Police told to break previous promises
With severe cuts to police budgets on the cards, the answer to keeping bobbies on the beat, it transpires, is to tear up the promise to... er... keep bobbies on the beat.
Yes, the National Policing Pledge for England and Wales is to be scrapped as part of government plans to drive out bureaucratic inefficiencies from the service. But a quick look at the pledge reveals that it is all about ensuring officers do what the public wants them to do - not least, pounding the streets.
It demands that neighbourhood officers "spend at least 80% of their time visibly working in your neighbourhood, tackling your priorities". That promise is now to be dropped.
It also demands that police answer 999 calls within 10 seconds and get to an emergency within 15 or 20 minutes. Those commitments are to be ditched. So is a promise to attend to a non-emergency within 60 minutes if the caller is vulnerable or upset.
The police, the government argues, must be much more accountable to local priorities rather than central targets. But they've just torn up the pledge to hold monthly local public meetings to set priorities and promises to keep victims informed of progress on crimes.
"It is a paradox that we have seen record numbers of police officers recruited in the last few years and yet the public still say to us that they don't see them on the streets", Home Office Minister Nick Herbert told the Today programme this morning. "There is some evidence that they get caught up doing other things, not spending sufficient time on the beat."
How, one might ask, does getting rid of the commitment to ensure officers are out on the streets improve matters?
One of the reasons Labour ministers introduced the National Policing Pledge in 2008 was to try and ensure chief constables did what the public told them after they had scrapped all of the previous targets save one. As things stand, there is only one measure of police performance in England and Wales - that 60% of local people should have confidence in them.
Instead of detailed targets for how officers are performing in cutting crime, responding to calls or dealing with local issues, the then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith introduced a single target based on how people feel.
The debate about cuts to police is also a psychological one, it seems to me. As research as shown [1.18MB PDF], bobbies on the beat are hopeless at catching criminals and there is a heated academic discussion as to whether they do much to prevent crime. Whether they reduce or increase fear of crime is also contested.
And yet we have set up the argument over policing budgets as a battle between back-room bureaucracy (bad) and front-line policing (good). Of course there is waste. Of course there is inefficiency. But those problems can be found back and front.
I'm 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~37~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
Complain about this comment
I'm struggling to remember the last time I saw a policeman walking the streets of a residential area, rather than in the commercial area. I've seen possibly two or three PCSOs, but seeing as they command zero respect you may as well just put a cat in a police uniform and let it wander the neighbourhood for all the good they do.
The one time I've actually had need to call the police though, they were very efficient and arrived within twenty minutes, and then told me off as apparently it wasn't serious enough to need them. Bit of a mixed experience.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps one way in which the Police Service can save money would be to reduce the numbers of senior ranks including ACPO and also to take away ACPO company cars!! It always seems disingenuous to me for Senior Officers to talk about reducing rank and file when the Public want more bobbies on the street. Why does reducing staff always mean lower ranks. The Police Service has been top heavy for decades if we all have to suffer the pain as David Cameron has said then why not senior rank!!
Complain about this comment
On the face of it, trying to ensure that there are more 'bobbies' on the beat by saving money through removal of the plege to ensure that they are there does sound ridiculous. But think about it for a moment.
In making that pledge, a lot of money has been spent on advertising the fact. On one street in Crewe every single bus shelter has a poster about it... oddly enough, the one street you can be sure of finding them, it's a favourite haunt of constables with radar guns looking for speeding motorists (known hereabouts as Bandit country - stopped it and banned it).
Then if you make such a pledge, you need to spend money monitoring that the correct percentage of an officer's time is spent on the beat as opposed to his other duties. Oh, and conduct surveys, again at great expense, to see if locals feel that the pledge is being kept.
So ditching a 'pledge' to do their job is not quite as daft as it seems. Makes a good headline, though!
Complain about this comment
Ted Maul wrote:
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
Next you'll be wanting Freedom of Speech and the right to lawful public demonstration...
Worse still you may want to take pictures of some Police Cadets as they prepare to march in their local Armed Forces day parade:
Officers claim they don't need law to stop photographer taking pictures
Two police officers stopped a teenage photographer from taking pictures of an Armed Forces Day parade - and then claimed they did not need a law to detain him.
Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/officers-claim-they-dont-need-law-to-stop-photographer-taking-pictures-2012827.html
Complain about this comment
The police should be doing police work to catch criminals, nosey neighbours/residents should be peering out their windows to see if anyone alien to their neighbourhood is loitering, or those who are locally known to be criminal/devious.
Instead of say 30 police officers in Doncaster pounding their local beats, they should be raiding the houses of criminals and drug dealers and actually undertaking action to aprehend criminals.
As I have said on other comments, removing standards measuring systems, will just result in greater chaos across the WHOLE of public service expenditure cuts.
This is basically a SLASH & BURN policy, more reminiscent of retreating WWII Russian or nazi soldiers.
My greatest worry is enevitably that there is just so MUCH endemic incompetance when governments moves forward and implements policy, that ANY/ALL situations of retreat ultimately result in MASSIVE MASSIVE unnecessary casualtys, of which ordinary citizens of the UK will be the victims of such incompetance and NEGLECT of care of duty.
Its all very well for MUPPET government ministers to say appeasing things to voters about minimising detrimental problems/issues, but in ALL FACT & REALITY it is just PURE 100% HOGWASH and is NOT born out by FACT of experience of citizens.
Complain about this comment
Those deciding about cuts are usually those who need to be cut.
Complain about this comment
Why does pay in the Police start at £23,259 ?
A Private in the Army only gets £17,014 so how can the Police possibly justify paying their new recruits £6,000 a year more than this ?
This is replicated all the way through the ranks, a Brigadier will earn £100,963 a year while Police Commissioners are earning between £127,017 and £260,088.
And please don't reply that Police work is dangerous too, so far this year there has been one Police officer killed in the line of duty and he died in a traffic accident when responding to a 999 call and the most common cause of death for Police Officers in the UK is dying in traffic accidents on the way too and from work while off duty.
http://www.policeoracle.com/pay_and_conditions/police_pay_scales.html
http://www.armedforces.co.uk/armypayscales.htm
http://www.policememorial.org.uk/
Complain about this comment
We will wait and see I wonder how the balance of time will be sourced? What will be seen as no longer needs involvement by the police.
With the cuts happening there will not be enough police to manage current crime how will this effect communities effected by 'drugs'? will we see a relaxing of drug laws? certainly cant increase with less police!
Will we see a blind eye to traffic offences? ASB? we were told the other day that a noisy neighbour is no longer a police issue and should be solely pursued through the council.
going to be interesting to see......
Complain about this comment
MrWonderfulReality wrote:
This is basically a SLASH & BURN policy, more reminiscent of retreating WWII Russian or nazi soldiers.
That's got to be a new record; it only took six posts for Godwin's Law to be proven...
Complain about this comment
Maybe its just me but here in Northern Ireland the police don't even patrol the streets, it takes them hours to respond to serious calls and bomb alerts (Which happen almost 4 times a week).
In other words the police are useless and may as well stay at home.
Complain about this comment
Was just wondering, is there really no more recent research into how effective police are at preventing crime? The one linked to in this article is 26 years old! Surely things have changed a little since then?!
Complain about this comment
8. At 2:56pm on 29 Jun 2010, General_Jack_Ripper wrote:
Why does pay in the Police start at £23,259 ?
A Private in the Army only gets £17,014 so how can the Police possibly justify paying their new recruits £6,000 a year more than this ?
they do have to deal with members of the general public, don't forget.
Complain about this comment
If they need to cut waste, cut the pension age. Why should Police be able to retire at 55 with a full pension when the rest of us have to wait another 10 years and more. They then normally go back to work as a civilian and earn another pension. Nice.
Complain about this comment
Perhaps if the police focussed on crimes that actually make a difference and spent less time prosecuting things that don't actually make a difference they might command more respect.
Since discussions on policing inevitably end up with the question of speeding motorists, how about using a little discretion? Someone a little bit over the speed limit outside a school at 3pm on a sunny Friday afternoon needs to be dealt with. Someone a little more over the speed limit on the same road at 3am on the Saturday morning is unlikely to be a danger to anyone.
We might also suggest a little bit of proportion in the police response to situations. When my local off-license was robbed the CCTV captured the faces of those responsible but the police claimed there was insufficient evidence and they didn't have the resources to deal with it. The poor police weren't even able to send me a crime reference number when my car was broken into despite their promise to do so. Yet if a spat in the primary school playground ends up with one 9-year-old saying something "racially insulting" at another then half a dozen police officers turn up.
If we could fire all the staff whose job appears to be to explain why the police won't attend a situation we might get further.
Complain about this comment
"yet the public still say to us that they don't see them on the streets"
When did the public say that to you Herbert? This government has yet to ask the public a single thing, in fact public opinion research has all but disappeared since the election, in complete contradiction to CameraOn's promises to be more engaged with the population.
If they were to ask me, I would say that visible policing, helped by the excellent PCSO scheme, has significantly reduced the amount of petty crime in my area.
Complain about this comment
#13, suuuuuuure, the general public are so much more dangerous than, say, the Taliban or Iraqi insurgents. When a police officer has to watch his every step somewhere deadly like Kennington it's only fair he should get paid more than the soldier who can take a leisurely stroll through somewhere like Kabul.
Complain about this comment
It's stupididty to cut back on security personnel in such a critical time. Garnering the support of the general public and making them more aware of potential threats could help. The government should really re-think this one. Why not have a junior system. Where young people can enter the police, MI5, MI6 on a junior level with the potential to advancement in 3 years? There are so many good, capable citizens who would love to work in security but will never get a chance to. That's such a waste of potential man power and talent.
Complain about this comment
Its time everyone shared the cuts, that frankly, we know were coming! ME - private sector - no pay rise for 2 years, no bonus for 4 (and then it was £100) no overtime claimable, stay at the cheapest hotel possible to save costs, pay as much as I can afford into my pension, is this a moan? NO, I'm stating facts, I'm lucky to have a job!
A FRIEND - works at a mid level in the police, last year bought a new £1500 laptop with ONE of their bonuses, has had a pay raise every year, plans to retire at 50 on full salary and a £100k one off payment, stays at the malmaison, has two houses, has 5 hours double time for half an hours work on a weekend and at this very moment, is on work business in London having been sat in the pub since 2pm. Perish the thought of reducing anything as the union would demand a strike.
FAIR? ERM?
Complain about this comment
Partnering with the Los Angeles and New York Police departments could bolster England's police force since drug crime is so prevalent here. A trip to England and vice versa would break up the monotony of the job. The police have it rough. Why not mix it up a bit and create some excitement, memories and new friends.
Complain about this comment
Like every discussion nowadays, the objective is to save money. I feel a new quango is about to be set up. On the beat or in the cars hidden behind the chip shop? What about bikes? As the song says: 'Bobbies on bicycles two by two', save footwear, save petrol and environmentally friendly. But when I was a youngster the bad lads would let the bobby's tyres down when he went indoors to investigate, so back-up would be required.
Complain about this comment
The previous government created 4,000 new criminal offences. In the news today is a report about a woman who was prosecuted and convicted for calling someone a "coconut", under one of these new laws. How much police time - not to mention Crown Prosecution Service time, court time and all the rest - is wasted in ridiculous investigations and prosecutions of this type?
Complain about this comment
#8 It is interesting that you use the army for comparison as a period in the army was once regarded as a good preperation to becoming a police constable. But it was generally felt that obtaining the rank of Sargeant was required to show the qualities required for what was and remains a demanding job.
Also I believe only the metropolitan police are headed by a commissioner all other forces having a chief constable. I believe a number of prewar commissioners were retired military usually Major General or above.
Complain about this comment
"If they need to cut waste, cut the pension age"
Surely you mean increase the pension age?
Complain about this comment
" If they need to cut waste, cut the pension age. Why should Police be able to retire at 55 with a full pension when the rest of us have to wait another 10 years and more. They then normally go back to work as a civilian and earn another pension. Nice."
the reason for this is the same as in the forces ..... common and garden biology.....most officers remain as PCs, sergeants and so on doing front line duties and need to respond to anything, fighting outside a nightclub at 3am, chasing suspects, climbing over fences and gates ..... even at 55 this is often asking too much, cant see how we could expect someone at 65to do this !!!
Complain about this comment
The police service could save money by getting rid of the bureaucracy creating NPIA. This organisation has grown massively over the last few years and just adds more pressure to operational police officers.
Recently issued guidelines on mental health expect officers to have the the knowledge of a psychiatrist.
In recent years the police have have moved away from policing and into other agencies responsibility i.e. looking after working in local council offices, providing activities for youth in police time, looking after vulnerable people, child care after abuse. These are all issues that should rightly be dealt with by the police but then passed onto the more appropriate agency for follow up.
The police should be left to protect life & property, keep the peace, prevent & detect crime and bring offenders to justice.
Complain about this comment
The police would be able to deal with far more real issues far more if people didnt report so many petty domestic squabbles and disputes and expect the cops to sort it all out...Many people ring the police when there just isnt just cause.
People need to take more responsibility for thier own problems.
Complain about this comment
There is a huge amount of wastage within the Police Service. For example - why do we have 43 County Forces in 2010 - it is a complete nonsense. The duplication is massive and it beggars belief that Ken Clarke ducked the issue when he was Home Secetary.
Complain about this comment
Get rid of PCSOs they are not value for money they have no powers and cant realy achieve much.
Complain about this comment
The truth is that most new recruits into the Police Force are by and large only interested in the career prospects of the job and not public service. Which should be the main reason for wishing to join.
Sadly, what we see is an arrogant disdain for your average law abiding citizen, whose level of service is determined by their geographic location.
Complain about this comment
This article sums up a lot of what went wrong under NuLab. Why should we care whether a "pledge" is ripped up or not? Has that "pledge" any bearing on whether our streets will be actually safer? No, but elf and safety rules excusing policemen sitting in the station chasing non-criminals does, as championed by NuLab.
Reminds you of that law the Labour grandly passed to "reduce the deficit", without doing a shred of work to make it happen until forced at market gunpoint to do so... at greater cost to everyone. Long may they languish in opposition.
Complain about this comment
Since when have 'bobbies on the beat' ever caught criminals?
They're there as a purely aesthetic feature intended to let the public see that they're doing something, when in fact all they're doing is walking about catching absolutely nobody.
Total waste - get them doing something of substance.
Complain about this comment
If the courts and judges were half as effective as the police, we would not need so many police. At the moment the villains are back on the street before the arresting officer gets through the mountain of paperwork each arrest entails. Those who criticise police salaries should remember that the people the police are dealing with are not just run of the mill members of the public, in the main they are the lowest forms of human life, addicts thieves,violent ignorant individuals and generally low life who have more rights than any law abiding citizen it seems.
Complain about this comment
I'd be interested to know why we generally need police officers to go around in two's, particularly in cities. This alone is wasteful of man/womanpower and seems to hve become the norm in many areas from the late 70's on. If police have public support and respect, which is not simply achieved by putting on an antistab vest and blue uniform, there should be no reason for dancing partners. Unforunatly even older people don't see eye to eye with the service as increasingly the service hs lot its core role as a servant of the public. In the last two months I have both complained about an praised the police and their activities. They have a job to do and ike us all make errors of judgement at times. Too much time spent on achieving tick box results doesn't lead to better outcomes because it depends on what boxes are left to tick. Over the years the ability of experiance on a demanding person to prson job has been eroded so that mistrust exists on both sides instead of a mutual understanding of aims and outcomes. Perhaps these changes might start a revival of the ideas of policing as a mutually progressive force rather than merely onfronttonal.
Complain about this comment
Anthony_analyst wrote:
Also I believe only the metropolitan police are headed by a commissioner all other forces having a chief constable.
You're right, I was quoting the Chief Constable pay rates but then typed Commissioner on my earlier post.
Complain about this comment
The reason Police are not seen enough on the streets is due to the last Governments absolute obsession with accountability and measuring.
In the last twenty years constables (as its them who patrol no one else really) are filling in more paperwork than ever.
The constables discretion to deal with an incident how they see fit has been totally removed by Government ministers.That is why people are being targeted for minor offences,speeding etc.If you the constable deal with the offence by administering words of advice that is not recordable and does not tick a box.Thus you are subject to discipline for failing to meet targets and do enough work,a vicious circle.
Most people joined the Police to help the public,patrol the streets,speak to people and deal with what they come across how they see fit at the time.
Not how someone later analyzes it in some new backroom role,again another part of Policing that has ballooned out of control.Decisions that are not now made by the officer dealing with the incident but by a CPS lawyer at the end of a telephone who has no idea about the incident or the people involved.All they look at is whether they can get a positive result at court,noy how it may be affecting the individual involved .
There are more backroom staff analyzing the small amount of officers out there than people realise.
Some forces now have more civillian employees than warranted officers ,and it is the warranted officer who patrols and responds to incidents.It is the warranted officer who covers the streets 24 hours a day 365 days a year including all bank holidays,xmas day and new years day when most people are with their families.That is the commitment given when people join this profession.
Not the backroom staff who are being employed to oversee a role they do not really understand.
Maybe Teresa May can put it right , lets hope so.
Complain about this comment
@ Ted Maul and General Jack,
So you think the police should not prosecute Victimless crimes? Drugs are classified as victimless crimes as are Public Order incidents that happen every weekend night. If you think the police should not deal with or prosecute people for these types of offences then what do you think they should be doing?
Complain about this comment
Why do the comments posted always rapidly descend into a diatribe of people's gripes and dislikes about any given subject. What has most of what has been written got to do with the subject in hand? Will the levels of cuts proposed affect the quality of the policing service provided to this country? Most likely yes.
Should this be left to individual forces to decide on a piecemeal basis. This seems to be what the government are indicating? Would it not be better to have a Royal Commission on policing ( the last one was in the 1970's, a lot has changed in British society since then )so that structural reform of the entire service can be co-ordinated. This is surely the way to acheive both best value and ensuring this country has a police service for the 21st century.
Complain about this comment
31. At 7:13pm on 29 Jun 2010, brownsoup wrote:
This article sums up a lot of what went wrong under NuLab. Why should we care whether a "pledge" is ripped up or not? Has that "pledge" any bearing on whether our streets will be actually safer? No, but elf and safety rules excusing policemen sitting in the station chasing non-criminals does, as championed by NuLab.
Reminds you of that law the Labour grandly passed to "reduce the deficit", without doing a shred of work to make it happen until forced at market gunpoint to do so... at greater cost to everyone. Long may they languish in opposition.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Tough on crime, but not if it requires tax rises."
Complain about this comment
Ted Maul wrote:
they do have to deal with members of the general public, don't forget.
Teachers have to deal with their children and they only get £21,102 a year, they have to buy their own tasers too...
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
As a wife of a Police Officer,I see every day the frustration that my husband and his collegues have on a daily basis, targets targets targets, senior Officers should wake up.....chasing % figures detracts from Policing the streets, senior Officers live in a world that is so far removed from every day Policing, most spent two minutes on the streets.....they have no idea....Police Officers are afraid to Police the streets, as quite simply they have targets to meet....so they meet those targets otherwise they are discplined ! Targets that if the public really knew, they would be horrified. PCSO's need a greater defined role, they patrol the streets in two's, and the Criminals, know that they cannot deal with incidents effectively. Let them Police the streets, not chase targets that are meaningless....my husband waits to see what coporate line is fed by senior Officers over the next few days.
Complain about this comment
No, no, no, no, no!
The purpose of more bobbies on the beat is NOT to catch more criminals: in the last few years, that seems to be all they've failed to do. The purpose is to prevent those crimes from occurring in the first place. OF COURSE THERE'S NO EVIDENCE! It's impossible to prove that a jewellers would definitely have been robbed if that bobby hadn't been standing outside it. Or that old lady mugged, or that guy stabbed etc etc. But any criminal with half a brain cell will surely think twice about committing a crime when there's 3 or 4 police officers within sight/hearing.
I for one don't want a police force that goes round clearing up AFTER a crime, whether they catch those responsible or not. I would much rather have a police force that PREVENTS crime: catching criminals (who aren't criminals until they've committed the crime) should be reserved for those occasions when the police weren't able to be there to prevent it. Putting the emphasis on solving crimes after the fact is what took the police off the streets in the first place... what good are a bunch of puzzle-solvers? Knowing who murdered a member of my family, and why, is never going to be better than not having them murdered in the first place.
Complain about this comment
The previous commments about police pay compared to Army pay seemed to miss the obvious point that perhaps we are underpaying the soldiers rather than overpaying the police.
On the starting rate quoted of a Private on £17,000 a year is only slightly more than my salary in my first full time job in a call centre. That to me seems disgraceful given what we expect from our servicemen and women.
Complain about this comment
"Why does pay in the Police start at £23,259 ?
A Private in the Army only gets £17,014 so how can the Police possibly justify paying their new recruits £6,000 a year more than this ?
This is replicated all the way through the ranks, a Brigadier will earn £100,963 a year while Police Commissioners are earning between £127,017 and £260,088."
Simple. A private in the Army has his food and housing provided at no cost. Police officers have to find a house and either rent or pay a mortgage.
Complain about this comment
I am a serving police officer and am slightly bemused as to why there seems to be an obsession with getting officers out on the beat. There is no question when I am off duty and see a bobby walk down my street it gives me some reassurance as a member of the public. But that bobby could walk the streets for 30 years and never catch a burglar climbing over the fence or see a drug deal right in front of his eyes. He does wear a high vis jacket and a big hat after all, and if that burglar is aware of high police presence, he will just move onto the next area, or wait until night. The bobby wont prevent him committing crime- the burglar will need his heroin or crack. To catch that burglar you might need a twelve man covert team deployed for the three days, after that one or two detectives could be tied up for a month producing the evidence to get him locked up. Then there are court appearances for all the officers involved. This is the reality and there are no simple ways to cut this workload. This might be the effort for a simple burglar, if you start talking about armed robbers and sophisticated drug dealers you can times these resources by ten and the investigations could take years.
Effective policing comes from targeting persistent offenders or serious organised criminals and hitting them with robust investigations to ensure they are not free to walk the streets. Community policing is vitally important, but it is not the be all and is not the area where we get the best results.
Complain about this comment
And here we go again with the same old arguments......... police should be catching proper criminal not prosecuting motorists who "creep" over the speed limit.......... at 30 mph 80% survive, at 40mph 80% die. It takes an extra 18 feet to stop between 30 & 35 mph...........
there are traffic for traffic offences, cid for criminal offences, neighbourhood teams for asb and low level crime and 24/7 response officers for needs of an immediate nature......... public confidence in the police has grown year by year for the last five years and crime is down....... compared to 10, 5 & 2 years ago.......
the real crime is the enourmous cuts........... the naysayers think its bad now........... see you in five years time when all public service bears the brunt of the national deficit........... whats the old political phrase.......... you've never had it so good......
Complain about this comment
I have read some interesting items and as a serving officer I would like to comment.
Many of us dont like the fact that traffic units target easy middle class motorists for minor speading offences rather than prosecuting criiminals in their cars and getting them banned which makes it harder for them to commit crime.
Forces Vs Police pay- I have no idea why we have the difference but you can always apply to join but like the armed forces most people say "I could never do your job."
There are far too many upper tier managers who do nothing jobs and far too many officers moved off the frontline to do jobs that have no bearining or relationship to catching criminals or keeping the queens peace. As these are politicaly correct areas I reckon they will be protected!!!!!
All the public want is the police to turn up promptly, be polite, deal with the crime and catch the criminal. It would be nice if the resources went to do that and that is all us officers want to do.
Complain about this comment
If Crime was ever easy to report ... like online with a proper user friendly database ... then the UK would have millions of part time unpaid policeman ... pounding their keyboard giving the vital snippets of information ... saving our police hundreds of thousands of hours investingating petit crime ... only to see it ignored by the Crown Prosecution Service.
A proper public crime reporting database would prevent gun massacres and help catch all manner of criminals and would be cost effective and make the police more accountable.
When are we going to get a database?
Complain about this comment
Wait until the crime rate goes up then everybody will be moaning then.
Complain about this comment
Forgot to mention ... the police should charge the football clubs more more for them using police for match security... their time would be better spent on the beat ... where they should be ... instead of lining the pockets of foreign football club owners.
Complain about this comment
Firstly if you want a first class service, whatever you're talking about....education, health, policing....you have to pay for it.
So people not happy with the british police service?.... let's nominate some countries/continents around the world then that they'd be happy to state they'd get a better police service?....Africa?...Southern Asia?...South America?
What is the role of a police officer?...I thought it was along the lines of prevent/investigate crime, protect people and property?
I forgot to include taking kids on school trips, dealing with social housing, social services, enviromental health eg to remove fly tipping...the list goes on, and on.
The political target setting has stopped police doing what the need to do, and swamped them with extra responsibilities like those stated above.
Public sector cuts?...lets start with not giving anyone with a criminal conviction, paid for solicitors out of tax payers money, when they are arrested - they should pay for their own. I'm sick of seeing career criminals on benefits who pay nothing into the system, claiming solicitors at £200+ PER arrest.
What is the role of a police officer?
Complain about this comment
Unfortunately Mark, your arguments are badly flawed and lack the support of current thinking.
"The debate about cuts to police is also a psychological one, it seems to me. As research as shown(1) [1.18MB PDF], bobbies on the beat are hopeless at catching criminals and there is a heated academic discussion (2) as to whether they do much to prevent crime. Whether they reduce or increase fear of crime is also contested".
The first document you refer to was written in 1984. 25 years is an awful long time in policing and the content is hardly valid when applied to the challenges faced by officers today. The second document is little better, published in 1997 and contains more references to American policing than the challenges faced in the UK.
The policing pledge cost £3.4million to advertise and was a complete waste of tax payers money. The police force is not a business that needs to promote itself with spin and pr as advocated by the Labour administration. That same party who inroduced crippling levels of bureaucracy and financial incentives for senior officers to skew the crime statistics for political gain. We do not need to be told that police officers should spend more time nicking villians and clearing up real crime (not the playground disputes and ridiculous texting offences that consume so much valuable police time and criminalise the wrong sectors of society).
The pledge problem lay not with the promise to put officers on the street for more of the time. That is a 'given' and what officers and the public want. The problem lay in creating yet another bureaucratic project that takes so much time and money to audit, it takes officers off the street to accomplish it, defeating its own objective.
All the crazy bureaucratic ideas need to be scrapped so that the frontliners can focus on what is really important, reducing crime and making our towns, cities and villages safer places to live. Any duplicitous unnecessary form filling must go. Its all very well creating one measure of public confidence, which in itself is a nebulous and doubtful indicator. We do not need to be told by spinning pr departments that the public confidence has risen. Public confidence will return along with the return of more effective common sense policing, unobstructed by barmy projects introduced by scores of administrators with brightly coloured pens and flow charts.
Get back to basics. Lock up real villains for real offences, make our streets safer places and the futility of the policing pledge and measures of public confidence will be revealed as the waseful disctraction and obstruction they really were.
Complain about this comment
The problem with the Police is that no one wants to be a cop any more. Recruits are coming with a degree expecting to fly to the higher ranks. The Police Service, ( I prefer the old word Force) is top heavy with far too many "managers". The government needs to cut the paperwork that cops are bound by and the Chief Constables need to cut the number of higher ranks by 1/2.
Time and time again the public say they want more Police on the Streets.
When I was in the police (more than 2o years ago) many cops spent their entire time walking the beat and were happy to do so. The community knew and trusted their local cops.
Now they swan about like some bloody fluorescent paramilitary organisation.
Complain about this comment
re darren.
the armed forces do not get free food and accomodation a charge is deducted from their pay for both. the only time they dont pay is when under field conditions ie on exercise or in a combat zone.unless he thinks our troops should pay for a sleeping bag in a forward operating base in sangin.
Complain about this comment
Teachers have to deal with their children and they only get £21,102 a year, they have to buy their own tasers too...
But the 14 week holiday makes up for that. As do the management points bonuses for taking on things such as PE.
There is massive waste in every public body what is frustrating is seeing it and not being able to do anything about it. The pension regulations for police officers have already been changed, i agree that there is still a way to go to get rid of further waste. I would add that the average age of officers retiring and then dying is 7 years. I have seen many colleagues retire and then die without enjoying any real retirement. There are some forces more in tune who have seen this financial monster coming already and have made some strides towards reducing costs such as getting rid of the 12 hour shift pattern and tailoring the shift times to when the public need us. There is always going to be good and bad experiences with the police. We are as stiffled with targets as anyone, the vast majority of officers joined to serve our communities and try to make a difference, we want to tackle those things that matter as someone who joined when i was 18 i had no idea about pensions and it wasnt on my list as to why i wanted to join.
Complain about this comment
A huge amount of police time could be saved by returning the decision to charge offenders to Custody sergeants. At present, officers spend literally hours hanging on the phone waiting for a decision from a Crown Prosecution representative for simple cases.
Secondly, has the Home Secretary had a look at the Police Almanac which displays HQ staff within all the forces? I'm sure some sweeping cuts could be made there.
Complain about this comment
"At 2:56pm on 29 Jun 2010, General_Jack_Ripper wrote:
Why does pay in the Police start at £23,259 ?
A Private in the Army only gets £17,014 so how can the Police possibly justify paying their new recruits £6,000 a year more than this ?"
While I have the utmost respect for our armed forces, the most junior members merely obey orders while operating in a unit, whereas police officers are obliged to have a wide knowledge of the law and to be able to enforce it on their own, in addition to a knowledge of the ridiculously complex bureaucracy which successive governments have introduced. Their training and knowledge is considerably more complex than that of an army private. If salary was only about danger then a soldier would earn more than any lawyer, banker or accountant. So why mock the salaries of police officers, who earn much less than any of these people?
Complain about this comment
"28. At 6:46pm on 29 Jun 2010, malcwood wrote:
There is a huge amount of wastage within the Police Service. For example - why do we have 43 County Forces in 2010 - it is a complete nonsense. The duplication is massive and it beggars belief that Ken Clarke ducked the issue when he was Home Secetary."
The United States has many thousands of police departments, some with only a couple of officers. We're not exactly overwhelmed with police forces in comparison!
Complain about this comment
"32. At 7:16pm on 29 Jun 2010, CoaitionOfTheWilting wrote:
Since when have 'bobbies on the beat' ever caught criminals?
They're there as a purely aesthetic feature intended to let the public see that they're doing something, when in fact all they're doing is walking about catching absolutely nobody.
Total waste - get them doing something of substance."
Maybe if you'd actually walked the beat on a Saturday evening you'd realise how inaccurate a comment this is. It's a proven fact that police officers on the beat often disperse groups of potential troublemakers before they start causing trouble and their mere presence frequently acts as a deterrent. It really is true that people don't tend to misbehave when they know the police are just around the corner.
Complain about this comment
"34. At 7:23pm on 29 Jun 2010, 1geoffski wrote:
I'd be interested to know why we generally need police officers to go around in two's, particularly in cities."
They don't. When you see officers in pairs they're generally an inexperienced officer paired with an experienced officer. Everybody needs to learn. Experienced officers usually patrol alone.
Complain about this comment
46. At 9:37pm on 29 Jun 2010, magnificentraekwon wrote:
I am a serving police officer and am slightly bemused as to why there seems to be an obsession with getting officers out on the beat. There is no question when I am off duty and see a bobby walk down my street it gives me some reassurance as a member of the public. But that bobby could walk the streets for 30 years and never catch a burglar climbing over the fence or see a drug deal right in front of his eyes. He does wear a high vis jacket and a big hat after all, and if that burglar is aware of high police presence, he will just move onto the next area, or wait until night. The bobby wont prevent him committing crime- the burglar will need his heroin or crack. To catch that burglar you might need a twelve man covert team deployed for the three days, after that one or two detectives could be tied up for a month producing the evidence to get him locked up. Then there are court appearances for all the officers involved. This is the reality and there are no simple ways to cut this workload. This might be the effort for a simple burglar, if you start talking about armed robbers and sophisticated drug dealers you can times these resources by ten and the investigations could take years.
Effective policing comes from targeting persistent offenders or serious organised criminals and hitting them with robust investigations to ensure they are not free to walk the streets. Community policing is vitally important, but it is not the be all and is not the area where we get the best results.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Can't see the coalition asking you for advice. After all you're knowledgeable and have a grasp of common sense!
Just join the ever growing list - civil servants, teachers, social workers, bin men, any manager, any consultant (some must do a good job Private companies use them all the time), any public sector worker earning over 21000,etc, etc, etc.
You know when you've been scapegoated!
What was it the unions used to say? Unity is strength. They weren't completely wrong about everything then.
Complain about this comment
"Its time everyone shared the cuts, that frankly, we know were coming! ME - private sector - no pay rise for 2 years, no bonus for 4 (and then it was £100) no overtime claimable, stay at the cheapest hotel possible to save costs, pay as much as I can afford into my pension, is this a moan? NO, I'm stating facts, I'm lucky to have a job!
A FRIEND - works at a mid level in the police, last year bought a new £1500 laptop with ONE of their bonuses, has had a pay raise every year, plans to retire at 50 on full salary and a £100k one off payment, stays at the malmaison, has two houses, has 5 hours double time for half an hours work on a weekend and at this very moment, is on work business in London having been sat in the pub since 2pm. Perish the thought of reducing anything as the union would demand a strike.
FAIR? ERM?"
Oh diddums - well I work in public sector - I have had no (thats zero, nil, nada) pay rises for 5 years. I work on average a 50 hour week for a pay scale that Tescos would improve on if I were stacking shelves (and thats no exagerration) I have a highly responsible job and am paid about 10k less than most private sector companies would pay. I can be sure of that because I am about to leave public sector employment. Bonus - dont make me laugh - we even have to pay for our car parking at the office, discounts or perks like a hotel hahahaha - a joke surely we arent allowed a hotel we get a per diem rate which wouldnt buy you a space on a park bench. 5 years on no pay rise - another two to go. On top of that where I work we have had three rounds of redundancy AND we take stick from the public all day long. Small wonder I am leaving public sector - you want it done cheap - do it yourselves and volunteer I'm off to look after number one - the same as the private sector workers have always done. When your streets arent safe, the bins arent collected and your rubbish atart stacking up at the side of the road because a privatised bin collection is too expensive then I just hope you remember your comments about public sector - and factor this in as well - your community charge only pays around 13% of the true cost of the services you receive. Think about that when its privatised because your community charge will be up at least 100% to make it profitable for some spiv anxious to run down the public sector as fast as possible so he can make a fast buck. Dont say you werent warned.
As I say I am off to the private sector - the hard pressed private sector apparentley where they have had 5% pay rises for the past 2 years and this year a £10k bonus PLUS an extra 5 days holiday - will all be very welcome after 6 years in the public sector. I cant wait and I know I am not alone as a public sector worker who has now finally gotten fed up with picking up the pieces every time joe public throws a hissy fit.
Complain about this comment
"Lock up real villains for real offences"
Does that infer you'd be happy for cyber crime to take place then ? I'd love to know what your definition of a 'real villain' or a 'real crime' is. I can only assume you are talking about the old days when men were real mean and villians were real villains who wore stripey jumpers and carried a bag marked swag while declaiming 'Gor Blimey guv'nor its a fair cop'
Would a 'real' villian include corrupt and greedy bankers or only your imagined villains from 'The Bill' or 'Dixon of Dock Green'.
Complain about this comment
Huge amounts of money (and time) could be saved by getting rid of the idiotic practise of printing out case files and associated documents and then physically posting them to the CPS (which certainly happens in the Met). These files are already created electronically and could be sent via email on the combined pnn/gsi network (to GPMS Restricted level) by the officer to the CPS. Why don't they do this? - because they just keep doing things the way they've always done them.
Complain about this comment
#46 Can I first agree with you that "Bobbies on the beat" is more a slogan not really way of catching criminals. but its not surprising that people have an unrealistic view of policing. When we are children we are taught that if we are bad the policemen will come and put us in jail. When you encounter the reality of how much time effort and paperwork is needed and how many times that cycle must be gone through before the policeman does get to put the bad man in jail it can be a bit shocking.
One area which would improve this would a more effective prison labour system designed with the aim of making the prison system self financing and allowing longer sentances for long term offenders without over burdening society.
In most cases this will neither deter them or reform them. But it will improve police productivity as they will only catch each of them say once every 10 years rather than once every 2 years.
For the same reason we should return the death penalty for murder and probably consider physical punishments for acts of violence.
I also think we need to go back to making the good order of society a primary consideration in the sale of alcohol. That should free a few more coppers.
Complain about this comment
Police need to be SEEN. On the road in patrol vehicles, in urban centres, and yes, walking a beat. This is what the public repeatedly ask for, and repeatedly are told is "inefficient". What is equally inefficient is the force being reduced to a social service. What we need is law enforcement and the keeping of the peace. The only way I see law enforcement is with mobile speed cameras, attending public events like parades and football matches, and attempts at keeping the peace on Friday and Saturday nights when the pubs and clubs disgorge the weekly load of inebriates. The whole point of the 'bobby on the beat' is one of comunication with the public, a visible deterrent to crimes yet to be considered,and the notion of 'policing' made a reality. And yes, 42 discrete forces is an absurd way to manage law and order, and should be attacked head-on as a priority matter.
Complain about this comment
I am speaking as an innocent person without a criminal record who was given a nervous breakdown by criminal intimidation and repeat victimisation and had to change her whole life to get away from it.
I can honestly say I found the police investigation made the situation worse. Criminals are very adept at setting up situations, or twisting situations with lies, faking evidence etc, and the police seem remarkably unable to work out what is really going on considering the number of years they've had practice at it. They also do not nip situations in the bud early enough to stop them getting out of hand. Also as in all occupations you get corrupt people in the police force who can mislead the good people. So if things are going against you and you know you are innocent and being victimised you start wondering if the police on the case are corrupt, which makes you even more scared. In the end as well as the frighteners being put on me by a known drug trafficker who had previously been imprisoned abroad, and other criminals, I was also bullied by police and neighbourhood watch! My mind was played with by so much suggestion, inference and intimidation by so many people I ended up having to abandon and undersell my house and give up my career and move to another part of the country. Once away in an interim place, a stranger obviously connected to the situation threatened my future on a train. At one point I was so ill from what seemed like a never ending nightmare I thought of killing myself, when all my life I have been one of the most down to earth people you could ever meet. Really, it is immaterial how many police are on the streets - hardened criminals will keep on reoffending and mashing up their victims brains and will always find an opportunity somewhere. There must be many people out there like me whose cases never make it to court and who never get any justice. In some cases the police are wrongfully exceeding their powers, witholding information about allegations, acting as judge and jury in situations and taking sides, never even taking people into police stations, charging them, or even allowing them legal defense before they start breaking up and ruining their lives. They also have too much influence over partner organisations like doctors and social workers who can also end up bullying innocent people. It can become like a web of intrigue you cannot fathom. If you crack up in these situations cover ups later on become possible because they will just say you were mental, but the reality is that criminals did things to try to make you mentally crack up and nothing was done to stop them. I was also horrified to find that some of the incidents in my case were never put in police records so the case was skewed anyway. I do not think it will make any difference if there are more or less police on the streets. I think the whole system needs a shake up like the MPs over the expenses scandal. I see the same old comments time and time again as I have read on this website today. It is clear to me that most of the people making them are just posturing and have never been really serious victims of crime themselves. It's time more people like me had their say about what they have found to be wrong in policing instead of being gagged. Then we might get a straighter, better crime tackling system in the UK. I think there's going to be much more dirt coming out about our criminal justice system as time progresses before things get any better.
Complain about this comment
As expected, this latest colony of Pinocchios is proposing a total contradiction in terms. As the noses grow, they fail to see beyond the end of them. The annual cost of crime in the UK was £78 billion this time last year. Osborne already proposes to exacerbate the situation further by wantonly promoting unemployment while unravelling the benefit safety net. What a recipe for disaster!
Ironically, benefit fraud & overpayment is a mere fraction of this figure. Adding to those already between a rock & a hard place will inevitably affect the crime rate & that's without the civil unrest that's likely to come.
This is the time to be investing as much as possible in crime prevention & policing generally, if only to reduce that £78 billion & rising. You have to speculate to accumulate, not sit complacently on your thumbs accepting that crime will always be part of everyday life. If you want to strip away bureaucracy, give 'elfin safety' a reality check. Get rid of the jobsworths & other wastrels intent on making a drama out of a crisis, simply to justify their engineered jobs. Sharp end policing relies on logic followed by experience, not a set of reference books.
I've every respect for those who stand up to bullies & despots, but no time for anti-establishment campaigners hiding behind the civil rights banner. These are the soft-soapers who have eroded respect & ruined an entire generation in the process. Try telling the victim who's been robbed on the bus home or had his head stamped on, how CCTV affects his human rights.
The New Economics Foundation recently reported that it costs £140,000 p.a. to jail a young offender (10-17) & that money should be redirected into community-based initiatives & other rehabilitation alternatives. That same report suggests we have an obsession with prisons & that most will likely re-offend on release. I think the better saving would come from dismissing this think tank obsessed with the cost.
Ironically, in the same article, John Fassenfelt, deputy chairman of the Magistrates' Association, said: "Custody really is the last resort and only used when all other measures have been tried and exhausted". Doesn't this beg the question then; how many offences does a 10 to 17 year old get away with before being jailed & how much has he cost society in the process? A prolific car thief can outstrip that £140,000 in weeks. Have they also considered how prison reform has made incarceration a viable option?
What troubles me is that, police cuts will signal crime re-assessment, so offenders will get away with even more. Mainstream offenders often start with anti-social behaviour & this is likely to be treated as even lower priority than it is now through budget restrictions. Why don't we just hand the asylum over to the lunatics now & have done with it?
Complain about this comment
Clearly there are a number of people on this post with expert detailed knowledge of the workings if the police and I hardly feel qualified to comment in the face of such expertise , but isn't the case that the police have been successful in reducing crime to it's lowest levels for 20 years. Just a thought but if true they deserve significant credit.
Complain about this comment
Again we see the coalitions true plans - what happened to the promises not to cut front line services?
The first thing you do when you know things are going to get worse is make it impossible to measure it. If you drop these pledges and associated measurements then you can reframe the discussion around anecdotal evidence rather than fact and "prove" whatever you want.
The Tories claim to be the party of business - in business, if you know what you are doing (and believe you can demonstrate benefit) you set concrete and tangible objectives and you work out how to measure your performance against them. The only people that don't do this either want to cover up anticipated failures or are incompetent. I think the coalition is motivated by the former.
Complain about this comment
The trouble with the previous pledge is that the police STILL didn't get respect and results. Loads of reports like my wife phoned 999 to report someone being attacked in our garden. It took 20 minutes for two cars to scream to a halt outside by which time neighbours had beaten off the man. If could have been a murder and right in the middle of a town.
Hopefully the useless service officers will be changed to real PCs or else scrapped.
Unless all law officer demand and get respect there will be problems.
Complain about this comment
I was a police officer back in 1969, and also again in the 90's. In 1969 the police were a force. Now they are a service. The purpose of the police is to PREVENT and DETECT crime. We all know about the abject failure of the latter. High visibility policing is the only way we will maintain order and safety on our streets. Replacing officers with PCSOs is not the answer. Strip out the deadwood in chair bound jobs, and simplify the complexity of the hierarchical management structure, and use those savings to employ more front line officers.
Complain about this comment
37. At 8:03pm on 29 Jun 2010, Wil Taylor wrote:
@ Ted Maul and General Jack,
So you think the police should not prosecute Victimless crimes?
Yes, the police should drop the prosecution of victimless crimes.
Drugs are classified as victimless crimes
it depends what you mean by your vague and potentially inappropriate use of the term "Drugs". I'm talking about posession for personal use, not the next Tony Montana. I'm fairly certain attempting to import 10 kilos of cocaine for resale (for example) is not viewed as a victimless crime by anyone.
as are Public Order incidents that happen every weekend night. If you think the police should not deal with or prosecute people for these types of offences then what do you think they should be doing?
I kindly refer you to: CPS Public Order Offences: Legal Guide
Read the section on Affray, a weekend night special. I quote:
"Apart from the hypothetical bystander, there must be present a 'victim' against whom the violence is to be directed (I & Others v DPP (2002) 1 AC 285 HL)."
Public Order Offence = Victimless Crime?
Probably not.
@ThoughtCrime, #17:
Sarcasm is the lowest form of humour. that's why I employ it so much ;)
40. At 8:45pm on 29 Jun 2010, General_Jack_Ripper wrote:
Ted Maul wrote:
they do have to deal with members of the general public, don't forget.
Teachers have to deal with their children and they only get £21,102 a year, they have to buy their own tasers too...
But they do get to watch day-long episodes of the Inbetweeners, 5 days a week, seemingly forever.
Complain about this comment
In terms of crime I don't think cutting the police will have much effect on crime rates - they are largely a waste of space, let alone money.
A more worrying issue is Clarke's announcement that he intends to put thousands of criminals back on the streets. The reduction in run of the mill crime over the last few years is no magic - put a burglar in jail and he can not burgle your house whilst he is in there. When you let him out he will be committing 1-2 burglaries a day to feed his habits, that’s a lot of burglaries in a year. He has no concern about 'community sentences' - he describes all of them as being 'let off' and has no intention of ever attending.
My idea for a cut in spending? Take away the insane number of police standing around doing nothing at parliament and downing street. Let Cameron et.al. experience a bit of 'pain'
Complain about this comment
69. At 03:58am on 30 Jun 2010, Steve-T wrote:
Try telling the victim who's been robbed on the bus home or had his head stamped on, how CCTV affects his human rights.
CCTV doesn't prevent this kind of thing from happening per se. claims to the contrary are myths. what CCTV offers is a further avenue of investigation for the police, post-incident, if:
- the police choose to investigate it at all
- the camera is working at all
- there is any footage recorded at all
- the footage is of sufficient quality to be of any use
then they still need to catch the perpetrators.
for CCTV to actually prevent crime, you'd need people watching all cameras in the UK in real time and a police force able to react in a timely fashion to everything these people report. right now you get to see a grainy video replay of your own face being smashed into the kerb, if you're lucky.
CCTV is a very passive, patronising and lazy way of attempting to placate the general public and subdue their valid concerns by providing a so-called "deterrent". we're the nation with the most CCTV of anywhere on the planet, and have been for a long time - tell me, why are we still discussing these issues then?
maybe because it doesn't really work.
Complain about this comment
Get rid of the number of high paid corrupt and lazy chiefs in the police, most are tombstones from the racists cops era, they are holding the force back and i think its time the police force stopped trying to exclude non whites from the force, just remember the scene from secret policeman when they announced they finally got rid of the one asian recruit and a cheers went up round the room, thats the truth and its sick when they claim they are working towards a multicultural force!
Complain about this comment
1. At 1:37pm on 29 Jun 2010, Ted Maul wrote:
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
There's no such thing as a "victimless crime"
"The term is not used in jurisprudence. It is rather a political term, used by lobbyists with the implication that the law in question should be abolished."
We'll soon have the Condems paying criminals the average weekly wage.
Complain about this comment
i am fed up with the attitude of the 'lets get rid of PCSO'S' brigade, who do you think conducts all house to house enquiries, scene preservation, low level crime and disorder, and patrols your streets day and night, as for the comments of having no powers, and are a waste of time, how dare you !!!!
these officers take so much strain off neighbourhood police officers and do the work that most police officers would rather not do, they know more about what is going on in their area, and provide vast amounts of intelligence for the force as they are dealing with the public every day.
the PCSO's in my area are both smart,fit and provide a first class service and have reduced anti social behaviour more than before as they know who is responsible and deal with it, these officers provide a varied and versatile service, who most police officers have now become to respect and value.
Complain about this comment
It gives me no pleasure to say this, but it is clearly the case.
The primary functions of the po lice and the many other Law Enforcement Agencies is to transfer resources from us Ordinary Decent People to the State, and to protect the State from us.
Law and Justice are two totally different things.
Complain about this comment
All this tearing up of the "National Policing Pledge" is nothing more than a way for the government to hide the effect of its cuts.
So it's back to the bad old days of the Tories playing on the fears of the public over crime, and then quietly behind the scenes, emasculating them. And the quickest way to hide the incriminating evidence is to remove the ability of the public to know how well each force is performing.
On top of that we have Ken Clarke saying "Vast sums are being spent "warehousing" people in outdated prisons without any proof it protects the public". So, the party that complains that too many criminals are getting away with everything, and should receive longer prison terms is now telling us, some 7 weeks into the new administrations, that they have had an epiphany and decided that prison - wait for it - doesn't always work. Where was that in the Tories manifesto. The key to this Damascene conversion is contained in the opening words of Ken Clarke's statment - "Vast sums".
The need to protect the public is not so much of an issue, it would appear, than ensuring money is not spent on the hoi polloi, and instead kept in the pockets of the uber-wealthy. It won't be long before we start seeing gated communities for those who can afford their own security, and the rest of us will be treated as feral beasts to be kept at bay.
May be they should privatise the police, and we should all signup for a "protection package", albeit in standard, bronze, silver and gold versions, depending on how much we can afford. And for those sink estates that can't afford anything, a perimeter fence to keep the bad guys in, and only let certain people out through manned checkpoints.
Wow, now there's a great new business opportunity for the future. Well, isn't that what the Tories are all about, making people stand on their own two feet and taking responsibility for themselves. I can see it all so clearly in this new dawn of Tory opportunity.
Complain about this comment
Never seen a 'bobby on the beat'. Haven't seen one in response to witnessing a serious assault either. Lots of them manning speed traps in our area though and manning 'community police vans' in Sainsbury's car park where the elderly tend to spend hours complaining to them that 'young people swear too much nowadays.' They couldn't respond to any reported crime for days before and during the queen's visit here as they 'were too busy'. Gosh, kind of a declared opportunity for criminals. I have nothing against the average policeman but it does seem their role is unclear and their public image shaky. I have no faith in the service at all.
Complain about this comment
change PCSO's into civillian investigators, cops patrol the street, apprehend a criminal, take them in , handover and back out again, its not rocket science
Complain about this comment
It is about time the police were made accountable to deliver service. Ask anybody when was the last time you saw a policeman on the beat? Answer seldom and always in 2s.
Police are overpaid compared to the Army and few work that hard. No one likes to have to deal with fights or drunks being sick on you. But wakey wakey! You knew that when you joined.
As for the top brass of the police remember they all started as Police Constables so have an inate tribalism and job protection in their hearts. Hence they will never do without their BMWs, or status as chief constables unless they are forced. I hope to see government freeze all police pay, cut the number of forces dramatically, outsource air support and highway patrol, introduce charges for police call out to alarms and car accidents and increase fixed penalty fines from £60 to £100.
All other fines and charges to be increased. Police to work an additional year before retirement with immediately effect, an additional 2yrs service within 5yrs. Increase personal contribution to their pension by 2% immediately. Payment by results introcuded on 30% of current pay for all senior officers over grade of chief inspector. Hiring and promotion freeze for all officer grades over inspector. Overtime limited to 8 hrs in a week with immediate effect.
These people need to understand performance and visibility is all - we have seen too little of both in the past 13years.
Complain about this comment
76. At 09:11am on 30 Jun 2010, Ted Maul wrote:
69. At 03:58am on 30 Jun 2010, Steve-T wrote:
Try telling the victim who's been robbed on the bus home or had his head stamped on, how CCTV affects his human rights.
CCTV doesn't prevent this kind of thing from happening per se. claims to the contrary are myths. what CCTV offers is a further avenue of investigation for the police, post-incident, if:
- the police choose to investigate it at all
- the camera is working at all
- there is any footage recorded at all
- the footage is of sufficient quality to be of any use
then they still need to catch the perpetrators.
I fully agree with the first sentence, but the real myth came from those immediate sceptics misinterpreting the use of CCTV on behalf of others. Many of these negative reports came from the anti-establishment lobby as well as the Home Office itself (after the event) who seemed to be accepting that ‘victims’ were a cheaper option. These are pen-pushers negotiating the value of our lives!
As for your ‘if’ list, there’s no disputing any of it, but we can apply ‘ifs’ to every scenario. If I sever an artery & leave it to bleed I’ll die, so I’m not going to ignore! It’s long been determined, that we need experts in place to determine the most effective positioning & use of CCTV. Something I readily agree with, but as with any government, these haven’t the foresight to appreciate the long-term savings.
for CCTV to actually prevent crime, you'd need people watching all cameras in the UK in real time and a police force able to react in a timely fashion to everything these people report. right now you get to see a grainy video replay of your own face being smashed into the kerb, if you're lucky.
Various reports set out to discredit CCTV & shot themselves in the foot. While there was evidence that crime had risen in some areas, these reports reluctantly agreed it had actually fallen in far more. The most significant effect was on car crime, particularly in car parks. What might be worth considering is; did the crime rate actually rise in those former areas, or did CCTV enable more crime to be recorded that otherwise would have been unseen & unreported.
Agreed, CCTV has no ‘deterrent’ value against violent crime, because most red mist primevals are on a different planet anyway, but if CCTV takes one psycho off the streets, that alone can be a significant reduction in victims. What we’re rarely told is the part CCTV has played in ongoing conviction rates. This is easily overlooked & loosely categorised as ‘evidence’ because of the length of time it takes to secure a conviction through the judicial process. Consider how long David Copeland (nail bomber) might have continued if he hadn’t been picked out on CCTV.
CCTV is a very passive, patronising and lazy way of attempting to placate the general public and subdue their valid concerns by providing a so-called "deterrent". we're the nation with the most CCTV of anywhere on the planet, and have been for a long time - tell me, why are we still discussing these issues then?
maybe because it doesn't really work.
Invalid conclusion, unless you can determine the effect of wholesale CCTV removal. Bear in mind that effective CCTV affects insurance rates alone. It’s a debate that no one will ever win because, in this country, for every realist there’s at least two whingers. The New York alternative of a copper on every corner would soon have the big brother lobby moaning all over again. What these liberalists really want is to be able to exchange a bit of weed, smoke their spliffs in public & deface public monuments with impunity.
As a matter of interest, it’s literally just been announced that passenger numbers on London buses has risen while crime on those same buses is at its lowest in 6 years & by a significant degree. I wonder why?
Complain about this comment
Why this constant demand for more 'bobbies on the beat'? 'The beat' isn't where the crime is, and even if it were, we'd need hundreds of thousands more coppers to deliver any realistic presence on all the streets of the realm.
Why employ so many policemen, and then waste their time slogging around a few streets? - Well, mostly, it seems, it's a PR exercise in nostalgia; being seen to be doing something, harking back to the 'good old days' of Dixon of Dock Green (a fiction, remember).
Bobbies on the beat do not actually address crime in the modern world, most of which is occurring behind closed doors, in private or commercial premises or on the internet - all unseen by the bobby on the beat.
Complain about this comment
Revolving door of crime and reoffending to stop says Clarke
The Government’s vision for criminal justice reform has been unveiled today by the Justice Secretary, Kenneth Clarke, in his first major speech.
http://www.justice.gov.uk/news/newsrelease300610a.htm
Complain about this comment
Scrap targets and give police (and all public secotor works) more automony to get on with the job.
Ban police officers from joining politcal parties and secret societies, i'm talking aobut the masons here.
Did you know that 95% of masons in the UK are police officors? And we the public and supposed to respect them?
Complain about this comment
Sod the "promises" made under their Kommissar bosses (formerly known as Chief Constables before Liebour contaminated the pool).
We're a third world state and can't afford it.
Allowing for the public debt, however one accounts for finances, Zimbabwe is a lot richer than the U.K.
Thanks, Gordon. Sorry, bobbies.
Complain about this comment
"8. At 2:56pm on 29 Jun 2010, General_Jack_Ripper wrote:
Why does pay in the Police start at £23,259 ?
A Private in the Army only gets £17,014 so how can the Police possibly justify paying their new recruits £6,000 a year more than this?"
Speaking as an ex-soldier and currently a police officer, I can say that that soldiers get free dental, reduced rate food (if single) reduced rate lodgings, some free travel and do not pay towards their pensions amongst other benefits. Taking all this into account they don't do too badly. This is not a criticism of the army I am just balancing the argument. Comparing the police to the army is a non-starter. They are not the same.
Complain about this comment
As a long retired police officer I feel a real sense of despair at the current state of our society. No responsibility, no consequences, no respect but oh so many "civil rights"....contact with local police and council officials starts a paper trail of statistics with which they hope to either convince an individual of their safety or to wear them down and decrease the number of contacts made!
Complain about this comment
Bobbies on the beat are only one aspect to the police. What about fraud investigation, murder investigation and covert policing and so on. A lot of officers are involved in covert policing which is not made public for obvious reasons. That's how organised criminals and terrorists are caught. The prisons are full of convicts saying, "DOH! I thought we'd never get caught". Yes it is costly, but it is effective.
Cutting these officers to maintain the public face of policing is a major risk.
Complain about this comment
No more NEW ideas. Just let the police do policing. Stop people wasting police time on silly complaints. Neighbourhood policing is good but you also need the bobbies in the response cars and serious crime teams. The police do so much for so many people ( a fair bit nothing to do with police work ) with few officers on the ground. To many staff in diversity type rolls. Lets get back to Patrol, Traffic And CID so all officers police and civilians support. This would save a smal fortune.
Complain about this comment
If the UK was a hospital patient, the prognosis would be 'Critical'. Cuts in education and local authority services all impact on crime. The police have had to take on more new areas of threat and more sophisticated criminals, who don't seem to be as cash strapped. They do a wonderful job on the whole, in the face of more red tape and openness policies.
The earlier comment by Stu is spot on, the response is layered and the uniform man on the beat doesn't stop major crime, which requires coordinated effort by specialist teams, so we do not see much of the vital work that goes on. That said, neighbourhood policing is vital for public confidence, intelligence gathering and schools liaison. If you scrap it, the baby goes out with the bath water. That seems to be the conundrum, what to cut without killing the service? Force amalgamation is inevitable and I think that elected Police Commissioners covering these larger forces, will replace local (County) electoral responsibility. PCSOs (Police Cost Saving Officers) seem to have been a very poor substitute for the man or woman with full police powers. A hard look at getting rid of them and replacing them with two thirds of that number of warranted officers is overdue.
Be assured though, that driver training, firearms training and many other things that we rely on our police to be 'the best' at will suffer.
Critical ...and in great pain.
Complain about this comment
*********************************************************************
Why does pay in the Police start at £23,259 ?
A Private in the Army only gets £17,014 so how can the Police possibly justify paying their new recruits £6,000 a year more than this ?
they do have to deal with members of the general public, don't forget
**********************************************************************
They have to deal day in day out with the public.....+ the army have guns. End of.
Complain about this comment
Post 43.
But any criminal with half a brain cell will surely think twice about committing a crime when there's 3 or 4 police officers within sight/hearing.
My local take away should be safe enough then.
Post 45.
For your information. Squadies have to pay for food and board unless on active service.
as for the person who believes that the police have gone up in the publics opinion. I would love to know what part of paradise he lives in.
Respect is not a right. IT HAS TO BE EARNED, and the police are low on brownie points round here.
Complain about this comment
Sadly I can no longer remember the academic who stated this, but recently (a few years ago maybe) she said that there were still more than enough policemen (refuse to say policepersons) to beat patrol every property (business and private) twice per shift (that’s 6 x per 24 hours) just like they did when my father was a copper 50 years ago. Noticing the unusual, checking business premises were secure, spotting n'e'r-do-wells and generally "knowing" their beat.
Such an approach would certainly have a direct impact on low-level crime, delinquency and anti-social behaviour etc. I accept there may be a need for more resources today in CID than then, eg for serious and organised crime (but haven’t we got SOCA for that?), fraud (but don’t we have a Serious Fraud Office for that?), terrorism (but don’t we have the Met and directly-funded SB units for this?) etc – so, leaving rape, murder and so on for the CID.
What am I missing?
Complain about this comment
I keep hearing about targets and cuts to policing and the amount on council tax bills for policing going up, etc, etc, but I have to say, this means absolutely zero when it is impossible to talk to a police officer about anything and you get a glorified telesales clerk on the phone who apparently knows the situation and the law better than the police do. We dont have too many coppers, exactly the opposite, pcsos yes, but frankly you dont see many of those either. What needs to be cut is the paperwork that keeps the police off the beat, and make the laws that they are supposed to uphold more workable. What they need to do is stop telling us how much they need to spend, stop advertising how wonderful the force is on limited funding, and get on with the job instead.
Complain about this comment
86. At 2:23pm on 30 Jun 2010, David Craig wrote:
Why this constant demand for more 'bobbies on the beat'? 'The beat' isn't where the crime is, and even if it were, we'd need hundreds of thousands more coppers to deliver any realistic presence on all the streets of the realm.
Why employ so many policemen, and then waste their time slogging around a few streets? - Well, mostly, it seems, it's a PR exercise in nostalgia; being seen to be doing something, harking back to the 'good old days' of Dixon of Dock Green (a fiction, remember).
Bobbies on the beat do not actually address crime in the modern world, most of which is occurring behind closed doors, in private or commercial premises or on the internet - all unseen by the bobby on the beat.
*** At least there's one sensible person contributing to this forum ***
Complain about this comment
86;99:
THE BEAT?
I have been 'off the reservation' for a little while and would be happy to be corrected, also there will be regional variations.
Do you understand the term 'beat' as meaning 8 hours walking round shaking hands with doorknobs? If so I totally agree with you.
Today, Neighbourhood Policing is a specialist job, which takes in schools liaison, multi agency co-operation, intelligence gathering etc etc. Trust me, it works and these are the guys providing confidence visits, visible policing etc. Just like in 1980 when Unit Beat Policing was discarded, you could disband them, send them on 5 week driving courses, put them on 'Response' and provide them with a nice 150mph vehicle.....but for having wasted that money, the work they used to do wouldn't go away. It either wouldn't get done, or it would tie up the emergency response section.
The 'sharp end' is not the place to make cuts, go to the conference room for the 9am coffee & croissants meeting and start adding up the salaries that are making the seat of their trousers shiny.
Complain about this comment
I understand the term Beat to be the following. An area assigned to a Police Officer that is their turf, their area that they come to know, the shops. businesses and people within it. Small or large it doesnt matter, smaller is probably better though. At the risk of sounding archaic and a dinosaur, we had a beat bobby around when I was kid. Think Heartbeat. We knew him, he knew us by name, watched us all grow up and was the one who dealt with us if we stepped out of line. I got blamed for starting a fire and playing with matches when I was 9, 10,cant remember, but I do remember the Police man standing in the living room and what he said! As it happens it wasnt me, but that was what his job was, to find out these things.He also gave me a lift home from school one day when my mother went into hospital unexpectedly.He sorted out a domestic within the family calmly and decisively because he was known and trusted. He was a friend and he was respected because he was the law in our area. We could turn to him in times of trouble and he was there even in the middle of the night.I dont think life has changed that much, there are still communities, still people,and still crime and incidences that on a local level, if we had a local police officer who was on the ground locally,might be preventable or be sorted out quicker. I dont think the cutbacks of the 80s that saw police houses and police officers taken out of an area were a good thing. Centralisation and call centre policing has a lot to do with the lack of respect Police now get. That and taking their ability away to deal with 'petty' crimes has damaged Police credibility. We all would like local police officers again, but right now, in my neighbour hood I would settle for seeing a PCSO on a regular basis and always the same person, someone responsible for this area that local people could get to know, and trust.If the government are really serious about giving people back their own communities and decentralising services, then the Police service is a darn good place to start.
Complain about this comment
I recently bought some computer gear from the most secure industrial unit I have ever set foot in. Bollards. Steel bars over steel shutters. Etc.
It was of course directly adjacent to the police depot. In full view.
Their insurance company demanded the security because of the number of times it had been broken into.
Complain about this comment
I find Mr Easten's opinion on the effectiveness of Bobbies on the beat most refreshing. The public are warmed by the sight of a policeman. It makes them feel secure. They want to say "hello" and have the police officer say "hello" back. BUT BOBBIES ON THE BEAT DONT STOP CRIME AND DONT CATCH CRIMINALS. There is no elemant of surprise..you see them coming..you see them going and once you've observed your local Bobby chatting to Mrs Miggins for half an hour about everything and nothing, you watch him amble off, knowing that he wont be back this way for an hour or so...which means you can safely go the opposite way and burgle houses on his previous route. The public obsession with police officers walking a beat is based on nothing more than folklore and old black and white films. Dixon of Dock Green was a fictitious character (who, incidentally, was shot dead!). People want a policeman on every corner and they want a policeman on their doorstep. They expect an immediate response when they report a broken plant pot. They want personal service. Everyone feels their call to the police is so much more important than everyone elses. People dont care about crime in places where they dont go. They care only about what happens in their street and on their route to the shops or to work. But the police have to care about EVERYONE.
Complain about this comment
I agree with comments made by RichieH100 at No 79. People think that they are “Plastic” or “Saving Cost” officers, when in fact they do free up a lot of strain that regular officers do.
Instead of getting PCSO’s sacked and removing approx 16,000 front line officers, why don’t the government increase there powers and give them the ability to do more. This might give them the respect that many people feel they don’t have, free up the officers to deal with Friday / Saturday night drunken yobs, and still keep the streets safe.
My local PCSO’s known who all the local youths are and deal with them. Without them on the streets, ASB would go though the roof and there would be no one to keep on top of it.
Complain about this comment
The pledge was never acheivable, its introduction forced yet even more targets on a police service which is overwhelmed with figures, local targets, and over recording.
The advertising standards agency even upheld complaints that Policing pledge adverts were misleading, and Police officers agreed. Over the last year, the Police service has been crippled whilst trying to bend over backwards in every instance to ensure they didn't 'breach the pledge'. It created even more bureaucracy as forces were fearful of breaching each pledge. Paperwork and needless policy / teams of admin staff to appeared overnight to police the pledge.
A complete waste of Police time and taxpayers money. I am delighted the pledge has been scrapped. it's a breath of fresh air to see the government listen and accept something was wrong and wasn't working. Long may the cull on red tape continue.
Free the Police, empower them to leave the station!
*Post 1 Ted...
Some of the worst offending behaviour such as violent disorder, affrays etc are dealt with as victimless prosecutions. It's a valuable tool. Without it gangs would terrorise our streets safe in the knowledge no-one will give evidence against them and Police couldn't prosecute.
Complain about this comment
I notice that on the rare occasions when police do make mistakes, they will go to any lengths to cover it up. Nobody's perfect.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Please get rid of these facile attempts at Propaganda, and just let us get on with our jobs.
The latest diktat from NSY is the ridiculous 5 P's.
Every blank surface is emblazoned with five P words,from the moment you switch a computer on, to a poster above the urinal. (With the exclusion of the obvious ones of course)
Tens of thousands of pounds wasted on banal soundbyte style posters and advertising telling us, the Bobby how to do our jobs better, when we haven't got enough money for a radio for each individual officer.
for the un-enlightened here they are:
Presence - (Single patrolling and PCSO's - Hmmm.Still you can't see 'em )
Performance - (Busting a kid with a spliff gets you your statistic bravo)
Productivity - (Half of your shift doing pointless paperwork??)
Professionalism - (Now you don't even have go to training school!)
Pride - (In providing absolutely no service to the Public,just the Gov't)
This is the sort of morale sapping blinkered nonsensical propagandist indoctrination that our Police Chiefs endorse, and your money gets spent on.
I'd like to design a similar poster for the Senior officer's canteens & urinals.
Only it wouldn't have Five "P"s just a simple F & O
Complain about this comment
I see that the MET can save £250000 at a stroke by removing the protection from Blair, who 80% of the country think should be in jail for treason and also as a war criminal. Maybe all ex PM's should not have protection then they may just try to run the country as the public wanted them to do.
Complain about this comment
Isn't it time to ask the questions
1) Is the role of Police clearly defined
and
2) Are we getting Value for money.
Time to ask deeper questions rather than superficial debate on bobbies on beat
Complain about this comment
Stop that rubbish about officers getting more money. First of all serving soldiers gets bed and board, meals cooked for them every day. The get medical care second to none. The only thing a young solider has to worry about is which pub to spend his money at. And don’t get me started on the pampered officers, with their lovely officer’s messes and married living quarters. No police officer gets any of these, they have to pay their bills and live within their means. None of my mates still in the army or navy worry about money, their life is rule and ordered for them. It’s a shock to all when they leave.
Complain about this comment
110. At 4:19pm on 04 Jul 2010, timetochange wrote:
1) Is the role of Police clearly defined
Their role is to investigate, collate evidence and arrest Suspects.
2) Are we getting Value for money.
That depends on whether you believe that crime is falling or not and whether paying slightly more for the Police in order for them to bring crime down is value for money i.e overtime and money for operations.
Public Sector services are constantly looking at ways to become more cost effective. I work as a civilian in my local force/service and our force is always looking at saving money for example in the last two years of the Labour government my force lost 200 police officers through retirement and a recruitment freeze. Despite this crime has fallen consistantly throughout the county and yet as a result of retirement and recruitment freeze we have seen overtime costs go up. So we have had to pay slightly more to get crime levels down. Some overtime claims I admit can be a tad excessive but in the main these Officers are only asking for pay due to them for putting in extra time and potentially putting their lives in danger on your behalf.
Complain about this comment
I am a desk bound Police Officer supervising a large number of PC's and PCSO's in a run-down area of a Midlands city. My Officers have not prosecuted anyone for speeding in my memory, they patrol in 2's mainly, so that if they arrest someone (usually violent) they have back-up present to assist physically, and to corroborate the evidence leading up to the arrest, as the CPS often won't prosecute without such evidence.
We would arrest and prosecute far more people if we weren't hamstrung by a system that requires so much paperwork its untrue - even to gain a decision to charge in basic matters requires all sorts of hoop-jumping.
Prisoners who eventually do get charged then deny matters at Court, resulting in far more paperwork being required, keeping Officers off the street, before the inevitable Guilty plea at Court, with an allowance made for such a plea.....
The main problem within the Police currently sits with Senior Managers, many of whom are not really concerned with local Policing, but merely in advancing their careers by coming up with some hare-brained scheme that brings momentary headlines, or some snappy phrase that the Force can use as a slogan....
Lets also put some of the blame at the doors of the public - my area has recently seen a huge problem with burglaries - we know who is doing it, and have managed to prosecute some of the offenders, but, sadly, most of the stolen property is sold door to sdoor on the very Estates where it is being stolen!
Finally, remember that most of the Politicians, past and present, have a legal background! The only people making money at the moment are the Solicitors and Barristers who are manipulating the Laws their ex-colleagues make to their own ends.
I could go on and on, but I've got to get back to work and type up some reports on repeat callers for ASB........
Complain about this comment
To join in one aspect of this debate:- The reason that the starting Salary for a Police Officer is over £23000 is for the same reason that many other starting Salaries are high, to attract quality applicants. The comparison has been made with a Soldier starting on around £17000, normally a youth of 18, with poor education and few skills. The normal recruit to the Police now needs a degree, or as an alternative a previous life, Often those leaving the Armed Services make good recruits, especially ex-NCO's. The Police recruit from the same small pool as Officers for the Armed services, Teachers, Fire Service, Paramedics and Nurses, together with career changers. Recruits must have integrity, education and strength of character, unlike the Infantry Private the PC works either alone or with minimal supervision.
My last shift consisted of 9 PC's (6 male, 3 Female) ALL either had a degree in a relevant subject, or a previous well paid employment. Most importantly they ALL had tremendous drive to serve, to stop the bad guys and protect the weak. It is not for nothing that 'THE JOB' is how the Police look upon their work, with dedication that few outside will understand.
Complain about this comment
1. At 1:37pm on 29 Jun 2010, Ted Maul wrote:
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ummmm, this is how plice make there money. Ever heard of fines??????
Complain about this comment
jonsparta wrote:
The only thing a young solider has to worry about is which pub to spend his money at.
Err...
UK death toll in Afghanistan conflict reaches 300
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/10360705.stm
While I can appreciate many of the posts regarding the point I raised and have actually learned a little about the requirements for new Police recruits I think you may be going a little far with the above statement.
I can assure you that my grandson and all of the other UK and coalition troops currently have a hell of a lot more to worry about than what pub to spend their money in.
While I still think the military should be paid more and I do now accept the Police probably do deserve such a starting wage I'd still question why there is such a disparity with the higher ranks, although I've got to ask if anyone needs to earn £120,000 let alone £200,000 as some senior Police Officers do.
Complain about this comment
Get rid of all the PCSOs and use the money saved to fund policemen. Have the Police only do real crime related work, not do crowd control at Football matches, which should be responsibility of the Clubs. Have one of two policeman available to arrest individuals, but not control the crowds. Make the organisers responsible to control their marches. Make the Police accountable to local communities, who should contribute to their costs via the local authorities. Reduce Civilian Staff and employ policeman instead to do their jobs. Limit Police overtime. Reduce needless paperwork.
Complain about this comment
For info of Phoenix85:- The Police DO NOT receive any part of fines leveled in Courts, nor even part of money from Fixed Penalty Tickets. The nearest the Police get to receiving money from offenders is via the money that goes to the Road Safety Camera Schemes.
That is one facet of Policing that the Police Federation has always fought against, there should be no connection between prosecuting offenders and financial rewards.
Also the number of arrests does not lead to Promotion, that is another Urban Myth.
Complain about this comment
Well it seems to simple to me. The police do a tough job, work hard and long hours and for what. Courts dish out £50 fine with £15 costs. Give over. I agree we don't need to put everyone in prison but the fines should be a deterrant and costs should cover the costs. Take grafitti, 2 officers spend 3 hours arresting 1 yob and the paper work. The yob eventually gets £25 fine £10 costs and warned not to do it again. It cost us 6 police hours, a cleanup crew and court time. The yob should be getting a £25o fine, all costs to clean up and more relevent costs. lets say £1000 in all. Less likely to do it again. Pleading poverty doesn't excuse the damage. Send round the baliffs, take % from benefits or wages before they get them until paid in full. This can be applied to so many crimes including drunks fri and sat nights. If offenders don't feel the pain they will do it again. The money can go back into the police and courts reducing costs. These fines must be enforced properly and ruthlessly in the same ruthless manner they stole a car or broke into someones house. If they step outside the law they can't hide behind it.
Complain about this comment
"A Private in the Army only gets £17,014 so how can the Police possibly justify paying their new recruits £6,000 a year more than this ?"
Police have to be paid reasonably to help prevent corruption, it is only sensible. I would think that this is also why police pay rises so quickly after Sgt as well. It might be uncomfortable if the people responsible for protecting property were destitute...
As for it not being dangerous, well it is relativly dangerous compared with normaly civilian jobs...
(I think military pay is a whole different issue)
Complain about this comment
Ted Maul wrote:
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
as a volunteer police officer I have never been to a victimless crime, i would like to know which victimless crime you are talking about.
Complain about this comment
Where I live crime and anti-social behaviour have never been lower. Vast improvements were made during the last government.
Although, at first, I was against the PCSOs they have made a big difference in this area.
Also the local police have been more contactable and accountable.
Let's not return to the bad old days before those changes were made as it was a nightmare where I live, with out of control gangs and criminals free to do their worst.
Short term savings, long term disaster.
Complain about this comment
"121. At 2:19pm on 07 Jul 2010, Craigh1 wrote:
Ted Maul wrote:
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
as a volunteer police officer I have never been to a victimless crime, i would like to know which victimless crime you are talking about."
Marijuana Possesion.
Complain about this comment
1. At 1:37pm on 29 Jun 2010, Ted Maul wrote:
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
Please enlighten me, name a victimless crime?
Complain about this comment
123. At 4:10pm on 08 Jul 2010, bigsammyb wrote:
"121. At 2:19pm on 07 Jul 2010, Craigh1 wrote:
Ted Maul wrote:
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
as a volunteer police officer I have never been to a victimless crime, i would like to know which victimless crime you are talking about."
Marijuana Possesion.
So, where has the Marijuana come from. Was it produced in someones house they rented out that has been totally destroyed by converting it to a Marijuana farm.
What about the use of people to smuggle it into the country, what about the vast amounts of money which ends up in organised criminal hands, what about the great many who start on Marijuana and then progress onto harder drugs, costing society £billions.
There is NO SUCH THING AS A VICTIMLESS CRIME.
There is such a thing as a muppet, which is a name for people who believe in victimless crimes.
Complain about this comment
As a retired Chief Inspector, it is not difficult to realise what are the problems of modern day policing! The Police have abandoned the beats (foot-patrols!) Although a retired Police Officer, I have been working at the Crown Courts where I meet regularly, Police Officers of today!They always complain that "paper-work" is their biggest enemy! I understand that in cases that go to Crown Courts for trial, that a lot of paper work is involved but mainly by the CPS staff! How is it that in my day, every patrol beat was manned? Why is it that there is not enough prosecutions by the Police that Magistrates Courts are closing down! Simple! Police Officers are not doing their jobs! Its not their fault! The fault lies with the Home Office & Chief Constables who know next to nothing about policing and the we the public!
The Police College at Bramshill must bear a lot of the blame because they preach modern methods of policing within a budget constrained to high tech equipment! You stop a police officer for a chat and they do not know how to hold a conversation! They do not know how to mix with us! I am in my seventies and do not hold back when meeting a policeman! So when I eventually tell them that I am a retired policeman they start to relax and talk normally! It is all about avoiding work in case they are complained against and are subject to an internal, investigation! We do not get value for money!
Complain about this comment
do you think that has anything to do with them lowering the pass mark of Police entrance exams.
Complain about this comment
"125. At 6:22pm on 08 Jul 2010, MrWonderfulReality wrote:
123. At 4:10pm on 08 Jul 2010, bigsammyb wrote:
"121. At 2:19pm on 07 Jul 2010, Craigh1 wrote:
Ted Maul wrote:
you could save a huge amount of money by not pursuing and prosecuting people for victimless crimes.
as a volunteer police officer I have never been to a victimless crime, i would like to know which victimless crime you are talking about."
Marijuana Possesion.
So, where has the Marijuana come from. Was it produced in someones house they rented out that has been totally destroyed by converting it to a Marijuana farm.
What about the use of people to smuggle it into the country, what about the vast amounts of money which ends up in organised criminal hands, what about the great many who start on Marijuana and then progress onto harder drugs, costing society £billions.
There is NO SUCH THING AS A VICTIMLESS CRIME.
There is such a thing as a muppet, which is a name for people who believe in victimless crimes."
Thats exactly the point thouggh. There are only victims because of the illegality caused by the government therfore the responsibility for the crime is on the government not the user.
Therfore posession is a victimless crime, the victims are not created by the user they are created by the government.
Complain about this comment
The 'risk to public' on the Moat issue says it all - spinning it to suit their own needs - get the public to do their job - just as Labour had spun and as other politicians do.
The police want to get out of doing anything at all - they cite 'civil' and not 'criminal' on just about everything when you approach them for help. And then look at your council tax for the fat paychecks they earn for doing nothing.
Moat seems like he is playing out 'First Blood' all over again.
Complain about this comment
There is something weird about the police situation in the UK. Admittedly it may have changed in the past three years, but somehow I doubt it.
More police officers, more support staff, yet I don't remember EVER seeing any bobbies walking around my neighbourhoods in the UK. The only time I saw them was when there was a big event or football match.
Compare that with Japan. This morning, walking to work in a residential area, I saw 2 cops cycling around. Last night, walking home from work I saw one cop cycling around. I'd say that I see cops in my neighbourhood, on average, 4-5 times a week. And when i go to other neighbourhoods I see them there too. Plus they seem much more friendly and approachable than the neon-yellow, combat vest wearing UK cops. (despite all carrying guns).
Japan has a rather good solution, I think. They have local "police boxes" all over the place. By every station, in all main city areas, near parks, etc. The police are permanently stationed here (24 hrs a day), and also cycle around the nearby area daily. Sure, they spend most of their time giving people directions, or filing lost-item reports, but they give people a sense of security and connection.
Also, each box displays a total of crimes committed/solved in the neighbourhood that month.
There is also a big split between the police-box cops and the detectives. The police box cops tend to be the new recruits, and the older guys near retirement. Which makes a lot of sense. I suspect their pay isn't amazing, but generally their work is less stressful than those in the firing line.
I suspect it's true that bobbies on the beat don't make a significant reduction in crime, but (it done correctly, and not in the UK style) they can make people feel safer, and give them a connection. And if the bobbies on the beat (or in the box) have a more approachable face (and local area maps!) and are close-to-retirement cops, then the costs aren't so high either.
Complain about this comment
Get rid of the paperwork any maybe then there will be more police on the street. I think the PCSO's are doing a good job even though they are restricted this give the police more time to concentrate on more serious crime.
Complain about this comment
"..Research has shown 'bobbies on the beat are hopeless at catching criminals' and there is a heated academic discussion as to whether they do much to prevent crime..."
Well, to strain at a paraphrase of a certain Ms Davis all those years ago, "..that would be the reaction from the cushioned, largely crime-free ivory-tower Intellectuals & Academics, & the Senior Police echelons with vested interests in justifying misused Bobby-Power for the last 2 to 3 decades, wouldn't it?
Mr Easton, I read the Report to which you refer: It is about as meaningful & relevant to the experience & understanding of everyday life for the proverbial 'man/woman/child-in-the-street' as those other intoxicatingly trendy all-in-one panaceas for a sloganised 'Better Britain': You know the ones I mean, and if You don't, I assure You millions of Britons could name them in seconds: The 'Multi-culturalism', 'Care in the Community', or, 'Tough on Crime & Tough on the Causes' etc. National Policies implemented by Labour & Conservative Governments.
All of them are standing jokes in any Pub or Takeaway in England: Seen a Cabinet Minister, MP, Judge, Chief Constable, Senior Policeman, Human Rights Lawyer in Your local lately!?
Come to that, seen any UK Senior Bank Executive or Finance Investment Board member face a charge over the UK's perilous Fiscal situation due to their reckless, greed-driven policies!?
No, but we still see the single mother up before the Magistrate for non-Payment of the TV License & the Pensioner for failing to pay the Community Charge!
They were/are all about 'Cost-Cutting' and now the Tax-Payer is going to have to 'pay' through the nose even more harshly than ever: For what? Is the UK Government going to 'represent' the People - - it plainly cannot turn back the clock - - so, how can they do that when they support Policies directly contradictory to the experiences & interests of Citizen UK!?
E.g Ken Clarke's about to release more Criminals because they are 'minor' offenders, but of course, 90% of Crime is only relatively 'minor': To the victim it isn't at all minor - - and the Law & Order brigade, what is their incentive - - if You are a Policeman who has spent weeks gathering evidence on a sneak-thief & for his 30 break-ins he gets Community Service of less Hours than it took to write-up the CPS Evidence/Crime sheets!
Where is the Report about 'real' people's lives?
'Prevent Crime!
Since when did a University Academic or White Hall Civil Servant have their handbag snatched or their relative shoved under a train while the CCTV records the whole thing!?
A couple of those sort of elite (& Journalists too) may get caught in compromising situations on Clapham Common, or the dozy ones drop their 'secret docs' in public, for the NOW & BBC to run off at the mouth about, but that isn't what the ordinary person really cares or even wants to know about. Let's face it: Of 340 MPs found in the last Parliament to have inappropriately used Public monies of varying amounts just TWO (MPs) are facing any sort of legal sanction!
Prevention of Crime!
You are having a laugh, aren't You!?
Of course Bobbies on the Beat prevent Crime & they catch Criminals: Ask any ordinary person in the street how many times they have seen 2 PCs in a speeding car catch anything but the traffic lights!
You won't get statistics to back that assertion because the people compiling the Reports are asking the wrong questions, in the wrong places, of the wrong people.
Sit in a Town Centre Pub from 7pm on a Friday to 2a.m. closing time: Count the Cop Cars zooming around and see the reaction of the People.
A week later, put the same number of Cops on the streets of the same Town Centre for the same Time Period.
Compare Your Reports.
Mr Easton: Analytical Reports on an already fixed-position have, oddly enough, been shown by 'Research' to usually state more-or-less what those who Commissioned the Report anticipated it should say to vindicate their Position.
People on the other hand - - 'man/woman/child-in-the-street', well they don't have any interest in Reports so they just react - - try the Friday night Pub Test Mr Easton: PCs in a car & PCs walking the beat. You will get an answer no amount clever Intellectualising can refute.
Even simpler: If You are a Parent ask Yourself this Q & A: You are walking Your child to Friday night Cub night & You have to cross the Recration Ground to get to the Scout Hut, do You tell Your child he's quite safe because of that siren Police Car that just sped by or because of the 2 PCs walking the footpath through the rec!?
Intellects & Academics juxtaposed with vested 'financial' resources groups: They only miss out on the one thing that matters - - People.
Complain about this comment
In the recent past, I headed a much needed home watch scheme. The area had several bad individuals and families. Many frail and partly disabled residents were among the group. Collectively, we accrued a pile of information regarding the trouble makers. Eventually, there was a murder. On the back of this, we submitted all the information gathered to the local council. The department head was a woman. It soon became clear, that she was out of her depth in dealing with this situation. She enrolled the assistance of a W.P.C.S.O. to come and interview me bringing all the evidence we had submitted. In no short measure, both of them proceeded to tell me that I would be sent to jail for harassment of these trouble makers. Gob smacked, at the response, we moved. Now we see reported that one of the families has had a member given a jail term for battering a frail old woman. The councilor is still in employment in her roll, as is the W.P.C.S.O. HOW ON GODS EARTH, ARE SUCH INCOMPETENT PEOPLE ALLOWED EMPLOYMENT?
Complain about this comment
@ cool_brush_work
Your post demonstrates exactly why we never make any progress on the issue. You seem to believe that it's better to ignore all the "research", "experts" and "studies" (brackets yours) and instead base national policy on your anecdotal evidence from chats in the pub.
Why do the people in Britain always feel that they know so much more than the experts? Why do they have such a distrust of science, experts and research? It's like we're going backwards into a luddite stone age.
WHen Britain was Great it was because we had experts, we trusted them and allowed them to do their thing... rather than nitpicking them to death, wearing them down, or simply ignoring them in favour of pub tabloid "common sense". (brackets mine).
Complain about this comment
Not intended I'm sure but "clamdip lobster claws" used the dreaded "man power" phrase in his dialogue. No offence intended I am sure but it begs the question when I wander around London. Where are all the "older women",by this I mean the female police officers recruited during the late 80's 90's and 00's. I do not see them on the streets keeping me safe. What I do see are many male officer in their late 50 and into their 60's patrolling the streets, kept on at considerable expence for what reason.
Surely we have many hundred female police officers in London and elsewhere between the ages of 25 and 50 who could perform this role.
In the early 70' the service was split 80/20 male/female with the majority of the 20% being female civilian staff now the split has reversed 20/80 male/female with the majority of the 80% doing administrative (none warrant requiring roles) but the administrative split is 50/25/25 warranted female officers/male clerical/female clerical.
For every 60 warranted officers on the street 120 others are restday/off shift, and a massive 300 perform a support role of some kind where a warrant is not required again don't forget supported by 300 clerical staff.
Like the NHS the Police Service has built a massive administrative system to provide sinecures for those not wishing to meet the public face on. In the words of Eric Pickles "none jobs".
Why has this happened, consider the pay of ACPO ranks, one of the generators is the number of staff each force is responsible for. Not an effective way to run a business.
Complain about this comment
Soulgrind
Re #135
I don't know!
Why do You assert, "..people in Britain always know so much more than the experts.."?
What is Your research to back-up this worrying accusation?
"..Luddite.."!
Hmm, so if I had written as You appear to wish we all did, that the 'experts' must be right because... well, they are 'experts', and because well, 'experts' are so expert at getting things right, then the UK would be a go-ahead-progressive-up-to-the-minute society that You clearly long for.
"..when Britain was Great it was because we had experts.."!
Phew! Now that IS what I call a sweeping endorsement of 'expertism'!
Is that the 'Great' Britain of outstanding individuals, e.g. Fleming, Davey, Plimsoll, Brunel etc all of whom were indeed expert in their chosen field? Or, the 'Great' that got dragged into 2 World Wars cos its expert Leadership got their Foreign Policy wrong? I've read WW1's Field Marshall Haig was an expert Soldier & 1,000,000 dead certainly testify to his 'greatness'!? Maybe it's the 'Great' Britain that had Cholera, Typhoid & Malaria Epidemics as the 'expert' Medical advice upto the 1870s was that Sewerage/Drainage had nothing to do with the causes?
Maybe I'm being a bit too hard on 'experts': I mean just because it was an 'expert' designed the Titanic doesn't mean it had to hit that damn Iceberg!
And the 'experts' who compiled the Report on the Effectiveness of Police Foot Patrols, well, they wouldn't by any chance have driven to work every day rather than walk the 'Streets' & 'Neighbourhoods' they were researching because 'There's never a Policeman about when you want one!' No, they wouldn't presume that, would they!?
I mean how did they research 'bobbies on the beat' when three-quarters of PC are statistically shown to get about using vehicles?
Seriously, I have no more truck with 'tabloid' headline stuff than You: I do believe my suggestion to Mr Easton to ask some Local Force to try the Pub Test would embarrass the hell out of the 'experts' because I repeat they are asking the wrong questions at the wrong time from the wrong people!
Complain about this comment
"14. At 4:56pm on 29 Jun 2010, Ziggy wrote:
If they need to cut waste, cut the pension age. Why should Police be able to retire at 55 with a full pension when the rest of us have to wait another 10 years and more."
Because firstly we pay for it and it was part of our conditions when we joined and secondly we have no choice - I am one year away from retirement having served thirty years - and I have no option but to retire - if I stay on I lose £10K a year from my lump sum - and still have to pay contributions. If the Police pension system would allow me to stay on and not lose money then I would - as would most of my colleagues. And while people are comparing army pay with Police pay I have done both - fighting in the Falklands and patrolling in Ireland. I wouldnt take anything away from our military colleagues who do an amazing job but its a very different job and shouldnt be compared. Its the military pay thats low not the Police pay that is high. And for those people who go on about "bobbies walking the beat" - you need to forget Dixon of Dock Green - the modern professional criminal travels longs distances and drives or uses a computer to do their dirty work - hence we have vehicles and computer crimes units. Things have moved on!
Complain about this comment
"I suspect it's true that bobbies on the beat don't make a significant reduction in crime, but (it done correctly, and not in the UK style) they can make people feel safer, and give them a connection"
There in lies the problem - do you want people to "feel safer" or "be safer" - there isnt a bottomless pit of money that will allow a Police officer on every corner - so they have to be targetted. Its a balance between visibility and proactivity. Do you have a visible presence of some bobby on his bicycle (while the criminal moves elsewhere in his high performance car) or do you have undercover cops who people dont see but who catch the criminals - discuss!!
Complain about this comment
JP
Re #136 & 137
".. forget Dixon of Dock Green.." plus, "..things have moved on..".
How right You are: The Police & Pensions was very informative, thank you for that. You are also accurate in the remarks on Armed Forces pay for lower ranks.
As one who served in N. Ireland on 3 'tours' & a daughter in the Met (12yrs) I do know something of what You mean & where You are coming from with the 'different jobs'.
Now, 'PC Dixon' was a fine chap in his time, but he is clearly not what is needed for modern 'policing' ('Blue Lamp' = for a PC shot dead in the line of duty he did very well for another 40yrs!).
That said, his job was no different in its basics to what the modern 'force' is all about: I mean, You are there to 'PREVENT' or to 'APPREHEND' CRIMINALS, aren't You!?
So, if You are going to argue the 'modern' criminal moves hundreds of miles to commit a crime they are still only in one-place when they do it, aren't they? Thus, in most cases, it is the 'Police' on the ground in that one-place upon whom falls the task of either 'preventing' or 'apprehending'.
And, let us be quite clear - - for all sorts of 'modern' computer/technology crime no particular ground is required at all - - just the skilled Officers able to comprehend what the whizz-kid criminal is attempting & taking steps to 'prevent' or 'apprehend' and a CPS has the evidence to make a case a Jury will understand.
Doubtless, as in Dixon's day the equivalent of 'Flying Squad', i.e. Special Crimes units are required to oversee the activities of the major Criminal networks: Thus, Drugs/Pornography/Terrorism/Internet/Multi-million heists etc. all have to have a dedicated Police Unit with Nationwide reach in their investigation, collation & active intervention in such 'professional' criminal activity.
How else do the Mr Noyes etc. get apprehended? In the end it was a Local Force following up a road-rage murder!
Also, most Crime is not of the 'professional' hardened Bank Robbery etc. type: Most crime is 'LOCAL', committed in a locality by relatively local small-time/small-ideas crooks. House-breakers, robbers, thieves... call them what You will, they are not a mafioso. True, they may hop on a bus, take the underground, or drive from Hackney to Dulwich etc., but movers & shakers of ground-breaking criminality, they aren't!
There always was and will be those local gangland groups (these days ethnicity plays its part) & the shootings/stabbings etc. between these distinctly 'territorial hoodlums' does warrant 'special units' to deal with them, but again, at a relatively local level.
After all that; the most common criminal Police come across is almost inevitably a Friday-Saturday night drunken/drugged off-his/her-face spiteful/violent irk, or, the local crook exploiting opportunities around those 'off-their-face' members of society. How many Offences are committed by or on that group: It adds up to well over 50% of all Reported Crime - - from DUI to Murder - - and they occur at a Local level among a relatively local population every day of the Year.
You may think a 'high performance' vehicle is the criminals' preference and their methodology; but, I say the PC on foot or bicycle will still 'prevent' & 'apprehend' more of the most 'common criminals' than any number of high performance Police Response cars who really should be directed almost entirely toward the seriously 'professional criminal' I outlined above.
So in essence my argument would be that People should not only 'feel safer' they will 'be safer' if and when there are more Bobbies on the beat because most people never come into contact with a high performance vehicle driven by a Mr Noye or his associates!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Ok i want to steal a car from this very nice street and i might have to burgle the house to do it ,now what is the police situation [none ]no patrols ,ok looks good with the latest cut backs in response time and back up ,i think its gona be a dodle ,right i will have some of that.
meanwhile in a very posh street full of solictors fat councillors and mp,s and a regular police presents ,i would think twice about doing that one as the odds of getting caught are to high !
Complain about this comment
When I worked in Tokyo, there was a small local police station, one day in the local supermarket I was spoken to by a very polite Japanese gentleman. We briefly chit-chatted, I asked him how it was he knew my name, it turned out he was the local area policeman and it was required that he know as many of the people in his area as he could.
This policy of local policeman obviously worked, for in a minor car accident the alcohol vending machine at a junction was damaged, anyone could have walked away with one or more bottles - no-one did, nor did they steal from the two one metre cubes of cigarettes deposited on the sidewalk each night at the Tsukiji fish market, the cigarettes stood there for many hours till the market opened at dawn.
Their policing obviously works - most crimes are quickly solved - we should study their tactics not blindly follow the USA in putting policemen in cars to hound motorists for the easy collar.
Complain about this comment
In the book Freakonomics by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner the explanation for the drop in crime rate in the US seen almost everywhere was not better policing, "zero-tolerance" lock-em-all-up but simply - the impact of legalized abortion. Unwanted kids never appeared who then did not go on to produce crimes.
But the UK seems to have a completely opposite approach where teenage girls make a career decision to have two or more children using state-subsidies and guaranteed state-paid-for accomodation - bringing up children in one-parent familes delibrately - and producing feral, gang-member children as a result.
I was a child of of a one-parent family in the sixties - my mother got NOTHING from the state, worked nights in a hospital changing beds for incontinent patients. She struggled between paying the rent, feeding us and keeping us warm.
Complain about this comment
You use a reference from 26 years ago to support your argument. Not exactly reasoned informed debate then? Pre-computers, pre number plate recognition, pre- mobile phones, pre-the Police and Criminal Evidence Act? Simply relying on flawed statistics to make an argument about the efficacy of individual Officers using data collected from over a quarter century ago is is bit much, don't you think? Perhaps you would like to visit a busy city centre custody suite any time soon and confirm that your Officers are "hopeless" ...?
Complain about this comment
It may be too late. For many years now the police, (I will not call them a service or a force) have steadily become politicised, and have evolved as poodles i.e. servants to their political masters. No longer do they uphold the law. Common sense is not allowed to break into their world. No, their allegience lies elsewhere - not with the likes of us, the people that pay their inflated wages.They are now cotrolled by politicians, and the corrupt useless judicial system in place. (The one that prosecutes innocent people attempting to defend their property & life against attack.) the same force that is scared of us - hence the numerous arrests in such cases.
The POLICE ? a useles, morally corrupt useless organisation. It should be disbanded, all rules torn up, and started again with a clean sheet - and when it is started again - go back to basics - protection of the innocent being the priority.
Complain about this comment
The police are no longer men and women, they are officers. That is their given title. They are legal fictions hell bent on making money for their masters and not solving real crimes, such as murders and rape. Why do you think they are called officers? And the police force, uggh, makes me shudder to think that. There were days when you ould walk up to a police MAN in the street and have a conversation, human to human. You would probably be arrested now for doing so, or at least asking the wrong question.
Are you aware that when you provide your name and address, you are actually signing into a contract with the police? Doubt it, and I doubt the 'officers' even know this. Are you also aware that when the police ask "do you understand?", it actually means "do you agree do stand under?". As long as you have not broken the law (law of the land, or common law) and not done something seen as illegal, or even being questioned in the street (or anywhere), you have a right to remain silent. Do not understand, as then you are seen as being below them. It's a farce and when are the populace going to wake up and realise this?
It's time not to be scared, not to live in fear and start being ourselves. Stop being oppressed and remove those that are oppressing is. It's time to start loving each other instead of hating. Time to stop casting each other and instead look at everyone as equal and born of the Earth, instead of birthed in the system. If you don't 'get it' then instead of disregarding what I say, find out for yourself. I am a man of peace. When are you going to start saying "I am not a person (Legal fiction/strawmna, ie Mr John SMITH), I am a living, breathing, walking talking, THINKING, human being"?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
View these comments in RSS