|
|
|
Paragraphs: 15.41
- 15.46
|
|
|
|
15.41
|
The impression I gained of CPTs being neglected by the MPS in the
years leading up to Victoria's death was reinforced by the evidence
I heard about the accommodation with which they were provided. For
example, some teams were based in premises other than police stations.
Commander Kendrick said that remoteness from the principal arena
of police activity is seen by some as a problem, because it makes
CPTs feel "semi-detached". I agree. I have already expressed the
view that child protection policing, and the principles that underpin
it, should not be viewed as somehow distinct from other forms of
policing. It will inevitably prove more difficult to promote this
view if the teams are physically separated from the rest of the
force.
|
|
15.42
|
However, the simple fact of location within a police station does
not appear to be a guarantee of adequate accommodation. Both Brent
and Haringey CPTs were located in police-owned buildings and I heard
considerable evidence concerning cramped conditions, poor heating
systems and difficult access.
|
|
15.43
|
I will not labour the issue because, as I have indicated already,
I see no direct correlation between the mishandling of Victoria's
case and the accommodation in which the two CPTs concerned were
housed. I will simply note that the poor state of the accommodation
provided to many CPTs in London adds weight to my conclusion that
they had been seriously neglected for some time. No doubt it also
added to the feelings of isolation and poor status apparently experienced
by many officers working in those teams.
|
|
15.44
|
Overall, the impression I gained from the evidence about the equipping
and resourcing of CPTs in London during the period with which I
am concerned, is entirely consistent with the findings of the report
by DCS Kelleher who, in September 2000, was commissioned to explore
what would be needed to bring the CPTs up to a suitable standard.
Among his conclusions were the following: "Child protection teams
have become the Cinderella of the Metropolitan Police Service ...
they have been under-resourced"; and "Child protection teams have
suffered ten years of neglect."
|
|
15.45
|
Having heard evidence relating only to CPTs in London, I am unable
to comment on the extent to which the problems I have identified
above are replicated across the country. In order to ensure that
they are not, I make the following recommendation:
|
|
|
Recommendation
|
|
|
Chief constables must ensure that child protection teams are fully
integrated into the structure of their forces and not disadvantaged
in terms of accommodation, equipment or resources.
|
|
15.46
|
I heard evidence that suggested that part of the explanation for
the long-term neglect of child protection teams, at least in London,
may be due to the lack of prominence given to such policing by central
government. It is a branch of policing, I was told, which very rarely
finds its way onto the list of ministerial priorities. While this
should not serve as an excuse for any failure to provide an adequate
service to child victims of crime, it would be naïve to underestimate
the impact of a strong lead from central government on this issue.
With a view to prompting such a lead being given and responded to,
I make the following recommendations:
|
|
|
Recommendation
|
|
|
The Home Office must ensure that child protection policing is
included in the list of ministerial priorities for the police.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recommendation
|
|
|
Chief constables and police authorities must give child protection
investigations a high priority in their policing plans, thereby
ensuring consistently high standards of service by well-resourced,
well-managed and well-motivated teams.
|
|
|
Back to Top
|
