Surrey Police has been affected by a nationwide push by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) to influence responses to Freedom of Information (FOI) requests, raising concerns about transparency in local policing.

Newly obtained data from the BBC reveals that Surrey Police referred a total of 39 FOI and Environmental Information Regulation (EIR) requests to the NPCC’s Central Referral Unit (CRU) between January and March 2024. This accounts for around 9.6% of all FOI and EIR requests received by the force in January, 8% in February, and 3.5% in March.

Of the 39 requests referred, six were classified as “mandatory referrals,” a controversial category requiring police forces to consult with the CRU before disclosing certain types of information. Topics covered under these mandatory referrals include covert policing operations, counter-terrorism, and the use of controversial surveillance technology. Critics argue this process enables the NPCC to centralise control over information disclosure, effectively limiting the public’s right to know.

Nationally, the CRU advised local police forces on 1,706 FOI requests in the first three months of 2024, a practice campaigners have labelled as “authoritarian censorship.” In some cases, police forces that had initially disclosed information were later advised to retract their responses, with the CRU citing concerns about national security and reputational risks.

Surrey Police received 523 FOI and EIR requests over the three-month period, meaning one in 13 requests was referred for CRU advice. Transparency advocates argue that these figures highlight an increasing trend of policing secrecy, particularly in sensitive areas such as police surveillance, drug-related crime, and misconduct investigations.

Jake Hurfurt, head of research at Big Brother Watch, condemned the NPCC’s role, stating: “Pressuring police forces to retract data disclosed in response to journalists’ Freedom of Information requests, and instead trying to refuse to confirm or deny they hold the data, is the practice of an authoritarian censor, not an accountable public body.”

While the NPCC insists it only provides guidance and does not dictate disclosure decisions, critics believe the process lacks accountability. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has previously taken action against multiple police forces for poor FOI performance, though Surrey Police has not been subject to specific regulatory action.

This revelation raises questions about whether Surrey residents are receiving the full picture when requesting information from their local police force. As scrutiny intensifies over the role of the NPCC in transparency matters, campaigners are calling for greater oversight to ensure that FOI laws serve the public interest rather than institutional secrecy.

Surrey Police Accepts Recommendation to Improve Retention of Body-Worn Video Evidence in Complaints

Surrey Police has agreed to implement a key recommendation from the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) following a complaint by an Epsom resident regarding the retention of body-worn video (BWV) footage in police complaints.

The issue arose from an incident on 12 April 2023, when the complainant was filmed by a police officer, PC Scruby, during a meeting at his mother’s address. The complainant alleged that he was not informed he was being recorded until ten minutes into their interaction. He later raised concerns that the footage, which he believed could substantiate his account, had been deleted under Surrey Police’s 28-day evidence retention policy before it could be considered in his complaint.

After being dissatisfied with the response from Surrey Police’s Professional Standards Department (PSD) in October 2024, the complainant appealed to the OPCC. The OPCC conducted a review and found that Surrey Police’s service was acceptable in 18 out of 19 points raised in the complaint. However, it upheld one element of the complaint, determining that the complaint handler had failed to properly investigate the complainant’s concerns regarding what the officer had said during the meeting.

The review confirmed that the interaction had been recorded on BWV, but the footage was not secured by Surrey Police despite the complaint being made the following day on 13 April 2023. As a result, in line with the force’s BWV policy, the footage was automatically deleted from the system without being saved, rendering it unavailable as evidence in the complaint process.

In response to the case, the OPCC issued a recommendation that complaint handlers should secure any BWV footage providing evidence in a complaint against police at the earliest opportunity and, in any case, within 28 days of the alleged incident. This measure is aimed at closing a procedural gap that may hinder transparency and accountability in police investigations.

The complainant expressed frustration over the deletion of potentially valuable evidence, stating: “It is concerning that evidence which could clarify what happened during my interaction with the officer was destroyed. I welcome the OPCC’s recognition that procedural changes are needed.”

The OPCC’s report also addressed broader concerns raised in the complaint, including allegations of inadequate communication and procedural mishandling by PSD. While it found that Surrey Police’s actions were generally in line with existing procedures, the recommendation for improved evidence retention was seen as a necessary step to enhance the fairness and thoroughness of future complaint investigations.

Surrey Police confirmed that it accepted the recommendation in full on 20 January 2025, with the PSD now in the process of implementing the change.

This development highlights ongoing efforts to ensure greater accountability and efficiency in police complaint handling, reinforcing public trust in the system.

Image: West Midlands Police – CC BY-SA 2.0

Surrey Police’s share of council tax bills will leap over £335 a year for the average Band D households. Lisa Townsend, Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) said the 4.3 per cent increase was needed to “maintain the level of service”. 

Ms Townsend told the Surrey Police and Crime panel the government “absolutely expects” PCCs to raise council tax precepts  by the maximum £14 to cover the police officer wage increase (set nationally) and inflation.  

The annual charge will increase from £323.57 in 2024/25 for a Band D property to £337.57 in 2025/26. 

The commissioner told the panel even with the precept increase and the use of some reserves, the Force will still need to find £3.6m of savings this year and over £15m for the three years after that.

Although the commissioner said Surrey Police is one of the fastest-improving forces in the country, she stressed the increase in funds was needed to “keep us where we are”. Surrey Police has more than doubled its charge rate, with an additional 3,500 offences being prosecuted, according to the PCC. Ms Townsend told the panel the increase is “against a backdrop of a massive increase year on year which our financial resources can’t keep up with”. 

Reports state the cost to operate the Force has increased by £23.2m compared to 2024/25, meaning Surrey Police have to make a saving of £3.6m this year. Ms Townsend argued if the precept was not increased, police services would have to be cut and “achievements would be at risk”. 

The news comes as 59 per cent of people said they would pay more to support Surrey police in the PCC’s online survey. Over 3,200 people voted in the online consultation which asked them if they would be willing to pay an extra £1.16 a month to support policing teams, based on the average Band D property. 

But members of the Surrey Police and Crime Panel voted against the proposed increase in a meeting on February 3. Four councillors opposed the tax hike, four were in favour and one person abstained- leaving the chair of the meeting to cast the deciding vote which was found to be against. 

“There is no doubt that all members want to support the police,” said Cllr John Robini, chair of the meeting. “However, we hear time and time again how our community is struggling with finances.” Yet, there were not enough votes to veto the proposal and the panel accepted the Commissioner’s precept of 4.3 per cent to come into effect.

Epsom and Ewell Times explainer: First vote on principle against the rise by a simple majority of votes cast, including the chair’s. Second vote a legal requirement as vetoing the proposed increase requires a two-thirds majority under the rules and that special majority was not achieved.

“I’ve got people in my ward who can’t afford to pay their bills and feed their kids,” Cllr Richard Wilson said. “This squeeze above inflation is going to take more of their pay…and make it more difficult to support their families.” 

Raising the council tax above inflation levels (currently around 2.5 per cent), councillors questioned whether this was an acceptable strain on residents. Kelvin Menon, Chief Financial Officer for the PCC, said: “We have a lot of historic inflation we have to cope with and cover.”

The PCC’s report details recruiting officers can be a challenge with high living costs in Surrey, contributing to over 11 per cent of posts vacant. Increased use of technology by criminals has also led to a growing demand for technological forensic services, with almost all crimes having a digital element to them, according to the report.

Online fraud, particularly through fake retail websites, has become a significant issue both nationally and within our local community of Epsom & Ewell. Recent data underscores the pressing need for enhanced measures to protect consumers from these deceptive practices.

The Local Impact

In the 2023/24 financial year, Surrey reported 1,276 cases of online shopping fraud, resulting in losses totaling £848,000.his equates to an average loss of approximately £665 per victim. These figures highlight the substantial financial impact on residents and the pervasive nature of online fraud in our area.

National Perspective

Across the UK, online shopping scams are alarmingly prevalent.n the year leading up to October 2023, there were 71,894 reports of such scams, with total reported losses amounting to £106.8 million.he average loss per victim was £1,486, indicating that the financial repercussions can be devastating.

Current Policing Resources

The primary body for reporting fraud in the UK is Action Fraud, the national reporting center for fraud and cybercrime. Reports submitted to Action Fraud are analyzed by the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB), which then disseminates information to relevant police forces for investigation. However, the increasing volume and sophistication of online fraud cases have strained existing resources, leading to calls for more specialized approaches.

The Proposal for an Online Crime Agency

Helen Maguire, Liberal Democrat MP for Epsom & Ewell, is advocating for the establishment of a dedicated Online Crime Agency. This agency would focus exclusively on combating online fraud and related cyber crimes. The proposed agency aims to:

• Specialized Focus: oncentrate resources and expertise specifically on online fraud, ensuring more effective prevention and enforcement.
• Enhanced Coordination: acilitate better collaboration between various law enforcement bodies, technology companies, and financial institutions to address the multifaceted nature of online scams.
• Victim Support: rovide dedicated support to victims of online fraud, guiding them through reporting processes and helping them recover losses where possible. P Maguire emphasizes the urgency of this initiative, stating, “Victims in Surrey have been left short-changed and vulnerable to opportunistic fraudsters. We urgently need action. The previous Conservative government completely failed to act. They were asleep at the wheel when it came to online fraud.”

Maguire argues the establishment of a specialized Online Crime Agency could play a pivotal role in safeguarding consumers. By focusing dedicated resources and fostering collaboration across sectors, such an agency holds the promise of mitigating the impact of online fraud on our community.

The “post-code lottery” of police funding could force residents to shoulder more of the burden, according to Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Lisa Townsend. The PCC said she fears it will be inevitable taxpayers will have to contribute more to policing. 

Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced she will end the “postcode lottery in policing”, in a speech to local PCCs and police chiefs on November 19. She confirmed that central government funding for police will go up next year by around £500m, with a detailed breakdown of funding allocations for each force will be published mid-December. Until then, many police forces are left in uncertainty about what the changes might be. 

But Surrey’s Commissioner said she fears money will be distributed unfairly in Surrey, from the government’s “not fit for purpose” police funding formula. Ms Townsend said if there is a postcode lottery of policing it is financial. She said: “There’s an idea that Surrey is wealthy, but Surrey Police isn’t.” 

The way money is divided up for police forces means that some areas receive a significantly larger share than others. For instance, money allocated to Surrey covers just 45% of the total budget whereas other areas such as Northumbria get 80%.

Surrey Police have to save, or cut, £23.4m over the next four years to maintain its current service, according to the LDRS. Inflation, government-agreed pay increases have also contributed to the force’s position. 

The Conservative PCC wrote to the Home Secretary on November 13, urging her to review the police funding.  She asked the Home Secretary to not use the police funding formula when granting additional money to combat the increase in employers’ National Insurance (NI) as this would “penalise” some counties and benefit others. 

Earlier this year, the government provided an additional grant to cover the police pay increase of over 2.5 per cent. Because this money was distributed by the funding formula, Surrey Police had to make up for a shortfall of around £1m, according to the PCC. 

In the letter, Commissioner Townsend said she is “prepared to ask local taxpayers to shoulder more of the burden of the cost of policing”. But she added it “cannot be fair” that residents have to pay for an “imposed” increase. 

The letter read: “Here in Surrey, 80% of our costs relate to people and so we have calculated that the proposed increase in NI would add approximately £4.5m to our costs. To put this into context, this would be equivalent to an additional £9 on Band D Council Tax or around 100 Police officers.”

Ms Townsend said she did not want to alter Surrey Police’s service to make residents suffer. “What we’re not clear on is what else the government wants us to cut,” she said. 

The PCC said she is “not optimistic” about Surrey achieving more money from the new government, despite the county getting an additional £17.3m last year.  “We’ve got nobody making the case for us,” Ms Townsend told the LDRS, “we’ve got no Labour MPs or Labour councils.” 

A Home Office spokesperson said: “The Government will fully compensate police forces for the impact of the changes to National Insurance Employer contributions.” They added: “Details on the allocation of this funding will be confirmed at the provisional police settlement in mid-December.”

Photo: Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey Lisa Townsend. Credit: Surrey Live photographer Darren Pepe.

Plans to redevelop Surrey Police headquarters, at Mount Browne, have been given the go-ahead. The changes also include a new access road which the Force say will speed up response times from Mount Browne by two minutes. 

The significant modifications to the police’s home include demolition and rebuilding of the dog school, accommodation for Police students, and a new Contact and Deployment centre, a multi-storey car park with electrical charging points. 

Members of Guildford Borough Council (GBC) planning committee unanimously approved both applications on November 6. Councillors praised the application for the compactness of the development, with no overall height increase and limited harm to the Green Belt. 

One of the applications included a new western arm to Artington Roundabout, which the Force says will reduce traffic on neighbouring roads like Sandy Lane and The Ridges. 

Straight through the middle of an open field, officers highlighted the new access road would be visible and harm the Green Belt as well as agricultural land. However, they also noted even small improvements in Police response times can have a large positive impact on how emergencies can be handled.

The second application relates to the redevelopment and modernisation of the site, including demolition and construction of operational buildings, as well as internal refurbishment of the old building, corridor wing and sports building.

Mount Browne, on the outskirts of Guildford, has been the headquarters for Surrey Police for over 70 years. The current campus contains a large number of buildings which have been constructed mainly on a piecemeal basis and are judged no longer fit for purpose by the Force. 

The benefits of the scheme include high quality facilities to meet the ongoing operational needs of the Police, as well as staff retention and well-being, according to the report.  Replacing the dog kennels was also said to provide significant improvements to operations. Officers told the committee that currently all the training dogs can see each other in the kennels, so if one dog barks “they all go off”.

Surrey’s Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Lisa Townsend has welcomed the decision, calling it a “significant milestone for the Force”. A six-week judicial review period now awaits before Surrey Police can take decisions on the next steps. 

Mrs Townsend added: “Mount Browne has been Surrey Police’s home for over 70 years, but the buildings here are run down, expensive to maintain and simply no longer meet the requirements of a modern police force.”

The PCC and Surrey Police’s Chief Officer decided in 2021 that the Force should remain at Mount Browne, on the edge of Guildford, rather than seek a new location.

Image – unrelated dog in a kennel

An ex-police officer has been banned from the profession after she “maliciously” made a “false” complaint about child sexual abuse to the NSPCC, a misconduct hearing has ruled. The former Surrey officer, PC Tina Anscombe was found culpable of providing false and very misleading information to the NSPCC about a family.

Ms Anscombe has maintained she genuinely believed her concerns were valid and has denied any wrongdoing. The police misconduct hearing panel, held on November 5 and 6, found Ms Anscombe breached professional standards of behaviour as she acted dishonestly and with the purpose of causing harm to a mother and her family.

Recognising the potentially “devastating impact” the false claim could have had on the individual and the family, the panel found Ms Anscombe to have undermined public confidence and trust in the police.

Ms Anscombe was found to have made a referral to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) about child sexual abuse “in bad faith” on April 30, 2020. Representing Surrey Police, Robert Talalay claimed that former PC Anscombe had “abused her powers” as a police officer to potentially act as “revenge”.

The panel heard Ms Anscombe had stated in the referral form that Mrs XY was aware of the potential abuse and was not addressing her responsibilities as a mother. Mr Talalay told the panel the former PC had given the impression she was close to the family, suggesting she had seen them ‘one month ago’, when she had never laid eyes on the family. She also indicated she witnessed behaviour she had referred to on the form.

Children’s Services visited the family in direct response to the NSPCC report and found the allegations were “baseless and unsound”, according to Surrey Police’s legal representative.

Speaking on behalf of Ms Anscombe, Tom Arthur said at the misconduct meeting, that the former PC felt “duty bound” to share the information about alleged child abuse. He said her only concern was to safeguard the children.

The former officer, who did not attend the hearing, appealed to the panel to consider her state of mind and the “shame” she felt at work as her colleagues knew her then-husband, a Detective Constable with the force, was going through misconduct proceedings. He was sacked in December 2020, following allegations of a sexual relationship with someone he met during the course of his duties. Ms Anscombe resigned from Surrey Police after 21 years of service in October 2021.

At the hearing this week, Ms Anscombe was found to have breached her responsibilities in failing to identify herself as a police officer to the NSPCC or raising her safeguarding concerns with a sergeant within Surrey Police. Mr Talalay argued Ms Anscombe had submitted “false and misleading information” to the NSPCC as she did not identify herself as a ‘professional’ but as ‘other relative’ without explaining further detail in the form.

The misconduct panel heard the ex-officer did not go through the usual channels to report potential child abuse, which she could have done through her sergeant at work. Ms Anscombe said she feared if she reported her concerns to the sergeant, her actions would be labelled as malicious. Instead, she chose to anonymously refer the family via the NSPCC.

The misconduct panel found that Ms Anscombe’s behaviour had amounted to gross misconduct and, if she was still a serving officer, she would have been dismissed without notice. Ms Anscombe will be placed on the barred list from other police forces and the Fire and Rescue Service.

Chief Superintendent Andy Rundle, Head of Professional Standards Department, said: “The public rightly expects officers to behave in a professional manner, with the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and respect. Former officer Anscombe showed a clear disregard for these expected behaviours when she made a false allegation to the NSPCC, identifying herself as the relative of a family with whom she had no previous contact.

“Within this allegation, she made an inaccurate claim, which further subjected a family to unnecessary investigation and intrusion. Anscombe’s behaviours demonstrated a lack of respect for the family and was a clear breach of the standards of behaviour expected of a police officer.”

Chief SI Rundle said he was supportive of the panel’s findings, adding the department’s investigation into the case demonstrate the force’s commitment to robustly dealing with misconduct. “Thankfully, the majority of our officers and act with integrity and work tirelessly to serve the public,” he said.

After eight long years, a gorgeous Cocker Spaniel called Daisy, who was stolen from her home in Mole Valley back in 2016, has now been reunited with her owners.

Daisy, who was one at the time, was stolen along with three other dogs in November 2016, after thieves took the working gun dogs from the garden kennels they were housed in.

Tragically one of the dogs was killed after being hit by a car as it tried to escape and the other two stolen dogs have never been located, despite best efforts from officers.

In a surreal turn of events, and nearly eight years to the day since Daisy was taken, officers were alerted on Tuesday 29 October, that someone had tried to update her microchip details. Our rural crime officer PC Laura Rowley immediately contacted the microchip company to obtain the details of the new owners.

Just two days later officers from the Mole Valley Safer Neighbourhood team completed a three hour round trip to bring Daisy back to Surrey and her owners. They said, “Daisy had been rehomed in good faith by the new owners and they were unaware of the theft of Daisy.

“We brought Daisy, who is now slightly deaf, back to the Mole Valley Safer Neighbourhood Team Office and there was not a dry eye in the house when she was reunited with her owners. She recognised them immediately and stuck to them like glue!”

Sadly, the other dogs, Tilly a black working Cocker Spaniel, and Storm a patchy white Patterdale Terrier, remain missing and are believed to be elderly or have possibly passed away due to their age at the time of the theft. However, if you have any information that may be relevant, please contact us quoting PR/45160097926.

Pictured with Daisy are PC Ewan Keen and PC Ellen Francis.

A Surrey Police sergeant who shared racist texts and a video of a man attempting to take his own life has been stripped of his rank – but will continue on active front line duties.

Daniel Hebborn admitted to sending a series of Whatsapp messages to friends in 2019 and 2020 which included a video which showed a man attempting to take his own life by jumping from a high rise building. The video showed the male with “devastating injuries” on the floor, a police misconduct panel heard.

During the two-day police misconduct hearing this September, the former sergeant accepted the messages were inappropriate, breached of the standards of authority, respect and courtesy. The panel said his behaviour had the “obvious potential to cause serious harm to the reputational standing of the Surrey Police and national policing in general and undermine public confidence”.

The messages also included an image deemed an “inappropriate racist joke” showing a photo of an elderly black man with his arm around the shoulders of an elderly white man with the accompanying title ‘is this a mugging?. In a separate message, the officer was asked whether he “beat a guy like you did when you arrested him for littering” to which the officer responded “he was white”.

He also shared an image of an empty articulated lorry trailer with the heading “Trailer for sale, serious offers only, sleeps 39 people”, followed by “Guess my favourite restaurant will be short staffed again too”.

Hebborn continued to serve as a sergeant with Surrey Police in the years between sending the racist messages and the conduct hearing.

The report read: “There was some concern that the ‘banter’ contained in the WhatsApp messages may have extended beyond the private group and into his position as a sergeant and role model to those in his team or station. based on comments made in his own submitted character references including; “Dan’s sense of humour is best described as pushing boundaries that are deliberately controversial but always intended as a joke”.

The panel determined that the multiple breaches of the Standards as admitted, amounted to gross misconduct and were arguably so serious as to justify dismissal. However Hebborn avoided being sacked and was instead given a final warning and reduced to the rank of constable.

The report reads: “A clear message had to be given that where an officer behaved in a way demonstrated by the conduct in this case, such conduct was not tolerated within the police service. There was a strong need to build and maintain public trust in the police.”

The report added that action had to be taken in order to maintain public confidence and respect especially when it came to the police “tackling issues of racism within their forces.”

Head of professional standards, Chief Superintendent Andy Rundle, said; “Surrey Police expects a high level of professionalism from our officers and staff and we will take action when these standards are not met.

“The hearing heard that former PS Dan Hebborn had admitted to the offensive and inappropriate messages and shown significant remorse for his actions. Due to their historic, non-work-related nature, as well as his previous record of service, on this occasion the panel has determined that reducing his rank to PC is an appropriate course of action.

“This decision carries a financial impact as well as potentially impacting any transfer request and future career development. Surrey Police is committed to being an anti-racist organisation, where all forms of discrimination are entirely unacceptable. We place immense value on serving and protecting all our communities with fairness and respect as well as ensuring those who work within our Force enjoy a sense of belonging and respect from their colleagues.

“Earlier this year, we shared our anti-racism statement across the organisation. Our expectation is that all officers, staff, and volunteers uphold the commitments outlined in this statement to challenge injustice and uphold anti-racist principles. We are developing training to deliver to officers and staff that will support the knowledge, skills and behaviours needed to ensure respect for all in the service we deliver. In September, we began a series of training sessions that all leaders are required to attend which include a focus on race equality and guidance on how to ensure an inclusive team environment.”

_{Surrey Police ethics print on wall at Mount Browne HQ. (Credit: Emily Dalton/LDRS)}

Staffing cuts at Surrey Police could be in the pipeline as the force attempts to fill a potential £23.4 million financial hole. 

Surrey Police has to make the savings in the next four years and both government-agreed pay increases for police officers and staff and inflation have added to the difficult financial position. 

Recognising the financial pressures on forces, the government has awarded a special grant of £175m in 2024/25 to fund the 4.75% officer pay award. Out of money set aside to cover the pay increases, Surrey has been awarded just £2.1m to cover the costs. 

As Surrey gets a smaller slice of government funding, calculated by a formula, there is less money to go around. The police allocation formula (PAF) is worked out through various data sources, including population density and the relative need for policing in areas. The nature of the formula grant system means the annual money allocated to Surrey covers just 45% of the total budget whereas other areas such as Northumbria get 80%.

In a Police and Crime Panel meeting on September 26, Surrey Police’s Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Kelvin Menon, said “it is too early to say” exactly the savings that will need to be made and where.

The CFO said it is likely the government’s funding will only cover pay increases for Surrey’s police officers so the force will have to bridge the £2.4m gap to cover the costs of police staff itself. Police staff may be cut as the force has to keep a base number of 2,253 police officers in place. 

Speaking after the meeting, Cllr Richard Wilson (Bagshot and North Windlesham/ Liberal Democrat) said: Due to the government’s penalty regime in place to ensure officer numbers are maintained, any reduction can only come from police staff. This means the people helping front-line officers in investigations and forensics.”

The CFO told the panel that work was also being done into making savings by changing shift patterns, reducing overtime and forensics, looking at the benefits of upgrading administrative and data systems, potentially reducing vehicle numbers and a detailed budget review by area.

Modelling different scenarios, the CFO said Surrey Police might have to make up to £27.6m gap as a worst-case scenario, or £21.5m on an optimistic basis. Mr Menon added: “The Chief and the PCC are both committed to try and minimise any impact on residents.”

If the savings cannot be reduced by the time the budget is set in February 2025, the CFO said Surrey Police will have to use some of its reserves. 

Uncertain future for officer numbers

In a national drive to increase police officers, the previous government set Surrey Police an ‘uplift’ target of 2,253 officers and awarded £48k for every officer recruited above the baseline. Although the force recruited an additional 22 officers it now remains uncertain whether the £48k bonus will be received every year, accounting for the extra officers. 

Surrey’s Police and Crime Commissioner, Lisa Townsend, said: “If [the bonus] ceases to be the case then officer numbers will have to be reduced.” She added the reduction would happen through “natural wastage”, meaning officers leaving the force for a new job or change in career. 

Surrey currently loses an average of 17 officers a month, creating overall a 10% vacancy in the force.

A gloomy atmosphere took over the meeting as the PCC repeated there was a lot of “uncertainty” in the new government’s policy going forward so the force is unable to forecast officer numbers beyond 24/25. She said that constables have been told not to expect any more funding. 

Cllr Wilson criticised Mrs Townsend during the meeting, stating the PCC ballot paper for her re-election had the description. More police, safer streets’. He asked: “Shouldn’t voters take that as a commitment that the number of officers is going to increase?”

Mrs Townsend said the number of officers has increased and is still increasing, and argued it was for the Chief Constable to decide where officers and staff are best deployed. She added: Both the Chief Constable and I have both made commitments to ensure that we have more officers out and about on the streets.”