Chester Borrows: Extra police must be for right reason

THICKER BLUE LINE: Another batch of recruits graduate from the Police College in Porirua.

You'd be excused for thinking I had a vested interest in seeing fewer police on the streets given the currency of criminal proceedings in my name, but I think it is sad to see an increase in numbers so well applauded for other reasons.

I cannot understand the need for a radical increase in police numbers when the crime statistics - as far as we can rely on them - are falling. And this is a real drop in numbers of offences and not some artistic use of statistics.

There are more police than there has ever been and they are better equipped and remunerated better than ever before. So if there is less crime, why do we need more police?

It is an anomaly that, at a time with low crime numbers, we have more people in prisons. Many of them are for administrative offences like failing to adhere to court orders which are not even indirectly violence offences.

The need for increased police numbers takes account of the preventative effect that more constables on the street have. The greatest deterrent for criminal behaviour is the chance of getting caught so I am hoping that more police doesn't mean they just lock more people up and blow the budget at the Ministry of Corrections.

But almost more importantly is the placating effect of people feeling safer in their homes, knowing the thin blue line is bulking up a bit, and that is just political.

I wonder about the integrity of allowing people to go on thinking crime is rife and their safety is at risk when, in fact, people are less likely to be burgled, assaulted, or otherwise infringed upon than in the previous 30 years.

I am pleased the Government's recently-announced increase in police numbers of about 1100 - 880 sworn police and 245 non-sworn civilian staff - sees the extra staff allocated to deal with areas of concern like the investigation of child and sexual abuse and family violence and rural and provincial policing.

Getting a response to a call for assistance in the rural areas has been like pulling teeth.

Speaking to a call centre in Auckland, Wellington or Palmerston North and having to explain the difference between a heifer and a steer is like lecturing your kids on the birds and the bees.

When the default position of the police is not to attend, offer counselling and to bat the complainant away with a rant about how busy police are when the rest of us are also busy, it just doesn't stack up - and it certainly doesn't endear the public to awarding warm fuzzies.

So news that there will be a non-urgent three-digit calling number is great, but when we want to see a police officer, a call centre just won't do.

Opposition parties are making promises of an extra 1000 police (Labour) and an extra 1800 (New Zealand First) with no explanation of where these new officers would be deployed.

In other words, they are using "pork-barrel politics" because fear of crime is one of the Big Four, along with health, education and the economy, when it comes to voters' hot issues.

In the end, the Government has responded to a need and a desire for more police but they'd better turn up where they are needed, and put as much emphasis on prevention as they do on enforcement.

Police and government should explain to people that they are truly safe and no longer need to suffer under the delusion that we have to be afraid of every bump in the night, suspicious of every neighbour in the street and sceptical of every crime stat we are quoted.