A political coup to arrest any policeman

Of course, the operational ­decision-making of the police — such as deciding who to arrest, or not to arrest — should not be political, and it is not. But given crime's importance to the public, it is wholly proper for policy, and the choice of senior personnel, to be political, and in practice it always has been. What is Ms Smith, if not a politician?

Sir Ian Blair's departure does not set a precedent for the sacking of a police chief every time a new mayor comes to office. It was the product of failings specific to him alone, failings which people across the political spectrum agreed made his position impossible.

It was, in fact, Sir Ian's survival, not his removal, which was an ­unsavoury act of politics. In any other job, someone with his record of endlessly poor leadership and bad judgment would have gone years ago.

Sir Ian was protected because, in one of his worst ­decisions, he provided support far beyond the call of duty to New Labour. (Even Sir Ian's supposed achievements were not what they seem: for all his image as a racial reconciler, black officers were at loggerheads with his leadership, as Boris's newly announced inquiry into racism will highlight.)

Amid the Home Secretary's ­synthetic fury, we forget that one of her own predecessors, David ­Blunkett, suspended, tried to sack and eventually forced into early retirement another chief constable, Humberside's David Westwood.
Westwood's error (just the one, rather than Sir Ian's nine or ten) was not even made by him but by his subordinates. Westwood, ­however, was not a chum of the Labour Party.

Ms Smith's real complaint, I fear, is not that the appointment and dismissal of chief constables has been politicised — but that a rival politician has seized the reins from her. (For even though she will appoint Sir Ian's successor, Boris will enjoy an effective veto.)

Bravo, I say. Smith was directly elected by 18,000 people in Redditch. Boris was directly elected, not six months ago, by 1.1 million ­Londoners on an explicit platform of changing the way the city was policed.

One common canker of British politics is the public body set up to provide the appearance of accountability and renewal, rather than the reality; the public body behind whose glossy facade the same useless Whitehall civil servants remain in charge. The mayor's policing oversight subsidiary, the Metropolitan Police Authority, was set up as one such body. Overnight, in a quite magnificent democratic coup, all that has changed and there is now the chance of real improvement in London's policing.

Under Whitehall control, the British police remained one of the least reformed public services. But American cities — indeed normal democratic cities almost anywhere outside Britain — show just how much a police chief and an elected mayor, working together, can achieve without the dead hand of central government.
Under Whitehall control, a serious gap opened between police and public. Overnight, that accountability gap has dramatically closed. It's a new world now, in which police bureaucrats everywhere are going to have to pay more attention to the service they provide. No wonder so many police chiefs, too, were unhappy last week.