Telegraph | Opinion | Act now: London's police are in paralysis
By David Davis
(Filed: 18/06/2006)
The Metropolitan Police is London's, and indeed Britain's, first line of defence against terrorism. Its role is vital, and its success is a fundamental part of the whole anti-terror strategy of our country.
The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police is pivotal in that success. His job is one of the most difficult in modern policing. He must create the systems, the organisation, the command structure and the rules of engagement to deal with the terrorist menace.
He must provide strong leadership under the most trying circumstances. He must exercise impeccable judgment, often at times of extreme stress.
He must inspire public confidence at the very time our enemies are trying to instil panic and fear. If he fails, the consequences for our battle with terrorism will be severe.
The Met is in paralysis, plagued by internal turmoil, damaging leaks and uncertainty over the future of its Commissioner.
The slow release of the IPPC reports on the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes means that they are hanging over Sir Ian Blair's head. Until the reports are published, and a decision has been made for him to stay or go, the Commissioner is hobbled.
In the past few months, we have witnessed a mounting atmosphere of chaos and uncertainty, with newspaper after newspaper carrying "leaked" versions of the IPCC reports into the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, with growing criticism of the handling of the Forest Gate operation, and with Liam Byrne, the police minister, giving Sir Ian only the most lukewarm support.
In many respects Sir Ian has been his own worst enemy. He has made a number of widely criticised judgments, from an expensive change of the Met's logo when he first arrived, through his insensitive comments on the Soham murders, to his extraordinary decision to tape his telephone conversation with the Attorney General.
This was compounded last week by embarrassment over the Kate Moss affair after he boasted he was going to "crack down" on middle class crime.
These are unhappy events, but it is probable that he can survive and recover from them. The real issue is whether he can survive the potential criticisms that may be levelled in the two IPCC reports on the Stockwell shooting.
If we are to believe the "leaked" versions of these reports, the criticisms are pretty serious. It is alleged that there were errors and mistakes at every level.
It has been said that the command and control systems were flawed, and this was compounded by the absence of any surface to underground communication systems.
It is said that the commands given were ambiguous, and that the rules of engagement that allowed Mr Menezes to be shot dead were not clear enough.
As a result, a number of questionable decisions were made. For example, if it was really thought the suspect was carrying a bomb or other weapons, why let him onto a bus and subsequently onto the tube?
Other operational failures are supposed to have occurred, from failure to deploy the firearms team early enough, through to a failure to pass on to them the doubts of the surveillance team.
Any of these criticisms would be serious for Sir Ian and his team; but it would be quite wrong to come to judgment based on unverified "leaks".
But every day that passes without resolution sees public confidence in the Commissioner bleeding away.
At least one senior officer at Scotland Yard has described the Metropolitan Police as having been left "in paralysis" since receiving the IPCC report, a viewpoint reinforced by recurrent newspaper reports of rows and reassignments in the senior ranks in the last two months.
The handling of the Forest Gate raid and its aftermath has also reinforced this perception. It is probable that Scotland Yard had no choice but to carry out the operation once it received the intelligence.
The issues around the operation itself will only properly be resolved by the IPCC's full inquiry.
But it is hard to justify the incredibly undisciplined briefing by police officers that went on around the raid, first against the family, and then later against MI5 and each other.
It was at best inappropriate, at worst improper. Sir Ian Blair should have been the only voice speaking on this subject, and he should have limited what was given out to the minimum necessary.
The fact that this could not happen demonstrates the weakness created by the corrosive state of affairs today.
The only solution to this is for the IPCC reports to be put into the public domain as soon as possible, which in practice means the next two weeks.
Very soon we will be into July, with the terrible anniversaries of the attacks on the 7th and 21st and of Mr Menezes's death on the 22nd.
Publication then will be difficult and may even be seen as insensitive. But it is inconceivable that this current state of paralysis can be allowed to continue through July, particularly with the continuing threat of terrorism very much still there.
So the Government must honour Charles Clarke's promise, and publish the reports. Some will say that they cannot be published because the CPS might be bringing prosecutions.
If so, it is likely that redaction of the relevant parts will protect the rights of any defendants while still allowing the public to understand what happened on those fateful days. Any strictly technical legal issues could be dealt with by publication under Parliamentary privilege.
Putting these reports in the public domain will allow this episode to be brought to a close. Either Sir Ian Blair will be exonerated, or he will be replaced.
In the latter event, the Government has no shortage of good candidates that will take a grip of the Met, restore morale, and re-establish its directions.
This approach will be fair to Sir Ian, but, even more importantly, fair to the British people, who deserve the highest standards of protection against the terrorist threat that still menaces our nation.
June 19, 2006 at 12:47 AM in UK | Permalink | Top of page | Blog Home