142 replies to this topic

[Morse]

I don't agree, you know I'm a Tory voter and voted for Maggie (and would have done for a lot longer if she hadn't been knifed in the back by her own party)

Maggie and Cameron are two completely different beasts. What is going on now under Cameron's government is the systematic destruction of the police force in this Country. You only need to look at Theresa May to know that this is true. They hate the police service and are going all out to destroy it.

I also do not believe that this has anything to do with budget cuts and cost savings because the £3.5bn pot earmarked for this experiment could be spent on what it should be spent on - police officers and the service in general.

When the HO refuses to release it's business model for this even after legal FOI requests then you know something is deeply wrong.

This really is kicking off, and there is an interview with the deputy fed chair on Sky News at 13:40 (Check the time just to be sure I got that right)

Different beasts indeed. Change police officer for Miner.

[Capt. Carrot]

This could be successful if the contract is written carefully and there is sufficient oversight. I won't hold my breath but a lot of the tin foil hat Tory bashing seems to be rather unnecessary.

I'd tend to agree with the tory bashing comment. I don't vote Tory, in fact I choose not to vote at all as I couldn't, with a clear conscience, put my X next to anyone's name. I do believe though that the Tory party are not the architects of the mess, but they would appear to be the sub-contractors!

[gordon]

In truth inefficient public services don't really matter so long as the people being employed are on fairly low wages as they don't really cost much more than managing the unemployed of the country, it's better than paying them to do nothing at all.

Also the reason we are in the financial situation we are in now is because no government in the last 20-30 years has bothered to put a lid on teh take avoidance by big businesses and the rich. If we'd been getting the taxes that we should have been getting we'd be in a much more healthy position that we are now. Any money earned in the UK should be taxed in the UK but no party is going to do it when the cabinet also have companies in the Caymen Islands to avoid tax too.

[Rocket]

I do wonder if the government got this idea after viewing this sketch from the 80's by Fry & Laurie...




Edit: trying to get that youtube media to display properly.

Edited by Rocket, 03 March 2012 - 01:21 PM.

[Shogy1]

Does anyone know if this is the same model as in America? I spoke to a Sheriff over there who said that he just arrests people, Someone comes and collects them carts them off to jail and he has a laptop in his car where he does all the statements and handover file. This is sent off to the investigation team who will deal from there on. He is then left free to deal with other incidents.

This frees him up to continue patrolling instead of hours upon hours stuck in an office doing paperwork.

Sounds like a much better system to me.

[rolex-oyster]

We used to have a system where police officers would take prisoners from the cells and put them before the magistrates courts and wait with them in the court .We would then release them or take them to prison,whatever the magistrates said.When you had to do it, it was your 'court week' then around 1996 group 4 took over this service and we jumped for joy as we hated it.We even 'trained' them and it was a smooth transition.Then because they employed alot more staff who did the job all the time the courts,cps,defence who ever gave them a massive thumbs up satisfaction rating especially compared to us lot we were rubbish at best.So it can work.

What people want is more uniforms on the streets who they feel are on their side.Hence PCSO's who the average MOP who makes a noise about policing really like.Even PCSOs are expensive the experienced ones top 25K I am told.So the forces concerned want more for the money.
We have to have a reality check as a street PC up to about 2005 I was utterly convinced the work done on the streets level by us was of ultimate importance and the almost superhero status of the role of constable was beyond critique.However the SMTs don't tend to agree and they see the day to day stuff at grass roots level as mundane drudgery that requires little or no skill.They think that cops who earn quite alot in the scheme of things should be doing more 'important' work.Which in my force is catching burglars and street robbers who are making the said SMT look bad.

So like the PCSOs if these guards are wired into the police radio systems should things go wrong they can shout up and we will come running combined with the passive presence a uniform has on people then they will be happy.

As police we have a very high opinion of ourselves and our worth sadly few others share this view especially politicians and people above the rank of Inspector.

Most regular street cops (regs) are digging their tunnels to get away from core patrol on earlies lates and nights and the horrible anti social hours and would happily let group 4 take over as my previous example.

[Radman]

Does anyone know if this is the same model as in America? I spoke to a Sheriff over there who said that he just arrests people, Someone comes and collects them carts them off to jail and he has a laptop in his car where he does all the statements and handover file. This is sent off to the investigation team who will deal from there on. He is then left free to deal with other incidents.

This frees him up to continue patrolling instead of hours upon hours stuck in an office doing paperwork.

Sounds like a much better system to me.

No because a Sheriff is a warranted officer in the states what they want to do here is privatise patrol duties and criminal investigations. It wouldn't be PCs patrolling the streets it'd be G4S security men

[MacGregor]

No because a Sheriff is a warranted officer in the states what they want to do here is privatise patrol duties and criminal investigations. It wouldn't be PCs patrolling the streets it'd be G4S security men

Slightly dishonest thing to suggest on your part.

Chief Superintendent Phil Kay of West Midlands Police said the most important duties would still be carried out by sworn officers. "Some elements of patrolling it may be appropriate, but the majority of patrolling, the majority of responding to calls for service, particularly 999 calls, will continue to be done by police officers,'" he said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17242956

[Shogy1]

Slightly dishonest thing to suggest on your part.

I agree.

[Giraffe]

No because a Sheriff is a warranted officer in the states what they want to do here is privatise patrol duties and criminal investigations. It wouldn't be PCs patrolling the streets it'd be G4S security men

Surrey Police have confirmed this will not be happening (link).

Surrey Police is exploring the feasibility of working with the private sector to improve the delivery of services for the public, whilst at the same time make savings. The Force has entered a lengthy procurement process, with West Midlands Police, and is currently in the very early stages of discussions with the private sector.

Commenting on the reports in today’s media, Surrey’s Chief Constable, Lynne Owens said, “Some of the coverage today has been very misleading. My job is to make sure Surrey stays safe, it will be police officers and staff that do that.

“Any suggestion that a private sector company will patrol the streets of Surrey is simply nonsense. It would be no more acceptable to the public than it would be to me.

“This is just an opportunity to see if the private sector can deliver some behind the scenes functions better and cheaper as part of a broader programme.

“We have to comply with a pretty cumbersome procurement process, hence the breadth of the documents that are prepared. We are surprised at any suggestions of secrecy. This is an open and transparent process and has been discussed publicly in Police Authority meetings. The Blue Light website, which details the possible contracts, is open to everyone to view

“The final decision will be for the Police Authority or Police & Crime Commissioner (PCC) but we cannot escape the changing financial climate. I must do my utmost to protect frontline policing services for the long-term. We will not change for changes sake. Our service to the Surrey public is my priority. I will retain all accountability for operational decision making.”

“Peter Williams, Chairman of Surrey Police Authority added: I agree with everything the Chief Constable says. I am most surprised and disappointed at the way a necessarily widely drafted document to comply with EU Regulations has been interpreted as the foundation for rumours that are simply untrue and without foundation”

By making better use of resources, Surrey Police has the potential to make savings, which will help the Force to protect frontline services in the long-term. Surrey Police has a good track record in taking an innovative approach to improve our front-line services, for example we have recently recruited an additional 200 PCs.

[support]

The idea of private security patrols, now that is interesting, effectively this is what ATTRACK, Dave Maclean was doing in Southampton Area, accept he charged the users rather than the council / police.

This scheme would need to be very carefully regulated to prevent security impersonating police.

I am not sure I support this idea.

[Giraffe]

I can see how the thought processes are going. The ambulance service already use private contractors in various parts of the country and that appears to work. Giraffe may have better info on this.

Unfortunately I don't know a great deal about that, although I suspect I'll have a much better idea in a few months time (if you're happy to wait for an answer ).

The idea of private security patrols, now that is interesting, effectively this is what ATTRACK, Dave Maclean was doing in Southampton Area, accept he charged the users rather than the council / police.

This scheme would need to be very carefully regulated to prevent security impersonating police.

I am not sure I support this idea.

Going by Surrey Police's statement, this will not be happening.

[Damsel]

Slightly dishonest thing to suggest on your part.

That's a bit harsh. I'm quite sure Radman was only responding to the news story quoted in the OP which clearly says.

Private companies could take responsibility for investigating crimes, patrolling neighbourhoods and even detaining suspects under a radical privatisation plan being put forward by two of the largest police forces in the country.

Admittedly that's probably more press hype than fact, but it is what it says.

[-AJ]

*sigh*

The day this happens in my area is the day I

a) Return my Warrant Card
b) Begin the process of moving to a new country.

[MikeBrum]

Robocop anybody!?

[MacGregor]

That's a bit harsh. I'm quite sure Radman was only responding to the news story quoted in the OP which clearly says.

Admittedly, that's probably more press hype than fact, but it is what it says.

I disagree, I don't feel it was unduly harsh (and it certainly wasn't intended to be). I'm sure Radman knew that employees of private companies wouldn't completely replace police officers in those roles.

b) Begin the process of moving to a new country.

Scotland.

[-AJ]

Scotland.

It's too cold up there

[tallypear]

http://www.west-midl...ase.asp?ID=3219

^ Link to the West Midlands official press release on this.

"Police officers and PCSOs will still be carrying out front line services, such as street patrols and arrests: we are looking at innovative ways of helping free officers from duties which don't need a serving police officer to carry out, such as guarding crime scenes and collecting CCTV."

[Radman]

I disagree, I don't feel it was unduly harsh (and it certainly wasn't intended to be). I'm sure Radman knew that employees of private companies wouldn't completely replace police officers in those roles.



Scotland.

How is it acceptable to have corporate security men patrol neighbourhoods in any capacity? How is it acceptable to put corporate interests before that of the publics interest.

Read the original article. This goes beyond 'back room functions' this is the very nature/function of the police service.

Its great Surrey chief has spoken out but where's West Mids press release?

This is a slippery slope, when some functions become privatised you often find further down the line more and more will be aswell.

The whole concept is disgraceful, nothing more need be said.

[Damsel]

Its great Surrey chief has spoken out but where's West Mids press release?

In fairness, here it is..

West Midlands Police and Police Authority have placed a notice in the Official Journal of European Union (OJEU) asking for expressions of interest from suitably qualified external organisations to work with the force, solidifying plans to develop closer links with the private sector.

Combining with the business sector is aimed at totally transforming the way the force currently does business – improving the service provided to the public.

Due to the length and value of the contract – which could be circa £1.5 billion over 10 years – the Authority is legally required to place a notice in the OJEU.

The areas of service listed in this notice are deliberately broad to allow the force to explore the skills, expertise and solutions a partnership could bring.

Not all the activities listed in the OJEU notice will necessarily be included in the final scope but if the force were to add other areas of business at a later date that would require a completely new and costly procurement exercise.

Chief Supt Phil Kay, who is overseeing the project, said: "This is about how we deal with the challenging conditions that we face and how we look to innovative ways to try and continue improving on delivering the service that we provide to communities. We want to explore how working with people in the private sector might be able to give us a new dimension and help us transform our service."

"Both Chief Constables remain accountable for the services provided. This is about maintaining the office of constable and being clear that some things have to be done by people with warranted powers. Our mission remains to serve and protect the community.

We also want to see what areas of business there are where we can work with partners in the private sector to deliver in a way that is more cost effective, efficient and helps to improve the service."

He added: "Police officers and PCSOs will still be carrying out front line services, such as street patrols and arrests: we are looking at innovative ways of helping free officers from duties which don't need a serving police officer to carry out, such as guarding crime scenes and collecting CCTV."

He added that in the next few weeks the formal procurement process is due to begin with private sector partnerships looking for suitable partners who could help us transform how we operate.

If a private sector partnership arranagement does go ahead it will be around 2013/14 before any chosen partner will play an active part in what we do.

"This provides our organisation with a huge and important opportunity to embrace new ideas and technology and revolutionise our ability to take in and process information."

Source: West Midlands Police.

[David]

I still don't get this. How can a private sector give the service that the public sector can't?

I hate the idea of privatisation of things like this. It puts it in shareholders' hands and there becomes vested interests rather than an apolitical, independent and impartial service.

[Shogy1]

No because a Sheriff is a warranted officer in the states what they want to do here is privatise patrol duties and criminal investigations. It wouldn't be PCs patrolling the streets it'd be G4S security men

I accept the Sheriff is a warranted officer but what about the people who collect the prisoner, transfer them to jail and then carry out the investigation?

Going by Surrey Police's statement, this will not be happening.

I cant see where they say it wont be happening. Only certain parts wont be happening like the Patrolling.

[Damsel]

I cant see where they say it wont be happening. Only certain parts wont be happening like the Patrolling.

Well, as patrolling is what was being talked about (and what was meant by the reference to "ATTRACKS"), I'd can most certainly see where it says that it won't be happening.

[Giraffe]

I think we can now assume that private patrolling will not be happening, although there is no doubting this has been an absolute disaster from a PR perspective. As for all the details being available on the Blue Light website, although I was able to find the site easily enough, finding further details about the specifics of the contract on offer was a tad more difficult. All I've been able to find was this - linky.

The website states 'Once you have registered your interest you will receive a confirmation receipt via email and the buyer may contact you with more information regarding the contract if you interest is successful.' - so it's hardly transparent. I think that proper consultation with the public is needed first - the investigation of the crime, however minor and regardless of it even being only in part by a private organisation, is a very serious move and the public absolutely should be consulted first. The last time I checked we policed by consent.

[rolex-oyster]

I still don't get this. How can a private sector give the service that the public sector can't?

They don't want them to give different service they want them to give the same service cheaper due to paying those that provide this service lower wages.
So they will do a course and be trained in role.Then they will do whatever they are expected to do if they do it well thats a bonus.If not as in the police individuals will be taken to task over performance.I.e blame the person and not the system.This happened massively when the PCSOs came in.However on paper it will be seen to be working and the best thing since sliced bread.
They will hope for retiring cops to do this sort of work which won't happen just as it didn't happen when the pcsos were introduced.As usual a case of gloss over no substance.