Morning:
11°c
AS COMMISSIONER of one of the world's finest police forces, I want to make two points very clear.
First, I will not accept inappropriate conduct by officers in the Met. The public must trust us. Anything else is utterly counter-productive.
The Met's officers are individually accountable for their actions and, like every other Londoner, they are not above the law. I will not tolerate wrongdoing by my officers.
Second, I do not accept that the units in the Met that handle public order and violent incidents are out of control.
I urge those who rush to judge police to consider the sometimes difficult and violent world in which we operate - and to remember the good and brave work that goes on unheralded, day in, day out.
I have thousands of officers who do a first-class job for London.
Do I have faith in my officers and staff doing the job they are trained to do? Yes, enormous faith.
My view is quite simple - the vast majority of officers behave professionally and with pride.
The Met is perhaps the most intensely scrutinised force in the world. There is nowhere for us to hide and nor should there be.
As police officers we know that most of our work is conducted in the public gaze. Pc Gary Toms, a fine and brave Met firearms officer, had no thoughts of hiding when he confronted alleged robbers. He died last Friday from injuries he suffered in that incident. He was prepared to put his own safety at risk, as officers do on a daily basis.
We rely on the specialist units of which he was a member. People all over the world are still surprised the Met is not routinely armed. Nor do we confront citizens with equipment such as water cannon.
We also have the Territorial Support Group. The Met relies on TSG officers for the first response to the most challenging incidents. They must be accountable - but they should also be judged fairly, with understanding of their difficult job. No one should brand all officers with the wrongdoing - if substantiated - of a handful.
The G20 operation itself was one of the most complex in the Met's history. Disruption to the summit and the city were kept to a minimum. It was an astonishing effort. There was undoubtedly intense provocation directed at officers. We expect that in public order policing.
I am content for the Met to be judged, fairly, but I am also keen for the commentary to have context. Mr Ian Tomlinson's death is being investigated. I again extend my sympathies to his family. They have asked for answers and they deserve nothing less.
A number of concerning images came to light and these events are now being investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. The Met is co-operating fully. But again I say: We should not prejudge these investigations.
I believe that we need to demonstrate stronger leadership and supervision at all levels.
This is why I have demanded "intrusive supervision". There are, in any organisation, supervisors who sit back and do not confront or challenge poor performance.
I want to see more active supervision - by sergeants of often young Pcs, by inspectors and superintendents of the officers they lead, and by more senior officers of, effectively, the mini-forces which come under their control.
However, when you supervise you also learn about the good and brave work which is being done. More need to follow the example of the best.
When I began my job I said I did not want to be a celebrity cop. I stand by that. I want to get on with straightforward policing - arresting villains and ensuring the safety of Londoners.
London is a great City and deserves a great police force. Where we get it wrong, it is right and proper we are held accountable. Where we get it right - and the improving crime figures last week show that we do - every Londoner should be proud.
Reader views (10)
I would be much more inclined to judge the Met fairly if they had been fairly held to account for the chronic failings of the Officer in charge when Jean-Charles de Menezes was killed. It is the unfortunate sense that such events have been whitewashed that leaves us less likely to judge the remaining officers, who are no doubt dedicated, committed and brave, less kindly.
- Nic, London
Sir Paul, You lost me at "the world's finest police forces". Open your eyes, go to New York, and see officers there who work in racially diverse environments, and who see no problem wearing their surnames on their shirts, and having tourists take photos of them.
Until you follow suit here, you clearly need to re write your article.
- Butters, LONDON, UK
I totally agree with Ranter, Maidstone. I think you have to also say that, the met has tried to appease all critics regardless of their agendas and be everything to all people and that is just not possible. We have to remember that they are a force that we need, because some people are intent on breaking the law, regardless of the laws or the rules that most of us abide by. It seems the people who complain the loudest or the most, are people who have the most to loose, such as the bodys who represent asylum seekers, the law breakers, compensation seekers and generally anyone who doesn't want to pay taxes, live within the law, take responsibility for their off spring and want to get as much money by doing as little as possible and blame someone else for their predicament and not themselves.So the met should step back and run the policeforce/service the way most sensible normal people want it run and not keep wasting money re-defining the system to suit another body that has a grievance. In saying all that, it doesnt mean no-one can challenge the MPS but common sense should be paramount in all cases of dispute and let the met get on with job.But you have to remember that not everyone takes on the job as a vocation, its also a well paid job for life if you play your cards right, so selection should be on the right person for the job, not to fulfill a criteria.
- Elaine O'Shea, bickley kent uk
He has admitted that he wants to see more supervision by
Sergeants et al. Wills of S'oton is right in his correction in that DISCIPLINE is what is required.
The Squabbling amongst those at the top,(which included Stephenson,) that went on when Blair was Commissioner obviously did nothing for the morale of the service. They were bad officers,setting an atrocious example to those below.It surprises me that Stephenson got the job. He needs to root out these "supervisors who sit back etc" . A few demotions would shake the rest up.
The alternative might be to bring in Mike Jackson,Paddy Ashdown or some similar hard nut to inspire the service.
- Mordwinoff, Lisle France.
Mr Stephenson says nothing new. If I may also offer some advice, senior officers who say 'cops' do not engender respect. Standards of discipline and supervision have been falling for years. I have no idea how he intends to get a grip when most front line officers are members of the mobile phone/text/facebook generation as are most of their sergeants and an ever increasing proportion of inspectors. How can a generation not used to any level of discipline be expected to enforce it in an organisation that has had to adapt recruitment to artificial quotas based on race primarily and then gender and sexuality. It seems that the Met Police can now take on any public sector organisation at having large numbers of the permanently aggrieved and easily offended. The organisation is also the victim of almost non stop change inflicted from within as much as from government. There needs to be a Royal Commission on Policing followed by many years of consolidation to alllow the necessary changes to be brought in, one of which should be the investigation and hopefully the abolition of ACPO. Too many chiefs - not enough indians (apologies to anyone annoyed by that old but very apt phrase). Lions led by donkeys is another!
- Ranter, Maidstone, UK
I think we need to be balanced in our judgement indeed.
The police prepared themselves admirably to cover all eventuality with the prospect of having to defend 20 heads of states.
The background was anarchists encouraging people to be violent and retaking the streets of London and the "whole world" (sic).
Now God knows what kind of word exchange took place between demonstrators and the police, but that counts too, and contributes to flare up situations.
We cannot have our cake and eat it, i.e. expect the police to show firmness and ensure the streets are safe, and at the same time expect them to let people attempt to hurt them without restraining them.
Ian Tomlinson's case is an extreme case, and I am glad that only one such case emerged, which in fact shows that the police methods worked in reducing violence instead of the opposite.
Kettling does not look nor sound good, but in small streets and cramped areas, it's the best way to contain disorder.
After all this is a demonstration, the point of which is to show up in numbers and to objectify by one's presence a message.
Why should it be that demonstrators have to smash the windows of a bank or try and destroy property. The police had to respond to that.
My worry now is that we get a police becoming too timid, and not doing its job properly because we are seeking too many contradictory requirements.
I for one don't agree that the demos happened near the City, they should have been done in open air areas.
- Nabil H, London, UK
Another list of platitudes! What action is Stephenson taking? I, like many other middle class, law-abiding Londoners no longer trust the police or have very much confidence in them. Not because of a few bad apples or a few feet of video footage from the G20, but because of personal experiennce of their rudeness, laziness, incompetence and dishonesty.
- Warren, London, UK
The Police have my full support in doing a very difficult and increasingly politicised job.
They will be damned if they do and damned if they don't. Not an enviable position to be in.
The emphasis from society and through the media should be placed at the feet of the 'protesters' and criminals. Not as is happening now in Labours society, where the excuses are made for the vermin in society and those trying to enforce the Law and protect citizens are blamed for everything.
It is cowardly and perverted concept. It is a Liberal-lefty attitude that is destroying this society and the right minded common sense thinking people. It is an attitude that infects our lives like a cancer.
- Frank, Home Counties, England.
Lots of talk about "supervision" a nonsense description for what used to be known as discipline. I am of the view that the police are in need of modernization. I now believe that the police should be administered by a civilian head and administration team with oversight of operational commanders. They have had many years to sort this from Sir Robert Mark who at least tried to change things. Sadly in recent years Chief officers have - it would appear been selected on acceptability at the expense of capability. I would hope that a new administration would promptly disband ACPO, what part of a democracy is this organization suited too, a private company with directors, who have "input: into the selection of Chief Constables, frightening, undemocratic and should play no part in policing - local accountability - tosh !
- Wills, Soton
I think we would judge you fairly if the laws that you are given to police are applied fairly. The more rules you use to try and control the populace, the less likely we are to respect you and help you. I really don't want to go down the Jack Night way of treating the police, but in the current situation, I fear as a law abiding citizen, I have no choice.
- Rachel Brett, Watford, UK
