Isle of Wight MP Bob Seely has asked a Home Office Minister for details of the number of additional police officers Hampshire Constabulary can expect to receive during this parliament.
The question was asked off the back of the commitment made by the government last year – that it would support the recruitment of 20,000 additional police officers.
In his response, Minister of State for the Home Office, Kit Malthouse, has said:
“Hampshire will receive up to £366.5 million of funding next year- an increase of up to £26.1 million on the previous year. In this year alone the county will benefit from 156 more police officers.”
Bob asked the Minister if he would agree that the increase will enable police both in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight – and other areas of the UK – to follow up lower level crime that, in recent years, the police have been under pressure not to investigate due to police numbers.
Mr Malthouse said that where and how resources are allocated is an operational matter for police constables to address, but hoped that an increase in the number of police officers would allow them to spend more time on the sort of crime that doesn’t always make the headlines, yet causes consternation in communities.
Bob said:
“I welcome the increase of 156 more police officers for Hampshire Constabulary, which covers the Isle of Wight.
Article continues below this advertisement “I hope that this news will help to give peace of mind to residents that we will see more police on our streets.”
Hopefully some of this funding will reach the Island and dose not get cream off as the norm.
Headline should read “156 additional officers for Hampshire Constabulary which covers the Isle of Wight”.
(May get about 5 extra I guess)
I hope the extra funding will be restricted to recruitment and not be used to refurbish offices or buy new toys for senior officers.
And that’ll still put the numbers to less than what they were 5 years ago. Headline should be, some police may return to the island, if we’re lucky.
“to follow up lower level crime that, in recent years, the police have been under pressure not to investigate due to police numbers.”
But, this government cut the police numbers because they said police numbers have no correlation to crime? This Prime Minister said it, the last one said it, so was that all BS then? What a shocker.
cuts were made across the board in all areas not just policing, when the conservative administration took over from the last labour administration – reference note – liam byrne – I’m afraid there is no money left. He left that for his replacement.
labour borrowed and borrowed to keep the bloated public services they had created going, with scant regard to the ability to pay.
When the recession hit and treasury receipts were down by £40bn massive cuts were needed. Labour, as usual were not up to the job and the tories took over.
Once the books had been stabilised and the damage reversed, the deepest cuts began to be reversed, with some becoming permanent – one of the reversals is to uplift police numbers, now that finances permit it once again.
labour spendthrifts that simply create vast financial problems and are then kicked out of office, time and time again…the tories come in, clean up the mess and begin to repair the system – only for dimwits, a generation or two later, to think that the good times will always roll, vote in the dumb labour lot again and back to financial stupidity – rinse and repeat.
always be assured that there is a socialist somewhere just trying every trick in the book to spend your hard earned money on themselves and their vanity projects.
Fully agree, sadly others wont as many many people ‘live’ like that now themselves, and then think it ‘normal’, to have everything they can gain, and then whinge when they too run out of cash to pay it back, yet never cut back, knowing the ‘state’ will bail them out.
Hence it will get worse.
I wrote you a very long reply explaining why you’re wrong, but once again the website doesn’t want to approve it.
@cage – doesn’t matter, your response would have been full of holes and inaccurate anyhow.
you will never, every convince me of any argument that requires me to have more of my money taken from me, to pay for someone else. Not now, nor ever. Socialists are only interested in rinsing the public for as much money as possible for their own ends.
I’m not intending to convince you, I stated facts that proved you to be wrong.
nope – you didn’t.
We’ll be lucky to get a couple of Bobbies…. After all, there’s no crime on the Island, is there….
It’s more judges we need too who live in the real world instead of dishing out slaps on the wrists or pointless ‘rehabilitation orders ‘ give them proper sentences when caught.
You keep censoring my comment, so I’m reporting you to the IPSO now. Good luck.
you do not have the right to utilise the platform of a provider, no more than you have any right to walk into a bar/club if your presence is not wanted for any reason.
Remember the saying “management reserve the right to refuse admission”
that applies to these boards as well.
Because this is a news site and censoring comments based on political leaning is illegal. Simple as that.
John, please see our previous response to you. We are not censoring your comments due to political leaning. For the record, we are not regulated by IPSO.
You’ve not given me a single response, unless you are the other accounts which use accounts to drive up comment numbers. All press is regulated.
@cage – Island Echo will have sent the response to the email address you supply each time you make a post on this site. If you are not receiving responses from them, then check your junk/spam folders and check your own spelling of the address you are supplying.
I am more inclined to believe that Island Echo will know which regulatory body regulates its activities, rather than yours.