Barclay pointed out that under Labour's watch, there has been a reduction in police officer numbers and highlighted the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners' claim of a £500 million funding shortfall.

Shannon asked if extra money would be allocated to the Police Service of Northern Ireland through Barnett consequentials due to terrorism risks in Northern Ireland and issues like immigration and theft of agricultural machinery.

Pritchard noted that West Mercia police, covering Shropshire, Herefordshire, and Worcestershire, is facing a reduction in frontline officers due to 'shortfall in Government funding.'

Philp mentioned that all categories of police workforce numbers have fallen over the past year, including officer numbers by 1,300 and staff numbers by 529. He asked if the Minister was proud of these figures.

McVey questioned why Cheshire police and crime commissioner had spent £200,000 on listening exercises and would spend another £400,000, suggesting that the money should be used for frontline policing rather than vanity projects.

Called on the Minister to be generous in her reply and raised issues regarding legislative oversight for AI in policing, unique challenges of rural police forces, and the need for structural changes.

Asked the Minister when the Government would come forward with legislation for regulating AI, emphasised that West Mercia covers a rural area and needs special consideration in reconfiguration.

Expressed concern about resource concentration in metropolitan areas and the need for structural changes to support rural communities, asked how to ensure successful police systems remain effective after reorganisation.

Asked about maintaining local specialisms in Staffordshire and the impact of increased responsibilities on neighbourhood policing.

Inquired about how to address costs related to man-marking criminals under Labour's new Sentencing Act 2026, citing an estimated £1.6 million annual cost.

Noted that the last Government left office with record police numbers and a reduction in overall crime by about 50% according to the crime survey for England and Wales. Rejected criticisms of misleading statements.

I thank the Minister for her remarks. She will find very considerable support for the broad thrust of what she said, especially on streamlining and the new policing models. I know that she is thinking very seriously about how to get the best return on the reorganisation in order to tackle serious and organised crime, and she is alive to the regional specialisms and expertise that already exist. I thank her for that, and for her commitment to delivering better funding for our police force following the disastrous period of austerity under the Conservatives. However, after hearing the shadow Secretary of State’s remarks about police numbers, I have to say, in all candour, that the reduction of 20,000 police officers in the name of austerity was one of the most reckless and stupid things a Government could ever do. Despite serving one of the most deprived and high crime areas in the country, Cleveland police remains the force with the lowest number of officers compared to 2010—a reduction of some 12%, leaving the community more vulnerable and officers overstretched. With almost a third of our neighbourhoods in the top 10% of the most deprived nationally, local residents cannot shoulder a £90 increase on band D properties to restore staffing to safe levels. The people of Cleveland, their PCC and officers on the frontline have done everything asked of them—exceeding recruitment targets, investing in neighbourhood policing and achieving crime reductions above the national average—and of course they made incredible efforts in response to the riot on 4 August 2024.

The Liberal Democrats have long called for a return to proper community policing, but unfortunately, under the last Conservative Government, community police numbers fell. According to statistics, frontline officer numbers decreased by 1,300 in September of the previous year and dropped further by over 4,300 by March 2025 compared with March 2024. The speaker emphasises the importance of increasing frontline policing numbers as soon as possible.

The Conservative MP intervenes to clarify that the Minister will respond at the end of debate, not during contributions from other Members. She also notes that the Front Benchers will have an opportunity to respond at the conclusion.

Foy argued that safe communities are crucial for economic renewal, noting the significant impact of austerity measures on police services. She cited examples such as North Road in Durham, where neighbourhood policing initiatives have been effective but are struggling due to funding constraints. She also pointed out geographical challenges and travel time issues affecting rural areas in County Durham.

Stuart acknowledged the impact of regressive council tax increases on low-earning residents, expressing concern over reduced policing capacity due to rising costs. He questioned Foy about her plans to address these issues with government officials.

The current policing funding system is complex and outdated, with Cambridgeshire constabulary receiving less funding per head compared to other forces. The promised restructuring of the police allocation formula will take years before it provides any benefit locally. There are concerns about how recruitment and resourcing will fit into new force structures. Additionally, there are inconsistencies in the number of officers per ward, making it difficult to achieve the promise of additional police officers. Rural crime is a significant issue that needs attention but risks being overlooked in discussions on policing reform.

The Labour Government has introduced 2,400 extra neighbourhood police officers and is committed to tilting resources into neighbourhoods. This policy aims to rebuild neighbourhood policing which was previously decimated by the previous government.

The current reform plan for policing is seen as incoherent, with uncertainties surrounding who will be responsible for police forces when governance changes take place. There are concerns about the effectiveness of new structures compared to existing ones.

Direct funding to police forces could be more efficient than spending through offices of police and crime commissioners, questioning whether the current system is optimally allocating resources for policing needs.

Dorset police is one of the worst-funded forces in the country and faces intense seasonal pressures, with a population increase of up to 42% during peak tourist months. Despite welcoming tourists for their economic contributions, this influx puts an incredible strain on local police forces and funding needs must reflect these changes.

Local police officers in Boscombe and Springbourne have highlighted the need to ensure that neighbourhood police teams are not seeing significant abstractions of police officers from our communities into the seafront and town centre, especially during high tourism periods. They welcome the neighbourhood guarantee increase but emphasise the importance of maintaining local decision making.

The Conservative Government's cuts to police numbers have led to an estimated 1,300 officers removed last year alone, with another 4,000 potentially at risk next year. Such centralised decisions can lead to the removal of police from where they are needed locally and are not a good thing for local communities.

Followed up on Tom Hayes' intervention, asking the Policing Minister to ensure that neighbourhood police forces remain in their communities during peak tourist seasons when there is an increased need for local policing.

Discussed the complexity and outdated nature of police funding allocations, citing issues with the current formula which relies on old data. Questioned whether closing pubs in rural areas would lead to less police funding under the current system, calling for a clearer and more up-to-date formula. Stressed the importance of community policing and the challenges faced by North Norfolk due to the lack of specialist officers for rural crime and high rates of fraud targeting elderly residents.

Agreed with his Liberal Democrat colleague, highlighting previous cuts under a Conservative police and crime commissioner that led to redundancies of 150 police and community support officers and the loss of public access at many police stations.

Called for an increase in police numbers to enhance both visible policing and better responses to crime, citing shoplifting as a specific issue that requires more attention from the police. Emphasised the importance of community presence in rebuilding public trust in policing.

The speaker discusses the reduction of police officers by more than 1,300 since Labour took office. He mentions the impact on neighbourhood safety and crime rates, with an increase in robberies against businesses and shoplifting incidents. Additionally, he raises concerns about local taxpayers bearing a greater burden through the police precept.

Intervened to suggest that some officers leaving may be due to retirement or ill health, questioning whether this affects public perception differently. He implies that reducing officer numbers might not necessarily impact visibility as much as the statistics suggest.

He comments on the reduction of 1,300 police officers so far, with another reduction of 4,000 expected next year. He criticises the government for not being transparent about overall funding cuts in Humberside despite a public announcement of an increase.

Responds to criticism by pointing out that Cleveland lost 500 police officers under the previous government’s watch, questioning whether the current government was as concerned back then as it is now.

Argues that measuring police effectiveness solely by numbers is flawed. He criticises Theresa May for allowing police numbers to plummet while claiming crime was falling, suggesting this approach led to a significant loss of experienced officers.

Asks why the speaker did not take action when similar issues were prevalent under the previous government if he is so concerned about the current situation.

I thank all hon. Members who have contributed to the debate and re-emphasise the importance of significant investment in policing as part of our programme for police reform, aimed at enhancing efficiency and effectiveness while ensuring that the police are equipped for future challenges. The settlement supports neighbourhood policing, which is fundamental to British policing. Despite criticisms, we acknowledge the need to address issues with the funding formula and will conduct a review of policing to ensure it aligns with modern demands. I highlight the importance of moving warranted officers from behind desks to frontline roles. There is consensus that unfairness exists in the current funding formula, which needs reforming alongside police reforms. The term 'mega-forces' has been mentioned but should be approached positively within the context of reviewing policing systems. Reform is necessary due to disparities between different forces and to address the unique challenges faced by various constituencies, including rural areas.

Challenged Jess Phillips on the number of police officers now compared to when Labour was in power. Asked if there were fewer police officers now than under Labour and whether those numbers had been record highs during their tenure.

Asked about the factors that will go into the police allocation formula, specifically regarding the outdated population data used from 2001 and whether the new formula would account for recent population growth in Cambridgeshire.

Asked Jess Phillips about ruling out getting rid of the police precept as a method of raising funding, given the current challenges posed by the council tax system and its impact on fairness in funding allocation.