Clause 4 - Standard powers and duties of community support officers
Police and Justice Bill
4:00 pm
James Brokenshire (Hornchurch, Conservative)
I support the points that my hon. Friend has made from the Front Bench about the need for flexibility. We have said all along that the debate is about localism and ensuring that decision-making processes are as close to the ground as possible. This is an opportunity for us to clarify the role and position that PCSOs have in the wider police family.
In my intervention, I alluded to the fact that there was a degree of uncertainty about where the order-making power would lead, although the explanatory notes list the proposed set of powers and discretionary powers. Clearly, things are not currently set in stone and are subject to change. We need to see what the final order looks like.
There is an issue about the need to maintain a balance between a fixed list, which sets certain criteria, and responding to the concern that PCSOs are used as effectively as possible in the communities that they serve. My constituency experience tells me that PCSOs are most commonly the ones who are walking the beat and are the visible sign of policing. If people have issues to raise, they can speak to PCSOs because they are visible and people know who they are. They are used as a way of feeding intelligence back to the police about issues that are taking place in the wider community.
I would be concerned if as a result of fixing a standard set of powers, that role was in some way diminished or changed. For example, safer neighbourhood teams use voluntary support: people who give up their time to support the police with a lot of the clerical duties and the behind-the-scenes work. That is an interesting development. It is good that people want to give to the community by serving the safer neighbourhood teams and dealing with some of the clerical work and the paperwork.
If the role of the PCSO was more prescribed in terms of some of the back-up work, that could lead to less time being spent out on the street, which is where we would like them to be as much as possible. We want them to work with their constable colleagues to ensure that the public are given as much reassurance as possible. We do not want the changes to create even more blurring of the role of PCSOs and that of fully fledged police constables. A distinction must be drawn. PCSOs are not policemen or policewomen on the cheap, as might be suggested. They have a distinct and more community-orientated role in feeding back intelligence; they have the relationship with their police officer colleagues to ensure that communities are better and safer places.
It is important to have clarity about the roles of PCSOs and police officers, so that the public understand how they sit together. There is a concern that people who wish to engage in antisocial behaviour understand the limitation of PCSOs and will therefore exploit the loopholes and that weakness. Therefore, there must always be a strong linkage between the PCSOs and police officers, so that we are not seen to be relying on PCSOs. We must have proper fully trained and fully fledged police officers, given that the training of PCSOs provides much more limited experience. After just a few short weeks, somebody joining as a PCSO is put out on to the streets. They are deployed quickly. That must be balanced with the need to ensure that those PCSOs are not put at risk and that they are not pushed beyond the training and support that they need to do an effective job. Also, their personal safety must not be compromised.
I welcome the opportunity to clarify the duties, roles and responsibilities of PCSOs. However, I support the amendment that my hon. Friend has tabled. It will ensure that PCSOs are kept as close as possible to the neighbourhoods that they serve. If there is a balance to be struck, it should be on that issue rather than on fixed or rigid rules that would apply to PCSOs and their duties and responsibilities.