PoliceOracle.com

G4S Lands Major Police Outsourcing Contract

G4S Lands Major Police Outsourcing Contract

Lincolnshire Police enters into partnership covering middle and back office functions.

Date - 29th December 2011
Courtesy of - Cliff Caswell - Police Oracle
11 Comments 11 Comments}

Lincolnshire Police Authority has selected security firm G4S as a preferred bidder for a £200m outsourcing contract to provide services to support front line policing.

The deal – the first of its kind in the UK – will see middle and back office functions provided by the company for the next ten years. It is likely that further forces will follow suit.

“This will put us firmly in the vanguard of change in the way policing is delivered.”

Two companies were involved in the final stages of the bidding process – G4S and Steria with Reliance. The contract could be extended for up to 15 years.

In hailing the move as a key moment of the history of Lincolnshire Police, Authority members said the initiative would complement both the restructuring of the Force and regional collaboration in the provision of major crime functions.

The Police Authority also said that the engagement with G4S would enable the Force to make further cost savings while enabling investment in new technologies.

The contract will cover the Custody and ID Unit – excluding the custody sergeant role – plus the Force control room minus the inspector position.

The partnership also covers Town Enquiry officers, the Crime Management Bureau, Central Ticket Office and Collisions Unit and Criminal Justice Unit plus Firearms Licensing, excluding the manager and initial licensing officers.

Business Support and the Resource Management Unit are included in the contract.

Human Resources and ICT Services are also in the partnership with HR Learning & Development, Assets and Facilities Management – including Fleet Management – plus Finance & Procurement and Support Services all covered.

In a joint statement, Lincolnshire Police Authority Chairman Barry Young and Chief Constable Richard Crompton said the partnership with G4S had "put us firmly in the vanguard of change in the way policing is delivered".

But they stressed that the move was not a complete solution and the Authority still faced significant financial challenges as government cuts continued to bite.

The statement added: "Reacting to the financial challenges imposed by the Government, we had already completed extensive organisational re-structuring which, allied with more regional collaboration, has proved extremely effective.

"Over the period of the contract this new approach will make significant savings, while also providing investment in key areas like IT infrastructure. The streamlining of processes will free officer time to concentrate on operational policing.

"If additional Authorities decide to obtain services through the contract, they could be provided from Lincolnshire – potentially giving a boost to local employment."

Do you have an interesting news story? Contact the newsdesk on 01737 648 432
or alternatively get in touch via the contact form.

Categories and Tags

Anonymous Anonymous says...
Bucko 1989

Bucko 1989 - Thu, 29 December 2011
More evidence that 'the beginning of the end' of policing as we know it has well and truly commenced!
ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Thu, 29 December 2011
This is sad!
ReportReply

ian

ian - Thu, 29 December 2011
" Change" implies that things were not right before.When police officers were recruited because they had common sense they had no need to change because they were allowed discretion and were capable of actually speaking to people..Sergeants ran the station effectively and efficiently.We now have too many highly educated sherrifs with no common sense and the cowboys tie themselves to computers so they only have to go out in emergencies. Hoiw did it get to this?
ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Thu, 29 December 2011
Tell me any sergeant in custody or Inspector in a control room that will want to continue in this role or apply for it. NONE I suspect.
ReportReply

Peter

Peter - Thu, 29 December 2011
Sad sad sad say no more
ReportReply

Carole-Anne

Carole-Anne - Fri, 30 December 2011
G4S are continuously paying penalties for their ineffective management of electronic monitoring. They "loose" prisoners and their presence in policing and prison services is diluting a professional service. This is a disgrace!
ReportReply

Siemarcus

Siemarcus - Fri, 30 December 2011
Actually, the record of G4S in transporting prisoners was excellent before they lost the contract to Geo-Amey, very poor early doors I would say, the prisons are ran well too, Altcourse, Parc and Ryehill all doing very well.
Sorry your argument does not stack up, what I find illuminating is they do this, make a profit yet the state fail to deliver the goods (less profit) hence why the work is contracted out in the first place.
ReportReply

Nick

Nick - Tue, 03 January 2012
Siemarcus, leaving aside the relative merits of G4S, "the state" you refer to is usually a local authority with squeezed resources pushed into a position where the only choice they have is to "outsource". This is political dogma in action, not market efficiency. Why should a private company be able to make a profit at the taxpayers' expense? I think that is immoral (a value judgement I know, but there it is). Incidentally, they generally make their profit by paying their staff less and eroding their working conditions. Hoorah for neoliberal economics!
ReportReply

Mark

Mark - Tue, 03 January 2012
Well, there's the future of policing for all to see; if you didn't already know it. I simply can't wait to get out of this job and I only hope I make it out before I get my G4S warrant card.
ReportReply

Coolcarbon

Coolcarbon - Thu, 05 January 2012
Job's (even more) Fekked!
ReportReply

Anonymous

Anonymous - Wed, 29 February 2012
@Mark i would rather g4s was involved with policing than pay taxes for these useless PCSO'S WHOlounge around my town, sometimes with their hands in their pockets, sometimes eating fish and chips and are usually too fat or thin
ReportReply