Jayne Dowle: Why should our homes bear brunt of police cuts?

We expected the lawnmower, strimmer and garden tools to be gone. Nothing, however, had been taken so we didn’t even bother to ring the police. We figured that the would-be robbers had probably been disturbed by a combination of our security lights and next door’s dogs.

What’s the point of reporting the matter, we reasoned, when we haven’t actually been robbed? We wouldn’t even be issued with a crime number, never mind expect a visit. Think about that for a moment. A family go on holiday for a week, return to find their property has been trespassed upon, broken into and damaged, yet have so little faith in the law they can’t even see the point in raising the alarm. Welcome to 21st century Britain.

A few days later, our neighbour got in touch to tell us that his shed had been broken into too. This time, an item had been taken. He did ring the police, and urged us to do the same in case the two incidents were connected. Even though we actually spoke to the same officer on duty, two crimes committed, within days of each other on the same street, still did not warrant even a cursory house-call or a promise to increase foot patrols in the area.

It was down to our own menfolk to rally together and set about looking for points of forced entry and evidence of footsteps. To be fair, this turned into an exercise more like Dad’s Army than crack commando, but at least the chaps made an attempt to find out what had happened. Which is more than the police did. And with the help of new padlocks and improved security measures, they took steps to ensure that it doesn’t happen again. They stopped short of mounting a vigilante patrol, thank goodness, but there was even talk of clubbing together to buy CCTV cameras. And we pay our taxes for what, exactly?

We were left wondering just what exactly we expect the police to do for us. Two crimes committed. Two families worried and feeling insecure, their peace of mind disturbed. One family facing a complicated and time-consuming insurance claim. Who are we kidding though? The days when we could rely on the police to support us in this kind of thing are over.

Only the other week Britain’s top policewoman informed us that we shouldn’t expect her officers to investigate such trifling matters as burglary. Chief Constable Sara Thornton, head of the new National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), said that significant budget cuts and the changing nature of criminality mean that police have to prioritise. “Traditional” crimes such as burglary have slipped down the agenda, she argues. Does this mean that other “traditional” crimes such as murder will soon be too quaint to investigate too?

Instead of worrying about sheds being broken into, she argues that officers’ time is considered to be better spent investigating child sex cases, cyber-crime and terrorism. Not for a moment would I argue that any of these matters did not merit concentration of the highest order. How though can our police force promise to serve and protect us when it does neither of these? And what kind of message does this alarmingly laissez-faire attitude send to those who do commit crimes? If police are not investigating shed break-ins, how long before they decide not to bother investigating house break-ins?

Hold on a minute, that’s happening already. Chief Constable Thornton has admitted herself that the public should no longer expect police officers to turn up at their door if they are burgled. She says, for example, that if someone had an iPad stolen from their home, “it could be” that an officer would not be dispatched to visit.

Well, if that’s her attitude, we might as well all go out and leave our doors open. At least that way we wouldn’t have to spend money having the locks replaced when thieves strike and jemmy them off. She says that cases of burglary are falling, according to official figures, so that’s why they no longer need to be a priority. However, it doesn’t take Inspector Clouseau to work out that cases of burglary might appear to be falling because a) fewer people can see the point of reporting them, and b) if they are reported, they aren’t recorded because they are never even investigated.

I’m angry about my shed, but I can see the dilemma police chiefs face. Their budgets have been cut by up to a quarter in the last decade, with the subsequent loss of 70,000 posts. As with all our beleaguered public services, something’s got to give. Why though should it be our own homes which end up under threat? Why should innocent people suffer stress and anxiety, afraid in their own beds at night? I’d ask Chief Constable Thornton not to forget that the public pay her wages.

The least we expect in return is for her officers to do their job. For us.