|
|
 |
| |
Scaremongering in your cop shop story
• YOUR police station story was blatant scaremongering, as well as being disingenuous (Police station earmarked for closure, November 23).
Firstly, the Estates Strategic Plan and Consultation and Communication Strategy was made public before the October meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) took place.
It was my decision, supported by MPA members, to have the documents withdrawn from the agenda because they did not contain the level of detail and analysis that is essential if we are to make informed and important decisions on how we manage the very large police estate.
Secondly, I can assure you that we did not discuss these documents behind closed doors in the way you suggest.
What we discussed was what steps had to be taken by the Met to produce comprehensive and highly detailed reports to us that would allow the MPA, as owner of the police estate, to reach our conclusions based on all of the relevant information available.
Policing demands in London are changing and as part of this we need an estate that can support a police service fit for the 21st century. We are in the process of opening a series of modern facilities closer to local communities, more accessible to the public and closer to crime hotspots. Some police stations will also be refurbished.
As these new facilities come into operation it is inevitable that some older-style police stations will close but these stations tend to be inefficient for modern day policing, have poor working conditions for staff, are inaccessible to the public and many of them are in the wrong locations.
The MPA are committed to not closing any police station in any borough in London without full local consultation and until at least one fully satisfactory front office counter, providing a point of contact for local people, has been opened.
Speculation over the future of individual police stations is unhelpful and misleading.
LEN DUVALL
Chairman
Metropolitan Police Authority
Dean Farrar Street
SW1
• I SEE from the New Journal the Lib Dems are employing the tactic of predicting police station closures just in time for the Kentish Town by-election.
As usual however they are ignoring the fact that they are now in charge of tackling crime in Camden.
As far as I know, newly elected Lib Dem councillor, Ben Rawlings, has been in charge of community safety in our borough for several months.
What is he doing to improve facilities for the local police? It’s all very well putting out scaremongering stories about a police review of their property portfolio, but what are the Lib Dems and their Tory friends actually doing to protect the public from crime?
So far, the alliance has introduced a seemingly endless review of council policy and called in some academics from outside Camden to tell them what to do. If the Lib Dems really think that police stations are about to be closed, even though the local police say it is not on the agenda, perhaps they should be asking Cllr Rawlings to stand up for local people for a change.
It really is disgraceful that the Lib Dems are playing politics in this way while refusing to actually do anything to tackle crime.
SUNI KHAN
Aborfield Street
NW5
• GREAT play is now being made by the Lib Dems about the closure of Kentish Town police station as it was earlier by the Tories about Hampstead police station. Alas, the ruling coalition appears to be missing the central point. What do we want our police to do in Camden?
I suggest there are four main things. Firstly, to prevent crime wherever possible. Secondly to catch criminals, thirdly to respond as quickly as possible to requests for help from the public, fourthly to keep people who have been arrested in conditions which are suitable for both detainees and the staff who have to work there.
If you want to call for help, report a crime or talk to the police there are telephones and the email, you surely do not need a “police local”
The question then becomes that whether keeping out of date, antiquated buildings with high maintenance costs – Kentish Town Police Station was opened 110 years ago – will help or hinder these goals.
What our police need are modern premises and an up to date custody suite; neither Hampstead nor Kentish Town fill this necessity.
The issue then becomes how can this building modernisation best be effected. My concern is that whilst other boroughs are having their plans for new buildings and new custody suites approved and financed by the MPA, the present vocal opposition from Tories and Lib Dems in Camden will put us at the bottom of the list and we may lose out.
I suggest that those who are concerned with efficient and effective policing and custody in Camden should direct their efforts to pushing for the provision of modern working facilities for our police rather than trying to preserve out dated police stations which are no longer fit for purpose either for those who have to work there or who are placed in a police cell.
MICK FARRANT
Oak Village
NW5
|
 |
|
|
|
