“Change is inevitable. Progress is optional” – Tony Robbins

Our beloved Home Secretary has made an announcement. And it’s a big one.

 This week Shabana Mahmood unveiled what she claims is the “most significant modernisation of policing in nearly 200 years.”

 Bold words indeed. 

 Among the 106-page White Paper are plans for a national rollout of live facial recognition technology, with the number of vans set to increase from 10 to 50. About time, I hear some of you cry!

 Alongside that, the Government intends to reduce the number of police forces in England and Wales from the current 43 by 2034. Each “mega” force would then be divided into local policing areas where neighbourhood officers will be responsible for dealing with crimes like shoplifting, phone theft and antisocial behaviour.

 Announcing the reforms, Mahmood said “The current policing model was built for a different century”. Whatever your political persuasion, I think most people would probably agree that on that point at least, she might be right.

 And then there’s the proposed creation of a British “FBI-style” National Police Service – a phrase that feels deliberately chosen to sound reassuringly cool… less Midsomer Murders and more CSI: Miami, one presumes!

 The new national force will take the lead on terrorism, fraud and organised crime, and bring the capabilities of the National Crime Agency (NCA), counter-terrorism policing, regional organised crime units, police helicopters and national road policing under a single organisation.

 Graeme Biggar, Director General of the NCA, was quick to lend his support, noting that “the overall policing system is out of date. Crime has changed, technology has changed, and how we respond needs to change.”

 I think he’s hit the nail squarely on the head. As shoplifting becomes ever more brazen, online fraud ever more sophisticated, and offenders ever less likely to face meaningful consequences, how many of us have cried with weary resignation that something has to give?

 After all, we can’t expect to keep doing the same things, in the same way, with the same structures, and get a different outcome. I believe that is the very definition of insanity!

There is also, of course, a very practical argument here and one that I suspect many readers will immediately recognise…

 Officials say merging police forces will cut red tape and save billions of pounds, with money currently spent replicating backroom services such as HR, payroll, and IT redirected to frontline policing instead. I know that if that level of duplication and inefficiency were uncovered in my own organisation, I wouldn’t be doing my job properly if I didn’t start asking some very awkward questions.

 The same logic applies to talent. Outlining her argument for a “British FBI”, Mahmood claimed that “some local forces lack the skills or resources they need to fight complex modern crime such as fraud, online child abuse or organised criminal gangs.”

 Over the years, I have learned that spreading your best people thinly rarely achieves everything you hope it will. That’s why at ASEL, we allocate expertise and resources where they will have the greatest impact. Policing isn’t really that different. The proposed creation of a national force feels like an attempt to do exactly that: putting the right skills in the right place, rather than expecting every local team to tackle every problem.

 Of course, change is rarely easy or comfortable. But then again, neither is pretending that a 20th-century system can adequately police a 21st-century problem!

 Large institutions rarely reform out of enthusiasm; they do so out of necessity. We saw it in banking regulation after financial crises, in defence strategy as warfare became digital, and in healthcare as data transformed diagnosis and treatment. Policing now finds itself at a similar inflexion point, where standing still could well be the riskiest option of all.

 Whilst the Government’s ambition is impressive, I am also a realist. Implementing measures this bold is never going to be straightforward, and some of the proposals will inevitably meet resistance. The creation of local policing areas has already prompted questions about whether the needs of rural communities could be overshadowed by those of towns and cities.

 I understand those concerns, and I hope the Government engages closely with local authorities, police leaders, and communities to get the balance right. Because by heck, we can’t afford to get this wrong!

 Ultimately, the White Paper is ambitious. It’s not perfect. But if doing nothing is the greater risk, isn’t bold reform –  however uncomfortable – a leap worth taking?