Sir Ronnie Flanagan may have won some extra time as ChiefConstable, but it has come at a price, writes Dan Keenan
Sir Ronnie Flanagan was never one for the easy road and the same is true of the manner in which he leaves the top policing job in the North.
Last week's meeting of the Policing Board which offered him an extra four weeks as Chief Constable looks like more pain than gain for him.
No doubt hoping for a Policing Board request to postpone retirement for a longer time while recruitment of a successor is begun, he now finds himself with a mere extra month in the job and restraints on what he can say about the Ombudsman's report on the single worst atrocity of the Troubles and his force's handling of it.
He had the option of leaving this Thursday having offered his resignation last November and worked his statutory three months notice. He could have left with the unanimous approval of the board and a united vote of best wishes for his days at his new coveted position with Her Majesty's Inspectors of Constabulary.
It is a plum appointment, some say an overtly political one by the Home Office in London. Prestigious, too, is the allocation to him of oversight of the eastern region of England which includes London's Metropolitan police under the command of John Stevens - the same John Stevens who has been investigating the RUC in relation to contentious murder cases.
However, Sir Ronnie let it be known he was interested in remaining at police headquarters in Belfast while the process of selecting a successor was followed. Had he been permitted to do so, he would have witnessed the arrival of the first 48 Police Service of Northern Ireland trainees onto the streets on April 5th complete with new uniform and crest. He could also have addressed the crucial question of what to do about the full-time police reserve which the Patten report on the future of policing recommended be scrapped. That will now fall to his successor.
Now, he survives for an additional month only until such time as Colin Cramphorn, the Deputy Chief Constable and the man who will act up when Sir Ronnie leaves, is interviewed on March 21st for Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester police.
Sir Ronnie may claim, with some justification, that this is the sense of continuity he sought to achieve by staying on. But many on both sides of the political divide see him now as a diminished Chief Constable.
It was the DUP which proposed an extension to his time at police headquarters and which has been most vociferous in insisting he was the man they wanted and needed until his successor was ready to take over.
For other unionists, both in the UUP and among the non-party independent members of the Policing Board, there was a desire in common with the SDLP for the board to continue to establish itself and to build on the successes in relation to the way forward for the Omagh bombing investigation and the choice of a police crest. In order to do this, the theory runs, a new Chief Constable is needed. A fresh leader to coincide with a fresh start. This is what carried the day last Thursday.
Sir Ronnie's extra time with the PSNI is a cover for a variety of causes. First, it allows the Chief Constable to claim he has had to put off his retirement because he is so needed in Belfast.
Second, it allows those unionists who back him against the criticisms of the Police Ombudsman, to claim he has been vindicated in relation to the Omagh bombing investigation.
Third, it lends credence to the claim that, by staying on, there will now be a sense of continuity and a smoother transfer from the first chief constable of the PSNI to the next.
But what will sway the public mind is not so much these, but the strident use of the pejorative by the SDLP's Alex Attwood and his claims that Sir Ronnie is a lame duck who had his bacon saved in relation to the vote on his staying on by the casting vote of the Policing Board chairman.
Were it not the loss of Eddie McGrady's vote - the SDLP man was out of the country for the board meeting - Sir Ronnie would be history by the weekend.
Some unionists and the police representative body have objected to Mr Attwood's tone and choice of language. But the fact is, that he is correct.
What victories Sir Ronnie gained on Thursday were pyrrhic and the cost has been measured in terms of blows to the arrogance which some board members say Sir Ronnie displays.
Allegations that the board is now split along party political lines do not stand up. Despite the fact that unionists voted for Sir Ronnie to stay for the extra month and the SDLP did not, many independents from both "sides" lined up with the nationalists.
What is more important is that there was no likelihood of Sir Ronnie being asked to stay beyond March as he would have liked and certainly not until June when interviews for his successor may well be scheduled.
So it will be Mr Cramphorn who will probably take the salute when the new PSNI trainees pass out on April 5th. And it will be the Policing Board which continues to build its reputation just as Sir Ronnie's was tarnished last Thursday.