CAN anyone explain precisely what having a police commissioner has achieved?

Introduced by the Government the post of police commissioner was intended to make the police more accountable, to improve performance, and to communicate with the public.

As we now realise the true intention of the Government in offering this appointment was “to get a quart out of a pint pot” by trying to do more for less by reducing police numbers.

Having a police commissioner does not appear to have resulted in any noticeable reduction in crime or detection or speed of response in Sussex and we are now having to get things back to where they were by paying more in our rates to recruit and train more police.

In spite of the “statistics” regularly compiled in different ways to prove some form of achievement in policing our communities it has now become obvious even to the Government that it cannot be done unless police numbers are increased.

This is precisely what the police themselves told us before and many times since police commissioners were appointed.

So what has been achieved in Sussex other than having a well intentioned politically endorsed appointee telling us that we now need more police and, wait for it, “The crime figure may not fall for some while if at all”.

It may be cynical of me to suggest that by making excuses for failure our commissioner is trying to pass the buck for a flawed idea for which ratepayers are having to bear the cost.

Name and address supplied