Toby Harris, an experienced MPA member, made several good points yesterday including:
It is the proper role of the MPA to set the strategic priorities and the budget for the Met. To pretend that this does not impact on operational performance is ridiculous. It is what having an accountable police service is all about. So why the hysterical reaction from the Metropolitan Police? My sources in New Scotland Yard tell me that the Commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, had to be dissuaded from flying back from his holiday to "demonstrate that he was in charge."
This row is really about candour and semantics. As I pointed out yesterday, Malthouse made clear in the part of his Guardian interview presented in audio form, that "we cannot tell the Commissioner what to do....but at the same time we can say what we think the priorities are."
Harris wonders if that's so different in from what Livingstone used to do (he chaired the MPA in the latter's first term). He also wonders if Scotland Yard's hostile response - including a letter to the Guardian today - was either neccessary or desirable.
I've been wondering that too, and also reaching the conclusion that Malthouse has performed a small but useful public service by reviving a very neccessary debate about Met accountability and reform. More on that from Tony Travers here and from me a little later*.
*Update, 7 September: It's here, at Comment is Free.
