Sir Hugh Orde

:00:03. > :00:13.abuse by African migrants in Libya, perpetrated by anti-Gaddafi rebels.

:00:13. > :00:13.

:00:13. > :00:16.You can find out more on that on our website.

:00:16. > :00:19.Now it is time for HARDtalk. Relations between Britain's police

:00:19. > :00:22.and politicians are under enormous strain. The police's handling of

:00:22. > :00:25.the so-called hacking scandal and the London riots raised questions

:00:25. > :00:28.of competence and credibility. In turn, the police have voiced grave

:00:28. > :00:31.concern about the impact of government cuts on their service.

:00:31. > :00:38.Sir Hugh Orde is the president of the Association of Chief Police

:00:38. > :00:48.Officers. What has happened to the bonds of trust between the police

:00:48. > :01:16.

:01:16. > :01:21.Welcome to HARDtalk. Do you accept the premise that there are worrying

:01:21. > :01:31.signs of a loss of faith in the police a month politicians and

:01:31. > :01:34.

:01:34. > :01:38.sections of the public? I do not,... Confidence has increased. The

:01:38. > :01:43.confidence between the police and community has caught up, not down.

:01:43. > :01:49.I think there is a basic bond on the British model of policing and

:01:49. > :01:52.the community. It is based on principles - uniform, minimal use

:01:52. > :01:57.of force. On the physical level, I think there will always be a

:01:57. > :02:00.healthy tension. So there should be. We hold very dear to our model the

:02:00. > :02:04.operational independence of Chief Police Officers and every police

:02:04. > :02:08.officer. They have the right to make decisions operationally on how

:02:08. > :02:13.they do their business. They then of course are held robustly to

:02:13. > :02:17.account by those who are paid to do exactly that. You raise several

:02:17. > :02:22.issues there - policing techniques, the way the public regards policing

:02:22. > :02:27.techniques. Let me just quote to you a survey that came not right

:02:27. > :02:30.after the riots in England but that came after the shock waves caused

:02:30. > :02:38.by the so-called phone hacking scandal just a few weeks before

:02:38. > :02:41.that. It was showing that 45% of almost 3,000 adults sampled said

:02:41. > :02:46.that their level of trust in senior police chiefs, the people you

:02:46. > :02:53.represent, was either not much or none. Why do you think that could

:02:53. > :02:58.be? That is a good question. My sense is, certainly, in the people

:02:58. > :03:03.I deal with - that that is not the case. We need to look at how the

:03:03. > :03:07.survey was taken. That is an interesting set of facts. My sense

:03:07. > :03:11.is that the confidence the public has in the police is balanced by

:03:11. > :03:15.other... For example by corruption, how corrupt you perceive police

:03:15. > :03:19.officers to be. They see us to be some of the least corrupt public

:03:19. > :03:22.servants, not the most. I think there is a debate to be had. I do

:03:22. > :03:26.not by the contention that the public does not trust senior police.

:03:26. > :03:29.Would you accept that damage has been done by what we learned from

:03:30. > :03:33.the revelations in the hacking scandal about the competence of the

:03:33. > :03:36.police - they acknowledge themselves - senior officers

:03:36. > :03:39.acknowledge that their initial investigation into the allegations

:03:39. > :03:44.of phone hacking by news of the World journalists had been

:03:44. > :03:48.inadequate and incompetent. Also revelations about extraordinarily

:03:48. > :03:53.close and cosy relationships between senior officers and tabloid

:03:53. > :03:57.journalists and executives. It was damaging, was it not? No question

:03:57. > :04:04.it was damaging. I don't think that's the way most police officers

:04:04. > :04:08.behave. Those police officers who felt they had a responsibility left

:04:08. > :04:14.the service. In terms of taking personal responsibility perhaps...

:04:14. > :04:19.It is systemic, though. It pointed to systemic problems. Let's wait

:04:19. > :04:23.and see. My sense is, no, it does not. We must have a relationship

:04:23. > :04:26.with the media. We're having a conversation now. The worst thing

:04:26. > :04:31.that happened to policing as some of the consequences of these events

:04:31. > :04:37.is that the public and the police lose that medium with the press

:04:37. > :04:40.through which they hear how are we go about our business. My sense is

:04:40. > :04:44.that we need to maintain a relationship with the media - in

:04:44. > :04:48.the majority of times we have had that and we must continue that. It

:04:48. > :04:53.is a far wider issue than simply a relationship with the media and the

:04:53. > :04:58.press, as you are fully aware. We're looking a much wider issues.

:04:58. > :05:02.Indeed, it is going to be a huge inquiry. It has many different

:05:02. > :05:05.facets - by hacking scandal. Including the way the police

:05:06. > :05:09.handled journalism, everything. If we just focus on what we are

:05:09. > :05:15.learning - I say systemic - what we are learning about the police and

:05:15. > :05:19.its relationships... For example, yesterday and you raft of

:05:19. > :05:22.revelations about the lavish gifts, worth tens of thousands of pounds

:05:22. > :05:26.that the Metropolitan Police senior officers have taken over the last

:05:26. > :05:32.three years, including trips to Royal Ascot, Wimbledon, top rugby

:05:32. > :05:35.games, dinners, award ceremonies, is this right? I think that is for

:05:35. > :05:40.individual officers to decide what is appropriate and what is not.

:05:40. > :05:43.Let's be clear - as achieve in Northern Ireland I would be out

:05:43. > :05:46.sometimes three or four nights a week speaking, engaging and

:05:46. > :05:50.consulting. Many of those engagements I could frankly do

:05:50. > :05:56.without. I have spoken at dinners and all sorts of occasions.

:05:56. > :05:59.Sporting events, it all gave me a connection with the public. You

:05:59. > :06:08.have to make a judgement call on each event and you have to say, in

:06:08. > :06:12.a transparent way, as clearly as you can - that I did that because

:06:12. > :06:15.of whatever. I thought it was a benefit to service, having that

:06:15. > :06:19.conversation. In Northern Ireland, these engagements were critical.

:06:19. > :06:23.They are not always pleasurable. I'm afraid chief officers to have

:06:24. > :06:27.to eat, on occasion, and sometimes you have to eat and speak at once.

:06:27. > :06:33.But Royal Ascot, Kenneth, some of the gifts that have been valued at

:06:33. > :06:37.substantial sums of money -- tennis. I just wonder whether you believe

:06:37. > :06:41.they need to reassess sometimes the way in which they conduct

:06:41. > :06:45.themselves in public life? course they do. Every individual

:06:45. > :06:48.officer is responsible for his or her own behaviour. It is a

:06:48. > :06:51.judgement call. What I am concerned about is having some huge

:06:51. > :06:55.bureaucratic response to is that would remove the chief officers

:06:55. > :07:00.from the public they serve because they are frightened to attend

:07:00. > :07:04.anything. That would be a tragedy for policing. Sometimes these

:07:05. > :07:10.events may well be fairly lavish. Awards ceremonies - what is wrong

:07:10. > :07:15.with that? Do you believe, right now, politicians are seeking to

:07:15. > :07:19.play a much more intrusive role in policing? I think the current

:07:19. > :07:24.government, of course, it is committed to a substantial police

:07:24. > :07:30.reform programme, as is their democratic right. My sense is that

:07:30. > :07:33.there is an ongoing, serious debate about where those lines are drawn.

:07:33. > :07:38.Before we get into the reforms, and bills are going through Parliament

:07:38. > :07:43.at the moment, let's talk about intrusive, day-to-day political

:07:43. > :07:46.actions. For example, during the riots that spread across the UK in

:07:46. > :07:55.August, the politicians were on holiday at the beginning and when

:07:55. > :07:59.they got back, 2-3 days, David Cameron, for one, said he was not

:07:59. > :08:05.happy with policing. He said there were far too few police officers on

:08:05. > :08:13.the street. That was unacceptable. Did you take umbrage at their word?

:08:13. > :08:18.They are entitled to voice... said that the politicians'

:08:18. > :08:22.intrusions were irrelevant. What it was was the deliberate campaign to

:08:22. > :08:28.misinterpret what I said. What I said was absolutely clear. It was

:08:28. > :08:33.on the news. I said that their role, their return to London in relation

:08:33. > :08:38.to the tactics decided by chief officers, were an irrelevancy. And

:08:38. > :08:42.they were irrelevant. It is as simple as that. The tactics, the

:08:42. > :08:46.operating independent Police officers decided what tactics to

:08:46. > :08:49.use to respond to the violence. I don't think any politician would

:08:49. > :08:53.want to shoulder that responsibility. I have read the

:08:53. > :08:56.quote time and time again. It was concise and it was utterly

:08:56. > :09:00.different to what was suggested, which is that I said politicians

:09:00. > :09:05.were irrelevant. At no time in my career have I said that politicians

:09:05. > :09:08.are irrelevant. To be quite clear about this - when politicians make

:09:09. > :09:13.comments, as Cameron did about his view that there were far too few

:09:13. > :09:17.police on the streets during those first nights, are you saying he was

:09:17. > :09:21.perfectly right to make those comments? He had every right to

:09:22. > :09:25.make those comments. The comments he made were stating the blindingly

:09:25. > :09:30.obvious. There were too few police officers on the streets in the

:09:30. > :09:35.first two nights. We are looking at this it on behalf of the police,

:09:35. > :09:44.the government and the public. The police report on the riots. We are

:09:44. > :09:49.looking at it in detail.... Let's wait and see. My sense of this

:09:49. > :09:53.disorder is that it was unique. We had no intelligence. It was a

:09:53. > :09:58.unique, spontaneous event across the country. Of course, with more

:09:58. > :10:01.than policing, it takes some time to respond. At the same time, come

:10:01. > :10:06.incidental or not, David Cameron was making it plain that he wanted

:10:06. > :10:11.to hear the advice of a senior US policeman, a former police chief of

:10:11. > :10:19.New York, Los Angeles and Boston. He wanted advice from him on how to

:10:19. > :10:26.deal with gangs. Its themes he wanted his advice as to why...

:10:26. > :10:29.Build baton has been a friend of mine for decades. I invited him to

:10:29. > :10:32.a conference in Northern Ireland and he came with other Chief Police

:10:32. > :10:39.Officers. The idea that his country is insular and does not want to

:10:39. > :10:44.learn, is wrong. We export and import learning. Can you learn from

:10:44. > :10:47.Bill Bratton who said - young people have been emboldened by

:10:47. > :10:51.over-cautious police tactics and lenient sentencing. The police need

:10:51. > :10:58.more arrows in their quiver. He talked about escalating force,

:10:58. > :11:02.including the use of water cannon, rubber bullets and pays us. For one

:11:02. > :11:07.thing, pays us are not used in this country. They are entirely

:11:07. > :11:14.inappropriate. He believes that the Arrows in the quiver, to use his

:11:14. > :11:17.phrase... Those weapons are present in policing in his country. The

:11:17. > :11:21.British model of policing is fundamentally different from the

:11:21. > :11:26.American one. That is not to say there is not learning, but we have

:11:26. > :11:30.to put it in context. We advise the Prime Minister on water cannons and

:11:30. > :11:40.battens. I am one of the two chiefs currently serving who has used both

:11:40. > :11:41.

:11:41. > :11:49.those.... You need static crowds and extreme violence. Neither of

:11:49. > :11:53.which were present. I suppose the key phrase there is over-cautious

:11:53. > :12:00.police tactics. We do except that? No-one would not. Their tactics

:12:00. > :12:04.were a function of police numbers. To deliver robust policing, you

:12:04. > :12:10.need sufficient numbers. Hence the question - did we have enough

:12:10. > :12:13.police on the street? As soon as we managed to lift the numbers up to

:12:13. > :12:16.16,000 on the Tuesday, we were able to use tactics that were not

:12:16. > :12:19.available to officers on Saturday or Sunday because they didn't have

:12:19. > :12:23.enough people. The primary objective of the police service is

:12:23. > :12:26.to protect life. Sometimes, sadly, protecting property has to be

:12:26. > :12:30.subordinate. The learning you are seeing now is the relentless

:12:30. > :12:36.pursuit of those who committed those crimes against property into

:12:36. > :12:40.the future so they realise they do not get away with it. They will be

:12:40. > :12:44.criminal justice against those who broke the law. A final point - Bill

:12:44. > :12:48.Bratton says it is crucial when dealing with these events that year

:12:48. > :12:51.is felt by those engaging in disorder. You off the police. You

:12:51. > :12:56.believe that young people involved in those rights were sufficiently

:12:56. > :13:01.fearful of the police? Successful policing is when the public do not

:13:01. > :13:07.fear the police. Successful policing... You have a young person

:13:07. > :13:10.breaking windows trying to steal.... Not terrified by the cops. When law

:13:10. > :13:15.and order breaks down, the British model is to use the appropriate use

:13:15. > :13:21.of force to bring things back. I have used lethal force in Northern

:13:21. > :13:26.Ireland. There is no impediment using extreme force where the

:13:26. > :13:30.circumstances dictate. What we saw, in my dad and, I only have 34

:13:30. > :13:35.years' service, maybe I don't know what I'm talking about - they were

:13:35. > :13:45.in keeping with the British style. The British have such trust in

:13:45. > :13:46.

:13:46. > :13:50.It is interesting that Bill Bratton was mooted as a possible candidate

:13:50. > :13:55.for the top policing job in the United Kingdom - the Metropolitan

:13:55. > :13:59.Police job. In the end, that was shot down and he did not go for the

:13:59. > :14:05.job. You did but you did not get it. It is a few days since you learn he

:14:05. > :14:09.did not get it - why did you not? It's a competition between three

:14:09. > :14:13.other colleagues and all of whom are highly competent and

:14:13. > :14:17.professional. The Home Secretary has made a good decision and I wish

:14:17. > :14:22.the incumbent all the best. It is more complicated than that. We

:14:22. > :14:28.learned... We learned that you were the top

:14:29. > :14:32.candidate. It is more complicated. He sat through the two panels. They

:14:32. > :14:40.thought they were the guy for the job. I wonder why you didn't get

:14:40. > :14:43.There were three interviews... But as was indicated that the word

:14:43. > :14:50.their guide best suited for the job?

:14:50. > :14:58.I am not privy to that information but I gave it 110 %. The guy that

:14:58. > :15:03.has got the job has got it and a fair fight and I know very well...

:15:03. > :15:06.Are understood but I suppose the conclusion is that the job was

:15:06. > :15:10.taken by the politicians and by Theresa May. The believer was

:15:10. > :15:12.political and the fact that you had spoken out and made clear your

:15:13. > :15:16.criticisms of some of the things that Bill Bratton had said and that

:15:16. > :15:22.some of the things that some politicians have said in the way of

:15:22. > :15:28.the policing of the riots - but that count against you?

:15:28. > :15:33.It has always been the case that it is a royal appointment. There is no

:15:33. > :15:38.difference to the one I came second to last time.

:15:38. > :15:42.But at for a direct answer, do you believe your political

:15:42. > :15:46.outspokenness came -- counter begins you?

:15:46. > :15:49.I am paid to represent the top members of the police service and

:15:49. > :15:53.give my professional judgement in a fair and independent way and that

:15:53. > :15:59.is what I have done. Whether that had the consequence is not for me

:15:59. > :16:05.to comment on. Do you think it will be difficult

:16:05. > :16:11.for the new guide to be seen as the guy who was selected by Theresa May

:16:11. > :16:20.has been a political appointment? He was a very successful chief in

:16:20. > :16:25.Merseyside. Police... The bill gone through Parliament recognises

:16:25. > :16:28.operational independence in a stark way. It describes operational

:16:28. > :16:34.independence and describes the role of the Chief Constable and

:16:34. > :16:37.describes the role of the policing crime commissioner. Operational

:16:37. > :16:41.independence is enshrined and the police service will make judgement

:16:41. > :16:45.and then be held to account for what they do. That is the proper

:16:45. > :16:47.way. Of that point of operational

:16:48. > :16:52.independence, we have already alluded to the government's plans

:16:52. > :16:54.for elected police commissioners to play a key strategic role in the

:16:54. > :16:59.future and policing across communities in the United Kingdom.

:16:59. > :17:01.Here is what the Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has said of

:17:01. > :17:07.these elections, which are supposed to begin, if the government gets

:17:07. > :17:11.its way, in 20th November 12. The danger is of a low turnout, I'm on

:17:11. > :17:14.it, marginal or even extremist candidates getting elected to these

:17:14. > :17:17.important posts as police commissioners. We could see police

:17:17. > :17:20.commissioners pursuant device of politics within sections of the

:17:20. > :17:23.community than their policing is supposed to be an must be fair and

:17:23. > :17:30.impartial. The Vatican said new share?

:17:30. > :17:36.We will have to wait and see how it pans out. It all depends on the

:17:36. > :17:39.local identity of the police force. The elections will be fought on

:17:39. > :17:43.local issues and the visibility of police officers in local towns

:17:43. > :17:47.rather than balancing that. But the national commitment that all the

:17:47. > :17:52.offices have is can be keeping -- is keeping the countryside. We

:17:52. > :17:58.argue for what is called a strategic... Police inquiries must

:17:58. > :18:01.take account of the national agenda. For example, National disorder.

:18:01. > :18:06.Staff must be allowed to be released into other parts of the

:18:06. > :18:09.country to fight crime. Does this in your view that he

:18:09. > :18:12.actually jeopardise operational independence?

:18:12. > :18:16.Not as could be constructed because we have operational independence

:18:16. > :18:20.enshrined in the bill. The defectors, these are going to

:18:20. > :18:26.be elected and therefore democratically mandate players in

:18:26. > :18:30.key decisions about policing. -- but the fact is.

:18:30. > :18:34.I would like to think of the people who apply for this post are

:18:34. > :18:40.sensible and mature individuals. We do not please the majority. We

:18:40. > :18:48.police all citizens and not just one party or another. In fact, one

:18:48. > :18:51.could make peace... One could make a point that we put more time in

:18:52. > :18:54.two minorities. But we must have protections in place and chief

:18:54. > :19:02.constables must be protected from being arbitrarily fired forcibly

:19:02. > :19:08.not agreeing with the commission. Let me ask you about the

:19:08. > :19:11.government's budget cuts. 20% in the police budget. It seems that

:19:11. > :19:14.roughly 16,000 police officers may lose their jobs as a result. Do you

:19:14. > :19:20.believe it is that they have a detrimental effect on levels of

:19:20. > :19:27.crime? And on the police ability to do their job?

:19:27. > :19:32.Without question he will lose 16,000 staff. If you lose 20% of

:19:32. > :19:35.any organisation, it is bound to have an impact. Our job is to

:19:35. > :19:40.minimise that impact that hard choices will have to be made if you

:19:40. > :19:44.have less officers. Will a crime levels rise?

:19:44. > :19:49.I am not in the business of predicting the future but evidence

:19:49. > :19:53.tells us that in eight recession, demand on policing increase. Crime

:19:53. > :20:00.it also increases as also there is every risk and we believe that we

:20:00. > :20:03.can make a difference. That there is a risk of a rise in

:20:03. > :20:08.crime, it is that a message using to politicians?

:20:08. > :20:12.Are message every police officer sends to the politicians is that we

:20:12. > :20:21.are concerned about the effects of the cuts. This country is in

:20:21. > :20:27.serious trouble financially. The commissioner needs to be tested.

:20:27. > :20:30.The first job is to minimise the impact on the front line and Currie,

:20:30. > :20:34.32% of replied officers are being cut despite cuts in the Budget been

:20:35. > :20:41.substantially higher. They will be an impact unquestionably the way

:20:41. > :20:44.falls, we will have to wait and see. Here is what Bill Bratton says. He

:20:44. > :20:49.says it is wrong to make an association between reductions in

:20:49. > :20:54.budget and police numbers and crime going up. He said, look at what I

:20:54. > :20:58.achieved. The budget was cut by 15% but I cut crime by 10% at the same

:20:58. > :21:02.time so you should not make that up tension.

:21:02. > :21:06.He said that one can actually assume that there may well be... I

:21:06. > :21:10.am not going to give you every single word of yours but you seem

:21:10. > :21:13.to be saying that they could be a real risk of rising crime as a

:21:13. > :21:22.result of cuts? Are there is that potential but it

:21:22. > :21:31.does not give up that fight before we started. Frontline officers have

:21:31. > :21:39.been get down to 82% cut despite higher cuts of budget. -- 2%. In

:21:39. > :21:45.most forces in this country forces have been cut. It can be done.

:21:45. > :21:48.I began by asking you about the way the public feels about the police.

:21:48. > :21:51.We had an extraordinary report yesterday from a lawyer who was

:21:51. > :21:55.commissioned to look at the quality of the new recruits into the police

:21:55. > :22:00.and he said there were severe problems. He said the entrance

:22:00. > :22:04.tests seemed weighty easy and easier than they were and he

:22:04. > :22:07.suggested that lots of layers in Court says that police giving

:22:07. > :22:14.evidence are almost functionally illiterate. This is a profound

:22:14. > :22:18.problem cos I is it not, you have bosses must be worried about?

:22:18. > :22:22.I need to see the evidence. I was at that conference but I did not

:22:22. > :22:26.hear him say that. I would need to see some hard evidence. My evidence

:22:26. > :22:30.is that the standard is far higher. Forget the basic minimum standard -

:22:30. > :22:34.the standard in my experience is far higher than where I was. Over

:22:34. > :22:39.one third of the officers had at least one degree. The average age

:22:39. > :22:42.was 39, not 18. They bring a wealth of experience at a thing to

:22:42. > :22:48.discredit the whole rank and file with a sweeping statement is not

:22:48. > :22:53.helpful and probably deeply inaccurate. Hearsay and third-hand

:22:53. > :22:58.from other lawyers meet some evidence behind it before we have

:22:58. > :23:03.to throw up our hands and say the quality of policing in this country

:23:03. > :23:07.is bad. The offices I saw during the riots were brave and

:23:07. > :23:12.intelligent and thoughtful and doing a very difficult job.

:23:12. > :23:14.I hear the passion in your boys but the running theme throughout this

:23:14. > :23:19.interview has been feted and credibility in the police from the

:23:19. > :23:22.public. A final thought on this - Theresa May has suggested that

:23:22. > :23:26.perhaps it would improve the quality of policing if senior

:23:26. > :23:31.figures and leaders from other parts of the public sector, from

:23:31. > :23:33.the private sector as well, were brought into the police, as leaders,

:23:34. > :23:36.implying that actually, the leadership at the moment is

:23:37. > :23:45.somewhat lacking medical be better to get none police into the force

:23:45. > :23:50.to help out with leadership? -- and it would be better.

:23:50. > :23:53.I do not need as a chief police officer people on work experience.

:23:54. > :23:58.This is not about that but proven leaders from other sectors to bring

:23:58. > :24:02.skills to the force. Qualified to make life and death

:24:02. > :24:07.decisions in a world that is unique? I do not think so. We

:24:07. > :24:13.already have a mixed economy. Over 50% of some forces are not sworn

:24:13. > :24:17.officers. They bring a wealth of experience. I have had exposed from

:24:17. > :24:27.the legal profession and from a camping and human resources. This

:24:27. > :24:27.

:24:27. > :24:32.notion that we are insular is wrong. -- accounting. Frankly, the notion

:24:32. > :24:36.that that we can just ship some one man and the next day they could