Conference 2004 - Speeches
Chairman's Address to the Chief Constable
Sir I would like to welcome you to this the 33rd Annual Conference of the Defence Police Federation. I would also like to thank you for the assistance you have given us over the past 12 months with the many issues that we have discussed both formally and informally. Just when I thought I was getting the hang of things, you move the goal post by leaving us.
I would now like to address a few areas where I feel you should be aware of our feelings or concerns. Firstly in regard to the JCC meetings, it is encouraging to see that we are welcome to engage, at an early stage in the processes that affect the membership. This early consultation has enabled many issues to be dealt with prior to them becoming a major and more difficult concern.
Also it is encouraging to see that the Force has shown a commitment to the refurbishing of Student accommodation at Wethersfield. I understand that blocks 1030 & 1029 are to be converted to en-suite accommodation early in 2005 and that this is to be a rolling process until all of the blocks are of this high standard. As you will be no doubt aware, accommodation, both resident and office, has been a cause for concern to the DPF over the years and one which we have vigorously pursued. It would be of great reassurance if such a commitment, as made at Wethersfield, were given by all divisional commanders in respect of accommodation that officers are expected to reside in whilst on division training courses. Unfortunately, at the moment, this is not the case.
With regard to the allocation of Special Priority Payments, This Federation would like to again register its discomfort with the way in which this scheme has been implemented. Firstly, we are unhappy that the amount of monies put aside for this scheme is not in line with those of our Home & Scottish department colleagues. The scheme has also caused unhealthy division amongst the membership. Due to this fact, the divisive nature of the award, we are reluctant to become involved in this process and cannot endorse the disjointed way in which we feel it has been awarded. We would wish to see a more consistent approach used, where all officers were eligible and finance was not the deciding factor. Until such a time we will not give our agreement to the process.
Moving on now I would like to address the issue of efficiency savings. Again this Federation would like to bring your attention to our concerns regarding the efficiency savings being requested by the centre.
I am sure that you are as disturbed as we are by the savings being proposed. If our information is correct, then the Agency is being forced to return 2% of its 2005 budget, 3% of its 2006 budget and 2% of its budget over the years 2007 - 2008 respectively. On our current budget of £260 Million this equates to around £22 million (Give or take a few hundred thousand). Sir I would ask if you are able to indicate at this early stage how these savings are going to be met? The main criterion for our membership is the use of "Risk Management" and the strong possibility that we can only meet these efficiencies by loss of resources. Our members feel that although this is a recognised management tool, it is they who are taking the risks and possible reductions.
Hardware is also a concern. Currently we have difficulty supplying our officers with safety equipment. For example many of our members have no body armour, or body armour, which is unsuitable for their specific role. We understand the situation with regard to the procurement of equipment; however, there are times when our officers are left vulnerable whilst red tape ties up the system.
Most recently we have seen the implementation of the civilianisation report on Head Quarters. This will eventually cascade down to a divisional level and this is obviously a great cause of uncertainty for our members. We are at a loss as to why, after the Divisional restructuring of the Force, Head Quarters appears not to have reduced in direct proportion to the increase of Divisional Staff and responsibility.
Sir at a time when our colleagues in the Home & Scottish departments are receiving investment from government, in relation to Home Security, it seems inexplicable that we, the Ministry of Defence Police, a service which is given the responsibility of securing the Nations Nuclear Deterrent, is being disadvantaged by being excluded from this injection of finance. Government consistently overlooks us when they examine national issues.
The Key Worker Scheme in the south of England is yet another example. There can be no better candidate for inclusion in the Key Worker Scheme than the police officer. Given our role in countering terrorism then the MDP should also be eligible for the scheme. Sir, excluding us is shortsighted; a point which I will make to the Minister this afternoon. I would also urge you and your Management Team to give us support because we have a common interest here.
This year has also seen the production of the GERSHAN & LYONS reports. Sir I would welcome it if you would take this opportunity to share with us your considered view of the likely effect of these reports on our Agency. Any reassurances you have received regarding advanced notice of those effects would also be welcomed. Many of the closures of Ministry Establishments are bound to have an effect on us, either directly or indirectly and as you can obviously imagine this is another area of anxiety for our members and their families.
Sir we understand that these are a few difficult issues I have placed before you today and that you will also respond to the formal questions that we have from the membership in a few minutes. Therefore I would like to again thank you for your attendance at our conference and ask that you first respond to the issues I have raised, then we will move on to the formal question by video. This opportunity for dialogue at the highest level within the Force is much appreciated.
Thank you Chief Constable…
