One golden autumn afternoon, in a quiet North London suburb, I stumbled across a portal to a possible English future. Hadley Wood sits on the fringes of the city, between Barnet and the M25, seemingly forgotten in its own little world of metroland Tudor houses, dotted with fields of ponies and commemorative plaques to steam age pioneers. Yet between the wisteria and the Jags, there is a sense of unease.
Roving bands of career burglars stalk the area. “They come every day whether you’re inside or not,” explains one local man from behind his wheelie bin. “They don’t seem to care.” Everything is up for grabs, the man tells me, from Amazon packages in doorways to the Lexus in the drive.
Brazenness is hardly surprising. Hadley Wood is one of countless British communities effectively abandoned by the protective arm of the state. In 2018, the area suffered 65 break-ins, a criminal romp that nonetheless failed to stir the short arm of the law. Such an experience now marks suburban life in the capital, with the Met failing to solve a single crime in 160 residential areas of London over the last three years. “The police gave up on this area years ago,” one shrugging resident explains.
Such is the national mood. Trust in the police is at an historic low, with crime recently surging to the fourth-biggest issue in the country. Yet in this vacuum of order, Hadley Wood offers one potential solution. For £100 a month per household, a firm called My Local Bobby will be your private police force, patrolling the lanes and back alleys, responding in 30 seconds to a break-in and even picking your wife up from the station in the dark. I spotted them myself, crawling by in patrol cars as I strolled the empty streets. Behind them, meanwhile, is a team that’ll privately prosecute criminals through the courts, with a conviction rate of 100%, a service recently used by Reform UK after the alleged assault of a police officer at Manchester Airport.
Welcome to 21st-century Britain, where the state increasingly struggles to carry out its basic functions, and where private players now rush to fill the void. Nor, of course, is this merely a function of law and order. Rather, the phenomenon of My Local Bobby represents the loose thread of a fraying social contract. When the state is no longer capable of carrying out its basic functions, after all, why wouldn’t Britain’s narrowing band of middle-class taxpayers plump for something better?
The recent budget offered a grim reminder of this future zero-sum reality facing public service funding in England. Much of the tax revenue raised over the next few years, alongside additional borrowing, will be geared towards funding the NHS: a short-term spending splurge ahead of promised reform that’ll anyway peter out by 2025. This, it seems, is already happening at the expense of other public services. Despite Labour’s mission to “take back the streets”, the Met is set to lose another 2,000 officers amid yet another budget cut. That’s off the back of a decade in which police funding has already fallen by 20% in real terms.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThis is truly frightening. The police are all that stands between us and chaos.
It’s not just a question of numbers, it’s how they’re deployed. Recently I witnessed seven police officers who were deployed to question one woman. I reported this to my Police and Crime Commissioner, and received an answer that was only barely adequate.
It’s up to us. If we do nothing, then we are just putting up with inadequate policing.
Taxes become a protection racket if a real service that the citizens want is not delivered but instead your life is disrupted by “the law” for failing to pay up. Only a tiny minority wants the police deployed harassing people for offensive face book posts rather than preventing robbery, fraud and violence.
Its much worse than that; There has been a stealth redefinition of right and wrong. In the old days, the bobby on the beat knew what was right and wrong; so did everybody else; Stealing; obstreperous behaviour(move on, lad);lying; violence… Nowadays, non-crime hate incident takes up 60% of police time. Diversity gives the job to small fat women, such as were supposed to be guarding Trump when he was nearly killed(the woman who couldn’t put here pistol back because she didn’t know diddly squat about weapons).
Why the redefinition of good and bad? Radicals seek to re-engineer society in their likeness.
In the old days, the bobby had probably been in the Normandy landings and seen his friends cut down. He knew what he was protecting and had some perspective on it.
Still amuses me thinking of the ‘small fat’ women trying to run in their riot gear.
There are plenty of small fat men in the force as well. In fact, it’s been a long time since I’ve seen a bobby who looked good in the uniform.
I was watching an early 1960s police recruitment film on YouTube the other day. The strap line: “come and do a man’s job!”
The feminisation of the Police and the Armed Forces will follow that of Education, Health Services and Justice. A few reports of ‘toxic masculinity’, discrimation, WFH, DEI and the white working class male will no longer be welcome. Watch some TV cop shows where a petite young woman, effortlessly solves the crime while the old hands are either useless or corrupt, before taking down the largest thug without even breaking sweat.
But what if they are not standing between people and chaos?
1.Was this woman angry /armed ?
2.Did they have intelligence about previous incidents ?
3.does she have associates ( who are armed) in the vicinity who are likely to get involved
4.Is the correct kit available ( see 1,2,3 ) if the initial deployment is inadequate and the officers have to withdraw , sorting it out is likely to consume more resource, staff and time and make matters worse
5.Do the local officers have intelligence that neither you nor the PCC know about
6.And the building. Multiple exits that need covering in case she tries to run for it ? other people in it who might get involved ?
Can find out and get back to us with the information ?
we can then better judge is the deployment was reasonable
Earlier this year I saw a police van, 2 police cars and several policemen and women, trying to persuade a man, who looked a bit unwell at a bus stop, that he ought to go to hospital and get checked out. He repeatedly said no thanks, but they didn’t leave. I know appearances can sometimes be deceiving, but really?
We were burgled a few years back, while on holiday. A neighbour saw the guy – drug addict – breaking in. Apparently, a whole host of police turned up, smashed through our gate, climbed through neighbours’ gardens and got him. Hooray! Oh, but they mistook completely how he broke in, even though it was obvious, and they never found all my jewellery he stole. We turned the house and garden upside down, but nothing. They suggested I must have misplaced it. That was the end of it.
They can’t work miracles, but it doesn’t inspire confidence. I’d pay the £100.
We no longer have a middle and upper class who can defeat violence. The days when politicians, civil servants, lawyers, academics had served in Commandos/Parachute Regiment/Special Forces and comprised very fit, tough men trained in violence with experience of combat and therefore understood the mentality of violent criminals and how to defeat them, are long gone. The middle class are now largely invertebrates terrified of violence and therefore incapable of understanding the recruitment, training and testing of Police who can arrest violent criminals. As many East European criminals are large, fit tough men with martial arts training and military/intelligence/security experience, we have a problem.
I would be surprised if there any Police Officers of the calibre of Sergeant Ernie Bond OBE, Scots Guards, SAS, later Asst Commissioner of of Police. or Sergeant Jack Terry DCM, RA and SAS who joined Nottingham Police.
If one was an East European criminal, who would one prefer to face in a fight, some of the flabby Police officers we have today or a Ernie Bond or Jack Terry?
The problem with these private firms though is that they’ll only take on the profitable areas. They’ll happily police the cities with high population density as it will be easy money. They’ll show no interest in rural areas where houses are much more spread out
Indeed that is the logic of profit driven security but has the State provided the universal police service in rural areas desired and the answer seems to be no.
Said before and I’ll continue to say – the problem withe the police is that everybody is a graduate. The two things – policing the streets and graduates – do not go together.
The same is true in the NHS (certainly in Wales). If you are in ‘management’ and you want to make a difference, you can only get to Band 4 on the wage scale if you don’t have a degree. So people work hard and try to make a difference but suddenly find themselves reporting to a young graduate (Band 5), the latter calling meeting after meeting because they don’t understand what is going on.
I would refine your point a little. The upper management of the police are all graduates, but also nearly all of them have never been on the beat, on the street, or at a crime scene. They simply have no idea.
Every time I have this misfortune to encounter Plod, I dream of them having a morning of rifting on the drill square by Brigade of Guards drill s’arnts….
At least you encounter Plod. I never see him (or her) – except occasionally flashing past behind tinted windows in chequered vehicles.
In South Wales police, you must have a degree as an entry requirement OR you enter a ‘degree apprenticeship’ scheme where you are effectively sponsored to get a degree. In Dyfed-Powys Police the entry requirement is a degree.
Completely agree, I live in a small Welsh village and we never see a copper. The biggest village locally used to have a police house and local bobby, the house was sold and the bobby transferred when a new police station was build. Only problem is it’s never staffed and only used by passing patrol cars to stop for a brew!
My wife worked for the Welsh NHS for 20 years but became so disillusioned she left for the reasons you explain. Top of her pay grade but no opportunity to progress and asked to do more and more by kids that can’t even manage to wipe their own noses.
Don’t you know that common sense is forbidden in new Britain. Sorry, but the Blob – bleeding-heart lawyers, limp-wristed lefty teachers and thought-crime obsessed senior police officers will put a stop to your ‘dangerous ramblings’.
I wonder if this is just an example of using bureaucracy to ‘defund the police’ in a low profile way?
It seems part of the failure of the State that ‘defunds’ opticians, dentists, non-urgent surgery, tax assessments, and various taxes now depending on online completion.
The State has grown and grown and is hobbled by bureaucracy and regulation, becoming less and less effective. I wonder if there is a bureaucracy/efficiency curve (like the Laffer curve) where further bureaucracy has a negative effect on efficiency? If so we must far along the curve.
It’s not deliberate, but it is exactly as you say – once the bureaucratic functions get to a certain size they simply create more bureaucracy.
The day I hear anyone saying “my job is not needed” I will do naked cartwheels down the high street.
I said that a number of times in my last year of working. I was angling for early retirement
Hopefully only after you’ve completed and got authorised the necessary risk assessments, equality impact statements and appropriate supervision in place.
Parkinson’s Law, by C. Northcote Parkinson.
One particular dodge used by politicians and senior police is to say that the Home Secretary must not interfere with “operational matters”. Obviously the Home Secretary should not instruct the Police to arrest particular people; but that is not a reason why she should not tell all the forces, tomorrow, to prioritise burglary and violence over offensive language.
It begs the question, what are we actually paying taxes for? The government cannot even perform its most basic functions, namely defend the borders and enforce the Law. What is the point of them? They are just a protection racket, who I pay half my income to, and don’t even get protection.
Again, Mark Steyn has the perfect bon mot, “Britain: the land where everything is policed except crime”.
By the way, isn’t this local fire departments were started? Private subscriptions to an extinguishing service, subscribers to which were obliged to stand off as non-subscribers’ homes burned?
A perfect storm of civilizational collapse. The government won’t protect you and the government won’t let you protect yourself in any meaningful way. Not to blame the victim, but over here in the former colonies we just shake our heads in astonishment at the very idea that a homeowner can’t simply defend his own property.
Returning to UK after 30 years in the third world, if I’m allowed to call it that, I was expecting something rather better. My daughter warned me “It’s different now, dad”. Should have listened to her. Third world policing is corrupt, sure, but for a small sum it’s far better value than the Met.
A homeowner can defend his property in England as it is covered under self defence laws.
I seem to recall an older gentleman brought up on charges sometime in the last few years after he defended his home by stabbing a burglar. I expect England’s “self-defence laws” are so hamstrung by rules, conditions, exceptions, and pitfalls that in reality they are functionally meaningless. H*ll, even the police are crippled by nervous bureaucracy in the use of their power.
If only life was as simple as you
Try examining reality. There is no understanding by judges as to what is required to subdue large violent strong men some with martial arts training especially when outnumbered. A fight lasts 5 seconds at most. If one is attacked by three people, to survive one needs to render two attackers immobile in about four seconds. The idea one can regulate one’s action so one only uses reasonable force is utterly absurd. Those who do not have experience of being attacked by several people have no contact with reality. It is all or nothing.
You just described one compelling reason for the 2nd ammendment in the US. A firearm is the great equalizer.
It would have been interesting to hear in this piece from a police spokesperson about this plain dereliction of duty, even if it (as is likely) would have been a terse “No comment.” Of course I guess that might have drawn police inquiries about the author’s online language.
Spokesperson?… please!!!!!!!
By the time the police spokesman would have filled out all the paperwork needed to get permission to provide a comment, the piece would already have gone to print.
Too many addle-brained graduates What’s needed is a return to promotion from the ranks.
NO!! Quite the opposite- Army rank structures are needed
Quite Francis! We need Sandhurst-trained Melchetts to replicate the glorious successes of Basra and Helmand! See you in the Mess (etc).
Can you please explain “graduate” in this context? I dont understand the reference as an American.
University degree
I guess The Graduate (Dustin Hoffman) had you puzzled.
I was wondering what “Plastics” had to do with policing, yes.
Someone that has finished university and graduated with a pointless degree in knitting or bean counting.
General Sir Michael Rose was educated at Cheltenham College, St. Edmund Hall, Oxford, and the Sorbonne. Officer in Guards, SAS and Colonel of the SAS.
Michael Rose (British Army officer) – Wikipedia
It is not being a graduate; it is the character of the person. Those who are bright, tough and good leaders largely enter the Armed Forces. Few if any of the calibre of Rose enter the Police. Those which do have to put up with the inferiority complexes, resentment and spite of lesser people.
General Sir Michael Rose, Cheltenham College, Oxford, Sorbonne, The Guards, SAS, Colonel of the SAS.
Colonel Oliver A Lee, King Edward’s School, Cambridge. Colonel Royal Marine Commandos.
It is the lck of quality which is the problem. The tough adventurous graduates go into the Armed Forces.
Plod are badly trained, badly led, ill educated, ill qualified, unfit, with appalling command and control execution, and embody the unique chippy bullying cum inferiority complex of Britain’s lower middle classes.
I didn’t realize things had gotten this bad. Well my friends across the pond is invite you to come to the states while you still can.
Private policing, private healthcare, private social care for the elderly and private schools. If you want anything done efficiently and expeditiously you have to pay for it. What the hell are we actually paying taxes for?
We are paying taxes because the brute force of the state compels us to. Try not paying up and see where that gets you. It’s worse than a protection racket – at least with the mob you get protection.
Indeed. This point is well covered in the book; ‘The Sovereign Individual’ by James Davidson and William Rees-Mogg. One is ‘forced’ by the state by way of taxes to pay for ever diminishing basic services that the state has a duty to provide. The first priority of the state is to protect it’s citizens. Many states are failing in this regard.
When I was a child if I did something wrong and the local bobby saw me I suspect I’d have had a clip round the ear and be told never to do it again. If I went and complained to my dad the chances are I would have had another one on the presumption that the policeman was well within his rights. Nowadays I guess any policeman meeting out that kind of justice could well find himself on a charge in the ECHR.
You need to restore the private health industry and get rid of the NHS; then there will be money for legitimate functions of government like policing. Then cut out the repressive Thought Crime crap and protect life and property.
I believe the original policing model in London was run exactly like this. For a quid a day, you could hire one of the Bow Street Runners, established in 1753 by Henry Fielding. Stout lads, the lot of them!
And the problem of the non subscriber being unprotected would simply require neighbourhood meetings and explanations. And even lower subscriptions per head if everybody joins! The fire brigade non subscriber is a bad analogy.
In our society there is no option to not subscribe. Taxes are our subscription.
If only regular citizens had the means by which to protect their property and, on occasion, themselves and loved ones. I wonder what that would look like.
The mining/ heavy industry areas of Britain during the Depression had very low levels of crime due to the following. 1. Methodist teaching of right and wrong. 2. Physically tough brave men who were miners and played rugby with some having been in the Armed Forces, taking responsibity to maintain law and order.3. The Police, Government and Legal System supporting those who maintain law and order.
However a bunch of flabby office working milksops who run away and hide when threatened by violence, will be no use in maintaining law and order and detering criminals.
Correct Charles, places like Easington here in the NE were self policed. Families worked and lived as a community and bad apples were sorted out pronto. Post mining, they have lost that sense of belonging.
Small, with detachable particles which could be ejected at a high rate of speed.
A colleague I worked with had a Father who had been a sergeant in the Guards and fought in WW2 and boxed as a heavy weight. When he was promoted to Inspector to a new town he went around to various pubs and challenged the hard men to fights and won every one of them. He said to the people in the pubs ” You know where I am, anyone who wants a fight knock on the station door”. He sorted out the town on his own.
Since the late 1960sseveral aspects have taken place
Massive decline in toughness and fighting spirit of middle and upper classes. Pre 1960 boys physical training classes comprised rope climbing, gymnastics and boxing. Many had been in combat. Most of those involved in influencing of crime are terrified of physical violence and have no knowledg of controlling violent people. They live in a world of ideas divorced from reality. Since late 1960s Trotskyists and other left wing middle classes have taken over The Labour Party, Civil Service, much inner city government, criminology, education and influenced the Law. The result is overturning traditionl views on morality and introducing such concepts as ” Property is theft. If it feels good do it. Self control is bad, Express your emotions. Discipline is bad. If a troublemaker is restrained by a member of public they can be prosecuted for assault, so it deters people making citizens arrests.There is a massive decline in toughness, size and unarmed combat skills of police so many are intimidated by the physical violence. The Police used to recruit ex military or had served in them in wars. Robert Mark – WikipediaEthnic minorities are often cut slack which is not afforded to white people, for example Stop and Seach has been stopped., the allowing of Black Lives Mtter demonstration during Covid. Simple changes
a. Increase size, strength, toughness and hand to hand combat skills of Police. Use the techniques developed by Fairbarn , Asst Commissioner of Shanghai Police in 1930s.
William E. Fairbairn – Wikipedia
b. Make resisting arrest a serious crime.
c. Encourage people to make citizens arrest of troublemakers .
d. Bring back boxing and gymnastic and rope climbing in schools so people can defend themselves. Many criminals now prcatice martial arts.
e. Enable people to use any force to defend themselves and property. Only when a criminal is face down on the ground and stopped moving can person not attack them. The criminal must demonstrate they were no possible threat
f. Return to the traditional values whereby men have the responsibility of detering crime and arresting criminals in order that they are taken into custody by the Police. The Police return to the traditional role of supporting the population in detering crime.
Basically return to pre WW2 values when violent crime was largely restricted to docks and pubs in areas of heavy industry.
When I was a child (I’m in my early 50s now) I remember reading about how the police were going to have to fill out forms following an arrest (I can’t remember the details beyond that – too long ago). Even as a child I could see that this meant they would make fewer arrests. And lo and behold, 30 odd years of increasing bureaucracy later, we have a Police force that doesn’t do a lot of policing.
However, it’s wrong to pick out just the police – the same increase in bureaucracy has overburdened the NHS, MOD, and likely much else in the public sector. A bonfire of regulations is required, and the removal of at least half of the management.
When parents can’t even discipline their children with a smack when they are continuously badly behaved, why is it a surprise that as adults we have a generation which is entitled, violent, have few morals and a contempt for law and order
The police aren’t “struggling to carry out their basic functions”. They have knowingly and wilfully abandoned and discarded them, the result of their politicisation by the State.
The State fully intend this to happen, just as they spend staggering sums on eroding the common good and disowning the very concept of “public service to a defined public”
Exactly. People love to blame stuff like this on stupidity or incompetence, but never on what it truly is – intent. Police are making choices, or at least the people telling cops what to do are making choices. Govt has no more basic duty than public safety and the govt there, and here in the US, is intentionally abdicating that role and elevating criminals over the law-abiding much as it prioritizes illegals over tax-paying citizens.
Let’s face it. The purpose of the police is to protect the rich and the property of the rich. so when they start removing that protection from you and your neighborhood, it just means that you are no longer rich enough to get the protection.
We are choked by bureaucracy. To understand why a growing state gets ever more inefficient I’d recommend Karl Weick’s The Social Psychology of Organising – read it when I was 20 on a business course and 40 years on it makes ever more sense.
I lived in Romania until 2018 and saw many ‘police + security’ companies. Often parked up outside estates or gated communities that could afford it. Is that the policing we want?
I don’t follow. Were the police working with the private companies? You feel if poor people don’t get policed nobody should?
An opportunity for Reform if ever there was one.
Hadley Wood – twinned with Johannesburg.
Having grown up in Hadley Wood, it’s often been a target from the most casual of thefts, to the most violent of being followed home, and attacked upon entering one’s home.
Frightening !
The endpoint is vigilantism certainly. The theft of stuff is the theft of time. And no, you cannot get it back with the insurance company.
“One man in Fulham describes how a neighbour, who chose not to pay for the road’s private security team, discovered that they were contractually obliged to stand by as his house was robbed.”
This is how the original fire brigades operated 200 years ago. You’d need to have a mark on your house if you had paid your insurance else the local fire brigade would not put out the fire.
This might be how it works in rural south-west France where i live. Local firefighters (pompiers) turn-up at the door every Christmas and in exchange for a small donation, we receive a new-year calendar. These pompiers are usually volunteers and the donation funds thier annual social activities. One gets the impression that if you do not donate, or is insultingly small, they may take their time attending to a call-out at your property!
A fascinating, if sobering development, but quite natural and one that should have been expected. We’ve seen it before. As the power of a state withers, the people must and will look to their own protection. The fading power of the late Roman Empire encouraged political figures and great landowners to enroll, equip and pay their own private soldiers, called bucellarii (“biscuit eaters”), to protect their estates, and even to go to war with them as elite regiments. Furthermore the Emperors allowed cities to create their own militias for self defense when it became evident that the regular army could no longer offer enough protection.
Hiring your own protection is possible for those who can afford it, but what about those who cannot? What happens to those of modest means who must choose between victimhood and self-protection? I understand that Britain has, for the most part, outlawed the carrying and use of weapons for self-defense—at least when it comes to native Britons. Is it defensible to prosecute a poor man for defending himself or his home with a weapon such as knife, when his better-heeled neighbor has hired protection and never faces the same threat?
This is to be expected. An example from the late Roman Empire was the aristocracy and great landowners enrolling, equipping and paying their own private soldiers, called bucellarii (or “biscuit eaters”). The fifth century Roman government allowed provincial cities to raise militias to defend themselves when it became evident that the army could no longer reliably do it.
Those who can afford to pay for protection, education or whatever else the state can no longer provide will do so. Those who cannot must suffer. Is it right to prosecute citizens of modest means who defend themselves or their homes with weapons (as I understand now happens in Britain), when the well-to-do can avoid this situation by purchasing security?
We have turned into South Africa.
And do the Police co-operate with them?
…meanwhile, they can find two bobbies to conduct a dubious interview with a well known national newspaper columnist on Remembrance Sunday Morning…about a possible “crime” that passed through three different police forces and ended up as a “Gold Command” task in the one that instigated the aforesaid interview…
Yet another legacy of Tony Blair’s. We used to have a police station in our large village. A copper called Jeremy I recall, did up an old bicycle he found in the station and began cycling all around his patch getting to know the local kids. At the time, twenty years ago, we were having problems with anti social teenage behaviour, Jeremy got to know them all by name and where they lived and incidents began to decline quite quickly. That was a Bobby we all knew by name in our community and then the Blair government shut up thousands of local police stations and the local police were sent to work in regional HQs, put into cars and we never saw anyone patrolling on foot again. Of course Blair was obsessively opposed to anything that smacked of tradition and little England so local patrolling police were bound to be on his hit list. Hence his ‘reform’ of the House of Lords, the introduction of a Supreme Court, establishing city Mayors everywhere. Just so little England could look like America. And it really does now doesn’t it? Huge increase in violent crime, thousands living homeless on the streets, less serious crime being given a complete open goal, drugs everywhere. The other side of the equation is the political hysteria surrounding the police who have now been turned into social workers and speech sneaks. No wonder so many of them are leaving the force. If the constabularies were liberated from the stranglehold of policing by dogma, so beloved of the political class, they may find there would be enough money to go around. How much is spent ‘educating’ officers about being black, queer, trans, Muslim? And what difference should this ‘great leap forward’ make? The law should be blind to human variations and be universally applied. Carrying on as we are is not an option for this country, burrowing deeper into the woke rabbit hole is going to cause the most divided society we have seen for centuries. Is Ikea Starmer going to come up with an imaginative and realistic solution? Oh you think not? You might be right!
Brilliant.
Many people I know just accept that the police are mainly enforcers of the 2010 Equalities Act and the hierarchy of worthiness that is enshrined therein.
What about some of the environmental factors which have created complexity for public policing? There is very significant change to do with the digital age – the burden of evidence now required to be sifted through, the increasingly sophisticated and international flavour of crime, the lack of resources, the demand on Police to pick up patients with mental health needs who should be supported by the appropriate agencies, bringing back children in care who have run away, increasing visibility of abuse which used to be overlooked, historical abuse etc etc. The demand now is very different even than 20 years ago.
Mr. Emil Doak, Editor of The American Conservative, tells us that the University of Chicago neighbourhood, ( Barack Obama’s) has the biggest private police force in the world.
There is a constant presence, for years, of private security on foot and in vehicles patrolling the Avenue Road, Wadham Gardens, Harley and King Henry’s Road’s neighbourhood immediately NE of Primrose Hill.
Do they carry guns?