privatised police

[captainhaddock]

Revealed: government plans for police privatisation | UK news | The Guardian

this isnt just any arrest ...this is a marks and sparks arrest
we clamp any car .com
we clamp any car . com

[Nimuae]

That is worrying !

[julian_craster]

Perhaps fit and healthy police officers will no longer be able to 'retire' aged 45 on a full pension ! (as at present...)

[Freddy]

It's interesting that this comes out a few days after the press revealed that every one pound in seven given to the police goes on their pensions. Privatisation is a back door way of dealing with that and therefore saving money, and what one county do today the rest might follow.

As for privatisation overall, everyday we put our lives in the hands of privatised companies, bus drivers, train drivers, pilots etc. so I've no qualms about parts of the police force being privatised so long as it's done well and under regular scrutiny.

[batman]

When I worked in forensic psychiatry most of the court security, secure transport etc was handled by private companies and they were very professional and very efficient.

[captainhaddock]

i found it extremely worrying when i first read it
then i remembered that the police are simply meant to be citizens in uniform

decades of political interference has put paid to that

listening to a radio 4 series a few weeks ago about what the police think they are there for was staggering .
more concerned with diversity and box ticking than rat catching they were

the inquest into fiona pilkington and her daughters death saddened me as well
a senior leicestershire ploiceman said he didnt think it was his job to protect a woman and her vulnerable daughter from thugs .

well what the hell are you there wearing that uniform for then ?

perhaps some burly security gaurds in a policing role who live in the area might have took more interest

rather than a coward in a policemans uniform in an office miles away who considers the whole thing beneath him

[Mark O]

Something I've only recently learned is that if you are stopped by a Litter Patrol Warden for dropping litter (whether deliberately or not, last week a woman was stopped and issued with a penalty because cotton had fallen from her coat) you're not obliged to give them your details, I always thought you were, so you could just walk on and there's absolutely nothing the Warden can do to stop you, has anyone been in this sort of situation?..............I assume I would have to give my details to a Policeperson if requested?

[Rowdon]

There are some things I think should be in the hands of the government, and the police force is one of them. Also the army. If you don't believe that the police force should be answerable only to the government, then you have to ask yourself what you think the government is for, and whether you actually believe a government is necessary.
If the disappointing reality doesn't match the hopeful theory, then we should try to change the reality back towards the theory, not give in to the disappointment.

[Rowdon]

Me again. Sorry. I've been thinking about this a lot, because I find it very depressing. The police should be public servants. If they are privatised, they cannot be public servants - it is, to me, as simple as that.
I have no plans to be arrested, but God I'd feel impotent of I were arrested by someone working for a private security company - if a private security firm were finally actually given that power.
As I said before, any argument in favour of this move would have to begin with an attitude of "Well, look how badly it's all handled now!" - and that problem is simply not addressed by this 'solution'.

Is it really a case, as the papers seem to say, that the police service has been cut back so badly, that they basically can no longer afford to run a protective service? Does anyone really think that the answer to that problem is to bring in a private security firm to do the job? Terrifying.

[Heinrich]

A private police force will no longer be Her Majesty's constabulary and will have no right to wear the royal badge. It will be a for-profit outfit in keeping with the Tory notion of reducing the role of a democratically government and replacing it with a "Big Society".

On the way out...


The new Bobby...cheaper by the dozen

[Steve Crook]

Before too many high horses are mounted ...
Nobody is suggesting a private or even a privatised police force

These will be people hired to deal with things like back office work, typing reports, filing reports and evidence, collecting results from the forensics lab or from the mortuary. These people won't have any police powers at all

Steve

[Mr Sloane]

Before too many high horses are mounted ...
Nobody is suggesting a private or even a privatised police force

These will be people hired to deal with things like back office work, typing reports, filing reports and evidence, collecting results from the forensics lab or from the mortuary. These people won't have any police powers at all

Steve

the following quote states they will be going more than that "The Home Office also insisted that private firms would not be able to make arrests, nor would they be solely responsible for investigating offences."

[Steve Crook]

the following quote states they will be going more than that "The Home Office also insisted that private firms would not be able to make arrests, nor would they be solely responsible for investigating offences."

How does that quote state that they'll be doing anything more than what I said? They wouldn't be solely responsible for investigating offences, they wouldn't be at all responsible for investigating offences but they might assist the police in their investigations

Steve

[Mr Sloane]

How does that quote state that they'll be doing anything more than what I said? They wouldn't be solely responsible for investigating offences, they wouldn't be at all responsible for investigating offences but they might assist the police in their investigations

Steve

[Steve Crook]

I'm glad that amuses you

Steve

[Rowdon]

I'm glad that amuses you

Steve

Mr. Sloane's quote seems to indicate that they would have some investigative powers, which differs from your admin list - I think that's the point. But anyway ...
in my post I did say "if a private security firm were finally actually given that power", I didn't say that it was the case; it's more a 'thin end of the wedge' idea. But pessimism and concern about a possible scenario isn't necessarily a "high horse" - I wasn't, I hope, saying that I had some moral or intellectual superiority to what was being proposed (although, now that I think about it ...).

Anyway 2:
The article I was referring to is this one: Police Federation vice-chairman says privatisation could destroy service | UK news | guardian.co.uk, which includes the lines:

"West Midlands and Surrey have invited bids from G4S and other large security companies on behalf of all forces across England and Wales to take over the delivery of a wide range of services previously carried out by the police.

The list of policing activities up for grabs includes investigating crimes, detaining suspects, developing cases, responding to and investigating incidents, supporting victims and witnesses, managing high-risk individuals, patrolling neighbourhoods, managing intelligence, managing engagement with the public, as well as more traditional back-office functions, such as managing forensics, providing legal services, managing the vehicle fleet, finance and human resources."

Which is where my confusion arose ... particularly when I read further down the same article:

"A 26-page "commercial in confidence" contract note seen by the Guardian has been sent to potential bidders to run all services that "can be legally delegated to the private sector". They do not include those that involve the power of arrest and the other duties of a sworn constable."

So there you go. But I admit that if there is a high horse or similar animal passing when the Tories do something, then yes, I saddle up - I have a tendency to fly off the handle a bit when Conservatives bring in a seemingly radical idea, and have a wait-and-see approach when a Labour government does the same thing. Experience has shown me that far from trying to be more patient with the Conservatives, my mistake has been not to apply the 'fly off the handle and assume they're wrong' approach to both parties.

Goodnight all.

[Moor Larkin]

I agree with the Crook............

It's been said for years that it is crazy to have Hendon recruits spending all their time running an office. I know someone who rose to a senior rank in the police and retired at a young age on a high pension, and hadn't arrested anyone in twenty years. He was a computer specialist. I don't begrudge him anything and maybe he could have earned more employing his expertise in Silcon Valley, but the fact remains he wasn't really a copper. The same thing is endemic in the Army. Navy and Air Force I am sure. Everyone knows that the navy has more Admirals than it has ships.

I long ago felt that we should have a separated Traffic Force, to deal with errant motorists and this would also help to keep the great British public mood in unquestioned favour of the Plod, rather than detesting them at times, as they also do with Traffic Wardens.

Like Ronseal, the police should only be doing what it says on the tin. Dealing with crime and catching criminals.



As an addendum, this subject has just cropped up on the BBC World Service and someone said, "What about if I was beaten up by security men and then sued them, if they had a contract with the Police there would be a clash of interests!!" The commentator (Lis Dusett) at the World Service must be a bit reactionary (for the Beeb) because she replied, "and what is the difference now?" ...........

[Heinrich]

... I know someone who rose to a senior rank in the police and retired at a young age on a high pension, and hadn't arrested anyone in twenty years. ...

Next you will be telling us that there are Royal Navy officers who have never set foot on a battleship.

[Moor Larkin]

Next you will be telling us that there are Royal Navy officers who have never set foot on a battleship.

With regard to the third part of your request, I can confirm that, as at 1
September 2010, there were 222 substantive Captains serving in the Royal
Navy.
Microsoft Word - 20100929-RFI 20-09-2010-102820-004 Final Response _2_.doc

So far as I can make out, aided only by wiki, the British Navy currently can muster 79 ships, but only about 30 are proper warships. So you are probably right Heinrich.

The last British *battleship* was scrapped in about 1960 I believe, so on that strict criterion one can only hope to crikey you are right..........

[Steve Crook]

Mr. Sloane's quote seems to indicate that they would have some investigative powers, which differs from your admin list - I think that's the point.

My "admin list" was preceded by the words "things like". They can help with investigations, certainly. But the important thing is that they won't have any of the powers granted to the police. They won't have powers to arrest people or force people to do anything.

Mr. Sloane's quote seems to indicate that they would have some investigative powers

"seems to" yes. But if you look at what was actually said rather than what was reported as being said ...

Yes, they will have the power to detain people - people who have been arrested or detained by police. But that's a job done by private companies already when they transport detainees to and from court

Steve