Paying the Bill

A WILLINGNESS to "think the unthinkable" has become the mantra of every politician and public sector manager in Britain. This is inevitable as we embark on an austerity drive that is designed to restore the public finances to health, provide value for money for the taxpayer and improve the nation's international reputation.

While there is nothing wrong with considering unprecedented measures to tackle the 165bn budget deficit, there have to remain some still points in a turning world. Basic crime-fighting is one of them and that's why police authorities and the Home Office have to protect core services amid the slashing cuts of the coalition Government. This is particularly important in Yorkshire where four police forces, which between them have to cover vast rural areas and the demands of everything from road safety to anti-terrorist stings, face a 50m cut in funding over the next three years.

The forces have no choice but to look at staffing levels, vehicle fleets, overtime pay and maintenance costs. The balance of staff is one particularly ripe for being reconsidered, with figures last month showing a soaring number of civilian workers compared to uniformed officers.

What they must not do, however, is cut or jeopardise the basic services of the police. Crime fighting and crime prevention should not be constrained and, in reality, forces must have extra funds in reserve with which to handle major operations. This region has seen several such events in recent years, with the disappearance of sex workers in Bradford, the hunt for missing Claudia Lawrence and the inquiry into the two sets of London bombers in 2005 being just three examples of when forces have faced a huge strain. When it comes to cuts, the police need some protection because merely swinging an axe at the budget could prove a false economy.