Stoke-on-Trent Council spent £125k on city centre security
Reform councillor Dan Jellyman challenged council leaders over the safety of Hanley, but they insist things are getting better
More than £125,000 of taxpayers’ money was spent on private security patrols in Hanley last year. Stoke-on-Trent City Council spent the cash on security guards in car parks such as the Smithfield multi-storey and other areas of the city centre.
But council leaders insist that partnership work to make Hanley safer is having an effect, with crime and anti-social behaviour down according to the authority’s latest figures. These show that anti-social behaviour in Hanley fell by 33.97 per cent and overall crime by 6.66 per cent between October 2024 and October 2025.
Reform UK group leader Dan Jellyman challenged the council’s ruling Labour group over the safety of the city centre during Thursday’s full council meeting. Cllr Jellyman asked council leader Jane Ashworth if she believed Hanley is ‘a safe place to visit’, considering the £125,333 spend on private security.
But Cllr Ashworth hit back by criticising Cllr Jellyman for agreeing cuts to drug and alcohol services while he was part of the previous Conservative administration. Cllr Ashworth said: “Reported crime is down, anti-social behaviour is down, and drug possession and supply is down by 13 per cent. However, when you were in the cabinet you cut investment in substance and alcohol misuse services which help people get off the drugs which leads in many cases to them committing anti-social behaviour and crime. You cut it by 56 per cent.
“Don’t come telling me that there’s a problem in Hanley. I know there’s a problem in Hanley, and you are one of the reasons why there is.”
Earlier in the meeting, Cllr Ashworth said the reduction in crime and anti-social behaviour in Hanley was the result of ‘intensive partnership work in Hanley’ with the police and other agencies. Actions have included an increase in stop and search and high visibility patrols, along with investment in support services for people affected by drug misuse and homelessness.
Speaking after the meeting, Cllr Jellyman said he had submitted a freedom of information request for the council’s private security spend in Hanley after noticing a guard outside Smithfield multi-storey car park. He believes the crime and anti-social behaviour problems in Hanley are the result of the deteriorating local economy, rather than cuts to addiction services.
Cllr Jellyman said: “If Labour think this is the problem, why aren’t they spending the money on drug and alcohol services instead of private security? The real reason is that Hanley has stopped being the main shopping centre in the city, with businesses closing left, right and centre. And Labour are making things even worse with the business rates revaluations.
“Labour know this is the problem and they’re putting taxpayers’ money where their mouth is with this £125,000 spend on security guards. But another question is why the council is doing this, instead of the police.”
But Cllr Ashworth says there is a direct causal link between austerity cuts to council services and policing and rising crime.
She said: “It takes a particular kind of audacity to lecture others about public safety when the previous administration – which Cllr Jellyman was part of, before his recent change of heart – cut local drug and alcohol services by more than half. A 56 per cent reduction in treatment and prevention capacity has long-term consequences – it weakened our ability to intervene early, support vulnerable people and prevent antisocial behaviour linked to substance misuse.
“We welcome scrutiny – but we won’t accept lectures on public safety from those whose policies dismantled it. Our priority is getting on with the job of making our city safer, cleaner and more hopeful for everyone.”