Disbanded Police Motor Cycle Unit

1240/5(2742)

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR HOME AFFAIRS BY DEPUTY J.B. FOX OF ST. HELIER

ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 14th FEBRUARY 2006

Question

Would the Minister inform members –

( a ) w h e ther the Police Motor Cycle Unit was disbanded without prior knowledge or approval of the

former Home Affairs Committee?

( b ) who authorized the sale of the Police motor cycles and, in particular, when did the Minister know of the

intended sale and did the Minister agree to the sale?

( c ) w h e ther any representations were made by Deputy J.B. Fox to the former Home Affairs Committee

to retain the Police Motor Cycle Unit, and whether, as a result, a report was to be produced regarding options for the way forward? If so, why was the sale authorised if such a report was still awaited?

( d ) w h e ther an independent authority valued the sale price of the seven motorcycles in question and, if

so, which authority?

( e ) w h e ther the sale of the motor cycles was put out to tender either locally or nationally?

( f) w h e ther the public was consulted on the decision to disband the Police Motor Cycle Unit?

( g ) w h e ther, prior to the disbandment, new radios were purchased specifically for the motor cycle unit?

( h ) w h e ther any work has been undertaken to identify the effectiveness of a Police Motor Cycle Unit in

the prevention and detection of crime and safety of the public, or otherwise, by the provision of a Police Motor Cycle Unit and, if so, what did this conclude?

Answer

1. A reportwassubmitted to the formerHome Affairs Committeeinformingit of theoperational decision taken to disband the MotorCycleUnitinordertoachievecompliance with anH.M.I.C.recommendation in respect of the formationof a pro-activepolicingunit. Unfortunately, itwas leaked to the press before the reportwas received. TheformerCommittee recognised that failure toact on the H.M.I.C.recommendationcouldhave resulted in the Island being judged to benon-compliantwith recognised good practice and also that this additional commitmenthad to beachievedwithout any overall increase in resources.
2. A  report  went to  the  former Home Affairs  Committee on  19th September 2005,  which asked  for authorisation to sell the motor cycles. Verbal representations hadbeenmadeby Deputy Fox, and as a result, the  former Committee gave interested  parties  until the  next  meeting  to  formally submit an alternative proposal which satisfactorily addressed the issues of performance and affordability. No alternative proposal was received, nor did the former Committee atany stage receive any written proposal which offered any alternative view.Two bids were madeforthemotor cycles, both were acceptable but one waswithdrawn.
3. The answerto the previous question partly answersthequestion.Inaddition,the police report outlinedno loss inproductivityaroundroadspolicing but an increasein detection ofcrime matters attributable to the Proactive Investigation Team' set up, inplace of themotor cycles. The statistics speak for themselves. There was also an improvement in responsetimestoincidentsfollowing the disbandmentofthebikes.
4. The motor cycles were sold for the best price available having taken stock of Glass's Guide and the

professional advice of Workshop Technicians.

5. The motor cycles were high poweredmachineswhich the States of Jersey Police Forcedoes not considerto be appropriate for untrained use on the Island's roads, nor would the service wish to beseenas indirectly responsible for anymishapas a result oftheirusebyother than trained specialist riders. For this reason they were offered toemergencyservices in the U.K., and werenotputoutto tender.
6. This wasseenasanoperational decision takenby professionals with a responsibility to deliver the best policing service possible in accordance with H.M.I.C.advice on best practice. The public are frequently consulted about the priorities of the States of Jersey Police, andtheirviewstaken into account.They usually place dealing with speeding motorists ator near the top ofthose priorities, andthe job ofthe police is then to deliver on this and to decide theoperationalmethods used to do so.Thedisbandmentof the motorcycle unit has led to improved performance, not only in that area,butalsoinothercrimerelatedareasas a result of the increased emphasis on intelligence-ledpolicingwhich the disbandment allowed the Force to do.
7. No.Theradioswere in factalmostobsoletebecause the Forcewasmovingtosecond generation encryption of the TETRAradio.Keeping the bikes would have involved spending £3,500 to equip them withnewradios this cost beingoutofall proportion for their usefulness.
8. Yes. Researchsubmitted to the formerHome Affairs Committeeshowed that performance hadimproved in a numberofareasfollowingthedisbandmentof the Motor Cycle Unit.Responsetimes to Emergency calls improved in 2005 without the Unit. Serious Injury Road Traffic Crashes showed a decrease following disbandment. In the 18months before disbandment the monthlyaveragewas 4.16. In the firstsevenmonths of 2005 this had fallen to2.In 2005, thenumberof detections for speeding increased to an average of110 a month. Before the Unit was disbanded, the figure was51.Additionally, with theformationof the Proactive Policing Team which replaced the Unit, detections for burglary and thefts of vehicles have increased substantially. Thereportsubmitted earlier concluded that nothaving a motorcycleunit did not result in any loss of service to the public and that with the addition of a Proactive Unitactually gave a better service to the public with a decreasein reported crime and anincrease in detected crime.