There is a lack of evidence for ‘two-tier’ policing, but the public believes it exists – and so the idea must be taken seriously. This was the defining tension at the heart of the 44th annual Cumberland Lodge Policing Conference, held last weekend.
This year’s conference, Division, Distrust and Disorder: Policing Polarisation in Modern Society, took place against a stark backdrop: protests in Southampton following the sentencing of Henry Nowak’s killer, and riots in Belfast after the stabbing of Stephen Ogilvie by a Sudanese man. Rather than being isolated incidents, these acts of disorder and civil disobedience are part of a pattern in which individual cases are amplified by video footage and social media and seized on and exploited by malign actors.
Amid accusations of bias and falling confidence from across the political spectrum, the conference asked whether police can really be said to be policing with consent.
New research presented at the conference suggests that argument is gaining ground. An exclusive survey by Zencity found that nearly half of the British public believe police apply rules more strictly depending on political views. Among those, more than two in five think right-leaning individuals are treated more harshly than those on the left – full details of the survey will be published separately.
Professor Bobby Duffy of King’s College London warned that the implications are serious. Britain is facing a crisis of trust in policing, one that is particularly acute among Generation Z. And that distrust is not mirrored in the younger generation’s attitudes to other institutions, which suggests that police (and the courts) are suffering from an especially serious trust deficit. If that distrust hardens, it could render the concept of policing by consent meaningless.
The challenge, as set out over the weekend, is institutional as well as operational. Delegates heard that police officers try to do their best to act “without fear or favour”. But policing overall – and senior police leaders – have been less effective at demonstrating that to a sceptical and polarised public. As one speaker put it, “the operational reality on the ground [around policing protest] is closer to what people are calling for than they appreciate.” The difficulty lies in closing that gap between practice and perception, especially in a disordered information environment.
There was a clear call for policing to be more “full throated” in asserting its impartiality. Delegates heard about all the ways that the disordered information environment makes it harder for authorities to be believed, but that disinformation loves a vacuum so open and honest communication, done without delay, is one of the only ways policing can counter it. But the conference also made clear that communication alone will not resolve the issue, and policing needed to be better at getting the “basics” right.
The strength of the discussion lay in its breadth as well as depth. The conference, shaped by a steering committee chaired by Chief Constable Jason Hogg and including Sir Andy Marsh and Sir Mark Rowley, brought together police leaders, academics, politicians, and practitioners to confront these questions directly.
Speakers addressed a landscape defined by evolving threats and contested truths – from new forms of extremism and the fallout of the Southport attacks in 2024, and what it means to keep order in a climate of protest and polarisation.
Invited politicians including Lord Michael Gove, Festus Akinbusoye, Baroness Jenny Jones, Emily Spurrell and Baroness Claire Fox, examined policing’s central role in today’s political debates. Writers, thinkers and academics such as former BBC Global Disinformation Editor Rebecca Skippage, democracy writer Frances Lasok, and Professor Quassim Cassan provided broader context to these discussions. Senior policing leaders, including NPCC Chair Gavin Stephens, Director of Police AI Alex Murray, and Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police Sir Stephen Watson, outlined how policing is currently performing and what reforms are needed. Meanwhile, Sir Mark Rowley and New Zealand Police Commissioner Richard Chambers reflected on the challenges of leading major policing organisations during periods of change and uncertainty.
Delegates agreed that policing is no longer operating on stable ground, and it was important to be openly debating these issues alongside experts from outside policing. What emerged from Cumberland Lodge showed that policing now faces a hard task, that of rebuilding a shared understanding of legitimacy in a fragmented public sphere. Because once belief in fairness begins to fracture, the consequences go to the heart of the police service’s ability to provide what society needs of them.
A full write-up of the conference, including key debates and further analysis, will be published in July.