British Transport Police Federation

ANNUAL CONFERENCE
BRITISH TRANSPORT POLICE FEDERATION
SPEECH BY CHAIRMAN: MR ALEX ROBERTSON
0845 HRS ON WEDNESDAY 4 MARCH 2009 AT THE
PARK INN HOTEL, YORK

Minister, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen and colleagues.... welcome to our annual conference.

I am conscious, Minister, that you took over the responsibility for the Department for Transport in October only last year. However, in your first speech at Westminster you paid a handsome tribute to the work of the British Transport Police right upfront in your opening remarks. That alone makes you very welcome.

I have often emphasised to your Departmental officials and Ministerial predecessors the importance that we, as a Federation, attach to these annual occasions. It is an extremely useful exchange of dialogue. This is the opportunity not only for me to put at first hand the concerns of the Federation but the chance for representatives of the Federation to understand the Government's position, without intermediaries, perhaps clouding the message.

There is no doubt that the big issue dominating the mind of Government at the moment and, for the foreseeable future, is the unfortunate state of the economy. In fact the way the media are talking down the economy we could be forgiven for thinking that we will soon all be selling 'The Big Issue'.

The only economic good news is that the collapse in the commodity price of copper might bring some relief to the practice of stealing cable from our railway lines, a dangerous crime which carries the threat of electrocution for the public, railway workers and thieves alike.

It is quite apparent that no area of public sector expenditure will escape some pain as the belt of financial constraint is tightened to an uncomfortable notch. This has clear implications for the British Transport police budget which is geared to the retail price index. In normal times this linkage would be good news but it will not be helpful to the BTP budget. Our major costs are devoted to a pre-agreed pay and pension deal. The danger is that the decline of the RPI will take us below its current 0.9 per cent into negative territory leading even to a cut in the overall budget.

And while I am on the subject of funding. It remains the view of the Federation that the more financially and efficient way of funding the BTP by the Train Operating Companies would be for the Department for Transport to collect the due payments. The Department should then recoup the money from the Companies. The five major Train Operating Companies are coming under financial pressure with the growth in passenger numbers no longer as buoyant. This has obvious implications for the BTP. The Department is in a much stronger position to muscle the Companies than the management of the BTP whose time and expertise should be devoted to purely policing issues.

Given the pressures on us to deliver a professional job to the legitimate expectations of the Train Operating Companies and the travelling public any inflation inspired cutback would be disastrous. We would ask you Minister not to lose sight of our primary purpose of maintaining public confidence in their safety on our railways.

But second only to the economy in the public mind, is always the matter of policing, and how safe do the member s of the travelling public feel. Here the news is somewhat better for us and Government, although not unnaturally, there are a few concerns that I will air in my remarks.

Before I get into these points I want to express the Federation's pleasure at the appointment of Millie Banerjee as successor in the chair of the Police authority to Sir Alistair Grahame. She has a breadth of Board level experience and a particularly strong background in customer focus. Giving priority to the people on the ground always goes down well with any employee representative body.

Her predecessor, Sir Alistair, in his four years as Chairman, led the Authority with moral courage and vision. We are grateful and fortunate to have had his services as our first chairman.

Having welcomed the Minister and Ms Banerjee as newcomers I am sorry that I will shortly be saying goodbye on behalf of the Federation to our Chief Constable Mr Ian Johnston. No doubt I will get the opportunity to say more later this year but I do want to take this opportunity in front of the Minister and my Federation colleagues to say how much he will be missed.

Under Mr Johnston's stewardship the British Transport Police has reached new levels of performance and professionalism. In 2001 we were a force of 2100 and struggling for recognition. We needed to be seen and understood as the specialist railway police service charged with ensuring the health and safety of millions of passengers each day. We protected a railway infrastructure which is vital to the smooth running of the British economy. Now we are a force of 2,900 with a performance record which is the envy of many chief constables and, for us, the future as we head to the Olympic Games is one we face with confidence and enthusiasm. Particularly the performance of the BTP over the 7/7 and 21/7 terrorist attacks in London put this Force under the spotlight and I am proud, as all my colleagues are, that we rose to the occasion. It is a tribute to Mr Johnston that we showed the level of excellence required to cope on those dreadful days.

But elsewhere, all is not rosy. The Government in general and the Home Secretary in particular have succeeded in a souring of relationship with the police service which has been unprecedented since the days of Merlyn Rees. The Home Secretary's performance over the pay dispute was appalling. We were left with a massive sense of distrust as to how Government conducted negotiations on pay and conditions. The whole future of the Police Negotiation Board, which sets the agenda for this Federation as well as the Home Department police service, remains both uncertain and unsatisfactory.

The fact that we are heading into the second year of a three year deal brings us no sense that the problems of bad faith at the negotiating table on the part of Government have gone away. Police officers have long memories. It's a professional prerequisite of the job.

By contrast, the Federation is extremely grateful that the Mayor of London, Boris Johnston, fulfilled his campaign pledge of 50 additional British Transport Police Officers to patrol trains and stations in outer London. I don't think I can stress too highly the importance of police visibility to the public. The travelling public want to see uniformed officers at and in the vicinity of railway stations and on the late night trains. Without that sense of security how else can we persuade the public that train travel is not only the correct green option but the safest way to travel at anytime of the day or night? When the General Secretary, Roger Randall, and I met with the Mayor's Office we were able to take considerable satisfaction from his commitment to put more officer resources into policing.

One note of concern, however, was the hint that CCTV coverage was being seen as an expense rather than an invaluable tool to the police in establishing the exact circumstances of a crime scene. There should be no doubt that CCTV acts as a deterrent to potential lawbreakers; that it is a comfort to the innocent traveller and that it greatly assists in the clear-up of crime. The benefit and purpose of having more officers in stations would be lost overnight if CCTV coverage was downgraded.

We also have a new Police Commissioner in the Met with the appointment of Sir Paul Stephenson. With the retirement of Sir Ian Blair I hope we also saw the last of the serial nonsense of talk about merging major operational parts of the British Transport Police especially the Underground with the Met.

It would be an immense relief to this Federation if we were to hear no more speculation about our future as a police service in relation to the Met or better still if Sir Paul would confirm that we are not on his agenda for acquisition.... for it would never be a merger. We want to work with the Met in that spirit of cooperation which has proved so highly effective to date and which will be tested and proven again as we move towards the Olympic Games of 2012. Minister, any influence that you can exercise with the Home Office in preserving the independent standing of the BTP will be much appreciated.

Despite the impact of a recession on the UK economy we can be confident that the railways will remain a crucial method of travel. You, yourself Minister, quoted the statistics in your November speech.

Since the 1990s passenger numbers are more than 50 per cent higher. There are now more than 1.2billion passenger journeys a year. The number of train services now stands at over 100,000 a week. Apart from increased volume the Government is making a massive �15billion investment across the network over the next five years in projects such as Crossrail in London and in Thameslink. On the one hand, Minister, you will understand that my members are excited about the future of the British Transport Police and on the other, that there are matters which require your attention.

We have a national shortage of police officers - running into several thousands - judging by newspaper reports last week. Police forces throughout Britain have been quietly cutting their numbers because of budgetary constraints. The Federation finds these measures to be utterly irresponsible and short-sighted. It was the Home Secretary, herself, who warned of the likelihood of increasing crime rates that would result from the recession. The Olympic Games will bring special policing requirements but at least that is three years away. The recession is now and now is no time to reduce the services of police officers who will be needed to protect the public over the next, socially and economically difficult, few years. I urge the Government to make the necessary funds available to police authorities. Public confidence must be maintained that the police are adequately resourced to maintain law and order at all levels.

All over the country the police are gearing up for the Olympics. It is worth reminding ourselves that the United Kingdom has not hosted a global event of this magnitude since the football world cup of 1966, nearly 50 years ago. The planning and preparations would be a mammoth job on their own. But the logistics are further complicated by the opportunity that the Games will provide for ruthless terrorists. We have had recent and very public warning of the extent of the threat from the new head of MI5. As the only public facing national police force the Olympics will make special demands upon our resources. There will be a need for a concentration of police officers in London. The focus of the Games may be in London but the demands on policing and our transport system will affect the length and breadth of Britain.

We urge you Minister to ensure that there is the widest possible understanding at Government level of the challenge facing policing the Olympics. For instance, we have seen figures suggesting that UK police service could be as many as 2,000 officers short of the numbers necessary for safe deployment. And that was before we heard the latest news of officers not being replaced.

If we have such a shortage of officers will police replacements come from newly recruited PCSOs and Specials?

It may seem the obvious answer to the dealing with a shortage of numbers. But it would be a mistake to assume that PCSOs and Specials could be interchangeable with fully trained police officers. Use our PCSOs and Specials colleagues by all means but let's ensure that their role is complementary to the police service and not a substitute for it.

If we don't get the numbers will police leave be cancelled for the six weeks of the Games as has been suggested? If officers are to be seconded for weeks to London will they be properly compensated and properly accommodated and provided for? For the Games in Sydney officers received only two days training. They considered this inadequate. I would hope that we can expect more.

A further bone of contention was that officers on duty at the Sydney Games were awarded a service medal. The poor officers who were left to do endless duty back in the towns and villages got no recognition yet their commitment and contribution to the success of the Games was just as vital. As an ex-soldier I understand the importance of the contribution of those who only stand and wait. Their recognition should just be as much a priority as their colleagues' at the competitive events.

Unsurprisingly, I am unable to draw on any official feedback on the lessons learned regarding how the Games were policed in Beijing. But I am reliably informed that Beijing was able to deploy from 2.5 million military personnel and police officers. They may have the numbers but they don't have the problems of free movement of people within the country and open borders. It cannot be wise to make reductions in the strength of the police service without anticipating the policing and security requirements of the 2012 Olympics.

These are both government and police issues Minister, although I would understand if you were to feel that they fall to others with a more direct responsibility for service delivery. However, this Federation believes that co-ordination across the Government is the best prospect of a policing success at the Olympics 2012.

There are other immediate matters which you directly can influence. I keep bringing to the Department's attention the ludicrous obstacle caused by pensions over the exchange of police officers between this force and other forces. At present any officer of another force who wishes to transfer across to the BTP either on promotion or at the same level is required to join the less advantageous pension scheme. Not surprisingly, they decline. We are the worse off because of this bureaucratic blockage.

The forthcoming Police Bill is no answer to the problem. The idea that officers would choose to move on secondment between forces rather than integrated as a career move is unacceptable. It is also insulting. Our performance as a force is excellent; our senior officers hold highly respected and responsible duties with ACPO in such areas as crime, media and commodity theft yet BTP officers would be expected to surrender hard earned pension rights to join another Force other than by secondment.

Can I suggest Minister that your officials take a leaf out of Barak Obama's handbook on government? The keys words are: 'Yes. We. Can.' It is clearly a nonsense that this force is being denied the recruitment of skilled and experienced personnel where these aren't already available from existing personnel. This force, and indeed other forces, would be improved by the free movement of officers to and from the BTP.

Where are the Sir Humphreys of the Department for Transport? Surely all it takes is for civil servants to exercise their imagination as to how the change in the legislation might be achieved. It seems that this will only happen, Minister, if you political will is brought to bear on them. This is a serious matter.

Minister, at a recent meeting with the Police Minister and his civil servants at the Home Office I raised my concerns regarding secondments as the way forward. It was made abundantly clear to me that this was the only offer on the table.

I am a little concerned that the impression your Department and the signals from the Home Office are sending is that I and my Federation were in full agreement with the proposals. There was only one proposal - take it or leave it - no decision required. The Home Office also made it quite clear under no circumstances would BTP officers be allowed to join the 30 year scheme as it was also closed to the Serious Organised Crime Agency and the National Police Improvements Agency. There is, of course a subtle but unique difference. We are warranted officers: they are not. The burning question Minister is simply: we in the BTP, up to and including 2007, were afforded similar pension transfer arrangements as our Home Department colleagues. What has happened since then to treat us less favourably?

An area where we are more content is personal protection. We fully welcome the introduction of Tasers to the police service. But there is also a problem which could be solved by your support Minister. Ideally Tasers should be issued, in the words of the Home Secretary, "routinely to all officers".

The BTP has been offered the chance to bid for up to 400 units of the 10,000 tasers which are to be available to the UK Police Service. The cartridges for a Taser are �20 each. But this is a trifling sum when compared to the costs incurred if a live bullet round is used fatally or if injuries are sustained. There will be additional costs in training enough officers to provide cover for the force throughout the railway network. In our case, given that we are a modest sized force the extra costs to the Department are equally modest.

Let me remind you of the advantages of Tasers to a BTP officer. Our officers are more likely to face confrontation in railway carriages or stations remote from immediate support. The availability of a Taser may save an officer's or a member of the public or a deranged person's life. It is unacceptable that there should be a budget constraint that would see officers deprived of this particularly effective method of subduing dangerously aggressive people. I urge you, Minister, to ensure that the BTP is adequately funded for the specific use of Tasers so that our officers have access to the necessary training.

Minister, given the current economic climate we are fortunate in the British Transport Police that what grieves us is a series of niggling matters rather than fundamental disagreements which might cause a rift between the Federation and your Department. Nevertheless these are issues which affect the morale and hence the effectiveness of the Federation members. They can be put right through a combination of political will, Departmental action and, dare I say it, modest financial lubricant judiciously applied to issues which we seem to be otherwise stuck on.