Cross-party PCCs seek assurances from Home Secretary about Brexit
The APCC’s three lead Brexit Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs), Matthew Scott, Lord Willy Bach and Martyn Underhill met with the Home Secretary yesterday to discuss policing and the UK leaving the European Union.
Discussions focussed on contingency planning for both no deal and deal scenarios, in order to secure the best possible outcomes for policing through the Brexit process. Funding was discussed – both in relation to individual forces and national projects and PCCs sought assurances from the Home Secretary that funding could be secured to ensure sustainability of police operations, regardless of the outcome.
PCCs highlighted risks associated with the loss of multiple European law enforcement tools, databases and the European Arrest Warrants and sought assurances from the Home Secretary that UK policing can maintain these capabilities regardless of the EU-Exit scenarios.
PCCs also raised the importance of police officer and police staff welfare, for example loss of leave and rest days, during what could be a period of considerable strain on police resource and asked the Home Secretary to consider giving close regard to this issue including working closely with the Department for Education and the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government.
Matthew Scott PCC said: “We are pleased to have the opportunity to again impress upon the Government the importance of policing and security to any potential deal both for the UK and the EU. This week’s parliamentary events have not changed that simple fact”.
Willy Bach PCC aid: “It was important for us as representatives of all PCCs to be able to tell the Home Secretary in person of the concerns we have on behalf of our Police Forces around Brexit. It is vital that the arrangements for cooperation between our police and those in the EU remain in place. Those arrangements have saved lives and brought criminals to justice”.
Martyn Underhill PCC said: “It was a fruitful meeting, and I am glad we were able to discuss the financial and forensic implications of both deal or no deal.”