Dinámicas poblacionales y socioeconómicas

NUMBER OF PCSOs INITIALLY ALLOCATED 6

NUMBER OF PCSOs INTERVIEWED 5

REGULARS INTERVIEWED 4

COUNCIL STAFF INTERVIEWED 0

Documentation supplied

- Press releases and cuttings, some exclusively on PCSOs, some on PCSO/NSO link.

- Copies of objectives PCSOs and NSOs have all signed up to – includes Scan/Analysis, Response and Success Indicators

- Letters of appreciation from members of the public to the Chief Constable

Spelthorne comprises 15 wards. Ethnic minority groups make up approximately 3.4% of the total population. There are approximately 37,000 households, around 6,600 of whom are in rented or social housing accommodation, with the remainder owner occupied. A quarter of the population live alone and two thirds are in families of two to four members.

Spelthorne is quite affluent and unemployment is low. However, in comparison to the rest of Surrey, Spelthorne has the highest level of households in need. Three wards are amongst the twenty most deprived in the county.

Spelthorne has the highest crime rate per head of population in Surrey, having until 1998 fallen within the remit of the Metropolitan Police, where its crime rate was the lowest. The borough’s 2001 fear of crime survey identified 15 fear of crime hotspots, eight of which were concentrated in two wards.

Initial thoughts and expectations before PCSO arrival

Among regulars, initial reaction to PCSOs’ imminent arrival was positive. Lack of Home Office funding, by virtue of being the safest county in England (although the borough with the highest crime rate per head of population in the county) meant PCSOs were a welcome addition to the Neighbourhood team. The expectation was that PCSOs could deal with graffiti, parking, abandoned vehicles, lost and stolen bicycles were all mentioned – leaving police officers to concentrate on crime matters.

Three types of reservation were recounted. The first revolved around the way the role was framed – as a police role which was, in the opinion of one NSO, strictly speaking not police- oriented, and could therefore more appropriately be managed by the Council in the same way that CSWs were. The second concerned ensuring that the right type of people were recruited – in the words of one NSO, “not power-mad police wannabies”. He did not think another police officer appropriate in his area, as this would simply mean two people dealing with crime – while the so-called “lower level stuff” fell by the wayside.

Knowledge of area beforehand

Two of the PCSOs were unhappy at the time it took to be told where they would be working. This was not simply inconvenient - in practical terms it left little time to research the area, and, as one put it, would have meant one less thing to worry about at a time when she was having to absorb a lot of information in a very short period. It was, she felt, a failure that needed correcting for future intakes.

Explanation of powers beforehand

One of the regulars was satisfied that Surrey Police Headquarters had provided a lot of guidance to officers in the borough about PCSO powers and the purpose of the role. This does not appear to have filtered down to everyone, however. One went so far as to say that, even six months after PCSOs’ arrival, “no police officers understand their role – none at all”. Another expressed concerns for the role based upon uncertainty about what PCSOs would be expected to accomplish and the means they would have at their disposal to do this. The issuing of CLE26s provides the best example of this lack of clarity. One PCSO explained that

“I cannot do CLE26s, but some people remember me as a traffic warden in this area and still think I can do that job. Obviously I don’t tell them that I can’t; instead I say I’m giving them the benefit of the doubt. But then I spoke to my NSO, who’ll let me do them but only if he’s there. Having said that, I went out with a Special Constable one day and we blitzed those parked illegally in the bays– the Special signed the lot for me.”

Initial training

Though well-delivered, all PCSOs interviewed had, in retrospect, discerned gaps in the three– week training. Statement-taking and use of radios were not covered sufficiently, even for the

PCSO who had previously written statements as a traffic warden. Another felt that a lot of

the training had not been used, and that, since the job had, predictably, involved dealing with people every day, learning in a classroom for three weeks was simply not an authentic

grounding for the job. However, she acknowledged that she had been in the minority when it came to deciding upon a learning style that suited as many of the group as possible.

One regular felt the training had been useful, and had not had to explain to his PCSO what he regarded as basics such as reading ICADs. However, he reported that some misinformation had surfaced among colleagues – for example, a CID officer had reportedly instructed PCSOs not to divulge information they came across to their NSOs, which the interviewee regarded as “absolutely crazy” and which the Community Safety Sergeant advised him to ignore. Two other regulars, however, felt the training limited, and insufficient for the demands that PCSOs have subsequently had put on them. At the time of the site visits, PCSOs did not have access to CIS; one commented that for her this was less of a problem, as she spent the bulk of her time with her NSO, who looked everything up for her.

Conflict training and vulnerability

Conflict management training had not been delivered by the time of either site visit. This was seen as a big gap by all but one of the interviewees. Had it been delivered, argued one PCSO, it would have helped build up confidence. It was agreed by most that PCSOs were

vulnerable, though the strategies for addressing this differed. One PCSO’s first rule before taking a decision was “I know my limitations”, whatever the interpretation onlooking members of the public might put on her actions:

“I would never get myself in a dangerous situation without backup…I once followed a chap they were after, radioed that I’d seen him and where he was heading, and they virtually said to me ‘Keep away’. I make the decision – pass things on and let the police deal with it. I used to walk away as a traffic warden and on reflection there was more grief doing that job than this one. As for the public watching, I don’t think any member of the public would expect anybody to put themselves in danger.”

In terms of protection, one regular favoured body armour, ASPs and CS gas, on the basis that anyone who might assault a police officer, would be unlikely to differentiate between that role and a PCSO. Stab vests were also suggested by a PCSO, referring to the fact that the area, though now covered by Surrey Police, still had the feel of Greater London and incursions by offenders from within the Met area to go with it.

The PCSO uniform itself was regarded as a generator of vulnerability by one NSO simply because it contained the word ‘POLICE’. He maintained that it was unnecessary to align the role so with the police in order for the job to be done well, pointing to the impact CSWs had made on overlapping issues.

One of the PCSOs was unenthusiastic about conflict training, feeling it was unnecessary. She argued that it

“You never know what you can walk into round the corner, but the same would apply if you had a truncheon or handcuffs or whatever. The way the trainer taught us in first three weeks was ‘You’re better off trying to talk your way out of a situation’.”

She was also strongly of the opinion that she did not need more protection. She had no inclination to be in a situation where she would have to use any extra weaponry, believing it ran the risk of someone using it on her. She continued

“If I wanted batons or anything I’d join the police. I don’t want to carry anything that looks menacing because that’s not how I see the job - I see it as a bit more fluffy. Having all that equipment would make you more vulnerable – you’d be a target.”

Arrival and integration

Integration of PCSOs within neighbourhood teams appears to have run smoothly. The NSO Sergeant commented that all PCSOs were approaching him with questions, and he was encouraged that they felt able to do this. One PCSO said she had encountered a little bit of scepticism from some officers to begin with, but felt the role had proved its worth - “now they realise we are an asset to them and not to be sniffed at”.

One of the PCSOs stressed how critical integration was to the success of her role. She remarked

“If I didn’t get on with my NSO I wouldn’t be able to do this job. I know there’s a few PCSOs who don’t have a good working relationship with their NSO – and I don’t know how they’ve stayed, because I couldn’t.”

She added that both the NSO Sergeants she had contact with were “brilliant”, and that she had no problem raising issues with them. She doubted that many regulars other than NSOs knew what her role comprised – but that even those who were unclear were friendly. She had called TPT on two occasions: once when some kids were smoking cannabis, and she did not have the power to search them, and on another occasion at a fair when she encountered a group of youths drinking alcohol and, although she had the power to seize the drink because it was open, there were, as she put it “twenty of them and one of me”.

Interviews with Spelthorne PCSOs showed a similar induction process for all – initial weeks spent with their NSO, who familiarised them with their area, nominals, historical hotspots, and influencial members of the public. This process was informed by a visit from an NSO and PCSO from another Surrey Police division, where POCSOs had begun work six weeks sooner than in Spelthorne. By the time of the fieldwork visit, all PCSOs interviewed were routinely tasking themselves, although some were spending more time with their NSO than others.

Activities and deployment

In addition to parking problems, issues that PCSOs in Spelthorne have become involved in so far include: criminal damage; abandoned vehicles; graffiti; people breaking into cars and stealing from shops; youths riding bikes, playing football outside residents’ houses, and congregating in large groups in parks and on main streets; vagrants gathering and sleeping in a park next to the river, causing complaints from workers in an overlooking office block; Strategies for tackling these issues, apart from foot patrolling, have included:

 Engaging youths in conversation and encouraging them to see that their behaviour can be intimidating

 Discussion about the provision of a youth shelter

 Establishment of a reassurance panel following selection of a Surrey Reassurance

pilot site

 Explaining to residents and shopowners the logic behind their strategy for dealing

with complaints about youths

 Attendance at NW meetings

 Assisting in the establishment of new NW schemes

 Joint organisation of a trip to Kent for some of the youths (aged 14-16)

 A disco planned for Valentine’s Day 2004.

 Participation in mediation schemes

 Assisting in a two-day clear-up of overgrown land in one part of the borough -

described as “a real win for the PCSOs” by one of the regulars.

The PCSO whose area had been selected as part of Surrey Police Reassurance Project said that this had had a bearing on deployment. She and her NSO were now more likely to patrol together, because they judged this to have a greater impact. As a result, she was more likely to work beyond 10pm. She stressed that Sergeants would not force PCSOs to work that late, it was a matter of choice. She and her NSO had been asked to produce a report on work done as part off the Reassurance Project, with a view to distribution of best practice.

Sufficiency of powers

All but one of the PCSOs felt their powers needed bolstering. The following provides a good example of why:

“I was out with the NSO – he wanted to search two youths, one male, one female. He searched the male, but I couldn’t go too deeply on the female. I have no powers to search, but since NSO was there and the female was comfortable with me doing it, it was ok. I tell kids that if they don’t do something I’ll call a unit out and it will be a lot harder for you. Often I’m in the shopping centre and they frequently have shoplifters. Good relationship with the CCTV operators, but when I’m with shoplifters in the holding bay…Nothing I can do except stand with them until a unit arrives, and think ‘What am I doing here?’ The shoplifting side of it hadn’t entered my head during training – again because I didn’t know where I was going. You’re the mechanic without the tools.”

One PCSO was worried, however, that more “tools” could add strength to the views of those who considered the role to be a cheaper form of policing. Her approach to the role was to exercise commonsense when deciding which situations (or areas) to venture into, and which to avoid.

Several PCSOs said they would often find themselves first on the scene at a situation where, because of understaffing, it would take a long time before a response team arrived. In August,

one PCSO25 made a citizens arrest of six youths who he encountered spraying graffiti on a

25

bus shelter. This was praised by a supervising officer as “an excellent example of the work

PCSOs can do within the borough26”.

For some NSOs, however, a PCSOs’ decision to use ‘any person’ powers cannot be taken lightly. As one put it:

“They seem strong powers which more than likely will end up in a conflict situation if they tried to use them, with no training to back that up. The role has its limitations, and it’s not easy for us as police to back them up if they start arresting people and getting into conflict situations as we don’t have the officers to back them up within half an hour.”

This is not to say that regulars considered the powers insufficient. Rather, some that were seen as essential were missing, while some that had been granted were believed to be either too difficult to enforce, or worse, potentially damaging to due process.

“Surrey Police have given them a very obscure menu of powers. Seizing vehicles and taking alcohol off 17 year old kids on a dark winter’s night is too hard. But they’ve not given them training in statement taking. And in the case of shoplifting – in fact they could cock up the evidence. How are you going to explain that a PCSO’s been there for fifteen minutes rabbiting on to the person when they weren’t at the scene? Breach of PACE if they start answering any questions before caution, because they’re technically badged to the police.”

Power to detain

One of the PCSOs believed she and her colleagues held this power, though she regarded it as “a joke” because it was unlikely that a police officer would arrive within thirty minutes in any case. One of her colleagues believed PCSOs should be able to detain, again referring to the fact that the area was to all intents and purposes Greater London.

A note of caution was sounded by one of the NSOs, however. He contended that although Spelthorne might well have recently been a Met area, it was now being policed with a county force’s strength, and consequently, “if we did what the Met have done with PCSOs, we’d have a few injuries on our hands.”

Parking powers

Illegal parking was regarded as a big problem, and PCSOs’ inability to address it directly was seen as a major drawback. PCSOs had delivered verbal warnings, but reported that vehicle owners were becoming wise to the fact that these could not be supported by direct action. One NSO was particularly critical of the failure to invest PCSOs with this power:

“Because there are now no traffic wardens left in this borough at all, beat officers are the only people currently issuing parking tickets – and the general public do not want police officers stuck with their nose in a piece of carbon paper putting it on a car – they actually come along and say that to me. Of course, doing every car on every line in every bay would mean you’d do nothing else, which is why they have traffic

26

wardens in every other borough bar here, because they make the council money. I know it’s different pots of money – but the public are not bothered about budgets, all they want is to know why there are 25 cars parked on double yellow lines outside their house, and somebody in a uniform is walking past and doing nothing. But they won’t do it because they think it’s political – senior officers think if we start doing it the council won’t take it over.”

The worry that if granted these powers, PCSOs would overuse them was quickly dismissed, as it was felt that the PCSOs all possessed the commonsense not to do this. One PCSO said that in her view what was needed were “back-pocket powers”, to be exercised with discretion and sparingly when, essentially, a motorist failed the “attitude test”:

“The other day I came across a car parked on the pavement. A man came out of the bank and said ‘Have you got a problem?’. I’d’ve loved to’ve given him a ticket, whereas if he’d said ‘Oh, I’m so sorry, I was being a bit of a dickhead’ then I’d’ve let him go.”

Information sharing and joint work with the borough council

One regular gave an example of how joint work between council staff and the PCSO had led to swift and well-received action in one area:

“The PCSO and I came across a patch of overgrown land, opposite some houses, on which were six abandoned cars, an abandoned trailer tent, two old tyres and a fridge. Within 48 hours the Council had been tasked to cut the grass, to sort out the

abandoned cars, the fridge had gone, and the trailer tent was taken away for destruction.”

There was however some difficulty in ensuring that the PCSOs were working in harmony with Council representatives rather than in opposition to them. This was especially true of the parks PCSOs, who were 49% Council-funded As one PCSO commented