Hi folks,
My profound apologies for the length of time since my last update, I have been paying close attention to the game of musical chairs that has been the Conservative party over the last few weeks. Never fear things have been ‘going on’ behind the scenes with regard to our campaign.
Holly Lynch is still working on securing an Adjournment Debate; NARPO are ploughing through the information that you have been sending in and may be needing more soon.
For those of you kicking your heels for want of something to do – there has to be someone! It is always worth noticing when the replies from the Policing Minister change in some way, and some of the most recent missives from Nick Hurd did just that.
“…refers to EDM 2351 which focuses on the immeasurable contribution of spouses. The government has recognised the particular risks faced as an everyday part of these jobs and believes that where police officers have died on duty, their surviving spouses/civil partners should have their pensions awarded for life. However, outside of this situation, the nature of policing does not have a disproportionate impact in terms of disruption to family life for spouses compared to other public servants, for example nurses, doctors, firefighters and prison officers…”
The comparison to the families of nurses, doctors and prison officers is new.
Comparisons made between the families of public service sector workers in this way have the potential to cause friction between us; our campaign has always been and always will be - for parity with our RUC sisters in Northern Ireland where a like-for-like comparison can be made.
We are not claiming to be a ‘special’ case in comparison with anyone – our case is ‘equal to’ when compared to other police families.
Historically police officers have made larger pension contributions than most other public service sector workers; one comparison that the Home Office doesn't appear to be shouting about.
When comparisons were made between police officers’ families and the families of armed forces personnel in the early days of the campaign you sent a flurry of letters to parliament.
The widow of a firearms officer wrote to her MP about the occasions when her husband would go off to work and not return until 2 days later; during that time he could not contact her to say where he was, what duties he was engaged in or if he was safe.
Another lady wrote:
“…in the 70s I stayed at home to care for them (our children) a career for me was now out of the question as we could be and were moved regularly around the country…”
Some forces prevented officers from having a mortgage compelling them to live in police accommodation, sometimes giving just 2 weeks’ notice before relocating them and their families.
If we are to be asked to accept these comparisons then I urge you to look at your own situation; if your spouse’s service has at any time had, “a disproportionate impact in terms of disruption to your family life compared to that of other public servants, for example nurses, doctors, firefighters and prison officers,” then please let the Policing Minister know.
You may be aware that Kit Malthouse has replaced Nick Hurd as Policing Minister; you may not know that he has previously expressed a desire to support our campaign – now could be his chance.
Don’t let the fact that parliament is now in recess for the summer delay or put you off; MPs have returned to their constituencies, they may jet off on a well-deserved holiday, but they are still being paid to represent you – the more of our letters that they find on the mat upon their return the better.
Ask them to write to Kit Malthouse acknowledging his desire to help and explain that in some cases there is indeed “disproportionate impact in terms of disruption to the family life of police officers…”
Whatever your story about the 1987 Police Pension Regulations and how they affect you and your family - make him aware. It is one thing for an MP to say that he is supportive of a campaign and quite another for him to have the ministerial discretion to do something about it.
If you are a constituent of Mr Malthouse please make an appointment to meet with him; I appreciate that he may be a tad busy at present but he remains your MP.
There is much talk of a general election - Mr Malthouse may not be in post for long.
Do remember in your communications with him that the minister has been open to our arguments in the past – on the face of it he is one of the good guys! A little sugar goes a long way...
My email address for copies of your letters and replies received is as always CathrynHall11@outlook.com
Best wishes,
Cathryn