of custody has had a huge negative effect on local policing; it is perversely claimed by the Chief Constable to be a successful PFI initiative. Locally, policing is seen by the public to be unresponsive to public need, despite the police mantra that there are more officers now “on the front line” in North Wales than at any other time; this is a term used loosely without proper definition, as if talking about officers on patrol, which is not the case. The North Wales Police Authority appears to conduct itself in a ‘rubber stamping’ role for the ideas and policies of the Chief Constable.
Our report is self explanatory. I respectfully ask on behalf of the members, for the report which is currently with Mr Gareth Thomas MP, to be examined and responded to by the Home Office.
Yours sincerely
David Curtis
Secretary
Answer From The Prime Minister
Mr Blair replied that he was unable to take any action in this case as this was in the jurisdiction of a fellow Member of Parliament
________________________________________________________________
TEXT SCAN of Letter from Hazel Blears following intervention by David Jones MP
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OLD COLWYN EAST RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
LETTERS REGARDING THE CHIEF CONSTABLE RICHARD BRUNSTROM
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accompanying letter to Gareth Thomas MP
OUR ASSOCIATION HAS GONE IN A FULL CIRCLE RIGHT BACK TO THE START,
THE MATTER IS CLOSED, WE HAVE NO “COMPLAINT AGAINST POLICE” TO MAKE,
AS SUGGESTED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE, WE HAVE ALREADY CONTACTED
THE POLICE AUTHORITY WITH NO SUCCESS. THE DEBATE HOWEVER, LIVES ON.
THE MATTER IS CLOSED, WE HAVE NO “COMPLAINT AGAINST POLICE” TO MAKE,
AS SUGGESTED BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE, WE HAVE ALREADY CONTACTED
THE POLICE AUTHORITY WITH NO SUCCESS. THE DEBATE HOWEVER, LIVES ON.
Home Office
The Rt Hon Hazel Blears MP
MINISTER OF STATE
2 Marsham Street, London
SW1P 4DF
www.homeoffice;gov
David Jones MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Reference: M26198/5
Your Reference: 1764.116.316
Dear David
Thank you for your letter of 28 October 2005 on behalf of The Old Colwyn (East) Residents Association addressed to the Home Secretary Charles Clarke. I have been asked to reply as the Minister with responsibilities for policing matters.
As you will be aware the Government has established through the Police Reform Act 2002 a dedicated system for handling complaints against the police. Certain duties are placed upon the Chief Officer of each force and the police authority.
The chief officer or police authority are obliged to record all complaints that fall
within the definition of a complaint as stipulated in part II of the Police Reform Act 2002. This system is overseen by the Independent Police Complaints
Commission (IPCC) and neither Ministers nor the Home Office can intervene in this process, nor act as an avenue of appeal for decisions made within this
system by a chief officer or police authority.
In the response dated 6 July 2004 to Mr Gareth Thomas’s letter dated 26 May 2004, I advised Mr Thomas that if the members of the Resident’s Association
wished to take their concern further they should contact the North Wales Police Authority as they are the appropriate authority to respond to the residents’ concerns.
If the members of the Old Colwyn Residents’ Association have not already raised the matter with the North Wales Police Authority they may wish to take the matter forward by first contacting them. If they are not able to resolve the issue through the North Wales Police Authority then they may wish to take it forward through the IPCC.
The IPCC can be contacted at:
90 High Holborn London
WCIV 6BH
www. i pcc.gov. uk
signed
HAZEL BLEARS MP
BUILDING A SAFE, JUST AND TOLERANT SOCIETY
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Reference: M26198/5
Your Reference: 1764.116.316
Dear David
Thank you for your letter of 28 October 2005 on behalf of The Old Colwyn (East) Residents Association addressed to the Home Secretary Charles Clarke. I have been asked to reply as the Minister with responsibilities for policing matters.
As you will be aware the Government has established through the Police Reform Act 2002 a dedicated system for handling complaints against the police. Certain duties are placed upon the Chief Officer of each force and the police authority.
The chief officer or police authority are obliged to record all complaints that fall
within the definition of a complaint as stipulated in part II of the Police Reform Act 2002. This system is overseen by the Independent Police Complaints
Commission (IPCC) and neither Ministers nor the Home Office can intervene in this process, nor act as an avenue of appeal for decisions made within this
system by a chief officer or police authority.
In the response dated 6 July 2004 to Mr Gareth Thomas’s letter dated 26 May 2004, I advised Mr Thomas that if the members of the Resident’s Association
wished to take their concern further they should contact the North Wales Police Authority as they are the appropriate authority to respond to the residents’ concerns.
If the members of the Old Colwyn Residents’ Association have not already raised the matter with the North Wales Police Authority they may wish to take the matter forward by first contacting them. If they are not able to resolve the issue through the North Wales Police Authority then they may wish to take it forward through the IPCC.
The IPCC can be contacted at:
90 High Holborn London
WCIV 6BH
www. i pcc.gov. uk
signed
HAZEL BLEARS MP
BUILDING A SAFE, JUST AND TOLERANT SOCIETY
END