Tech
Police Digital Service future remains uncertain as ‘radical’ Home Office policing reform unveiled | Computer Weekly
Uncertainty about what the future holds for the Police Digital Service (PDS) continues, despite the UK government confirming the organisation is set to be absorbed into a new national policing body, as part of a wider reform of the policing sector.
The UK government published its long-awaited whitepaper, detailing its plans to reform the policing sector, on 26 January 2025, with its contents being described as the most “radical blueprint for reform” the sector has seen in 200 years.
The changes the whitepaper commits the government to delivering on “over this parliament and the next” include a “significant” reduction in the number of police forces in operation, informed by an independent review of the 43 forces in operation now across England and Wales.
Once this process is complete, the remaining local police provision will be “better supported by a much more coherent organisational structure regionally and nationally”, thanks in part to the creation of a “national tier of policing” dubbed the National Police Service (NPS), according to the whitepaper.
The overarching aim of these changes is to make the way the sector operates more lean and efficient, because having 43 separate forces “each providing back-office functions to local policing” is a waste of money, the whitepaper stated. “Fewer forces would provide more effective specialist services in areas like major crime and firearms, while also being better able to deal with surges in demand and major incidents.”
The document also acknowledged that there are “too many organisations overseeing different elements of policing, none of whom have the necessary powers to drive change”, which is where the NPS comes in.
“The NPS will bring together existing national bodies, including the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), the College of Policing, the National Crime Agency (NCA) and Counter Terrorism Policing (CTP), into a single organisation with a clear mandate and the powers to get things done,” the whitepaper confirmed.
Saving money
The NPS will also help in the delivery of “commercial efficiencies, improved productivity and new technology capabilities” by absorbing the work of PDS in the name of saving money, the whitepaper said.
“We have already mobilised an ambitious Police Efficiency and Collaboration Programme (PECP) to deliver better value for money in police procurement … [which] will drive the delivery of significant cashable efficiencies of around £350m by the end of this parliament,” it continued.
“The NPS will support its long-term sustainability through bringing together enabling services into this single body … [and] as part of this, Blue Light Commercial and the Police Digital Service will be rolled into the NPS.”
Speaking to Computer Weekly, Dale Peters, a public sector-focused senior research director at IT analyst TechMarketView, said the government’s decision to streamline the number of forces in operation across England and Wales, and centralise procurement processes within the policing sector, is the right one.
“The 43 forces model does not align with 21st century requirements, either from a technology perspective or to address the changing nature of crime,” he said. “The NPS should drive better value for money, deliver much-needed interoperability improvements and help alleviate competition for in-demand skills.”
That said, these changes will require careful management to ensure the individual, local policing needs within communities are not overlooked or ignored as a result of this change in strategy, added Peters.
“There is also an SME [small and medium-sized enterprises] risk,” he said. “As contracts consolidate nationally, smaller suppliers who may struggle to compete for large frameworks could be squeezed out. The NPS will need to design mechanisms to preserve competition and innovation, otherwise there is a risk the market consolidates too far. We do not need 43 solutions to the same problem, but we do not want more monopolistic positions either.”
What next for PDS?
The absorption of PDS into some form of national policing body has been repeatedly foreshadowed in the Home Office’s various communications about its plans to reform the policing sector, which it first went public with news of in November 2024.
At that time, the then home secretary, Yvette Cooper, confirmed the national policing body the government was plotting to create would have IT in its purview.
This statement prompted questions about what this development would mean for the future of the PDS, given it is responsible for the development and delivery of the National Policing Digital Strategy.
This strategy is focused on enabling forces through technology to tackle increasingly complex crimes and, in turn, improve public safety, which are all areas the whitepaper suggests the NPS will eventually be responsible for.
“The NPS will be empowered to set mandatory standards in areas such as professional practice, training, technology, data and workforce planning,” it said.
“Efficiencies will be realised by buying technology and equipment nationally, delivering savings that will be reinvested in the frontline, [and] NPS will provide a platform for developing new technologies and deploying them across the country. By bringing together … focused capabilities … into a new national police force, we will be better able to share technology, intelligence and people across the range of serious threats we face.”
Artificial intelligence
In terms of what these shared technologies are likely to be, the whitepaper confirmed that artificial intelligence (AI) will play a key role in helping officers “catch more criminals, speed up investigations, reduce the administrative burden on policing”.
This will be achieved through the establishment of a National Centre for AI In Policing – known as Police.AI, which will receive £115m in funding over the next three years.
“Through Police.AI we will create a public-facing registry of the AI being deployed by police forces and the steps they have taken to ensure the reliability of tools before being used for operations,” the whitepaper stated. “We will [also] create a platform for identifying, testing and then scaling AI technology, as well as enabling chief constables to deploy AI responsibly and in a way which builds and maintains public consent.”
Funding is also being allocated to support the deployment of 40 additional live facial recognition (LFR) vans in what the whitepaper termed “high crime areas” – as part of a clampdown on violent crime and sexual offences.
“In all cases, we will give the police the resources and expertise to deploy AI in an ethical, robust and responsible way, supported by a new regulatory framework with strong oversight and accountability,” the whitepaper added.
NPS and policing IT reforms
The creation of NPS should help address long-standing concerns that police forces across England and Wales are being hampered in their ability to fight crime due to technological limitations, but it’s not a “silver bullet”, cautioned Peters.
“Currently, decisions about technology adoption are fragmented across 43 forces, each with different systems, budgets and risk appetite,” he said. “The risk-averse culture in policing means good innovations often get stuck in one or two forces and struggle to scale.”
“Meanwhile, criminals are increasingly turning to technology as a way of opening new opportunities, and to enhance and expand their activities.
“Centralising resources under the NPS should help policing reduce the velocity gap and enable it to build more effective countermeasures to tech-enabled threats,” said Peters. “However, success will depend on its ability to address the cultural challenges in policing – not just the structural ones.”
Where the whitepaper lacks detail is on the specifics of how PDS will be absorbed into NPS, and how integrating it will help the government achieve its tech ambitions for the policing sector.
Will PDS’s status as a privately owned company, funded by the Home Office, remain intact once its integration with the NPS is completed, and – furthermore – how long is that process expected to take?
Computer Weekly contacted the Home Office for clarification on all of these points, but the department did not provide a direct response to these questions.
All that is known about when these changes might be introduced is that the creation of NPS will be subject to legislation, and Computer Weekly understands the government is keen to make the necessary legislative changes as soon as parliamentary time allows.
Computer Weekly is aware that PDS has been actively participating in the planning process for its integration into some form of national policing entity for some time.
In a statement to Computer Weekly, a PDS spokesperson said the government’s plans “align with its mission to deliver digital services that support policing and keep the public safe”, and that it is committed to ensuring a smooth transition of its responsibilities during its absorption into the NPS.
“We look forward to working closely with the Home Office and policing partners to ensure a smooth transition and to leverage technology in building a more transparent, efficient and community-focused policing model,” the spokesperson said.
Low morale and lack of clarity
Computer Weekly has previously reported on issues of low staff morale at PDS, linked in part to the uncertainty surrounding what will happen to the organisation in the wake of the Home Office’s policing reforms.
In its statement to Computer Weekly, the PDS spokesperson said the organisation is “committed to ensuring our stakeholders are informed and engaged through the transition” to becoming part of NPS. “Our commitment to continuity and innovation remains unwavering as we help shape the future of policing,” the spokesperson added.
The PDS has been rocked by scandal in recent years, following the news that two of its employees had been arrested in July 2024 on suspicion of bribery, fraud and misconduct in public office. In the wake of this, its then CEO – Ian Bell – departed the organisation.
The company has undergone a sizeable reshuffle of its senior leadership team since then, resulting in the appointment of various interim leaders, with Computer Weekly reporting in January 2026 that three of the firm’s senior executives, including a director, had recently left the organisation.
Computer Weekly also revealed that PDS is set to be the subject of at least two employment tribunals in 2026, with former staffers making claims of harassment, sexual discrimination and unfair constructive dismissal against the organisation.
That aside, TechMarketView’s Peters said that while the whitepaper provides “no detail” about what PDS will “look like on the other side” once it’s a part of NPS, it is likely its operations will be impacted.
“The Police Efficiency and Collaboration Programme is seeking to deliver savings of £354m by 2028–29, which will clearly have an impact on enabling services such as those provided by PDS,” he said. “This may mean significant restructuring with functions being absorbed and redistributed across the new structure, but to what extent depends on implementation decisions that have not been made public yet.”
Tech
I Tested Bosch’s New Vacuum Against Shark and Dyson. It Didn’t Beat Them
There’s a lever on the back for this compression mechanism that you manually press down and a separate button to open the dustbin at the bottom. You can use the compression lever when it’s both closed and open. It did help compress the hair and dust while I was vacuuming, helping me see if I had really filled the bin, though at a certain point it doesn’t compress much more. It was helpful to push debris out if needed too, versus the times I’ve had to stick my hand in both the Dyson and Shark to get the stuck hair and dust out. Dyson has this same feature on the Piston Animal V16, which is due out this year, so I’ll be curious to see which mechanism is better engineered.
Bendable Winner: Shark
Photograph: Nena Farrell
If you’re looking for a vacuum that can bend to reach under furniture, I prefer the Shark to the Bosch. Both have a similar mechanism and feel, but the Bosch tended to push debris around when I was using it with an active bend, while the Shark managed to vacuum up debris I couldn’t get with the Bosch without lifting it and placing it on top of that particular debris (in this case, rogue cat kibble).
Accessory Winner: Dyson
Dyson pulls ahead because the Dyson Gen5 Detect comes with three attachments and two heads. You’ll get a Motorbar head, a Fluffy Optic head, a hair tool, a combination tool, and a dusting and crevice tool that’s actually built into the stick tube. I love that it’s built into the vacuum so that it’s one less separate attachment to carry around, and it makes me more likely to use it.
But Bosch does well in this area, too. You’ll get an upholstery nozzle, a furniture brush, and a crevice nozzle. It’s one more attachment than you’ll get with Shark, and Bosch also includes a wall mount that you can wire the charging cord into for storage and charging, and you can mount two attachments on it. But I will say, I like that Shark includes a simple tote bag to store the attachments in. The rest of my attachments are in plastic bags for each vacuum, and keeping track of attachments is the most annoying part of a cordless vacuum.
Build Winner: Tie
Photograph: Nena Farrell
All three of these vacuums have a good build quality, but each one feels like it focuses on something different. Bosch feels the lightest of the three and stands up the easiest on its own, but all three do need something to lean against to stay upright. The Dyson is the worst at this; it also needs a ledge or table wedged under the canister, or it’ll roll forward and tip over. The Bosch has a sleek black look and a colorful LED screen that will show you a picture of carpet or hardwood depending on what mode it’s vacuuming in. The vacuum head itself feels like the lightest plastic of the bunch, though.
Tech
Right-Wing Gun Enthusiasts and Extremists Are Working Overtime to Justify Alex Pretti’s Killing
Brandon Herrera, a prominent gun influencer with over 4 million followers on YouTube, said in a video posted this week that while it was unfortunate that Pretti died, ultimately the fault was his own.
“Pretti didn’t deserve to die, but it also wasn’t just a baseless execution,” Herrera said, adding without evidence that Pretti’s purpose was to disrupt ICE operations. “If you’re interfering with arrests and things like that, that’s a crime. If you get in the fucking officer’s way, that will probably be escalated to physical force, whether it’s arresting you or just getting you the fuck out of the way, which then can lead to a tussle, which, if you’re armed, can lead to a fatal shooting.” He described the situation as “lawful but awful.”
Herrera was joined in the video by former police officer and fellow gun influencer Cody Garrett, known online as Donut Operator.
Both men took the opportunity to deride immigrants, with Herrera saying “every news outlet is going to jump onto this because it’s current thing and they’re going to ignore the 12 drunk drivers who killed you know, American citizens yesterday that were all illegals or H-1Bs or whatever.”
Herrera also referenced his “friend” Kyle Rittenhouse, who has become central to much of the debate about the shooting.
On August 25, 2020, Rittenhouse, who was 17 at the time, traveled from his home in Illinois to a protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, brandishing an AR-15-style rifle, claiming he was there to protect local businesses. He killed two people and shot another in the arm that night.
Critics of ICE’s actions in Minneapolis quickly highlighted what they saw as the hypocrisy of the right’s defense of Rittenhouse and attacks on Pretti.
“Kyle Rittenhouse was a conservative hero for walking into a protest actually brandishing a weapon, but this guy who had a legal permit to carry and already had had his gun removed is to some people an instigator, when he was actually going to help a woman,” Jessica Tarlov, a Democratic strategist, said on Fox News this week.
Rittenhouse also waded into the debate, writing on X: “The correct way to approach law enforcement when armed,” above a picture of himself with his hands up in front of police after he killed two people. He added in another post that “ICE messed up.”
The claim that Pretti was to blame was repeated in private Facebook groups run by armed militias, according to data shared with WIRED by the Tech Transparency Project, as well as on extremist Telegram channels.
“I’m sorry for him and his family,” one member of a Facebook group called American Patriots wrote. “My question though, why did he go to these riots armed with a gun and extra magazines if he wasn’t planning on using them?”
Some extremist groups, such as the far-right Boogaloo movement, have been highly critical of the administration’s comments on being armed at a protest.
“To the ‘dont bring a gun to a protest’ crowd, fuck you,” one member of a private Boogaloo group wrote on Facebook this week. “To the fucking turn coats thinking disarming is the answer and dont think it would happen to you as well, fuck you. To the federal government who I’ve watched murder citizens just for saying no to them, fuck you. Shall not be infringed.”
Tech
After Minneapolis, Tech CEOs Are Struggling to Stay Silent
It was November 12, 2016, four days after Donald Trump won his first presidential election. Aside from a few outliers (looking at you, Peter Thiel), almost everyone in the tech world was shocked and appalled. At a conference I attended that Thursday, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said it was “a pretty crazy idea” to think that his company had anything to do with the outcome. The following Saturday, I was leaving my favorite breakfast place in downtown Palo Alto when I ran into Tim Cook, the CEO of Apple. We knew each other, but at that point, I had never really sat down with him to do a deep interview. But this was a moment when raw emotions were triggering all sorts of conversations, even between journalists and famously cautious executives. We ended up talking for what must have been 20 minutes.
I won’t go into the particulars of a private conversation. But it will surprise no one to hear what was mutually understood on that streetcorner: We were two people stunned at what had happened and shared the same unspoken belief that it was not good.
I have thought back to that day many times, certainly last year when Cook gifted President Trump a glitzy Apple sculpture with a 24k gold base, and most recently this past weekend when he attended a White House screening of the $40 million vanity documentary about Melania Trump. The event, which also included Amazon CEO Andy Jassy (whose company funded the project) and AMD CEO Lisa Su, took place only hours after the Trump administration’s masked army in Minneapolis put 10 bullets into 37-year-old Department of Veterans Affairs ICU nurse Alex Pretti. Also, a snowstorm was coming, which would have provided a good excuse to miss an event that might very well haunt its attendees for the rest of their lives. But there was Cook, feting a competitor’s media product, looking sharp in a tuxedo, and posing with the movie’s director, who hadn’t worked since he was accused of sexual misconduct or harassment by half a dozen women. (He has denied the allegations.)
Cook’s presence reflects the behavior of many of his peers in the trillion-dollar tech CEO club, all of whom run businesses highly vulnerable to the president’s potential ire. During Trump’s first term, CEOs of companies like Facebook, Amazon, and Google straddled a tightrope between objecting to policies that violated their company’s values and cooperating with the federal government. In the past year, however, their default strategy, executed with varying degrees of enthusiasm, has been to lavishly flatter the president and cut deals where Trump can claim wins. These executives have also funneled millions toward Trump’s inauguration, his future presidential library, and the humongous ballroom that he is building to replace the demolished East Wing of the White House. In return, the corporate leaders hoped to blunt the impact of tariffs and avoid onerous regulations.
This behavior disappointed a lot of people, including me. When Jeff Bezos bought The Washington Post, he was seen as a civic hero, but now he is molding the opinion pages of that venerable institution into that of a White House cheerleader. Zuckerberg once cofounded a group that advocated for immigration reform and penned an op-ed bemoaning the uncertain future of a young entrepreneur he was coaching who happened to be undocumented. Last year, Zuckerberg formally cut ties with the group, but by then he had already positioned himself as a Trump toady.
When Googlers protested Trump’s immigration policies during his first term, cofounder Sergey Brin joined their march. “I wouldn’t be where I am today or have any kind of the life that I have today if this was not a brave country that really stood out and spoke for liberty,” said Brin, whose family had escaped Russia when he was 6. Today, families like his are being pulled out of their cars and classrooms, sent to detention centers, and flown out of the country. Brin and fellow cofounder Larry Page built their search engine on the kind of government grant that the Trump administration no longer supports. Nonetheless, Brin is a Trump supporter. Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai, himself an immigrant, oversaw Google’s $22 million contribution to the White House ballroom and was among tech grandees flattering Trump at a September White House dinner where CEOs competed to see who could pander to Trump the most insincerely. Another immigrant, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, once slammed Trump’s first-term policies as “cruel and abusive.” In 2025, he was among those offering hosannas to the president.
-
Business1 week agoSuccess Story: This IITian Failed 17 Times Before Building A ₹40,000 Crore Giant
-
Entertainment1 week agoDrake takes legal battle over Kendrick Lamar track to next level
-
Politics1 week agoIn fiery Davos speech, Zelensky blasts EU, says US ‘security guarantees’ ready
-
Entertainment1 week agoHarry Styles world tour promises unforgettable star packed nights
-
Business1 week agoSilver ETFs Jump Up To 10%, Gold ETFs Gain Over 3% On Record Bullion Prices
-
Tech1 week agoRuckus gears up for networking partnership with TGR Haas F1 Team | Computer Weekly
-
Sports1 week agoSenegal coach defends team’s AFCON final walkoff and chaos
-
Fashion1 week agoSouth Korea tilts sourcing towards China as apparel imports shift

