JohnP Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Has anyone in your area received printed information regarding the candidates standing for this post? In the Thames Valley area there has been nothing circulated in print regarding the background experience and future plans of the candidates. Our Town Hall has had to print information off the Web for the public to see. Is it all a put up job? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Not sure where this idea originated, but, as I understand that they will be paid around £100,000 a year, I wouldn't have thought that this was a good time to introduce them. ( Plus, no doubt, a hefty pension when they leave office ). Haven't heard from anyone where the money will come from. :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 We're the same as you John, here in Wiltshire, nothing about the candidates in the printed booklet - but a refererence to a website -where there is full info. about each of our (six) candidates, their background experience and manifestos, etc. IMHO none of us should vote for this one (and I've never failed, snce age 21, to vote in any election) whatever was wrong with Police Authorities? Placing this much power in the hands of one person is surely not a good idea. Colin. P.S. You beat me to it, Malc. -- I was going to mention the exorbitant salary too! C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 You can find out who the candidates are from " www.choosemypcc.org.uk " " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Yup, Malc, that's the one that they refer to in the booklet -- it seems to assume that all of the electorate use a computer -- not the case of course -- particularly for that generation that is a bit older than most of us -- a peculiar form of discrimination! Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peter James Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Symbol Owner - 2012-11-07 10:44 AM whatever was wrong with Police Authorities? Hillsborough? Orgreave? (can't remember all the others) We had a choice of New Labour, Tory, and 2 independants. Must confess I know nothing about any of them but voted for the 2 independants as I have had enough of New Labour and Tory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Agree with your sentiment Peter. About time we had someone to overview the actions of the Police. As for some suggesting that they will not be voting 8-) - sorry but that is just stupid in my view. As for leaflets being sent out - what planets are people on these days? Full information is available simply by googling. If you want to print it off you can - only cost would be the ink and the paper. But think of the cost of producing leaflets and then FURTHER COST of posting them out to each and every household! Totally laughable that anyone would see this as a sensible option. As a Hampshire Resident I am able to see all candidates and then do further research on each one if i so desire simply by going to:- http://www.policecrimecommissioner.co.uk/Hampshire Personally I support this move as a valuable removal of the "bubble" world that enabled the Police to cover up the likes of Hillsborough. My only concern is that Political Party Candidates have been allowed - I at first thought this as a bad thing because you could then get a "block" of commissioners acting on party political lines. And that may still happen. I would have preferred it if only independent candidates were allowed to stand - but then that would have been open to deception so I have come round to the idea of simply voting for the best Independent Candidate. But seriously guys - DO VOTE!! Ignore the idiots who suggest otherwise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Jones Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Yes, do vote - otherwise you get what you deserve. And certainly go for independents - what one earth does party politics have to do with this job? For me, part of the point of an individual doing this job is they he/she IS an individual, whereas the old police authorities were made up of councillors, mainly party hacks, pro-rata to the parties on the relevant councils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Agree Tony Voting is a "no brainer" and the best option for voting is to vote for one of the Independents. Well said that man!! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnP Posted November 7, 2012 Author Share Posted November 7, 2012 CliveH We are all on the same planet as you but many still do not have access to the Internet. The printed word for them is ttheir only source of information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Dwight Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I agree with you John, Iknow several people whodonot own a computer and are never likelyto useone. As for the Candidates I have looked themupfor our area (Thames Valley) I do not know who they are or that they are capable of ! I might as well vote for the Pope or some such other person I dont know. I have always said you have a right to vote so therfore you should but for this !!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 John - this whole business is madness - the government is spending £75m on a special election in November -- when they could have included it with the May local elections! Then, to save money,(Ha! Ha!) they have refused free mailshots for candidates --expecting voters to find out for themselves. These elections mark the end of almost two centuries of non-political policing in England. This scheme has nothing to do with local democracy or public involvement. It is yet more Tory privatisation and 'market' ideology. These new police commissioners will control police budgets to enable them to 'modernise' the police and hand over police tasks to the private sector for profit - "To reduce costs". Just think of the potential revenue from traffic policing alone -- profits backed by the force of Law. No chaps, this is yet another example of the needs of society being ignored to promote ideology and profits, disguised as progress. This is how it goes:-County Police Authorities, made up of elected LA members,are being disbanded. their job was to monitor the local police force,set the budget, and, if neccessary sack the Chief Constable. In the future, elected LA members will sit on a 'police & crime panel' to monitor the new commissioner. If they don't likewhat the commissioner does, they will have the right of veto,including the choice of Chief Constable. So, what's the point of having a commissioner with their high salary (£100,000) no doubt with expenses? The only way to convince this government is to boycott it - as advocated by former chief constable (Lord) Ian Blair. So not voting, if you take my point of view -is for once in my lifetime, not so 'idiotic' after all. Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 So let me get this straight. Because a minority of people do not have access to the internet and supposedly refuse to go to the local Library or Internet cafe where you can get the info easily, it is being suggested that leaflets should be printed and distributed to every household? Sorry - appalling waste of money - do not do anything so silly in may name PLEASE! As for taking advice on not voting from the likes of Sir Ian Blair - the disgraced ex-police commissioner who is p*ssed that he could not get on what he would no doubt see as another bandwagon - no thanks - the man is a disgrace and how anyone could cite him as a sensible role model is beyond me. But then NOT voting/advocating a boycott in such an election as part of our democratic process as a protest is so far off the sensibility horizon that shooting oneself in the foot most be a regula and presumably painless exercise. The Guardian sums up the debacle that is Sir Ian Blair:- http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/ian-blair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Once again Clive, this is all politics. Ian Blair was a reforming police commissioner who fell foul of the elected Mayor - I don't agree with them either -- an unwise American idea -- but Ken livingstone has the right idea here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/oct/02/police1?intcmp=239 As for not providing all of the electorate with paper information -- as happens in all other elections - that is a total negation of democracy -- and who says a 'minority' of people have access to the internet? I have no figures on this, but I guess that it is a far higher proportion than you are making out. It is the election which is an appalling (and unneccessary) waste of money -- 75m indeed! Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Leake Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 David Dwight - 2012-11-07 3:47 PM I agree with you John, Iknow several people whodonot own a computer and are never likelyto useone. As for the Candidates I have looked themupfor our area (Thames Valley) I do not know who they are or that they are capable of ! I might as well vote for the Pope or some such other person I dont know. I have always said you have a right to vote so therfore you should but for this !!!!!!!! If its a £100,000 vote for me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Ok so let me get this straight II Hilsborough - and all the other cover-ups You REALLY think civilian oversight is not necessary Whatever the cost - the potential cost re miscarriages of justice if we DO NOT have such oversight is a far bigger cost. Try telling the families of the Hilsborough 96 that you think £75M is too much to provide the check and balance that was dreadfully lacking in that Police Force that went out of its way to vilify the victims to protect its own. And I say again - any notion of NOT voting is idiotic. And as for Sir Ian Blair! He was moved on because he was being:- investigatied into alleged conflicts of interest over the awarding of £3 million of contracts to a firm run by a close friend, He was unashamedly Politically Correct, earning him the nickname of "The PC Pc", and appeared deeply politicised, characterised by his public support of Labour's plan for ID cards shortly before the last general election. Now if you want and example of waste of taxpayers money - the ID card Blair (and Blair) wanted - is probably one of the best. One of his first decisions was to spend thousands of pounds changing the Met's slogan from "Working for a safer London" to "Working together for a safer London", triggering immediate disdain from the people of London. Far worse for morale within the Met was an industrial tribunal in June 2005 at which he was accused of "hanging out to dry" three white officers who were wrongly accused of racism in order to prove his non-racist credentials. Later the following year his judgement was questioned when he excused a Muslim police officer from guarding the Israeli Embassy after the officer objected to the duty on "moral grounds". But the defining moment of his career came on the afternoon of July 22, 2005, when Sir Ian made a statement on live television to say the shooting of a man at Stockwell Underground station that morning had been "directly linked" to the attempted suicide bombings on London transport the previous day. Sir Ian left little doubt that his officers had shot one of the bombers, yet many of his senior staff already knew that they had shot the wrong man – Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent Brazilian electrician. Such was the apparent distrust between Sir Ian and his officers that no-one told the Commissioner the truth until the next morning, by which time he had dug himself into an even deeper hole by boasting that his force was playing "out of its socks". Sir Ian refused to resign, even when further damaging revelations about his actions followed, including the fact that he had tried to delay an investigation into the shooting by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. There were also allegations of a smear campaign against Mr de Menezes, including leaked reports about his alleged cocaine use, which were seen as an attempt by the Met to diminish blame. (Perhaps the took advice from those who were in Charge at Hilsborough?) Perhaps the worst of these alleged "dirty tricks" was a photograph, issued by the Met's legal team, which showed half of Mr de Menezes's face matched up to half of the face of Hussain Osman, the bomber he had been mistaken for. The picture was composed to help show how the mistake was made, but it emerged that the photograph had been manipulated to make Mr de Menezes's skin appear darker and more like Osman's. Despite his undoubted intellect, Sir Ian appeared unable to learn from his mistakes. In January 2006 he had to apologise to the parents of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman after saying on air that "almost nobody" could understand why the murder of their daughters in Soham had become such a big story! Two months later he admitted to secretly tape-recording conversations with Lord Goldsmith, the then Attorney General, adding to the growing perception of his isolation. Hubris was added to the charge sheet against him after he talked up his successes in the wake of a damning report into the de Menezes shooting. In March 2007 his credibility suffered another damaging blow when it emerged that he had embellished an episode in 1975 when he claimed to have been shot at during a pursuit of IRA terrorists. In fact, he admitted, he had not been "in the thick of" the incident. Ironically, given his reputation for political correctness, Sir Ian was mired in claims of racism by the time he stepped down, with no fewer than five black and Asian officers, including Britain's most senior Asian officer, Tarique Ghaffur, launching race discrimination cases against him. Officers talked of "open warfare" within the Met, and the Metropolitan Police Federation, which represents rank and file officers, stated that it had no confidence in Sir Ian's leadership. For most of his tenure Sir Ian has survived because he enjoyed the backing of successive Home Secretaries and of Ken Livingstone, the former Mayor of London. Mr Livingstone's successor, Boris Johnson, had no such faith in him, and it was Mr Johnson who finally wielded the knife by telling Sir Ian it was time for a change of leadership. Source The Daily Telegraph - which amusingly says much the same about Ian Blair as does the Guardian! And so indeed – given the excellent example (Sir) Ian Blair gives us as to how NOT to run a Police Force – I am NOT surprised that those who seem to lack the ability to see the bigger picture here, try to make out that the Government will take notice of their NOT voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest peter Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 JohnP - 2012-11-07 10:23 AM Has anyone in your area received printed information regarding the candidates standing for this post? In the Thames Valley area there has been nothing circulated in print regarding the background experience and future plans of the candidates. Our Town Hall has had to print information off the Web for the public to see. Is it all a put up job?Who cares?. We chucked our voting papers straight in the bin. I'm buggered if I'm going to waste my time traipsing down to the poling station to vote in an uneccessary election. What a waste of time and money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave225 Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 I think I would have had more faith in it if I had not heard John Prescott is standing, and liable to win, in Hull as they are all numpties there. After all he has a track record in knocking people about,, lacking in morality and has an ability to get money from the public purse for almost anything, so should fit in just fine. It alos is, unless I have missed something, restricted to England. We are not doing the same but we have amalgamated all the Police forces into 1, similar to Northern Ireland. Whether that is an improvement or not, is yet to be seen. I feel that there is already a system in place to check the Police, it just has not been effective and I doubt that this will be any better, but will certainly increase the cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 If it works as it should - it should be more preventative than "treatment". Therefore if - as is thought - the instigation of Independent Commissioners provides that extra "check and balance" that currently is missing, then given the recent and future pay-outs because the Police have been a law unto themselves - the opportunity cost of NOT having such Independent Commissioners would be far greater than having them. But again - I take the point re Prescott - i too would loath to have him as a Commissioner. As I say - I would prefer that overtly Political Candidates should be banned. Look at the mess the Met got into with Ian Blair - who was Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Ken Livingstones toy poodle. So I would recommend everyone votes! I would also suggest that the best option would be to choose the Independent Candidate that come across as the most suitable candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Personally, the more I hear about this move, the more concerned I become. Police authorities are not perfect, but at least they are not just one opinionated person. Seventeen in fact: some councillors, some independents (chosen by the members of the authority) of whom at least three must be magistrates. It is a complex job that involves balancing conflicting demands, currently in an environment of cuts. Its meetings are public, though little attended. I should have far more sympathy with some adjustments to the present authorities, to make them more responsive to public concerns, than with the idea of booting them out in favour of a single individual on £100,000 PA. I can't see one person being able to maintain the required degree of public liaison throughout a police area, for a start. Ours is the whole of East and West Sussex, for example, but others are even larger - look at the Northern Constabulary area in Scotland. Staff seem an obvious addition, at extra cost, ditto offices and facilities (copying, phones, computer) here and there for meetings etc. There will doubtless be an essential user's car allowance, in addition, and the bod is going to spend hours driving around the police area to meet the aggrieved - and the influential, so reducing their effectiveness. Oh yes, and doubtless overnight expenses for all those essential 8AM meetings - held somewhere with a good hotel, of course! The commissioners are bound to grandstand their achievements, or folk will ask what they are for. That seems to me to mean they will pander to the loudest voices and the lowest common denominator, which I doubt is what is needed for effective policing. Add to this that the political parties are putting forward candidates, and part funding them in a way that disadvantages the independents (£5,000 to stand!) and I think this will end in tears. The only real question, IMO, is who will be crying the most. This seems to me a prime example of where evolution would be infinitely preferable to revolution. I move against! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flicka Posted November 8, 2012 Share Posted November 8, 2012 Dave225 - 2012-11-08 5:08 PM I think I would have had more faith in it if I had not heard John Prescott is standing, and liable to win, in Hull as they are all numpties there. After all he has a track record in knocking people about,, lacking in morality and has an ability to get money from the public purse for almost anything, so should fit in just fine. It alos is, unless I have missed something, restricted to England. We are not doing the same but we have amalgamated all the Police forces into 1, similar to Northern Ireland. Whether that is an improvement or not, is yet to be seen. I feel that there is already a system in place to check the Police, it just has not been effective and I doubt that this will be any better, but will certainly increase the cost. Dave - Please don't assume that because Prescott if favorite in the press, he is favorite with the Humberside voters. He is just chasing the salary & his own ego. House of Commons Pension, House of Lords income & expenses + Police Commissioner salary - very nice for someone who portrays himself as an ordinary working class man. Self interest, power crazy & s^d the rest is a more apt description of him IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 So, here's a very highly regarded senior police officer talking a great deal of good sense on this subject:- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20258446 Colin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CliveH Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 I suspect there will be "Tension" - the top brass within the police force have had it all their own way for as long as they can remember. They will have to take someone elses view into account now - one that is not coloured by the incestuous ability of the police to only promote their own. With Business - you often seek to find someone at the top who has outside experience - with the Police it has always been subject to the old boys network. If it causes Tension - so what? give the poor upset twit a slap, and tell them to get on with it. It's happening - get used to it. The rank and file within the Police generally think this is a good deal. Only at the top is there dumming spitting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbol Owner Posted November 9, 2012 Share Posted November 9, 2012 JohnP - 2012-11-07 10:23 AM Has anyone in your area received printed information regarding the candidates standing for this post? In the Thames Valley area there has been nothing circulated in print regarding the background experience and future plans of the candidates. Our Town Hall has had to print information off the Web for the public to see. Is it all a put up job? Here you are John -- this is the full answer to your query what a shambles! http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/08/police-commissioner-election-helpline-useless?INTCMP=SRCH A total subjugation of the democratic process I deem. Colin. P.S. 7m is a pretty big minority! C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave225 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 flicka - 2012-11-08 9:08 PM Dave225 - 2012-11-08 5:08 PM I think I would have had more faith in it if I had not heard John Prescott is standing, and liable to win, in Hull as they are all numpties there. After all he has a track record in knocking people about,, lacking in morality and has an ability to get money from the public purse for almost anything, so should fit in just fine. It alos is, unless I have missed something, restricted to England. We are not doing the same but we have amalgamated all the Police forces into 1, similar to Northern Ireland. Whether that is an improvement or not, is yet to be seen. I feel that there is already a system in place to check the Police, it just has not been effective and I doubt that this will be any better, but will certainly increase the cost. Dave - Please don't assume that because Prescott if favorite in the press, he is favorite with the Humberside voters. He is just chasing the salary & his own ego. House of Commons Pension, House of Lords income & expenses + Police Commissioner salary - very nice for someone who portrays himself as an ordinary working class man. Self interest, power crazy & s^d the rest is a more apt description of him IMO. I just kinda look at the fact that the 'good' people of Hull elected him time and time again and now will probably elect his son. There is either something in the water in Hull, or they are a bunch of numpties after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.