Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
28 February 2010
13:344155980% is very high but so are the public feelings at this time,with no rain on the big day lots of sun please.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Well today we start going round the streets with our leaflets,meeting first at the D.D.C, council then it is the off.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
This has just been send to me by my headoffice,I am only writing part of it out for you to read.
What we in UKIP propose is a system of locally elected police sheriffs. They would be in charge of the policing for the town or constituency.If the voters in the town were unhappy with the progress of their sheriff in the fight against crime then they could replace him.
The sheriff would be in charge of the police force.
If, as under the UKIPpolicy,the local sheriff has direct control of the police service in his or her area,and is at risk of removal if the voters are unhappy,there,s a direct link beween the local government and the consequences of its actions.
Voters can see it, councillors can see it,and the sheriff can see it.
All I have done is give you the outlines of this,it does go deeper and alot of it.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
vic
would these sheriffs come from a political or police background?
it sounds worthy of discussion, most people are not happy with the situation at present.
we just have chief constables issuing edicts about how well they are doing.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
I can not see that at this time Howard but I will find out.
But I do not think he would have to be a policeman, in Dover Roger might fit the bill, or Mr Cooper. Mr Perkins, I could of alot who could do it and none of them policemen, and Roger you would get paid aswell.
I will writemore of it later,it goes on about local referendums, just again to outline how it would work. Lets imagine a situation where a council wanted to demolish its existing town hall and buid a brand new one. The town hall is in the centre of the town and it,s a listed building but the council wants to knock it down ,sell the land for flats and build a new town hall out of town. This isn,t a hypothetical situation.
It,s happening in Tunbridge Wells in West Kent.
In the real world, very little can be done to stop this from happening.The councilis entirely conservative-controlled and is out of touch with the voters.
In our world of direct democracy ,people living in the area could obtain signatures demanding a referendum on this very subject.
Thet would need around 5,000 signatures-5%of the electorate within the constituency-which would force the council to hold a binding referendum on whether they could go ahead and knock the town hall down or not and go out of town.
This is just great to me,and why I joined up with UKIP.Howard if that had been in place in Dover at the time all the flats went up in Folkestone rd it would have never happen.
Guest 690- Registered: 10 Oct 2009
- Posts: 4,150
I`ll go along with you on a sheriff Vic, and I`ll also go along with Mr Cooper doing the role. After all, he got rid of them baddies back in 1952.
Tell them that I came, and no one answered.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
mmmm UKIP copying a Conservative policy ehhhhhh...
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Barry I have not seen any Conservative policys about them.
Vic, Nice to seeing you back on the UKIP thread when talking politics.
Apparently there is someone standing for the BNP locally at the next election.
What's your view on him/her having a thread on the DoverForum?
Local Sherriff's? Not bloomin' likely thanks. This is just another wheeze to up Council Tax which is already far too high. I dread t othink who some of the local candidates might be after what's happenend to Dover in the last 25 years+, just imagine having the same sense of community and urgency in our own local sherriff.
Clearly, our MP's and Councillors still don't get what WE the voters want them to focus on: THE ECONOMY
They still think we want them to squander the ever shrinking tax take. Unbelieveable!!!
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Bob, I have said this before,if the BNP wish to put a person up in Dover,and sighs say they are,that is OK with me,they are a party just like the rest of us,and it will be up to you the voter,who is going to be the next MP for Dover.
And yes if he wants to put a blog on the Dover forum, why not,but again it would be up to the boss,.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Vic - locally elected police chiefs who will also be in charge of the local prosecution service has been part of Conservative policy since 2005 and remains a key part of the law and order programme.
We have discussed this before on the forum. One of the centre pieces of the localism theme.
Sid - no it is not a proposal that will increase costs to council tax payers. They will replace other more expensive arrangements already in place. As far as the Conservative policy is concerned anyway.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Barry,We do not see any Conservative policys,even said on your own blog,"All we get is running the reds down"
You have not said anything about the "The Local Referndum the UKIP party would like to see. The policy is called "Direct Democracy"I think is good and will be talking about it over the next few days.
The process would go as follows.
(1)Electors in a constituency are unhappy with a particular decision.
(2) A petition is formed which must be signed by 5%of the electorate in the constituency.
(3) If the 5% threshold is reached then the council is required by law to hold a referendum within 30days on that subject.
(4)If the referendum is successful then the council must abide by the result of thr referendum.
Last night in my post I told you about acase going on at this time, please read it if you have not.
What couldn,t you do with direct democracy?Well, not much.
You couldn,t,though, use the petition system to force a referendum on an area of governance that was outside the control of the people you were petitioning-so you couldn,t for example, use a local referendum to demand a change in the abortion laws.You could, however, use it to stop your local NHS Trust closing down a maternity ward ,for example.
Lot more to come later on.I have a meeting and then to the Town Hall I hope to see lots of you there I will have some of my team with me+The UKIP man from Fokestone,and he is alot better talker than me.
91
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
barry
how would the blues decide who would stand for election in this role?
Sorry guys, but this just seems plain daft to me. I can foresee an endless stream of referenda over trivial matters and who has the fun of paying for it all? The taxpayer.
I can also foresee local taxpayers being forced to cough up for Wyatt Earp while all the savings are centralised. So, who pays? The local taxpayers.
My advice to Conservative Party and UKIP is to go away and try to think sensible thoughts please, preferably coming up with something NOT hitting the taxpayer and delivering something we actually need.
Is that too much to ask for?
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Sid - dont associate the Conservative proposals with UKIP. You will find there to be a ot of difference in the all important details.
I refer only to the local elected police chiefs, something that works in the USA. It ensures that the public via their elected police chief have a say over policing priorities in their area. The present system of appointed committees is a nonsense with no direct electoral accountability and as for the current prosecution service, its a joke. The Conservative ideas are not to increase costs and beaurocracy but to reduce it.
The candidates need not be politicians either, though it could happen.
I don't understand why, if one party or candidate adopts what may (or may not!) be a reasonable policy or attitude that another one may share that it is seen as copying. Most answers in the same GCSE paper will be broadly similar, but that deosn't mean all entrants copied each other!!! And the concept of parity and equality of opportunity isn't the preserve of solely one person or group.
Guest 649- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 14,118
Bern. Thank you for that. I hope you make it on Friday night I will be there and would like to meet up with you. Vic M
Barry/Vic I think we fundamentally disagree on the idea of local Sheriff's. There is no argument for them that holds water.
They will cost the local taxpayer because:
1. A salary will be required
2. Office accommodation may be required unless they are to be based inthe local cop-shop, but not all towns have one.
3. They will probably require a car and maybe driver too.
4. They will have legitimate expenses (note to MP's, it is possible to have legitimate expenses)
5. The cost of running an election for the post. How much will they be allowed to spend on campaigning and who will subsidise it?
So, let's have none of this, freeby improvement to policing nonsense chaps. Like I said, UKIP and CP should return to said drawing board and try to give us something we actually need.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Sid - dont mix up UKIPs botch job with what the Conservatives are proposing.
No additional costs of staffing and accomodation at all. This will replace the current unsatisfactory set-up and might even save money. Elections could be at same time as KCC elections and our local 'sherrif' would have a County authority and will not be per town (an absurd idea having one in each town, I agree).