Police Federation

Kevin Bonavia Excerpts

Wednesday 15th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jonathan Hinder]

I am not discussing that today, but the hon. Gentleman makes a valid point. Having diversity of options for officers could be useful in instances such as that.

I thank the National Police Association, formed of former federation reps and staff, for campaigning on this issue before me, in their own time. I thank the Metropolitan police’s network of women for sharing their concerns. The network’s leadership told me:

“Officers are effectively being asked to fund campaigns that they fundamentally do not support, without transparency, consultation or accountability.”

[Kevin Bonavia (Stevenage) (Lab)]

I pay tribute to my hon. Friend’s experience and advocacy of police officers throughout the country. In my constituency, local officers from the federation have been supporting police officers. This debate is not about them, but how can we support them by giving them more choice?

[Jonathan Hinder]

I am so pleased that my hon. Friend mentioned that, as I briefly did earlier, because I do not mean to diminish the work of many federation representatives. There are many brilliant federation representatives and leaders in some parts of the country. This debate is very much about the national organisation and whether it can reform itself.

The federation says that officers having choice of representation

“would weaken, not strengthen, the voices of police officers”

but it is hard to believe that it could be weaker than it has been in recent years. To reiterate, this would not require Government funds. It is not about striking or unionisation. The federation can remain a staff association for police officers to join if they so wish, but allowing officers to choose a staff association that truly represents their interests would send a powerful message to our police officers that their interests and voices matter.

I will finish with something mildly amusing. The Police Federation has been running a campaign called “Copped Enough: What the Police Take Home is Criminal”, which is about how police officer’s wages since 2010 have seen cuts in real terms. That is a worthy cause. Would anyone do the things I described at the start of my speech for a starting salary of £30,000? During the time of running that campaign, however, the federation has been led by someone paying themselves £700,000 a year from police officers’ subscriptions, and he was recently arrested on suspicion of corruption. To remind Members, the campaign that his organisation has been running is called “What the Police Take Home is Criminal”. It is hard not to laugh, but in truth, it is a massive slap in the face for the police officers effectively paying those ridiculous wages, whose interests the federation should be serving.

I am grateful for the Government’s engagement with the issue so far, and the Minister’s response to my letter, which was signed by colleagues across parties three weeks ago. I note that her response states that

“the Government stands ready to bring forward reforms to ensure that the interests of rank-and-file officers are properly, effectively and robustly represented.”

I hope that, having heard the case set out today, the Government will seriously consider simply giving police officers the freedom to form and join an alternative body, so that their interests are effectively represented.