Front line police officers
- 2 July 2012 12:20181067this gives the green light to rioters and the like, a minister was asked to explain, he started with "because of the situation we inherited" by then i had dozed off.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9369648/Police-forces-no-longer-able-to-protect-public-as-5800-frontline-officers-cut-by-2015.html - Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
2 July 2012 16:14181089thats dispicable howard,with more riots are predicted for this summer.and as the song go's "i predict a riot." - 2 July 2012 19:14181115Oh how tired we are of hearing what we inherited, even our own local police guys have said its going to get worse, they will move people around and when you do that, you take people from one area to go else where and someone will suffer.
- 2 July 2012 19:24181118wait until the hot weather arrives jan then watch things explode.
kent policepersons were moved up to london at the height of last year's riots, troublemakers will be watching for actions like that and know what areas are left with little protection. - 3 July 2012 00:52181146Howard, I'll have to use a phrase typed by you the other day in reply to me:
There is no money for all this
Chanters, Drums and Drones Potty Time http://youtu.be/99fMqpjnXYA
Rule Britannia!
Kent First http://youtu.be/04F3mAP3fV4 Keep banging on http://youtu.be/qYCU_SKmkGQ - 3 July 2012 17:29181256Yes Howard you are right, my nephew is one of those front line Policemen and gets moved at a moment notice, which natrually takes him away from his own area.
- Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
4 July 2012 08:17181311JAN;
Could you tell me labours plans for the police, and if to have front line police how it would be paid for
thank youALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS - 4 July 2012 09:42181336good question the reds have been very quiet on the issue.
- 4 July 2012 10:12181341Nationally Labour's plans for the police before losing the last election were indeed to introduce cuts to policing services, but they had plans to cut at a much lower rate than the current government. The Conservatives are going for a very deep 20% cut and we get that Herbert guy coming on TV regularly telling us it wont make any difference. Despite the cuts.. says he...there will be more frontline policing. That is a mathematical impossibility unless you are spinning when you do the calculations...perhaps he went to the same percentages school as Bob Diamond. The fact of the matter is they want to save money and thats it..end of..as they say.
Labour are not wholly clean on this either, recognising that costs are too high and cuts have to be made, but they aim to cut at a considerably lower rate ie..12%.
So supposing that cuts are really needed and we are really as broke as they say ( where did we find all that dosh for the Olympics?!) then the best of a bad situation with an eye on the possibility for future law and order chaos, is Labour's 12% as it is almost manageable. We save some money at a slower rate so the government of the day is happy, but we still have a good working Police Service.email: dover7@msn.com - 4 July 2012 15:59181359The recession has cut incomes of many self-employed people like myself by more than 50%. Why should public employees not share the burden? More work, less reward. That's what real life is like.I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
- 4 July 2012 16:16181365cutting of police person numbers affects everyone - private/public sector alike.
not just because there is more crime or at least a perception of it but the impact on household and motor vehicle insurance premiums.
current low level crime dogs town and city centres in the evening meaning that some business is lost, this would increase hitting pubs and restaurants. - 12 September 2013 16:42244442I searched for 'London Riots' and had a few threads to choose from, this one being the second most recent, (I thought we could do without the reminder of Boris dangling).
This though does have something to do with Boris, but only in passing.
The headline in the paper reads...
UK riots: insurers win legal battle for police costs over Enfield warehouse*
High court judge rules against Met police and London mayor in claim for damage to Sony building by looters in 2011
And begins...
"Insurers have won a high court battle with police bosses and the London mayor, Boris Johnson, after a warehouse was destroyed and looted during the summer riots of 2011.
A judge ruled that insurers were claiming for losses that arose out of damage caused by "persons riotously and tumultuously assembled".
Legislation governing police says compensation for damage by riot should be paid out of police funds..."
Police Funds?
A firm of Solicitors is a little more direct...
"Ultimately, though, the bill for any claims under the Riot (Damages) Act 1886 will sit at the feet of the council tax payer. Many feel that this archaic law is out of touch with modern society and that there should be an argument for amendment, particularly in the current economic climate when public funding services are already over-stretched and huge cutbacks are being made..."
http://www.kiteleys.co.uk/blog/riot-damages-act-1886-what-you-need-to-know/
*The newspaper report...
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/sep/12/uk-riots-insurers-win-legal-battle-policeIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing. - 12 September 2013 17:54244446a bit like ridiculous claims against the n.h.s. where payouts just mean a reduction in money spent on clinical needs.
- 12 September 2013 19:56244457We should be asking haw we can make the police more effective
If you where a pick pocketing in Thailand, the officer would deal with it on the street
He would give back the property if you where a Thai,
Then he would feed the pick pocket a length of truncheon.
This method would work wonders on Oxford Street.