A new 101 number has been introduced so people can call the police to discuss non-emergency problems – but you will have to pay for the call. Is this progress, asks Martin Hesp?

Say the word "police" and people will immediately be confronted by very different thoughts and images. Many readers of this newspaper might, for example, be instantly reminded of a nice old sergeant saying the comforting words "Evening all..." while standing under a blue illuminated police sign.

Oh for the days of Dixon of Dock Green. It was a TV programme made in times when the thin blue line wasn't particularly emaciated – and when images of police didn't include accusations of racism, scenes of violent "kettling" or the altogether uncivilised concept that citizens must pay good money to report something to, or communicate with, the forces which uphold our laws.

There will have been people this week rendered speechless by the news that victims or witnesses of crime will have to pay 15p to telephone police and report incidents on a new non-emergency number.

For the first time, members of the public in every force area in England and Wales will have to dial 101 unless there is an immediate danger to life or the crime is ongoing. One can only imagine the backwash that will see the less well-off – and, I suppose, folk of the penny-pinching kind – becoming suddenly reluctant to report an incident.

Which might, in itself, appeal to bean-counters because the charge could mean police will find less work on their plates.

But is it a good thing for society – especially in times when old-fashioned morals and principles seem to be drowning under an oncoming tide of grab-everything-while-you-can?

Perhaps I'm stupid, but I work on the vague assumption that things must get better as mankind gets cleverer. I always think of dentistry – would you like to go back 100 years for a visit to the dentist? The resounding answer would be: no thank you.

Look at the work of most experts today – save perhaps for hedge-layers or sardine-net-makers – and you will, I'm sure, agree that things have moved on for the better.

The same could usually be said for policing. But if you were to tell a person from a century ago the following fact, my guess is that you'd be met with disbelief…

"In 2012 there'll hardly be any police officers visible on the streets – they certainly won't patrol much on foot – and if you want to contact them you'll have to by telephone and you will be charged three shillings."

Even Sherlock Holmes, who was no particular fan of the police back then, would have spluttered.

What really rubs salt in the wounds when you look at the new call-charge from an historic perspective is that ministers and police chiefs dress the 15p bill up as being fairer, more efficient and even cheaper.

Nick Herbert, the policing minister, said: "Until the launch of the (new) 101 number, the public were charged up to 40p a minute to call 0845 numbers to reach their local police forces.

"At a flat rate of 15p per call from both mobile phones and landlines, no matter how long the call lasts or what time of day, for many, this will be cheaper than the previous cost of calling the police for non-emergencies."

Commander Ian Dyson, of the Association of Chief Police Officers, says: "Having just two phone numbers – 101 for reporting a crime that has happened, to get advice or to raise local policing issues – or 999 if it's an emergency, makes calling the police a lot easier and makes our services more accessible."

An aside here: dear old Dixon of Dock Green might have been surprised to learn that 40 years after his show aired on TV, more than half our police officers are paid £38,000 a year or above – putting them in the top 20 per cent of the nation's earners according to latest figures.

So let's get this straight: we're paying people much more to be policemen or women; we don't see them in evidence much on our streets; and nowadays we even have to pay good money to report a crime on our telephones so that the Old Bill can deal with it – if, indeed, they deign to take any action. Maybe there's something I'm not getting…

This erosion of service will, of course, be down to the aforementioned bean-counters. There is one big problem with them: they are either not interested in, or cannot see, the bigger picture. OK, so apparently emergency operators often tell people to hang up and call 101 if their call is not an emergency – only one in four calls to 999 need an immediate response. Obviously this is creating areas of inefficiency and costing forces money.

But what about the escalating cost of crimes that might now go unreported? What about the price in human misery, for example, to those unfortunate people with neighbours-from-hell who often have to call for help? You could go on and on naming the unseen but no less catastrophic and expensive examples which could weigh down our society once seemingly innocuous charges like this are introduced. It's called cutting off noses to spite faces. It means saving pennies to eventually spend pounds. I think the bean-counters should add one-and-one – and think twice.