Policing for who?

[nilagin]

My dad always said Thatcher wanted to eradicate the working man and she certainly eradicated manufacturing. Newcastle still has one of the highest unemployment figures in the country. There used to be coal mines, shipbuilding, iron & steel works, factories making all sorts of stuff where young lads leaving school could go and start an apprenticeship.

Nowadays most jobs are in offices or shops. Not everyone wants to work like that. Not everyone is academic. The govt. doesn't seem to cater for anyone who isn't capable of getting 9 A*s in their school exams

I've worked for the same company for over 35 years and started my apprenticeship in 1979, I was one of around 40 at the factory that year, subsequent years saw similar amounts or even more some years had in excess of 60. Once out of my time we had plenty of work/overtime. Roll forward 20yrs and things got quieter, less overtime, part of the factory closed, lower numbers taken on for apprenticeships, just two or three places. some years none at all. It's only in the last three years things have picked up again, lots of overtime and the number of apprentices taken on each year has gone back into double figures. I'll leave you to work out which governments were in charge at the time.

 

[StewartR]

Next you'll be suggesting that cutting funding for local councils has created over stretched children's services....

I know you're being ironic Phil, but I suggest to you that this actually *is* leftie propaganda.

Where I live (Maidenhead), the council has just reduced the council tax for the sixth year running. Not just cuts in real inflation-adjusted terms, but cuts in actual cash terms. We're now paying about 10% less than we were 6 years ago, or about 25% in real terms.

And so the fabric of the borough must be falling apart, right? Err... no. New schools are being built. A new ring road is being built. The library and town hall are open for longer hours than ever. The pothole mending service is incredibly effective. A load of old council buildings are bring demolished and redeveloped. The stream that runs through the town centre is being opened up into a navigable waterway. And so on, and so on.

I think we're fortunate to have a council which:
(a) recognises that they are basically spending *other people's money*, and quite a lot of it too (for many people, council tax costs more then their electricity, gas, water, phone, home insurance and car insurance added together);
(b) has the integrity and competence to spend that money as if it were their own.

Unfortunately these are traits which are all too rare in the public sector.

 

[StewartR]

In fact, all you ever need to know about public expenditure was summed up by the American author P.J.O'Rourke in his book "All The Trouble In The World".

Basically, he says, there are four types of spending.

1. You spend your money on yourself.
You’re motivated to get the thing you want most at the best price. This is the way middle-aged men haggle with Porsche dealers.

2. You spend your money on other people.
You still want a bargain, but you’re less interested in pleasing the recipient of your largesse. This is why children get underwear at Christmas.

3. You spend other people’s money on yourself.
You get what you want but price no longer matters. The second wives who ride around with the middle-aged men in the Porsches do this kind of spending at Neiman Marcus.

4. You spend other people’s money on other people.
And in this case, who gives a ****?

Now guess which type all government spending is?

 

[Phil V]

I'm trying to get you to think deeper and ask why they were set in the first place. I'd also like you to think about the quality of evidence gathered and how likely that would see a conviction at the time given it wasn't forensic in nature.

The police have to do other work than investigate child abuse and iirc this is what happened here.

With the greatest of respect.

No, scrap that...
Don't be a tool, you're the one simplifying the situation. I understand exactly what's happened.

The point of my original post being that a relatively inexpensive case to protect the most vulnerable in society was 'dropped' for financial reasons, whilst a multitude of hideously expensive undercover investigations designed to protect the most powerful in society we're being carried out.
Ergo the title 'policing for who'

 

[LCPete]

With the greatest of respect.

No, scrap that...
Don't be a tool, you're the one simplifying the situation. I understand exactly what's happened.

The point of my original post being that a relatively inexpensive case to protect the most vulnerable in society was 'dropped' for financial reasons, whilst a multitude of hideously expensive undercover investigations designed to protect the most powerful in society we're being carried out.
Ergo the title 'policing for who'

Yes exactly and just to add my experience of unions at grass roots level at least is they just want to get the best deal for members

 

[dejongj]

Yes exactly and just to add my experience of unions at grass roots level at least is they just want to get the best deal for members

Unfortunately how many go about that, is with a very short term view. But I admit I'm rather biased and can't stand the lot of them. Outdated unnecessary dinosaurs in my opinion.

 

[viv1969]

Yes exactly and just to add my experience of unions at grass roots level at least is they just want to get the best deal for members

Sadly though, they too are not run by those "at grass root level".
They are run by those who sit astride their mighty high horses, spouting rhetoric and often as not holding the public to ransom (public transport...public services....public health....)

The idea of an organisation protecting the right of workers is great.
But what happens in practice is an organisation protecting the wealth and status of the organisation.

 

[Phil V]

Unfortunately how many go about that, is with a very short term view. But I admit I'm rather biased and can't stand the lot of them. Outdated unnecessary dinosaurs in my opinion.

Of course they are, the world is full of examples of huge corporations bending over backwards to make sure their human resource is treated fairly. They'd be happy to pay fair wages and make sure the workplace is safe without all the terms that the trade union movement have fought for and continue to protect.
Sorry, no it's not. Businesses have a myopic view of the world and if more profit means cutting h&s corners they'd do it every time.

 

[SFTPhotography]

The point of my original post being that a relatively inexpensive case to protect the most vulnerable in society was 'dropped' for financial reasons, whilst a multitude of hideously expensive undercover investigations designed to protect the most powerful in society we're being carried out.
Ergo the title 'policing for who'

I think that line is typical leftwing rhetoric. I get it you don't like finest ever PM to Grace this land.

However, these uncover operations were designed to ensure the unions weren't going to attempt to cripple the country at large which to all intentions they were setting out to do and were nearly going about it. The good of these investigations were to protect all of us from a radical under current.

 

[simon ess]

Why are events of 30 - 40 years ago relevant to SYC diversion of funds today?

Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[simonblue]

Phil,have you watched the docs called The Power of Nightmares,its in 3 parts but well worth a watch

 

[viv1969]

I think that line is typical leftwing rhetoric. I get it you don't like finest ever PM to Grace this land.

You do realise she's dead. right?
She can no longer sense your nose snuffling around her bottom

 

[dejongj]

Of course they are, the world is full of examples of huge corporations bending over backwards to make sure their human resource is treated fairly. They'd be happy to pay fair wages and make sure the workplace is safe without all the terms that the trade union movement have fought for and continue to protect.
Sorry, no it's not. Businesses have a myopic view of the world and if more profit means cutting h&s corners they'd do it every time.

Not necessarily disagree, dramatic expression aside, however unions are in my opinion not the answer to that. A large part of it is also government as their interference distorts the markets, anytime they do that it will be at the cost of something else.

 

[boyfalldown]

You do realise she's dead. right?

Steve has the job of checking she stays that way every year or so

 

[big soft moose]

I'm trying to get you to think deeper and ask why they were set in the first place. I'd also like you to think about the quality of evidence gathered and how likely that would see a conviction at the time given it wasn't forensic in nature.

The police have to do other work than investigate child abuse and iirc this is what happened here.

they were set in the first place as a reaction from the home office in the blair government as a result of a need to be seen to be really 'doing something' about car crime, burglary, and street violence.. - they werent set by the police, nor have they actually acheived a real terms increase in convictions for these offences (they have acheived a drop of reported offences - but thats because of data being massaged to fit targets , not actuall criminals getting locked up)

as to the quality of evidence gathered i'd suspect the cop in charge of the investigation is better placed to say whether his investigation was going anywhere and whether he'd have seen an arrest - and it was him who spoke to the BBC about this in the first place

 

[big soft moose]

. I get it you don't like finest ever PM to Grace this land.

.

I'm not sure what Churchill has to do with it to be honest

 

[Phil V]

I think that line is typical leftwing rhetoric. I get it you don't like finest ever PM to Grace this land.

However, these uncover operations were designed to ensure the unions weren't going to attempt to cripple the country at large which to all intentions they were setting out to do and were nearly going about it. The good of these investigations were to protect all of us from a radical under current.

I'm happy for you to see it as 'left wing rhetoric', in fact I take it as a compliment.
It doesn't mean it's not what I believe to be true.
By the same token you must appreciate that I see your opinions as typical of those fed right wing propaganda, with barely a shred of truth to hold them together.

There's no middle ground to make either of us 'see sense'.

 

[SFTPhotography]

There's no middle ground to make either of us 'see sense'.

And on that happy note...

See you all later.

 

[viv1969]

I see even the MET aren't immune to such grubby dealings, it seems.

 

[big soft moose]

indeed the met cases are more serious as its about corruption rather than budgets or incompetence - the IPCC are investigating the following

1) Allegation of a potential cover up around failures to properly investigate child sex abuse offences in South London and further information about criminal allegations against a politician being dropped.
2) Allegation that an investigation involving a proactive operation targeting young men in Dolphin Square, was stopped because officers were too near prominent people.
3) Allegation that a document was found at an address of a paedophile that originated from the Houses of Parliament listing a number of highly prominent individuals (MPs and senior police officers) as being involved in a paedophile ring and no further action was taken.
4) Allegation that an account provided by an abuse victim had been altered to omit the name of a senior politician.
5) Allegation that an investigation into a paedophile ring, in which a number of people were convicted, did not take action in relation to other more prominent individuals
6) Allegations that a politician had spoken with a senior MPS officer and demanded no action was taken regarding a paedophile ring and boys being procured and supplied to prominent persons in Westminster in the 1970s.
7) Allegation that in the late 1970s a surveillance operation that gathered intelligence on a politician being involved in paedophile activities was closed down by a senior MPS officer.
8) Allegation that a dossier of allegations against senior figures and politicians involved in child abuse were taken by Special Branch officers.
9) Allegations that a surveillance operation of a child abuse ring was subsequently shut down due to high profile people being involved.
10) Allegations of child sex abuse against a senior politician and a subsequent cover-up of his crimes.
11) Allegations that during a sexual abuse investigation a senior officer instructed the investigation be halted and that that order had come from ‘up high’ in the MPS.
12) Allegation of a conspiracy within the MPS to prevent the prosecution of a politician suspected of offences.
13) Allegations against a former senior MPS officer regarding child sex abuse and that further members of the establishment including judges were involved. It is claimed that no further action was taken.
14) Allegation that police officers sexually abused a boy and carried out surveillance on him. Further allegations of financial corruption in a London borough police force

https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/ipcc-i...tion-relating-child-sexual-abuse-metropolitan

 

[LCPete]

Unfortunately how many go about that, is with a very short term view. But I admit I'm rather biased and can't stand the lot of them. Outdated unnecessary dinosaurs in my opinion.

Sadly though, they too are not run by those "at grass root level".
They are run by those who sit astride their mighty high horses, spouting rhetoric and often as not holding the public to ransom (public transport...public services....public health....)

The idea of an organisation protecting the right of workers is great.
But what happens in practice is an organisation protecting the wealth and status of the organisation.

yes I know that you are both right, the guys at the top of the unions are only in it for themselves the same as politicians if all parties
I've worked in the same factory for nearly 20 years tho and the local union reps have always done their best for us
not always winning for us but at least they try

 

[nilagin]

Yes exactly and just to add my experience of unions at grass roots level at least is they just want to get the best deal for members

I've been a union member for over 34yrs and in my experience most of the time they work to their own agenda, not even considering their members.

 

[Phil V]

Not necessarily disagree, dramatic expression aside, however unions are in my opinion not the answer to that. A large part of it is also government as their interference distorts the markets, anytime they do that it will be at the cost of something else.

Absolutely! The markets are allowed to keep all their 'winnings' but when they spectacularly fail, they want to live in a socialist state and have the taxpayer bail them out.
My solution wouldn't be the same as yours, but let's stop pretending the last government spent all our money on the poor, a massive chunk of it propped up the rich. And a government of any colour would do the same tomorrow.

 

[Garry Edwards]

indeed the met cases are more serious as its about corruption rather than budgets or incompetence - the IPCC are investigating the following



https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/ipcc-i...tion-relating-child-sexual-abuse-metropolitan

And this investigation may (or may not) actually happen, because the IPCC are actually handling it themselves, so we live in hope.

Most people have no idea what happens with police complaints.
In the vast majority of cases, complaints are investigated by the same police force that the public complain about, they have a 'Chinese Wall' in place, i.e. they have a 'Professional Standards Department' that is allegedly both separate from and independent of the rest of the force, but in reality that's just b*****ks and their real job seems to be to find that nothing untoward has ever occurred, with the odd exception that they may find that an overworked front line officer may have made a small and inconsequential paperwork error. The IPCC will do absolutely nothing unless the complaint is about an officer above the rank of Chief Superintendent. Even if the complaint is sent directly to the IPCC, they will just forward it to the police force... The only exceptions to this rule AFAIK is where the investigation is about a death in custody or a police shooting.

There is an appeal process to the IPCC from the findings of the police's own incestuous investigation, but the terms of reference are limited to investigating whether or not the investigation itself was carried out in accordance with the standard procedure, there is no investigation possible into the conclusions drawn. And it can only be based on the evidence that the individual police force admit to having, not to what they did have or should have had. And, as the public have no way of even knowing what evidence the complaint investigation was based on, it wouldn't even help if the IPCC could investigate the evidence that the police actually had.
And once they've rejected the appeal, there is nowhere else to go.

In other words, if the police act improperly then there is no real investigative process to hold them to account.

 

[LCPete]

I've been a union member for over 34yrs and in my experience most of the time they work to their own agenda, not even considering their members.

I can only speak as I find, I've worked in the same factory for nearly 20 years and our local reps have always tried their best sometimes in difficult circumstances

 

[StewartR]

Businesses have a myopic view of the world and if more profit means cutting h&s corners they'd do it every time.

@Phil V - I own and run a business, and I take offence at that.

 

[StewartR]

indeed the met cases are more serious as its about corruption rather than budgets or incompetence - the IPCC are investigating the following:

https://www.ipcc.gov.uk/news/ipcc-i...tion-relating-child-sexual-abuse-metropolitan

Crikey, that's an appalling list. Of course they are just allegations, but if even a fraction f them are true...

And this investigation may (or may not) actually happen, because the IPCC are actually handling it themselves, so we live in hope....

I'd think this was too big to be brushed under the carpet. But maybe I'm just being naive.

 

[dejongj]

Absolutely! The markets are allowed to keep all their 'winnings' but when they spectacularly fail, they want to live in a socialist state and have the taxpayer bail them out.
My solution wouldn't be the same as yours, but let's stop pretending the last government spent all our money on the poor, a massive chunk of it propped up the rich. And a government of any colour would do the same tomorrow.

Actually the markets didn't got a bailout, individually badly managed organisations did. And that act alone distorted the market yet once again.

Hey ho, at least we are agreed that the previous government spent all our money.

 

[Phil V]

@Phil V - I own and run a business, and I take offence at that.

Don't take it personally Stewart, I've worked for several large businesses and I speak as I find.

The right wing media have done an awesome job over the last twenty years to convince the 'average working man' that Unions are a blight on society. As if businesses would have invented lunch breaks, paid sick leave, paid holidays etc off their own bats.

It's no surprise that now they've succeeded in doing that we've seen a rise in people being employed on contracts where those 'perks' can no longer be taken for granted.

 

[Phil V]

...Hey ho, at least we are agreed that the previous government spent all our money.

Can we agree that the current one hasn't got a clue how to balance the books too?

Or indeed that 'balancing the books' on an annual basis isn't even that smart a thing to do, as I said earlier, successful businesses do something called 'investing', the 80's eventually taught us that just cutting back isn't a winning tactic.

 

[Garry Edwards]

Crikey, that's an appalling list. Of course they are just allegations, but if even a fraction f them are true...

I'd think this was too big to be brushed under the carpet. But maybe I'm just being naive.

Driving home, I heard on the news that although the IPCC will be 'overseeing' the investigation, the actual investigation will in fact be carried out by the met themselves, so don't expect too much.
Mind you, assuming of course that there is some substance to the allegations, it may be that some of the guilty people in the met will be dead now, or low-ranking, so there is a chance that some may be found to have acted corruptly.

 

[dejongj]

Don't take it personally Stewart, I've worked for several large businesses and I speak as I find.

The right wing media have done an awesome job over the last twenty years to convince the 'average working man' that Unions are a blight on society. As if businesses would have invented lunch breaks, paid sick leave, paid holidays etc off their own bats.

It's no surprise that now they've succeeded in doing that we've seen a rise in people being employed on contracts where those 'perks' can no longer be taken for granted.

And in my opinion the best way of dealing with that is to let the market handle it. We are a mature enough society that people wouldn't work for such organisation and will take their services elsewhere where they are appreciated.

It sounds too me like you haven't lived and have a very warped view of what big (or small) business is about.

 

[dejongj]

Can we agree that the current one hasn't got a clue how to balance the books too?

Or indeed that 'balancing the books' on an annual basis isn't even that smart a thing to do, as I said earlier, successful businesses do something called 'investing', the 80's eventually taught us that just cutting back isn't a winning tactic.

No we can't agree upon that.

They hardly begun cutting back. They haven't cut back hard and far enough for my liking. Cutting back to reduce a structural deficit is a good thing, the only other way away from that is the generate more income. They may be able to do that by lowering taxation.

 

[Phil V]

And in my opinion the best way of dealing with that is to let the market handle it. We are a mature enough society that people wouldn't work for such organisation and will take their services elsewhere where they are appreciated.

It sounds too me like you haven't lived and have a very warped view of what big (or small) business is about.

Well you were entitled to your opinion until the last bit, which crosses the line. I'll accept an apology or it can go to the mods.

50+ years on the planet! I've worked in the private and public sector and run my own business, brought up 3 gorgeous caring children. Haven't lived?

 

[Phil V]

...
It sounds too me like you haven't lived and have a very warped view of what big (or small) business is about.

People have different opinions, a sign of intelligence is to understand that.

 

[nilagin]

Don't take it personally Stewart, I've worked for several large businesses and I speak as I find.

The right wing media have done an awesome job over the last twenty years to convince the 'average working man' that Unions are a blight on society. As if businesses would have invented lunch breaks, paid sick leave, paid holidays etc off their own bats.

It's no surprise that now they've succeeded in doing that we've seen a rise in people being employed on contracts where those 'perks' can no longer be taken for granted.

I've worked for the same large company for over 35yrs, when I started, the unions ruled the roost and could call a strike at the drop of a hat. Price of baked beans in the cafeteria gone up without consultation, everyone out. Tea served from tea trolley without official tea taster giving his approval, everyone out and no I'm not kidding. Have you seen the film Made in Dagenham based on the women trim machinists struggle for equal pay set in the 60's, that's exactly how the unions still were in the early 80's. Thankfully all that power was taken away from them. Around 10yrs ago my employer wanted to make provision for an extra pay grade for skilled workers, just for taking on extra efficiencies/tasks. The union blocked it because not everyone could benefit from it straight away. Where I work now, same company different job and location, several years ago they built a new building to do more of the same job as I do, but these people are staff where as I'm hourly paid. Being staff would mean more money, better pension, and a few more days holiday. The company wanted to upgrade everyone doing this job to staff, but the union blocked it for whatever reason, not sure why, it was before I got there. I very much doubt the company will be making a similar offer anytime soon. I've found from experience the union doesn't live in the real world.

 

[viv1969]

@Phil V ....why bother the mods, apology or not?
It's a discussion...an argument even.
If you're having a lively discussion in a pub, do you run to the landlord if someone says something you don't like?
Be the bigger man. Move on. Don't become one of those whose finger is permanently poised over the the RTM button.

 

[Phil V]

@Phil V ....why bother the mods, apology or not?
It's a discussion...an argument even.
If you're having a lively discussion in a pub, do you run to the landlord if someone says something you don't like?
Be the bigger man. Move on. Don't become one of those whose finger is permanently poised over the the RTM button.

No, if he'd said that in the pub I'd have punched him

 

[dejongj]

Well you were entitled to your opinion until the last bit, which crosses the line. I'll accept an apology or it can go to the mods.

50+ years on the planet! I've worked in the private and public sector and run my own business, brought up 3 gorgeous caring children. Haven't lived?

Crossed the line? Are you serious. I think that just added weight to my point naturally "lived" was in context of big or small business. There are so many fantastic business about which are wonderful places to work for or do business with.

 

[dejongj]

No, if he'd said that in the pub I'd have punched him

And I would have done you for assault.