Essex Police said they are working closely with the council while the operation is introduced (Image: Getty)
Reform UK has deployed private security to patrol Essex towns following concerns about “the daily bussing of asylum seekers”. The scheme, named Operation Vanguard, is under a three-month trial, which is expected to cost around £118,000 plus VAT, and is being financed through a withdrawal of up to £150,000, according to the party.
From September 14, two security operatives will be present in Braintree, Colchester and Chelmsford town centres every day between 10am and 6pm. While their role is to patrol anti-social behaviour hotspots, Reform UK confirmed that the personnel “have no enforcement powers”. Essex Police told the Express it is working with Essex County Council to monitor the operation, and will “respond robustly” should any incidents arise.
Get the day’s biggest headlines in UK and World news and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
“Essex Police’s Neighbourhood Policing Teams patrol these areas every day, including at key times, providing reassurance to the public and acting to deter crime and anti-social behaviour,” the police told the Express.
“Where incidents do occur, we respond robustly and take action against those responsible.”
Essex County Council’s website states that the security patrols “have no police powers” and “any need for law enforcement will have to be reported to the police”.
The police said that the three town and city centres remains “safe places” with the level of crime falling in the last three years.
This year so far has seen 23 arrests relating to Wethersfield service users. (Image: Getty)
However, locals have raised complaints about feeling unsafe in their neighbourhoods.
Minibuses taking dozens of migrants to Colchester city centre have reportedly been seen dropping the men off while they browse around shops and visit local charities for hours before being picked up in the evening.
According to Essex Police, there have been 15 reported offences across Essex since June 2023, in which a member of the public was the victim and the suspect was identified as, or alleged to be, a Wethersfield service user.
Of those incidents, six were in Colchester, three in Braintree, and five occurred in Chelmsford, it added.
This year has so far seen 23 arrests relating to Wethersfield service users, with 14 related to incidents at the accommodation site itself, and four related to incidents in the wider Essex community.
Essex Police said: “We are in regular contact with Essex County Council and already have well-established processes in place to share information and respond to concerns.
“We will continue to work closely together as this operation is introduced across the three areas.”
Essex Police and Council Break Silence Over Reform’s Security Plan – ‘They Have No Powers’
A new security operation launched by Reform UK-led Essex County Council has triggered a fresh political row after it emerged that the private security guards deployed across three town centres have no police powers and cannot make arrests.
Operation Vanguard began on 14 September in Braintree, Chelmsford and Colchester, with six uniformed security operatives deployed across the three locations. The three-month trial was introduced after concerns were raised about the presence of asylum seekers travelling from the Wethersfield asylum accommodation centre into nearby towns.
The council says the scheme is intended to reassure residents, deter antisocial behaviour and gather evidence about whether additional support is required. However, Essex Police and local political opponents have stressed that the private operatives are not police officers and have no enforcement powers.
The disagreement has opened a wider debate about what private security can realistically achieve in public spaces and whether the operation addresses actual crime levels or perceptions of safety.
What Is Operation Vanguard?
Operation Vanguard is a three-month pilot funded by Essex County Council.
Two security operatives are assigned to each of the three locations: Braintree, Chelmsford and Colchester. They patrol from approximately 10am until 6pm, seven days a week.
The council says they will follow agreed routes, including locations where antisocial behaviour has previously been reported.
The operatives are employed by My Local Bobby, a private security company, and are licensed by the Security Industry Authority. They have training in areas including safeguarding, conflict management, de-escalation and public engagement.
Essex County Council says the operation is designed to provide a visible presence rather than replace conventional policing.
The council has allocated up to £150,000 from its Community Innovation and Improvement Fund reserve for the three-month trial. According to the council, the money comes from an existing reserve and does not result in an increase in council tax.
The Key Issue: They Are Not Police
The most significant limitation of Operation Vanguard is also the point that has generated the most discussion.
The guards have no police powers.
They cannot arrest people, conduct searches or compel members of the public to answer questions.
The council’s own information states that the operatives have no more powers than an ordinary member of the public. If they encounter a matter requiring enforcement, they must report it to Essex Police.
They can, like any member of the public, use reasonable force in circumstances where that is legally permitted, but they cannot exercise the statutory powers available to police officers.
That distinction means the patrols are fundamentally different from additional police officers.
Their main functions are visibility, reassurance, observation, prevention and reporting.
Essex Police remains responsible for criminal enforcement.
Why Did Reform Introduce the Scheme?
The operation is connected to the government’s use of Wethersfield, a former RAF airfield, as asylum accommodation.
The Home Office has confirmed plans to increase the number of people accommodated at the site.
Essex County Council says up to 17 minibuses can travel from the site each day to Braintree, Chelmsford and Colchester.
Reform-led councillors have argued that the arrival and movement of larger numbers of asylum seekers has generated concerns among some residents and businesses.
Council leader Peter Harris has said the county should act before there is an increase in antisocial behaviour or crime rather than waiting until problems emerge.
The council describes the operation as a preventive measure.
Its stated objective is therefore not simply to respond to recorded offences, but also to address concerns about safety and public confidence.
What Does Essex Police Say?
Essex Police has sought to distinguish between the council’s concerns and the available crime evidence.
According to reporting on the controversy, the force has said that Braintree, Colchester and Chelmsford town and city centres are safe places and that all three areas have seen less crime than three years ago.
That position has become central to criticism of Operation Vanguard.
The argument is not that residents cannot feel unsafe. Rather, critics question whether the available evidence demonstrates a rise in crime connected to asylum seekers that would justify the additional patrols.
The distinction between crime statistics and perceptions of crime is therefore an important part of the dispute.
The council itself has described the operation partly in terms of addressing a perceived fear of crime.
The Local Council’s Objections
The scheme has also faced criticism from local councillors outside the Reform-led county administration.
Braintree District Council leader Tom Cunningham has questioned the rationale for the operation and highlighted the limited powers available to the security guards.
He has also pointed to existing policing and community-safety initiatives in the area.
These include police operations and programmes involving Essex Police, the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner and local authorities.
The argument from critics is that residents may be better served by properly funded policing and established community-safety programmes than by a separate private patrol operation.
There is also a question about whether the new guards duplicate existing services.
The £150,000 Question
The cost of the operation has become another point of controversy.
Essex County Council has capped funding for the three-month trial at £150,000.
The council says this comes from an existing reserve rather than additional council tax.
Supporters argue that the expenditure is justified if it improves public confidence and provides useful evidence about what happens in the three town centres.
Critics, however, have questioned whether the money could be used more effectively.
Because the guards cannot arrest suspects or investigate crimes, some councillors have questioned how much additional security they can provide compared with police patrols.
The answer may depend on what the council considers success.
What Will the Guards Actually Do?
The council has outlined several practical responsibilities.
The operatives will maintain a visible presence in public spaces, patrol agreed routes and visit locations where antisocial behaviour has previously been reported.
They can observe incidents and report suspected criminal activity to Essex Police.
They can also provide assistance to members of the public who need help contacting the appropriate authorities.
The intention is partly preventive.
A visible security presence can potentially discourage certain forms of antisocial behaviour even without formal enforcement powers.
However, whether that effect occurs will need to be assessed during the trial.
The council has said the operation will also gather evidence about whether further support is necessary.
A Divisive Political Issue
Operation Vanguard has become part of the much broader political argument over asylum accommodation.
Supporters of the scheme argue that local residents should not have to wait for crime statistics to deteriorate before authorities respond to concerns about safety.
Opponents argue that linking asylum seekers with fears about crime risks reinforcing perceptions that are not supported by evidence.
This is particularly sensitive because the council’s own documents acknowledge the difference between actual criminality and fear of crime.
The debate therefore involves two separate questions.
The first is whether people are committing crimes.
The second is whether residents feel less safe because of changes in their local environment.
Those questions can produce different answers.
A community can experience increased anxiety without experiencing an equivalent increase in recorded crime.
The Role of Wethersfield
The Wethersfield asylum accommodation centre remains at the heart of the controversy.
The Home Office is using the former military site as part of its wider strategy for housing asylum seekers while their claims are processed.
The government has said that it wants to move away from the use of asylum hotels and increase the use of alternative accommodation, including former military facilities.
That policy places additional pressure on communities surrounding sites such as Wethersfield.
Local authorities are then left dealing with questions about transport, public services, community relations and perceptions of safety.
The Essex dispute demonstrates how national immigration policy can generate local political conflicts.
Could the Guards Stop a Crime?
This is another point that has attracted attention.
The answer is limited.
The operatives cannot use police powers to detain people simply because they suspect them of an offence.
They cannot search members of the public under police powers.
They cannot issue police penalties or conduct formal criminal investigations.
If a serious incident takes place, Essex Police must become involved.
The security guards can observe, report and, within the ordinary law applicable to everyone, intervene in limited circumstances.
That makes the operation more accurately described as a private security and reassurance scheme than an alternative police force.
What Happens if Someone Is Arrested?
Any arrest requiring police powers would have to be carried out by Essex Police or another person with the appropriate legal authority.
The private guards themselves cannot make arrests under special police powers.
This means that the effectiveness of Operation Vanguard will depend partly on its relationship with the existing police service.
The council has said it will inform Essex Police of relevant incidents and has been working with the force to establish arrangements during the trial.
The operation therefore does not remove the need for conventional policing.
Instead, it adds another layer between the public and the police.
A Test for Reform-Run Local Government
Operation Vanguard also provides an early test of how Reform UK-led local government operates in practice.
The party has campaigned strongly on immigration, public safety and visible enforcement.
Essex County Council’s decision to introduce private patrols represents a practical attempt to translate some of those concerns into a local policy.
However, the scheme also exposes the limits of local government powers.
Councillors can fund services and introduce initiatives, but they cannot simply create a parallel police force.
Criminal enforcement remains a responsibility of the police.
That division of responsibilities is particularly important in an emotionally charged debate over migration.
The Three-Month Test
Operation Vanguard is scheduled to operate for an initial three months.
That gives Essex County Council an opportunity to assess whether the patrols achieve their stated objectives.
Several questions will be important.
Do residents report feeling safer?
Does antisocial behaviour fall in the areas covered?
How many incidents are identified and passed to Essex Police?
Do businesses report any improvement?
And does the presence of private security provide measurable benefits compared with existing policing arrangements?
The answers could determine whether the scheme is extended, changed or abandoned.
Conclusion
The controversy surrounding Operation Vanguard ultimately comes down to what private security can achieve.
Reform-led Essex County Council has introduced six licensed security operatives across Braintree, Chelmsford and Colchester after concerns about the impact of asylum accommodation at Wethersfield.
The council says the patrols are intended to reassure residents, deter antisocial behaviour and collect evidence.
But Essex Police and local critics have stressed a crucial fact: the guards are not police officers and have no enforcement powers. They cannot arrest people or conduct searches and must refer criminal matters to Essex Police.
The operation has therefore become a test of whether visibility and reassurance can address concerns that traditional policing data does not necessarily show.
For Reform, it is an attempt to demonstrate that local government can respond directly to residents’ concerns.
For Essex Police, it remains clear that criminal enforcement belongs with the force.
And for local residents, the real measure of Operation Vanguard will ultimately be whether the three-month experiment makes their town centres feel safer while producing evidence that can justify its cost.
The debate over asylum accommodation will continue, but the operation now provides an opportunity to test competing claims against practical results rather than political rhetoric alone.