To think Teresa May has just won the election?

[desertmum]

Listening to TM outside Downing Street vs JC - I think she may have just won the election - saying what people wnat to hear and hopefully some of what she says needs to be done will be followed through with.

I suppose you could say "that's not what people voted for" when they originally voted in 1972. It was supposed to be about trade but changed beyond recognition. I think it was fair to have a new referendum in 2016. It was asking the country to vote on something again as what was originally voted for in 72 is now completely different.

I know what you mean sleep about the Tories having to clear up their own Brexit mess.

Although I can't reconcile wanting that with the degree of suffering another term of ideologically driven austerity will cause ordinary people.

The Tories have no plan for Brexit.

Chanting red, white and blue is not a plan.

sleeponeday Mon 05-Jun-17 22:17:47 excellent post!

I have no doubt that the Tories will win on Thursday but i am hoping that they won't get the landslide majority they thought they would.

More police will allow more monitoring of the 'persons of interest'. There simply aren't enough personnel to track all their activities.

How much of the police's time is taken up doing non-crime related activities?

Schools
Cycling proficiency
Postcoding bikes
Desk jobs
Admin work
Custody roles

Also utilised daily in things that other sectors should be dealing with (e.g. social problems, at risk children, people in mental health crisis, problem drug users etc)

Is 'More Police!' the right answer?

Or is it more nuanced than that?

What about a review of the roles & responsibilities of our police?
They're doing far, far more than they should be - their field of responsibility is far too wide.
This mission creep occurred under Tony Blair btw - he uplifted police numbers to extremely high levels & thus their job scope widened too.

They cannot do all those things on current numbers & budgets, obviously - but should they actually be doing all those roles at all?

Or should they go back to their core role - policing?

What are you talking about @Charmageddon

Police numbers are at an all time low since 1983. I've never seen the police at my dcs school doing things like cycling proficiency.

So I would like to see some evidence for your claims please, especially when a) police numbers have massively dropped and b) the budgets have been cut by nearly 20%.

What are you talking about @Charmageddon*

Police numbers are at an all time low since 1983. I've never seen the police at my dcs school doing things like cycling proficiency. *

So I would like to see some evidence for your claims please, especially when a) police numbers have massively dropped and b) the budgets have been cut by nearly 20%.

I didn't say police numbers weren't at an all time low, and didn't claim that budgets haven't been slashed either, so literally have no idea what point you're trying to make or what evidence you expect me to provide to back up something I didn't say

You may not have seen the police at your children's school, but I have.

My kids have attended 3 different primary schools, in 3 different parts of Britain - now at secondary.

Police at all schools for:
Cycling proficiency
Postcoding bikes
Various attendances in assemblies
Regular attendance in PSHE classes

Sleep, very measured post it's such a shame that these points are not debated & brought to the fore in such an important election, but as usual we are treated like stupid fools by the politicians/media/newspapers , I am hoping for a hung parliament.

anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/30-things-you-should-know-about-tory.html?m=1

Evidence please.... @Charmageddon

You are acting as if the police are doing things they shouldn't be and that there is mission creep started under Blair.

My counter was how can this be if police numbers and budgets have been cut how can they do more with less?

I've done some googling and can't find anything which suggest the police do cycling proficiency or bike coding.

Crime reduction officers might do that but not proper "beat" officers.

As for attending assemblies - what's wrong with that?

It's a 'Safer Schools Partnership' normally. You can google them.

How much of the police's time is taken up doing non-crime related activities?

That depends how narrow your interpretation of crime avoidance is. And how well informed you are on what they do, actually, do.

Schools

You think teaching kids that the police aren't the enemy, and building civic bonds, is a waste? You think establishing community policing with the people most at risk of committing public order and petty crime offences is a waste? Are you serious?

Cycling proficiency

Oh dear. Where to start: well, firstly it no longer exists and hasn't in a while - Bikeability does. Secondly, it has nothing to do with the police. At all. It's a Department of Transport administered scheme using accredited training providers. You might as well ask if the police should run driving tests, too. (For clarity - they don't do that, either.)

Postcoding bikes

As above, you appear to misunderstand something here. The database is police APPROVED. Not police run. It cuts crime via deterrence, this scheme, which is sort of handy, plus helps reunite people with their bikes easily and simply, with zilch police input, which cuts police costs. But again, it's not a police scheme, so your point is moot.

Desk jobs

You imagine that admin isn't necessary in a huge organisation? What, HR, record-keeping, reception, the myriad of other roles that exist in all major employers can be done by fairies? Not to mention statistical modelling and data keeping to track patterns - fairly important in lots of roles, but fairly key in crime, surely?

Admin work

Please see above. It's part of the same point.

Custody roles

Um. You don't think the police should arrest anyone? Have anyone there to book them in and out and keep tabs on them while in the cells? That they should have the power to deprive people of their liberty and not have to care for them, or record it, in any way?

Is that a joke?

Also utilised daily in things that other sectors should be dealing with (e.g. social problems, at risk children, people in mental health crisis, problem drug users etc)

You do realise the police are involved in such situations because they van be extremely volatile ones, and there is a need for police presence as backup sometimes, or to assess a situation and contain it while the appropriate professionals are involved and can assess? Because the police have powers that random members of the public don't, and they can therefore ensure the safety of the public, and that would include vulnerable people in crisis? How on earth is that a waste? That's not waste. That's need.

They said everything that is happening would happen. She sneered at them and said they were scaremongering and crying wolf. She was Home Secretary. This was her patch. We now have police roles filled by the army, which is something else she was warned about.

Corbyn put tens of thousands of new police in his manifesto BEFORE this all happened. Funny, how nobody is targeting him for being weak on law and order - just for a shoot to kill misrepresentation that the BBC news team were formally rebuked for, by their own Trust. Oh, and lies that he sympathised with the IRA. The Times published an apology for that claim as long ago as 1987, acknowledging that the police had confirmed he'd reported a suspected PIRA member to them. Then there's Ian Paisley's words commending him for his determination to talk to both sides, to help reach a negotiated settlement. Sort of what John Major very laudably did, which resulted in the Good Friday Agreement - no?

Is 'More Police!' the right answer?

Yes, it is.

Or is it more nuanced than that?

No. No, it isn't. You can't have a police force without, you know - police. Rather like you can't teach kids without teachers; something else they can't quite comprehend.

Theresa May has royally fucked up, and the chickens the police warned her about are home to roost. Right now.

*You are acting as if the police are doing things they shouldn't be and that there is mission creep started under Blair.

My counter was how can this be if police numbers and budgets have been cut how can they do more with less?*

I don't think they should be doing all those things, no.
Do you?

I think that this should be the remit of other people & organisations - I think the police should be allowed & enabled to do their actual core job - is that so terrible?

Under Blair the police budgets & numbers increased massively, under this environment mission creep happened & their primary role was expanded ever outward.

Since 2010 their numbers & budgets have been slashed massively - his on earth can they continue to do all the peripheral stuff as well as their core role now?
They can't.

That's why I think it's not just a numbers issue - it's a much bigger root & branch review of their core roles & responsibilities that is necessary too.

I am really struggling to see what is so abhorrent about that view tbh.
I cannot understand why you are so angry about it.

I can see the safer schools stuff - this seems reasonable to me.

Just read your post sleeponeday, you have missed my point completely.

Not to worry.

People sometime confuse those voluntary police people with real police. We have had people at our house dealing with neighbourhood watch and smart water marking but that is not policemen. Also crime preventino is not a bad thing. We had police at an annual resident meeting to give a short talk and they gave very good advice to prevent burglarly.

In fact we have less crime where I am than ever at the moment, not more which is interesting.

Just read your post sleeponeday, you have missed my point completely.

Please, do explain how. I'm always keen to be better informed.

Schools*

You think teaching kids that the police aren't the enemy, and building civic bonds, is a waste? You think establishing community policing with the people most at risk of committing public order and petty crime offences is a waste? Are you serious?*

No.
And I didn't say or imply any of that.
Community police are cheaper than sworn officers & are perfect for this sort of thing.
There should be more of them.
I don't think that sworn officers should be diverted into these jobs though - waste of trained & skilled resources.

Desk jobs*

You imagine that admin isn't necessary in a huge organisation? What, HR, record-keeping, reception, the myriad of other roles that exist in all major employers can be done by fairies? Not to mention statistical modelling and data keeping to track patterns - fairly important in lots of roles, but fairly key in crime, surely?*

What other organisation uses personnel who have been highly trained & skilled at great expense in specific specialisation to do roles that could be done by people specifically suited to those roles & who do not cost as much to train?

Admin work*

Please see above. It's part of the same point.*

Please see above also.

Custody roles

Um. You don't think the police should arrest anyone? Have anyone there to book them in and out and keep tabs on them while in the cells? That they should have the power to deprive people of their liberty and not have to care for them, or record it, in any way?

Is that a joke?

Do you need an actual policeman to book them into the cells & keep tabs on them in there?
Or could it be done by personnel who have specific training in that area instead?
Would cost less to train a custody officer than it does a sworn officer.

Bold fail.

My bigger point I missed out btw - that is, that it's more than just spending money better, it also releases highly trained police officers from those peripheral roles so that they can do the job they're actually trained to do.

The job they signed up for & wanted to do.

Who said it is the actual police doing the stuff in schools?

And who said that the police do actual admin? Yes they have to record crime data etc - well why wouldn't they?

I think you're making assumptions based on out of date data @Charmageddon

Community police are cheaper than sworn officers & are perfect for this sort of thing.

Community police ARE sworn officers. It was cuts to their roles the Manchester policeman who challenged May was so angry about - said it meant the police had no idea what was happening on the streets of Manchester, because they couldn't build relationships. I think you are confusing them with Special Constables and PSVs, who volunteer their time.

The reason community police go into schools is because, by definition, they have their own patches, and they try to build relationships within them, so they can know what is happening. Back to the chap in Manchester, explaining to May back in 2015 that cuts to community policing would end in a threat to national security.

There should be more of them.

Community police officers - absolutely.

I don't think that sworn officers should be diverted into these jobs though - waste of trained & skilled resources.

You don't understand community policing. Building relationships is how you gain trust, and therefore intelligence as well as deterrence. It's a core part of the role. Schools are a great way to build that early on. So nope.

What other organisation uses personnel who have been highly trained & skilled at great expense in specific specialisation to do roles that could be done by people specifically suited to those roles & who do not cost as much to train?

You do know that there are admin staff in the police, right? That CID don't administer timesheets? In the same way that teachers and doctors have to do some core admin, because they are the only people with the necessary info, some paperwork is done by police. But you don't find detectives doing the filing. I think you seem, again, to be under a misapprehension here.

Do you need an actual policeman to book them into the cells & keep tabs on them in there? Or could it be done by personnel who have specific training in that area instead? Would cost less to train a custody officer than it does a sworn officer.

Nope. Couldn't. A custody officer has to be at least the rank of Sergeant because the police aren't the only people with powers of detainment - HMRC and immigration, for example, can present someone to be held. You need a reasonably senior police officer there because they need to have the authority to accept or reject the detainment as lawful and proportionate. The police is a very hierarchical organisation - has to be - so you need to have someone of a certain rank, with a certain status, as custody officer, in order for them to have the necessary authority. Custody is incredibly serious - you are depriving people of their civil liberties in the most absolute way. Deaths in custody are, rightly, a very big deal. People in that situation are wholly vulnerable, too. It's pretty bizarre, frankly, to select that as an area to down-skill and status-reduce.

Honestly, you don't seem very informed about the police at all. You think they do things they don't do and you don't understand why they do the things they do do. I haven't missed your points. You're making mistaken ones.

What other organisation uses personnel who have been highly trained & skilled at great expense in specific specialisation to do roles that could be done by people specifically suited to those roles & who do not cost as much to train?

My point exactly. Loads of jobs within the police service don't need a trained PC to do the work, in fact, yes, it's a waste of training/wages, etc to use someone for such work.