Hopes for an extra 60 new police officers for Barnet were dashed on Monday as the borough lost out to inner-city areas.
Senior officers and politicians expressed disappointment after the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) ruled on the controversial Resource Allocation Formula (RAF).
Early drafts of the RAF which calculates how officers are shared between boroughs would have seen Barnet gaining an extra 60 officers. But the borough lost out during a lengthy consultation process as previous big losers such as Lambeth and Westminster successfully lobbied for support.
Previously officer numbers had been based solely on crime figures, punishing relatively crime-free boroughs like Barnet.
But the new formula included wider social factors such as truancy, deprivation and homelessness.
In the end it didn't make much difference. Barnet's total now stands at 535 officers, a little more than the borough's current strength.
The outcome, although depressing, was not entirely unexpected. Last week prior to publication, MPA chairman Toby Harris admitted Barnet had stopped being a big gainer during consultation.
"If you invite people to comment you have to listen and consider what they say," he added.
But Councillor Brian Coleman, Greater London Assembly member for Barnet and Camden, expressed frustrations following Monday's bad tempered meeting.
"We had faith that a fairer system for allocation was possible but Barnet now finds itself firmly lodged at the losing end of the scale," he said.
Superintendent David Bilson of Barnet Borough Police also expressed disappointment, but added: "No officers will be leaving Barnet as a result of this review."
December 12, 2001 14:51
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article