Street wardens patrol, but how will Ministers police the snoopers?

Ministers talk endlessly about reducing police paperwork in order to free officers to patrol the streets.

But, while making little progress in slashing bureaucracy, they have been quietly deploying another tactic: Giving big chunks of the job to other people.

First, they invented Community Support Officers, armed with a raft of police powers, but with a fraction of the salary or training.

Inevitably, the recruitment of 16,000 of these 'Blunkett's Bobbies' - who can issue fines, but not make arrests - was greeted with accusations of 'policing on the cheap'.

Now, details of another part of what the Home Office calls the 'extended police family' have emerged - the 'accredited' council worker or private security guard.

They will be able to gather intelligence, help trap road tax cheats and hand out fines to unsuspecting members of the public.

But, in a crucial distinction to CSOs, they will not be employed by the local police authority.

They will continue with their current employer, and simply undergo an unspecified level of training, as deemed appropriate by the local chief constable.

Critics believe it is a recipe for disaster. Vetting runs the risk of being either too lax (with potentially alarming consequences for public safety) or so severe that the scheme does not get off the ground.

Among the 33 police forces who have already accredited snoopers, some have been carrying out no more checks than they would give an external contractor.

Others have been using full anti-terrorist and financial checks, taking so long that - by the time a person had been cleared - they had moved on from their original job, and were no longer interested in accreditation.

In future, the minimum standard is likely to be an enhanced Criminal Records Bureau check.

There are also inherent dangers in giving any civilian some, but not all, police powers.

The new army of officials will be able to issue fines of up to £80 for some serious offences, including harassment.

This is likely to lead to confrontation, but - unlike CSOs - the accredited workers cannot even detain a suspect for 30 minutes, let alone arrest them.

They would be forced to ring the police for help or - more likely - let suspects go, for fear of violence.

Accountability will also be a worry, given the lack of a direct police role in their employment. It is up to police to check regularly that any local authority or private firm they have accredited is behaving properly.

But senior officers are busy enough already, and this could slip. Meanwhile, a single accredited private security guard or town hall worker will only be reported to their local force if they receive three minor complaints from the public in any 12-month period.

If just a single complaint is made about a police officer or CSO, the local force finds out immediately.

The Home Office papers revealed that, among those officers who have already worked with accredited staff, the sharing of intelligence is another 'major concern'.

There is a difficult balance to be struck - share too much information with somebody who does not have the vetting and training of a PC and, in the worst case scenario, an operation could be compromised.

Share nothing, and the civilian force will not know what it is looking for, or supposed to be doing.

The path ahead appears fraught with difficulties and, for the Home Office, controversy.