Ninety per cent of police demand right to strike in historic vote

Police have voted by an overwhelming majority to demand the right to strike.

In a landmark ballot, almost nine out of ten officers said they wanted their trade body, the Police Federation, to lobby for a change in the 89-year-old law which bars them from withdrawing their labour.

More than 60,000 policemen and women responded to the ballot, which comes in the wake of a bitter pay dispute and an unprecedented march on Parliament by 25,000 officers earlier this year.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith will face the wrath of rank-and-file police at the Federation's annual conference in Bournemouth today.

She will have to defend her decision not to backdate a wage rise and to defy the findings of an independent arbitration tribunal.

Some 86 per cent of officers voted for the move to seek the right to take industrial action. Yesterday Federation chairman Jan Berry described the result as "staggering".

"This is a wake-up call for the Government," she said.

She told delegates at the conference: "One issue has dominated the last ten months  -  fair pay for police  -  or perhaps, should I say, the lack of it."

She recalled the scenes in London in January  -  the largest ever march by police in the UK. "The betrayal by this Government to honour the decision of the Independent Police Arbitration Tribunal led to the unprecedented and historical moment of 25,000 off- duty police officers marching through London, many starting to talk of wanting industrial rights."

Of the vote, she said: "I do not see this as a vote to strike yet. This says to me that police officers want binding independent arbitration.

"Strange, the Prime Minister and the Education Secretary said recently that independent arbitration should be honoured  -  maybe they have listened. But police officers will expect their MPs support when the time is right."

The Federation launched a High Court legal challenge in January, accusing the Home Secretary of overstepping her powers in disregarding the pay agreement. A decision is due at any time.

The ballot on the right to strike was called last December after Miss Smith's announcement that the arbitration panel's 2.5 per cent pay deal would not be backdated to cover the whole year but would be phased in two stages  -  effectively downgrading it to 1.9 per cent.

It is the first time since the pay arbitration system was set up 28 years ago that a government has refused to accept the main recommendation.

Downscaling it saved the Home Office just £40million a year, a tiny fraction of the £500million the force spent on police overtime last year. Scores of MPs have signed a motion urging ministers to reconsider.

The refusal to fund the pay deal in full is robbing the average officer of around £200 a year but, rather than counting the modest cost, most see the matter as one of principle and a fundamental question of trust in the Government.

It emerged that Home Office civil servant Stephen Kershaw wrote a memo to ministers claiming there was "no real business case" for a more generous pay rise, because police pay has risen by 36 per cent over the past 10 years, and "there are six applicants for every job".

Mr Kershaw, who earns an estimated £120,000 a year, was later awarded a generous cash bonus for his success in cutting costs.To add insult to injury for police, community support officers, known as "Blunkett's bobbies", had their pay rise funded in full.