Comments for en-gb 30 Mon 02 Mar 2015 04:06:26 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at newageoracle I am not sure that requiring the police to "do more" is the best way to improve the service the police provide. It seems to me that they have been "doing more" things of their own choosing increasingly for the past decade or so and "doing less" of the things the public requires of them. Far better that they should do fewer of the "right" things to a much better standard. Chief Constables have been more interested in forming political connections, socialising at their local Round Table, getting on the after dinner speeches circuit, forming private companies to offer services at high fees that their police forces should already be providing.Should big strapping bobbies be sitting at key boards entering data with one finger typing while 5'0" girls stroll around shopping malls in ludicrous, ill fitting uniforms, supposedly deterring street crime?My only contact with the police during the past 10 years or so has been two "speeding tickets" after being caught on a long stretch of 40mph road with an inexplicable 30mph sign and camera on a bend.....meanwhile, we are plagued by drunken youths passing thro' residential areas on their way home from the pubs and not a sign of a policeman despite frequent complaints. Cut out the Social work and tax collecting and beef up the thief takers and gang busters. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:44:58 GMT+1 in_the_uk 403. At 3:09pm on 29 Jun 2010, Mr Cholmondley-Warner wrote:364. At 2:13pm on 29 Jun 2010, in_the_uk wrote:171. At 11:06am on 29 Jun 2010, Trainee Anarchist wrote:Well now Mr and Mrs this what you voted for?------------------------------Yes------------------------------Really ? Surely you voted BNP. --------------------------------------I did. Yet people complain that they have a coalition of tory and lib dems. Collectively this is what we all voted for. We vote for our favorite and the parties are given the share accordingly.The only time people voted for one thing and got another were the labour policies. They had the majority government and a mandate to do as they wanted however destructive.On a personal note I wouldnt want BNP to gain a majority government but they would be an awesome coalition with any of the top 3 Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:44:53 GMT+1 RonC Mmmmm, who is going to police the riots that will happen as they did when Thatcher tried to bully the country?Perhaps if they allowed the police to do their job instead of sitting behind desks compiling less than truthful statistics then we would have less crime that would result in prison sentences.Of course I am sure the politicians and their wealthy party donators will be kept safe and secure! Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:41:00 GMT+1 a-brit-in-mexico What did Mr Cameron say before the election; "I have no intention to put up VAT. Under labour there are less Police Officers on the beat, we need to get more out on the streets."But the fact is, there has always been more Police Officers on the Beat under a Labour Government. Why do we always have a high number of people in prison under a Labour Government. Think about it. Its because we have the Police to catch them.The party of Law and Order has never been the Torries. Under the Torries we have always had less Police Officers, Doctors, Nurses and Teachers.Welcome to the really world, not the Torry one Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:37:18 GMT+1 BAmberGas "The same goes for firemen- they're paid full time and do hardly any work. They could do the bins while there weren't any fires on."Why ever not .. even better would be to use the binmen to police the streets or in the words of McBain "Clean up the trash".As Homer said "The Garbage Man Can" Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:34:16 GMT+1 Buzz I'm all for it. After all I haven't seen one of these so called Bobbies on the beat that the Chief Constables always talk about, for years.Oh, we have had the Community support officers around, but they don’t cost as much as a good old Bobbie, “Do they”. Anyway, with Ken Clarke’s idea, to keep as many criminals out of jail as possible, why bother hiring Police to catch them?Hey! Ken mate, I’ve just had a great idea, why don’t you re-introduce hanging and then make most crimes a capital offence, that would reduce prison costs, after all, it worked for Judge Jeffries, didn’t it? Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:33:41 GMT+1 D the inspectors and chiefs get paid ridiculous amounts so they must be supercops so lets see them out on the streets! the police are no longer about serving the public it is now a political party and good ole boys club! shame its a Right wing Ole boys Club! Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:33:03 GMT+1 MellorSJ sledger10 exclaims: "Let's be honest - the reasons for all these cuts are two fold:- The Tories just LIKE cutting public services!! That's what they do!"OF COURSE that's what they do! Over and over, after a period of labour overspending, the tories have to reduce spending. "This is not just about the deficit - they do not NEED to make these drastic cuts so quickly!"Yes they do. We're bust."This will kill off any recovery stone dead!"Evidence? Apart from hysterical screaming, anything that Stiglitz publishes, and the fact that the US can afford to deficit-spend because of the temporary (oh so temporary!) strength of their currency."It's ALSO because of the greed of BANKS and the global financial crisis that has increased the deficit - nobody seems to be remembering that WE the taxpayer are paying for these useless bankers!That's why we have CUTS! "No its not. Gordon's profligacy is the reason we have a massive deficit."AND , no, I don't believe in cutting the police at all!"And I don't believe in gravity. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:28:49 GMT+1 BrimfulOfAshes Police shouldn't be cut, but the number of civilian support staff should, allowing older officers to do their office jobs. It makes no sense to me that my local Police Authority's precept from my council tax keeps on rising, mainly to support the pensions of officers who want to retire at 50. The rest of us can't afford to, why should we pay the police to? These officers frequently go on to do other work after "retirement" - if they're fit to work, I believe they should carry on working on non-frontline jobs and their pensions should be witheld until the age of 65. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:26:42 GMT+1 thisismyID MellorSJ 716 (at 08:12am on 30 Jun 2010) wrote:damnnearperfect wrote: "Don't forget - THE BANKERS DID THIS."Evidence?None.Next!"--------------------------George Osborne, Budget Speech to the House Of Commons, 22nd June 2010:"In putting in order the nation’s finances, we must remember that this was a crisis that started in the banking sector."Three years ago the deficit was a fifth of what it is now and Labour's spending programme was considered so irresponsible the Tories promised to match it. The global banking crisis and a global recession led to a reduction in tax receipts and therefore an increase in the deficit. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:26:23 GMT+1 Fogo The government need to decide what they want the police to do. There are so many specialist units now. A lot were set up to appease government and the public when particular crimes/problems got lots of media attention. The personnel for those units could only be recruited from those already doing something else. This meant that the number engaged in the core business of policing got less and less. Also, some of the smaller forces find it difficult to manage and it may be time to seriously consider amalgamations thereby reducing numbers through economies of scale. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:15:40 GMT+1 MellorSJ I_amStGeorge writes: "I neither have nor find the need to smoke anything to get a distorted view on life"Quite. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:13:44 GMT+1 sledger10 Let's be honest - the reasons for all these cuts are two fold:- The Tories just LIKE cutting public services!! That's what they do! This is not just about the deficit - they do not NEED to make these drastic cuts so quickly! This will kill off any recovery stone dead!- It's ALSO because of the greed of BANKS and the global financial crisis that has increased the deficit - nobody seems to be remembering that WE the taxpayer are paying for these useless bankers!That's why we have CUTS! AND , no, I don't believe in cutting the police at all! Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:12:27 GMT+1 MellorSJ Moreover, culpability, you evil tory you, you have the cheek not to lay the entire blame at the feet of the bankers.Next you'll be blaming Gordon Brown's emasculation of banking regulation and the vast increase in spending over the last five years, accelerating before the election. Why, you might even claim that he (and his cronies) deliberately tried to lock in spending contracts before the election so that evil tories like you could not reverse them, spent taxpayer's money preferentially in marginal districts, and distorted spending to such a degree that civil servants had to document their forced acquiesence.Really! The depths of your depravity shame even the Thatcher years! Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:11:24 GMT+1 Teebee Why not cut the number of M.P.'s first and start from there??It's always the easiest for M.P.'s some that have Police protection nowand some for the rest of their lives.Start there. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:06:02 GMT+1 MellorSJ Culpability (#728)! You are clearly an evil tory. How could you possibly say something like "The Public Sector has a Moral Obligation to the Taxpayer to keep costs down and make efficiency savings when and where necessary on a 'day to day' basis."Clearly, reducing spending in any form is unfair to the (ex-)recipient and will only affect the most vulnerable in our society. All the money saved will no doubt be used to reduce taxes, making the rich richer.People like you should be ashamed of their immoral greed. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:01:56 GMT+1 I_amStGeorge MellorsSJ Weites,What are you smoking, Can I have some.Im answer to both your comments 707,708I neither have nor find the need to smoke anything to get a distorted view on life it is already layed out before me. I take it, from your comments that you believe in totally being isolated from the "Real World"which may account for your disproportionate idea of what a "fair society"is, If you live in ivory towers you develop a Marie Antoinette outlook. Discrimination was rife in this country long before any coloured people were introduced here. The class system saw to that. Happily though your people are on the decline as they are realising the masses have been educated despite the Tory parties attempts to reverse this. You can believe if you wish, that the coloured paper strips bearing the queens head are really vouchers that the poor exchange at the supermarket for food but I'm sorry to tell you that is just not so. The poor do have the right to breed without permission for other purposes than to fill factories or become house servants.It really does bother me though that someone with your outlook on life is allowed to spout of your beliefs without being hauled before the race discrimination board. But its a freedom of expression, I suppose unless your coloured. The same class attitude also applies to money. Before, anyone was welcome at the "club", if you had wealth but as the perimeters of the wealthy shrink more ways are sought to differentiate between classes so an intermediate class is created IE "Old Money and New Money " and the same old discriminations apply "I know he's richer than me and he's a good old chap but seriously would you let your daughter marry him, Guffaw, Guffaw. No i'm not one of these people with an envious axe to grind. I do not begrudge any person who has worked hard and worshipped the great god. money I just kept my feet on the ground and believed in the saying "There but for the grace of God...........etc,etc, on the other hand there are others that wont change no matter what but that is the worship of a whole different god altogether. Wed 30 Jun 2010 08:01:55 GMT+1 Tom No. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:56:06 GMT+1 andyb67 I think this is an attempt to squeeze greater value out of the Police. They have had some fat years under Labour, and the suspicion is that a fair percentage of that money has been wasted. The current structure of the Police is inefficient, there are 42 (I think) Police forces in the UK. They each seem to operate as an independent entity, with their own purchasing, IT and administration. There is no reason why this has to happen.The idea is that these back room functions are amalgamated, in order to cut costs. Well that is the concept, in reality, senior managers are going to take the easy route, cutting jobs, and botched over priced IT projects and ineffective supply agreements, already one force is complaining about the cheap and nasty clothing supplied under new agreement (that was under Labour by the way).Cuts in services and reorganisation was already well under way when Labour was in power, what the LibCon coalition is doing is being more open about it. The simple fact is that this country is not paying its way in the world. We want expensive gold plated services then the wealth has to be generated to pay for it. Lamentably the establishment is now looking to support our industrial and scientific base. Too late I suggest. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:51:37 GMT+1 Culpability 621. At 10:19pm on 29 Jun 2010, Rhetorician wrote:"452. At 4:31pm on 29 Jun 2010, costbased wrote:Get out in the private sector and make some money for the country instead of draining it."------------------------You mean like the banks?************************Don't be Silly! The money loaned to the Banks by the Government tokeep them liquid and able to lend due to the reduction of Interbank lending caused by the Credit Crunch must be paid back WITH INTEREST.What "costbased" means is get an Appreciation of 'where' the money iscoming from before you spend/drain/waste it.The Public Sector has a Moral Obligation to the Taxpayer to keep costsdown and make efficiency savings when and where necessary on a 'day today' basis.If Private Sector Business (small, medium or large) ran their business as the Public Sector does, there would be no Private Sector to supportthe Public Sector, because they'd all be Bankrupt. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:48:15 GMT+1 BAmberGas When I was getting a good kicking as a Met Police Officer I should have told my colleagues who turned up bugger off and record a burglary!Numpty!and this attitude is exactly why the public have no respect for the police. It's your job "Numpty". If the burglar who tried to break into my house had succeeded I wouldn't have been impressed if the police chose to look after "one of their "own in preference to coming to my assistance. As I said it's your job "Numpty" gettit? Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:47:26 GMT+1 Mike from Brum 35. At 08:57am on 29 Jun 2010, Confucius wrote:Why not have all cars fitted with a limiter so they can't exceed the national speed limit. Think of the Millions which could be save and police time not having to sit on the road side with radar guns. Because that's the limit on public roads. It doesn't apply to private roads such as the M6 toll or places like race tracks. Also cars can be driven onto ferries and go to other countries. In Germany the non-enforced limit is roughly 160mph. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:40:58 GMT+1 Phil There seem to be a lot of people taking this coppers view that cuts mean job losses at the front line. Presumably with the abolition of all those targets, some of the paper shufflers could be moved or removed altogether instead."We have about 50/60,000 uniforms in great britain, to manage over 60 million people..."And therein lies the biggest problem. They are NOT there to manage 60 million people. All those people are not criminals. The problem is that certain parts of the judicial system see everybody as a potential criminal, their job is to find out what all 60 million have done. This is what over a decade of Labour control has done - it's driven a huge wedge between the people and the police. It'll probably take just as long to repair the damage done. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:38:57 GMT+1 CzarCastic Cut police numbers! Not necessary cut the fleets of brand new cars every year first Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:35:04 GMT+1 K9Alfie cutting budgets and forcing a reduction in police officers is not the answer.get rid of PCSO's. they earn nearly as much as a police officer but have little responsibility and few powers for nearly the same cost. all the money saved from getting rid of them can be ploughed back into the police.a dramatic reduction in paperwork, form filling and bureaucracy is required. this will result in a reduction of civilian admin staff that simply file forms and count statistics, saving more money. less paperwork, form filling and bureaucracy will also result in police officers being on the street for longer resulting in happier public and police alike. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:29:42 GMT+1 cyclical The Police, as I understand it, are able to retire after 25 years of service, regardless of age, and go on to enjoy an index-linked pension thereafter.Thus a policeman or woman, joining at 20, can retire at 45, collect a full pension and carry on working in another job for the next 20+ years. ie benefiting from a double income for that period.I assume this applies to both “front line” policeman (at risk all this time) and the “backroom boys”.My suggestion is this: all new police recruits in future to serve twenty five years as front line officers, at which point they are transferred to join the back room staff until the proper retirement age of 65 (at the moment). Any policeman leaving the force must wait until 65 to receive his or her full pension which, like all public sector workers from this point on, will not be index-linked or “final salary”, just like the rest of the population.This saves a massive amount of money in pensions and ensures that the back room is staffed by officers with years of experience behind them. The only case against this I can see is one in which it might be argued that these officers are too thick to do the back room work, an argument I cannot see anyone stepping up to volunteer. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:27:05 GMT+1 Phillip of England Instead of cuts to the policeHow about cuts to prisons first? We could offset cuts to the police by cutting the funding to prisons and actually reinstate prisons as a place to be feared and a place where the privileges of the law abiding have been removed. This dude has done a tremendous job of reducing the financial burden of those who take to a life of crime, when they are caught and sent to prison. I fail to see why we can't implement something along the same lines here. belts across the nation have to be tighten, frankly it should be those from the criminal fraternity that should feel it first and harshest. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:23:18 GMT+1 Derichleau Definitely not! We have an Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) that relies on data controllers to register and pay the £45 annual fee. Bearing in mind that it is a criminal offence not to register (unless you're exempt), the government is missing out on millions - because the ICO do not have a policy of chasing up organisations and making sure that they're registered. Many of the employment agencies in this country are criminals because the majority of them are required to register - because they are unlikely to be exempt. The country would be a better place if the ICO pursued these organisations and then the money could be used to prevent cuts to the police. Alternatively, millions of pounds are spent each year by the NHS on treating self inflicted wounds. Sport injuries, hiking injuries, drunken injuries etc, should all be invoiced for. Let people pay an insurance if they have a high risk of injury. Why should the tax payer foot the bill. Again, money saved could be used to maintain the police at it's current level.Where's the government's initiative? Here are two "fair" methods of saving millions. And in the case of the former, organisations that are not registered data controllers are committing a criminal offence unless they are exempt. So not only will the government be earning revenue but they will be reducing the number of criminals. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:22:18 GMT+1 Ron We are told these cuts will be the worst since the Second World War. If that’s the case then we should all get into the wartime spirit and be good boys and girls so we don’t need the Police.On the other had do the Police need Lamborghinis to catch speeders? Not that I condone speeding but coordination is the key to really fast cars Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:19:50 GMT+1 load_of_bull Why don't the Tories just privatise the Police force? Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:13:23 GMT+1 Brian Berlin "killerdalek wrote:Any chance of a cut in the number of criminals to go with this?"YES! You'll be delighted to know that even the Tories have now realised that retribution doesn't work, and so are going to cut the number of people in prison. Prison clearly does NOT work, but rehabilitation does. Of course, the right-wing rags shriek about any exceptions, but then they would, wouldn't they. Britain has the highest prison population in Western Europe; and the highest crime rate. Cut one, you cut the other, as Canada has shown. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:12:40 GMT+1 MellorSJ damnnearperfect wrote: "Don't forget - THE BANKERS DID THIS."Evidence?None.Next! Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:12:37 GMT+1 madmuller Instead of retiring experienced coppers at 50 - why can't they move into the back-room type jobs, leaving the younger ones to be out and about (but I agree - I can't actually remember the last time I saw a police officer outside of a car)this would solve the problem of unsustainable pension payments (I mean who else retires on full-pay at 50)too. Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:02:49 GMT+1 damnearperfect Don't forget - THE BANKERS DID THIS Wed 30 Jun 2010 07:01:14 GMT+1 Hoodie We have about 50/60,000 uniforms in great britain, to manage over 60 million people... Tell me how we can cut back on such a poor level of officers. Top paid jobs should be cut as with formal lunches and dinners by the big chiefs in the forces, especially the Met. Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:54:38 GMT+1 Alan T >> 461. At 4:46pm on 29 Jun 2010, Norman Brooke wrote:>>Western Civilization is in terminal decline and the Market system is to blame for it. As we debate cuts to the police, benefits for the poor, cuts of public services the World's millionaires net worth has reached $39 TRILLION dollars.>>And we are told 'Cuts are unavoidable'!>>This is the work of a perverted and morally corrupt, satanic system.>>Capitalism = Satan.Cutting police numbers (which remember is NOT a comitted policy it's just a senior policeman raising the spectre at this stage - perhaps as a defence measure for his force's budget) is hardly the work of satan!Norman, come on, things are really not that simple. Taking your argument to it's logical conclusion: If we enforcedly shared out all the wealth in the world equally, do you seriously think it would stay that way? That well known bloated plutocrat Paul Getty said it best: "If all the money and property in the world were divided up equally at say, three o'clock in the afternoon. By 3:30 there would already be notable differences in the financial conditions of the recipients. ..."We all instinctively know that to be true, it's based on basic human nature and the widely differing abilities of humans. Some people are more able than others, some people are more ruthless in getting the best for themselves and those they care about. If you want to suppress or compensate for those differences to enforce equality, you need a state apparatus. Somebody has to run that state apparatus, they have power and before you know it you have a self-seeking elite again. In all places in the world where "equality" has been tried (call it communism, socialism, communalism - whatever name you want) it's always worked out that way. It's just how human societies have to work. Get over it. Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:53:05 GMT+1 Peter Hodge Obviously not. There aren't enough around now. Maybe there is room to get rid of the numerous senior officers, and huge number of civilian pen pushers. But we are going to need a decent sized police force in the future as we become a more dysfunctional society. Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:43:01 GMT+1 Arthur Brede Do more what, Camo? Hours of daft paperwork? Attendance at caring, sharing worksops [sic] to learn to love and understand those who rob us, to protect the freedoms of those whose only hate-filled intention is to deprive us of them? Hours by the roadside collecting money from those forced onto the roads by lack of decent public transport? Or just filling the hours, avoiding the real job because it's impossible to do and working on fiddles to get you by until retirement?You get what you pay for, you politico's - the best police force money can buy.... Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:37:01 GMT+1 newshounduk A smaller more effective police force might be possible if career criminals were permanently kept in prison instead of being released to re-offend and waste police time. We just have to accept that some people do not want to reform and put them in prison where they cannot harm members of the public.History shows that if some career criminals had been kept in prison instead of being paroled or released other innocent members of the public would not have lost their lives.It would also send out a powerful message that if you do not want to spent your life behind bars do not commit crimes and avoid criminal environments.It is time that life imprisonment really means that so that career criminals can remain in prison while law-abiding citizens can go about the business of making a positive contribution to society.It is also time we saw the end of early release for good behaviour and instead saw the extension and lengthening of prison sentences for bad behaviour.The rationalisation of the police service coupled with the reform and standardisation of sentencing nationwide and the modernisation of prisons would probably be a lot more radical. Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:36:40 GMT+1 MellorSJ I_amStGeorge writes: "After all they dont want any of this new money that the lottery has given to the poor people do they"What are you smokin'? Can I have some? Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:35:39 GMT+1 MellorSJ I_amStGeorge (#706) writes: "will once again take shelter behind their ring fenced communities Isolated from the cruel world outside by ten foot high metal fences and private security guards patrolling the perimiter built smack in the middle of your town/city. As in Kingston on Thames. You wont be allowed in of course, not even to walk through in daylight they will be "out of reach" You will only be allowed to buy if first you have enough money and second if your vetted character is acceptable. "Works for me. Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:34:37 GMT+1 I_amStGeorge When all the police forces have been cut to a barely workable level and the fear and insecurity returns to the nation once more. When knife crime starts to rise and the estate gangs start to wield their terror. You can take comfort in the fact that our "elevated bretheren " will once again take shelter behind their ring fenced communities Isolated from the cruel world outside by ten foot high metal fences and private security guards patrolling the perimiter built smack in the middle of your town/city. As in Kingston on Thames. You wont be allowed in of course, not even to walk through in daylight they will be "out of reach" You will only be allowed to buy if first you have enough money and second if your vetted character is acceptable. After all they dont want any of this new money that the lottery has given to the poor people do they Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:27:50 GMT+1 antman I think cutting Police numbers would be folly. After all with the impending increase in crime caused by the government removing the safety net from so many of our countries disadvantaged, its only to be expected.If anything should be cut, its police powers to caution someone. These cautions stand for life, severely hampering an individuals ability to gain employment and can be issued based on the say so of anyone who claims some crime has been committed against them. This without evidence or witnesses. This power needs to be reduced and cautions should not be for life. Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:21:45 GMT+1 paul With Ken Clark about to announce less prison sentences, and the massive rise in Unemployment predicted, one assumes that Rather than being the "Party of Law and Order", this shower is trying to secure the votes of the Criminal class for the next elections.The only concession the Liberals appear to have gained is the repeal of the 10% tax on Cider, so at least the homeless have something to celebrate !! Well done Nick !! Wed 30 Jun 2010 06:06:30 GMT+1 solomondogs Well, maybe we will get a better police officer. I see some who are barely out of their teens and so caught up with PC nonsense they can barely move without causing perceived offence to someone! Another thing, will someone at the top of the Police food chain tell their officers to stop calling everyone 'mate', they are not. Maybe this will do the Police good, perehaps the high flying graduates can be put to good use reorganising so that the police on the street get to spend more time there, thus giving the paying public more value for their money. I have a feeling this is often forgotten, from whom they source their wages..... Wed 30 Jun 2010 05:58:15 GMT+1 ralphinrishon I live in a country that has one National Police Force for a 7 1/2 million population.Just think what a saving there would be if the UK had only 10 Police forces. What would be just the direct savings on the Chief Constables, Deputy Chief Constables, Assistant Chief Constables? Then add on to that their staffs, offices, cars, etc., and we are talking about hundreds of millions a year. How many office "workers" could be put on the streets if there was just one national computer system (on one item alone - could you imagine the savings if all salary forms came from one central office, after salaries had been equalised nationwide), one communications network.What a saving there would be if officers could cross boundaries to continue chases or investigations. Another problem is the waste of time once the policemen are on the streets with identifying people.I remember when I was about 17 in Manchester being stopped by a policeman at 6.00 in the morning and asked to identify myself. As I didn't have any documentation on me this process took two popicemen nearly half an hour.Here if I am asked to identify myself I simply whip out my identity card, and in 15 seconds the matter is over.People who have nothing to hide should have nothing to worry about carrying another plastic card in their wallets. When a Briton goes abroad he is advised to carry identification with him at all times, why is he/she so reluctant to do the same at home? Wed 30 Jun 2010 05:31:58 GMT+1 MellorSJ Zek24356 (#688) wrote: "Cutting police numbers sounds like a bad idea. Are the people considering this the same people who complained about not finding PCs when they wanted them in opposition?"Listen, people!No cuts in police numbers have been proposed. Cuts in budgets have been proposed.Cuts in police numbers is simply fear-mongering by the union affected by the budget cuts.The BBC's original question is disingenuous. And they know it. Wed 30 Jun 2010 04:59:53 GMT+1 MellorSJ Idon't BelieveIt (#644): "1. The size of a particular debt is irrelevant. If this was not the case we would all be trying to buy the cheapest smallest hovel that we could on the grounds that it 'would reduce our debt'. All that is relevant is that we have a credible plan to pay off the debt over time.e.g like a mortgage on a house. "Nope. Once the debt gets too big, it is impossible to pay it back, let alone build a credible plan. This will certainly happen if interest payments exceed income. Or if interest payments are a too large a proportion of income. However, a payer can reduce payments by extending maturity. After Japan and Greece, the UK has one of the hight debt to GDP ratios. What saves us--so far--is that maturity on our debt is longer dated."Bankers loaned huge amounts of 'imaginary' money to people who they knew wouldn't have a realistic probability of ever paying off. Hence 'credit crunch'."Nope. Bankers lent real money to people they had convinced themselves could pay it off. In the US, also because the banks had been required to lend money bad risks (who were often black)."hence recession and potential bank failure."Wrong cause and effect. It works like this: (1) Bankers lend, using money they borrow from similarly deluded sources, (2) somewhere along the line, a number of defaults cause a bank to be unable to repay its creditors, (3) banks refuse to lend to each other, causing further banks to get into trouble and even fail, (4) now we have a credit crunch because no one will lend for fear of default, (5) recession follows because no business can borrow to fund its operations." No sensible Government is going to let banks fail en masse - the alternative is Mugabe madness. Please don't delude yourself that a Conservative or any other flavour of Government would have done this."What might give you idea that I think they would? "At this point everyone, repeat everyone agreed that stimulus through spending was the only sane thing to do. Why do you have a problem with this?"This is the standard Keynsian prescription. It depends on building surplus during the good years to fund such cyclical spending which Gordon Brown signally failed to do.Listen up now, for this is important. Gummints, these last few years, have spent money in two distinct areas. One is stimulus spending, i.e. spending directly in the economy through direct payments or infrastructure projects that create employment. The other is by creapitalization of the banks. This money is not spent. It is actually an investment in equity in the banks. The value of this equity may rise. Already, the US gummint has made money on the sales of some investments. Had the Prudential AIA deal gone through, the gummint would have made a packet."Would you have preferred depression? I do sometimes get the impression that some posters here would have preferred depression. "Not my job to manage your hallucinations. See a doctor."To return to the point, banks have created a situation where, to paraphrase Homer Simpson's remark on alcohol, "Debt is the cause of and solution to all our problems"."False. In the US, as I mentioned above,the gummint required irresponsible lending, and regulators encouraged a culture of risk-taking. In the UK, the regulators had been emasculated by Gordon Brown, and, in any event Labour relied on the income from the banking sector, so Labour was unwilling to step in. "Once we have corrected the current situation we will return to encouraging debt once more. About that 'There is no choice'."We need a certain degree of debt. Even you can see the results of having no credit--recession."I don't care frankly how you seek to justify any of this death by a thousand cuts. If it is based on the severely limited (mis)information which Governments allow us, you are bound to get it wrong."As is evidenced by your remarks."If , on the other hand, you wish to attack the welfare state, public servants, the NHS etc., I just wish you had the honesty to make your case without hiding behind bogus figures and debt 'bogeymen'."My views on the welfare state are irrelevant. We can't afford it at the current level. Wed 30 Jun 2010 04:57:14 GMT+1 Derek Crespy It is simply a matter of quality vs. quantity. Wed 30 Jun 2010 04:33:03 GMT+1 Ian All and every public service should be reviewed because we can't afford what is being spent now. Wed 30 Jun 2010 03:14:37 GMT+1 Peter Dewsnap By far the best suggestion I have read here (and I can't remember who wrote it) was to go back to the old system where police forces were run by local councils who knew their area and what was required to control it. I lived under that system. The police stations were mostly empty except for a few administrative personnel. All the rest were out on the beat. Under this system, violent crime was virtually unknown in Britain and any rowdyism by local youths was dealt with summarily by the local coppers. Those men weren't feared but they were respected and they kept order. We knew our local policemen, they were friends and one would stop at our house for a cup of tea. He was welcome. My point is, the system worked well. That does not seem to be the case today.Peter D ex England Wed 30 Jun 2010 02:50:34 GMT+1 Stuart8827 Last year I was stopped by the police four times in the space of three weeks. Twice for perfectly legitimate reasons and twice because the local constabulary where having a clamp down on stolen motorcycles and were stopping motorcycles as a matter of routine to verify ownership.The two other reasons was for no rear light and going through a red light. The red light was at roadworks. Up until recently there was no legal requirement to stop at road works lights. However, if you caused and accident it wouldn't look good for you. It appears that the rules were changed recently and no one told me. There is now a legal requirement to stop at roadworks lights.On both of these occasions I given a bit of paper and sent on my way. I didn't feel in the least persecuted. I think any police officer reading this will know why I was not given a fixed penalty. I'm keeping it to myself as it improves my chances of not getting a penalty next time I am stopped for some minor traffic infringement while the coffers can be filled by all those that don't know the reason. Common sense really if you think about it. Unfortunately common sense is not all that common. Wed 30 Jun 2010 02:09:50 GMT+1 Wiser than you This post has been Removed Wed 30 Jun 2010 01:51:00 GMT+1 Stuart8827 691. At 02:01am on 30 Jun 2010, bibilo1977 wrote:Please, in this politic where it is the people you have to sacrifice for your own mistakes.The labour where happy to clean the mess that they found with a good plan. Creating job and put in place the minimum wage. Please do not be to excited by the power and do everything in once.-------------------------------------------------------------------------What mess was this? The one that Gordon Brown did nothing about for two year preferring to keep the same spending plans he inherited from the previous government. Then when he had to make some decisions of his own he sold of the gold reserves at the bottom of the market costing the taxpayer around £7 billion. Wed 30 Jun 2010 01:47:56 GMT+1 Wiser than you This post has been Removed Wed 30 Jun 2010 01:40:29 GMT+1 tonkatoy As a serving Police officer, I write this with a degree of bias, but with an element of informed opinion as well. I've done 26 years "front line" so I'm quite able to take criticism (and worse). What frustrates me just a tad is some of the ill informed comment on this page. Junior officers earning £80 000 a year? Yes I earned that once (and then I woke up). Persecuting innocent motorists? - wrong - if they're "innocent" we leave them alone ("oh come on officer, it was only 45 in a 30 zone, yes I've had a drink, but only 2 pints"). If we never lock any "real criminals" up, then my nick must be the exception. It's usually busy 24/7 with nice people like rapists, wife beaters, drunken buffoons, and the mentally ill. And given the sweeping inaccuracies in some of the more scathing comments, where do you people get your "facts"? Is it "Big Vern" down the pub or the Daily Mail? - or both? If you don't know what you're talking about, BACK AWAY FROM THE KEY BOARD! Getting back to the core subject, we simply cannot cut numbers of officers where I work. As it is, we struggle to get to jobs while we're queing out of the custody door with prisoners we've already locked up. Oh, and to the poster who wanted to see Dixon of Dock Green again - he wasn't real. Wed 30 Jun 2010 01:08:00 GMT+1 bibilo1977 I am taking this point to alert people about many issues this marriage Lib Deb & Cons are bringing in. You can not make a mistake if you never tried but been a politician is different to a scientist. We are not rats for them to try their magical potion. How can people thing about cutting the number of policemen when people come on TV and ask those on income to find a job, when they are pushing people to find a job!I am very scared bout this politic where: Freeze our money, increase the VAT, asked immigrant to pay for their treatment (when they pay the same NI than those “EU”). People have big bonuses, big salaries (£100000 /year at least for working for the government). Please, in this politic where it is the people you have to sacrifice for your own mistakes.The labour where happy to clean the mess that they found with a good plan. Creating job and put in place the minimum wage. Please do not be to excited by the power and do everything in once.Thanks Wed 30 Jun 2010 01:01:20 GMT+1 David Lilley It is absolutely necessary to cut the Police budget but that does not mean we need to cut the number of Police men and women.We all know that the Police, Offender Management (what used to be called the Probation Service) and Social Workers spend 4 days per week filling in forms and one day per week doing what we expect of them. It is not their fault, it is the fault of the system that our servants (our elected representatives) put in place.We only need to do two very simple things:1. We give every Officer an audiovisual hard disk recorder. They arrive at an incident, press a button and the whole incident is recorded. There is no form filling as we have the evidence from the horses mouth. The Police man/woman doesn't even have to take time off the beat to attend Court and the Crown Prosecution Service does not need to wade through massive files of Police wittness statements. Indeed, even the defence solicitor makes no defence because there isn't story A and story B. There is only the indisputable evidence of a fully recorded event. The matter does not even go to Court. It is an open and shut case of "its a fair cop". The offended does not even see the point of engaging a solicitor which will usually be at the tax payers expense via legal aid.2. We stop retiring Officers at the culmination of 30 years of service. We instead put their experience to use doing detective work in the office where their age is not a problem and their experience is an advantage. They can take the audiovisual data from the incident and make an electronic presentation of the legal case of the offence and put it to the offender with the "horse' mouth" data appended.We must remember that 70% of our prisoners can't read and write, have drug addiction problems or have a degree of mental illness. We are chasing the same usual suspects in and out of the detection, legal aid, Court and sentance (prison, probation and community work) system in a merry go round. The only winners are those employed in the criminal justice system. Without these poor suckers the Police would have little to do. Wed 30 Jun 2010 00:35:22 GMT+1 Stuart8827 682. At 00:48am on 30 Jun 2010, Wiser than you wrote:Here's a useful cut - since the outgoing Labour """government""" is responsible for the £2,000,000,000,000 public debt mountain, all police protection to previous members of the Labour administration should be withdrawn forthwith.-----------------------------------------------------------------------I think you will find it already is as a matter of routine. Only the PM and members of the cabinet get any police protection. The rest have to look after themselves. Wed 30 Jun 2010 00:25:48 GMT+1 Zek24356 Cutting police numbers sounds like a bad idea. Are the people considering this the same people who complained about not finding PCs when they wanted them in opposition? Wed 30 Jun 2010 00:22:03 GMT+1 Stuart8827 665. At 11:41pm on 29 Jun 2010, gadfly wrote:Oh, yes, and we should stop our involvement in all foreign wars that are nothing to do with us and make policing part of the Army's peace-time duties, with the SAS deployed ruthlessly against violent criminals and gangsters until the villains have nowhere to hide!------------------------------------------------------------------------I pray to God that never happens. You saw what happens on Bloody Sunday when you send soldiers to do a policeman's job. They behave like soldiers. Silly idea for so many reasons.As for using the SAS, arresting the criminals is the easy part. Identifying and finding them is the hard part and the police are best equipped to do that. Wed 30 Jun 2010 00:19:58 GMT+1 Mick We need more police officers on our streets not a reduction in numbers. I think the public would be shocked if they knew how few police we actually have patrolling out towns and cities. Our government should focus on reducing waste in our criminal justice / court system. Wed 30 Jun 2010 00:16:41 GMT+1 Mad Max and Satan Dog Paddy • • RE …………………………………………………..• 643. At 11:00pm on 29 Jun 2010, boodnock wrote: There would be no need for cuts if the Police officers worked a 40 hour week like the rest of us and have similar holidays....They ought to work until the national pension age and should also have to pay for their own pensions out of a normal realistic weekly wage.Overtime should be banned, sick pay should be the same SSP that the rest of has to get by on.They should pound the Beat more and not rely on a fleet of patrol cars that stand about unused half the time.The officers should be freed of needless Burocracy and red tape.I see no reason for the police to get preferential wages, conditions, pensions etc...They knew what the job involves and should only have taken it on if they truly wanted to uphold the law as compared to doing the job for an early retirement on a big pension pot...if not then they can resign from the force.Well I hate to disappoint you Boodnock, but Police officers work 40 hrs per week over a four week cycle of shifts. The shift pattern is 2 x 2 x 2 then four rest days. Some days have 8, 9, or 10 working Hours. By the way the canteens are gone and you tend to eat whilst bashing out a report on a workstation with your Radio switched on. Your Holiday entitlement varies with your length of service and rank. Annual leave is granted in hours. Before I retired I was entitled to 240 hours per year. I joined the service in 79 and retired aged 51 in 2009. When I joined the agreement was work for thirty years on shifts, pay 11 % of your salary as pension contribution, and then retire after 30 yrs. Not my fault, but that was the terms and conditions when I joined. My last year’s salary gross was £43000. I chose not to do overtime if I could avoid it. I.e. volunteering to cover shortages to cover for officers who were at court, or on incident rooms, to ensure minimum safe manning. But unfortunately you frequently got detained on duty to deal with serious incidents, to contain murder and serious crime scenes, do deal with prisoners. Someday it was not unrealistic to work 16 hours or so, and to be expected to be on your next tour of duty. So you could be on lates, starting at 2pm, get detained past 11pm until 7am the next morning, and still be expected to turn up at 2pm. FACT. Because if you don’t there wasn’t anybody to fill your gap. Also what tended to happen you would be warned for Crown court or Magistrates courts on your rest days. I would rather be at home with the family, but I think that a rather Irate Judge would probably have me arrested for contempt of court if I ignored his invitation to attend. You can of course choose to take the time off in Lieu instead of Payment, but officers were collecting hundreds of hours in time off credits. It’s ok if you want to use them towards holidays or retiring early (I am not being smug but I used a months worth of time owing when I left in March instead of April)I hear what you say about “Pounding the Beat “. I used to work in North Birmingham. Perhaps on some days I would have 12 to 15 constables working to cover and extremely busy area. Driving from one end to the other of the OCU would take 20 minutes in the early hours of the morning when quite, so you can just imagine how long it takes in rush hour. ???.. If say 12 officers were dropped out on foot beat areas minus their cars and told to carryon as normal, nobody but nobody would get the police to attend a job. The area was far too geographically large, both urban and rural.Sick pay, well I have been sick, I had a few days off following a Police car accident where a driver fell asleep and hit us, and I did have a bout of influenza. But nothing too serious. However I have been very fortunate, many colleagues have been seriously beaten and assaulted during the course of their duty. I believe that it’s the law for all employers to provide sickness benefit for their fulltime employees. Or perhaps would you like an exception for the Police.Perhaps Boodle you are right about the preferential pay the Police receive, perhaps they all should be on the minimum wage. Then nobody would do the job and then budget cuts would be achieved. I seem to realise when I joined in 79, I started on £3189 per annum, and I was earning £4249 in my previous profession as an electrical engineer. I joined because I had a silly idea about public service. Perhaps BOODLE you could volunteer?? You can have it thank you very much.: Wed 30 Jun 2010 00:02:10 GMT+1 malcolm heard With the cuts that police forces face in Britain, which will mean less police to keep law and order, will there be a big rise in crime, and will it make people feel safe in their homes and on the streets of the UK, perhaps like other public services, the private sector will become involved in police work, in America three-fourths of police are private ones, and the rich for safety live in what are called gated communities housing estates surrounded by a high fence, guarded and patrolled by a private police force, in Britain today there are 1000 such estates, guarded by private security men, while the well off may feel safe and secure, will people in ordinary surroundings feel the same. Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:54:53 GMT+1 Wiser than you This post has been Removed Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:53:20 GMT+1 Wiser than you Here's a useful cut - since the outgoing Labour """government""" is responsible for the £2,000,000,000,000 public debt mountain, all police protection to previous members of the Labour administration should be withdrawn forthwith.While of course I'm not advocating violence, for violence is abhorrent to me, in this case I believe nature will take its course.... Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:48:37 GMT+1 Wiser than you This post has been Removed Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:42:00 GMT+1 Libmeister As for what if they're unrest like before the answer is perfectly simple. The police will have to just police their protests instead of attacking them. No kettling no charging them just watching unless they actually start smashing things up in which case you go in grab the smashers and get out. The Poll tax riots were started by the police, because of miscommunications maybe but still. Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:40:17 GMT+1 muadib2 "Under Liebour, the Police has become a wholly politicised organ of the LABOUR Party,"You have noticed your mate Dave is going to put the police at the mercy of a local elected official?Its worth spending time doing research before having a tedious rant. Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:28:39 GMT+1 muadib2 Can you imagine what would have happened if Gordon brown had suggested this. The Mail, Express and Torygraph would have gone ballistic and our Dave would have decried it at nauseating insincere length.But now he is in power and has to do things rather than criticise other people, we see what a twit he is.Why not sack nurses, firemen and care worker while you are at it. I mean, they cost us money you know! You must save money. How else can you raise the limit for Inheritance tax to help Baronet Osborne et al.? Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:24:37 GMT+1 Richard Kendal Leah I worked in the control room of a major police force in the north-west. 50% of officers who booked on duty called in to say they would be "busy" and not available to take a job, often leaving very few officers to deal with pages of calls for service (50-60 people to be seen) and this did not count the calls for service coming in during the shift, many of which were priority one (genuine 999 calls). Often, when an officer knocked on to see a complainant, they were not home, thus requiring a recall. Many jobs had 6-10 recalls ! wasting police time trying to meet with complainants. When one prisoner was arrested, it required a van to transport them to custody (2 officers) plus the two officers in the car who made the arrest, thus tying up 4 officers for often 2 hours while they book one prisoner in to about a waste of resources! All this too often, a minor offences such as Public Order or shoplifting as an example.We need to introduce a citizen report for minor offences such as theft (suspect unknown) where people can attend their local station and fill out a report themselves and getting a crime number rather than wait hours and sometimes days for an officer to do the same job where there is no line of enquiry. This works well in Canada as I can personally attest to, thus freeing officers up for more serious criminal enquiries and ongoing crimes in progress.Why do we need to know the ethnic background of a petrol station attendant when they report a drive off? Who cares? We need to get rid of useless questionnaires that tie up time. Duty sergeants need to check more often why their officers are "tied up" and unavailable to go out onto the street as too much skiving is apparent. More power to PSCO's need to be given to allow them to do more of the leg work in follow up enquiries and to allow them to make arrests for minor offences (drunk, public order etc) rather than tying up fully sworn officers in such matters.I could go on and on. Yes we need to restructure badly as the current structure simply does not work and it's the public that suffer. Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:08:17 GMT+1 john As i said beforethe election..The Tories are WOLFS in Sheeps clothing...'Liars' and Cheats.. The ONE area that needs MORE Police and they are choosing to ignore. Just a shane they can't seethe real issues in this country.. Such as the criminalwho get smoney back for a filling falling out and costs the TAX payer THOUSANDS!! You are a disgrace!! Tue 29 Jun 2010 23:00:15 GMT+1 MrWonderfulReality Maybe we could expand the licenced poppyfields in oxfordshire and export to Afganistan and use the money to save police cuts. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:59:00 GMT+1 rhinorevolt 521. At 7:08pm on 29 Jun 2010, tomcruise24 wrote:should the police service be cut....NO! if anything we need more police.they do a dangerous job and should be higher paid and better supported, without the police we have this country would be a mess. And there pension they deserve!!!!-------------------------------------------------------------------------Police Constable 24 Cruise! Stop playing on that computer and get out on patrol immediately. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:58:15 GMT+1 Ruaraidh Why do police forces with less than a thousand officers require a Chief Constable, a Deputy Chief Constable and at least one Assistant Chief Constable.In Scotland we have Central Scotland Police which can field about 800 police officers on a good day.Dumfries and Galloway have an establishment of less than 700 officers yet have the same rank structure. Larger forces such as Strathclyde have Divisions which have more police officers tahn these two forces.Instant savings get rid of Chief Constables and go for an area Management Structure - result instant savings Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:57:07 GMT+1 Kaliyug If you cut the amount of policemen at any time then it should correspond with stricter punishments instead of merely warehousing criminals. Take a page from Singapore or China and apply it to the society. Less police with less crime with less criminals, everyone wins. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:56:10 GMT+1 Ralphie Soooo - for the electorate, crime was a big election issue. The party that was democratically elected reduces the crime fighting force... I must be stupid, but it doesn't make sense to me. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:56:10 GMT+1 MrWonderfulReality We just need to get rid of ALL RED TAPEBlue or green is much better!!!! Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:52:32 GMT+1 Idont Believeit 596. At 9:32pm on 29 Jun 2010, Deb wrote:Hugh Orde is setting his stall out - keep throwing money our way or we will give a 2nd rate service - the rest of the public services will use the same excuse for a 2nd rate service and the stubborn refusal to improve the performance of publicly funded workers at all levels is precisely why we don't compete on the world stageHe knows what we all know - there are some very good police officers who are fed up with carrying 2nd rate workers who ought to be drummed out of the service right now without the big fat payout on retirement plus the over inflated pension. Get down to managing properly.---------------------------------------------------------------I seem to remember a succession of very highly paid CEOs, bankers,etc. arguing that 'if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys'. By the same reasoning if you are only prepared to pay for a 2nd rate service, you can only expect a 2nd rate service. I thought 'you get what you pay for' was a popular maxim among right wingers or is that only applicable to private schools and private health plans? Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:43:18 GMT+1 HackToff 647. At 11:10pm on 29 Jun 2010, Bibi wrote:batrachian wrote:Police time could certainly be diverted away from, for example, persecuting motorists and towards catching real criminals such as illegal immigrants. However, how the "party of law and order" can decimate our police force whilst leaving foreign aid ring fenced is an insanity that absolutely beggars belief. Charity begins at home.*************************************************************************Would that we could keep the immigrants, who are in general polite, well-behaved, level-headed, hard-working and have the parenting skills necessary to produce peaceful and respectful, scholastically-minded children - and oh that we could expel the selfish, bigoted thugs who hide behind the banner of patriotism***********************************************************************Bibi, I guess that your name belies a heritage in Mauritius or similar? Perhaps in your community what you say is true but certainly not in the immigrant communities that I have encountered - far from it. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:43:03 GMT+1 deanarabin We are in an enormous national financial mess, and so all components of Government expenditure should be cut (ring fencing the NHS and the Armed Services was a mistake). The police should be required to make their cuts with the objective of keeping numbers up at the sharp end of policing; but if that cannot be done (and it probably won't be, given the proportion of staff costs in the average Force's expenditure) then regrettably numbers of front line officers will have to come down. And woe betide any Chief Constable who drives around in a big car with a number plate less than two years old, or other senior officers who retire with pensions deliberately maximised by 'managing' their personal circumstances. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:42:10 GMT+1 John in Kent 656Chris. Agree but also have a question. Why do my effects: bold, italics etc not come through? Am I doing something wrong? Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:41:51 GMT+1 gadfly Policing is now so sophisticated that the more mundane aspects of the task are being ignored. The police must be made to deal more severely with all aspects of low-level criminal behaviour in order to knock some respect for law and order into the empty heads of the perpetrators of this stuff. Nuisance criminal behaviour should be confronted and dealt with harshly, since not doing so only raises the bar of acceptibility in the criminal mind.Oh, yes, and we should stop our involvement in all foreign wars that are nothing to do with us and make policing part of the Army's peace-time duties, with the SAS deployed ruthlessly against violent criminals and gangsters until the villains have nowhere to hide! Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:41:50 GMT+1 HackToff First to say, I am a strong supporter of the police and the difficult role they have with now so many people and lawyers sniping at them from all quarters. BUT, they are paid way too much - and I don't just mean the headline salary, I refer to excessively generous pensions, overtime, housing allowances etc. Sickness rates are also a disgrace on top of already generous holiday. So, yes let's unshackle them from boundless bureacracy but we must cut overall remuneration - doing both should as a minimum maintain numbers of police if not increase them. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:40:40 GMT+1 AnAngryMan As soon as your born they make you feel small, By giving you no time instead of it all, Till the pain is so big you feel nothing at all, A working class hero is something to be, A working class hero is something to be. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:36:32 GMT+1 markus_uk I don't think this will affect my area, as there already is no police. Anarchy around here will probably stay at the same level, give or take a few vandalised gardens and dead boy racers... Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:35:19 GMT+1 Clive of India Perhaps rather odd recommending Greece as an example, but how about this?In greece a) the Jails are truly awful places that wouldn't commend themselves to the Human Rights lobby - so surprisingly no one wants to go there!!b) if a policeman catches a criminal for a fsirly minor offence, they can bribe the officer which will cost at least £500 or lots more, dependant on crime. No paperwork, criminal gets a reduced 'fine' policeman gets increased 'salary'c)as in b) but the criminal elects to go before the courts. Now he has two choices - pay a fine of say £2000 or go to jail.Now which option do you think the criminal goes for?From most points of view, its a better system - no rip-off legal aid fees with expensive courts and procedures, no paperwork, hardly anyone in jail, the thief gets punished - probably a fair deal all round. The only real loser is the poor criminal who HAS to go to jail ... but such is life. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:34:55 GMT+1 John in Kent 642J - Maggie tried that - the Community Charge (Poll Tax) but reneged following the riots - shame. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:33:07 GMT+1 Enny2012 We need more Police not less. May be the government should cut the paper work not the Police presence on the beaches and shopping centres. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:32:04 GMT+1 Laurence Mann Generally speaking, the police do an excellent job, and so it might seem that cutting their numbers or resources might seem a poor decision. However if these cuts are associated with a correlative cut in their workload, then there is no problem with this. So how do we do this? Simple. Legalise drugs and save around £20bn per year sucked out of our economy. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:27:37 GMT+1 professor plum Seems the only sensible comments on how to make cuts in the Police Service/Force are coming from experienced cops, and they should know.In fact there is a definate consensus of opinion in every public service that they are all top heavy, layers of useless management, box ticking forms, targets, etc.Obviously there's some serious managerial job creation and empire building jiggery pokery going on.Answer?, start the cuts from the top down. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:27:11 GMT+1 Chris Lenton I have a complaint. I write all by blogs in “Microsoft Word” first and check for all grammatical and spelling errors before cutting and pasting. I have this evening reviewed by posting since 2008 and I have noticed quite a lot with spelling and grammatical errors – what do the moderators think they are doing?!! Is this some form of censorship or a way of weakening my argument that they disagree with?Chris Lenton Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:26:55 GMT+1 Andy K It would seem strange to cut police numbers during the next few years as unemployment will rise and during all periods of large unemployment crime has increased. During the 1980's petty crime rose dramatically and orginised crime was established as a bussiness.A whole generation was lost through this do we want another one to be lost. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:22:57 GMT+1 snafuasever the police are picking on random people to treat hem like criminals mis-using the pathetic prevention of terrorism act. just last week 2 colleagues of mine were stopped in their car passing through central london, police searched the whole car, turned out their bags & broke stuff & made a right mess, which they apparently seemed to revel in, just for their own entertainment & satisfaction of their spite. It's going back to the bad old days of the 70s/80s police wise. We need a sympathetic police force, not an overpaid bullying goon squad. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:18:33 GMT+1 BBConservatives Comment 199:As to the plods themselves, all most of them are good for nowadays is harassing and extorting money from MOTORISTS, part of Labour's war on those who use their car for work. Any real criminals - rapists, murderers, burglars, violent thugs, get a free ride, as the Police are TOO STUPID to catch even the dumbest ones.TODAY, THE POLICE ARE INSTITUTIONALLY INCOMPETENT... without any doubt.Comment 537Hopefully they will leave the hard working and much needed uniform officers alone and sift through all the unnecessary managerial jobs that seem to make up their own title and purpose. Like a lot of public sector jobs, too many chiefs and not enough workforce. --------------------------------------------------------Can anyone believe these comments were made by the SAME contributor?Amazing - Absolutely amazing! Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:17:25 GMT+1 Billythefirst Wonder if they'll cut more front line police or troops - I'm betting it will be troops - that nice Mr U-turn Fox seems pretty determined. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:16:09 GMT+1 Ralphie 509. At 6:48pm on 29 Jun 2010, MrDarthy wrote:Funny how I have never seen a blogger breaking up a fight on a saturday night or out searching wasteground for a missing child.////Does that include you? Don't know if I can be described as a blogger, but I have a 32-stitch scar across my beer gut from standing up to local juvenile delinquents when there was no police around, and the way things are looking I might soon be in for some bites from "dangerous dogs". Harry Brown, any one? Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:15:09 GMT+1 Billythefirst #516 Good point about how the private sector has always relied on "freebies" from the public sector - and there's me thinking that the wealth creating private sector is propping up the public sector - well, apart from the main wealth creator within the private sector, of course, but then banks are a special case aren't they? Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:13:09 GMT+1 rifra No need to cut police numbers.. all the blessed Theresa of Maidenhead & Windsor has to do is legalise the production and distribution of cannabis and with the revenues raised from taxing it, create a new super improved police force. Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:13:07 GMT+1 snafuasever Might as well cut them .... they don't seem to think half the time that their job is to serve 'the people'Perhaps it's time the oath of allegiance was finally altered to make that fact plain .... instead of being 'her majesties' police force Tue 29 Jun 2010 22:12:29 GMT+1