Show the Working

Increase police numbers by 40,000

Reform UK · what the evidence says

An independent, source-checked look at Reform UK’s policy “Increase police numbers by 40,000” — what it would actually do across the things that affect your life. Every claim below quotes the source behind it. How this works.

Public finances & the next generation — Hurts

moderate · moderate confidence

Adding 40,000 police officers would cost well over a billion pounds a year with no stated funding source, worsening the public finances unless offset elsewhere. The policy text names no tax rise, spending cut, or borrowing rule to pay for it.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether the policy is accompanied by a credible offsetting fiscal measure — if funded, the verdict would change substantially.

Our reading: The policy commits to a large, specific workforce expansion — 40,000 officers over five years — but the stated text contains no funding mechanism: no identified tax rise, spending reallocation, or borrowing rule. Scaling from the IFS estimate for a 10,000-officer pledge (£300m), a 40,000-officer commitment implies a recurring cost of roughly £1.2bn annually or more at today's prices, making this a significant unfunded spending commitment. The high leaver rate (~8,800 per year in England and Wales alone) means gross recruitment must be substantially higher than the net 40,000 figure to achieve the stated per-capita target, which amplifies the fiscal pressure. Police funding draws on both central grants and local precepts, so the burden could land on central borrowing, council tax, or both — in any scenario adding to fiscal pressure without identified offsets. Under the O12 rubric, unfunded spending that increases the deficit and adds to the debt path worsens public finances for the next generation. There is no evidence in the provided units of a credible fiscal offset. The magnitude is rated moderate rather than major because the ~£1.2bn annual figure, while large in absolute terms, represents a manageable fraction of total public expenditure — material but not transformative to the overall debt path. If the policy were paired with identified funding (cuts elsewhere or new revenue), the verdict would change; absent that, the direction is clearly a worsening of O12.

Crime, justice & national security — Helps

moderate · moderate confidence

Adding 40,000 front-line officers would meaningfully increase police presence and is associated with some crime reduction, especially property crime, though the actual safety gain depends heavily on how those officers are deployed, not just their numbers.

The evidence

Biggest unknown: Whether deployment strategy and funding mechanisms are in place to translate raw officer numbers into measurable crime reductions — research suggests deployment matters as much as headcount.

Our reading: The policy commits to a large, concrete increase in officer numbers — from roughly 235 to 300 per 100,000 — representing a ~28% uplift on current England and Wales figures. The UK's comparatively low ratio relative to European peers provides a plausible baseline rationale. The prior Police Uplift Programme shows that recruiting at scale (20,000 officers in ~3.5 years) is operationally feasible, which supports delivery plausibility for 40,000 over five years, though the attrition rate of ~8,800 leavers per year means gross recruitment must be substantially higher to achieve net additions. On crime-reduction effect, the evidence is real but conditional. The College of Policing's cited estimate suggests a 10% officer increase links to roughly a 3% reduction in property crime — a genuine but modest signal. However, two credible research findings temper optimism: a study of 42 forces over 13 years found officer numbers per se are 'unrelated to crime rates'; and the College of Policing itself warns that numbers without effective deployment may not reduce crime. The NAO similarly noted benefits depend on 'a complex range of factors beyond just officer numbers.' These are not fringe views — they are institutional and academic assessments from within the provided evidence. Absent the policy, officer numbers remain at a comparatively low ratio and the evidence base (particularly the SMF argument cited) links this to public confidence and capacity to tackle evolving crime types like fraud. The counterfactual gain is therefore real: more officers, if well-deployed, plausibly improve the O5 indicators of crime rates and public safety. The direction is 'improves' because the weight of evidence supports a positive effect, and the delivery mechanism (recruitment) is concrete and precedented. However, magnitude is 'moderate' rather than 'major' because the crime-reduction per officer is modest per the evidence and contingent on deployment quality. Confidence is moderate because the deployment-vs-numbers debate introduces genuine uncertainty, but the baseline case for more officers having some positive safety effect is well-supported.