105 replies to this topic

[Radman]

I can't understand the problem here.

Some non-sworn staff and their functions would be transferred to a private company, who will do it cheaper and to an agreed standard.

The cake is only so big and it can only be cut in so many ways. Tough decisions need to be made to ensure that policing is sustainable and cost-effective.

Im sorry but in my humble opinion the police should be as seperate from private companies as they possibly can, as DaveSYP said its not just about cost.

Perhaps the Freeman and Anarchists who spout we're all pawns for private firms now have some sort of point eh?

[Dave SYP]

I can't understand the problem here.

Some non-sworn staff and their functions would be transferred to a private company, who will do it cheaper and to an agreed standard.

The cake is only so big and it can only be cut in so many ways. Tough decisions need to be made to ensure that policing is sustainable and cost-effective.

Privatisation of services have seen the demise of quality service delivery in the NHS and it's beginning to bite in the further and higher education sectors too. The police can get ready if they think it's going to solve all their financial problems, they have only just begun! The amount of time, effort and resources you need to put in place to monitor and manage the agreed standard will be phenomenal. The police service will be quality standards monitoring everything from toilet paper to the CC's teabags.

[Shogy1]

Surely though this means that police will be back where they should be. On the streets, visible acting as a detterent, engaging with the public and not stuck in a custody suite somewhere for hours on end dealing with prisoners and waiting ariound for solicitors etc to turn up.

[DGP]

Privatisation of services have seen the demise of quality service delivery in the NHS and it's beginning to bite in the further and higher education sectors too. The police can get ready if they think it's going to solve all their financial problems, they have only just begun! The amount of time, effort and resources you need to put in place to monitor and manage the agreed standard will be phenomenal. The police service will be quality standards monitoring everything from toilet paper to the CC's teabags.

Outsourcing with lots of irrelevant targets and monitoring mechanisms helps no one. I hope that will not happen,

Nonetheless, if the police had enough management talent then it wouldn't need to be doing the outsourcing in the first place. The sad reality is that the police have been struggling to make themselves more efficient, which is why the work is being outsourced.

Im sorry but in my humble opinion the police should be as seperate from private companies as they possibly can, as DaveSYP said its not just about cost.

Perhaps the Freeman and Anarchists who spout we're all pawns for private firms now have some sort of point eh?

The police should not be controlled or influenced by private companies. That's sometimes inappropriate.

Bu there is nothing wrong with the police controlling and influencing what it buys from private companies. In such an example, the police is the customer.

Edited by DGP, 21 June 2012 - 11:09 AM.

[Dave SYP]

Outsourcing with lots of irrelevant targets and monitoring mechanisms helps no one. I hope that will not happen,

Nonetheless, if the police had enough management talent then it wouldn't need to be doing the outsourcing in the first place. The sad reality is that the police have been struggling to make themselves more efficient, which is why the work is being outsourced.



The police should not be controlled or influenced by private companies. That's sometimes inappropriate.

Bu there is nothing wrong with the police controlling and influencing what it buys from private companies. In such an example, the police is the customer.

I wasn't suggesting that the targets would be irrelevant, just that they would need to have more resources to monitor and manage the performance of their contractors.
The police have a wealth of management talent and some forces have developed it and made good use of it for years. It is just a 'bigger push' now to save £millions and the knee-jerk reaction of some who have panicked. It has set the ball rolling for others to follow suit now and central government are relishing in the fact that they seem to be controlling it all for a change.

[Sam Vimes]

Surely though this means that police will be back where they should be. On the streets, visible acting as a detterent, engaging with the public and not stuck in a custody suite somewhere for hours on end dealing with prisoners and waiting ariound for solicitors etc to turn up.

Where should CID/MIT/VPD/SB/PPU etc be? Should they be on the streets being all visible and engaging with the public? Or should they be stuck in a Custody suite somewhere for hours on end doing the trivial things like evidence gathering and interviews? Your naiveity is truly saddening if you think all there is to Policing is the uniformed aspect meeting Mrs Miggins for a brew and a natter and clipping scallywags round the ear. I nicked 5 for robbery last week, seized their clothing and did their hand swabs etc, would you class that as wasting time in Custody? I consider it part of my job in putting together a professional and expedient investigation.

As for;

Some non-sworn staff and their functions would be transferred to a private company

Non-sworn staff doing patrols, detention of suspects, scene management and investigation... which bits do you propose are going to be left for the 'sworn' members of staff?

[General Purpose]

I know if they told me to do my job for less money, worse conditions and more hours I would quote happily quit. Same with control staff.

I cannot see sone employee of G4S, for example, getting stuck in restraining a persons who is violent, stinks of p*** and the other stuff, has HIV, Herpues, etc and is spitting and trying to bite you. The union would very quickly be involved telling them bot to do it. Fact. also, at the moment, if a DP is aggressive and gas kicked off, they won't take them to court as they don't have the powers to deal with them which means police have to take them. Imagine what its going to be like with them running the show 24/7

[Nicked]

What a smug arrogant pompus prick, he knows exactly what he's doing making those comments.

And now ladies and gentlemen, put your hands together for Theresa, Thomas and David singing "The Police"

One wheel on my wagon, and Im still rolling along...

Destroying doesn't come close does it?

[ococircusboy]

I don't understand how people cannot see the difference.

Civilianisation vs. Privatisation.

Civilian staff employed by the force are accountable to that force (and all other accounting bodies), private staff less so. No one is complaining about civvi's working as we need them but it is the privatisation of the civvi staff that has people worried.

[Prae]

The Beeb got this one wrong, G4S ran Doncaster Prison (Doncatraz) many years ago. It was originally built to be run by HMP and the HO changed their mind. I don't know whether G4S still run it?

What they mean is that HMP Birmingham is the first and only prison to have been handed from the public sector to the private sector. The other private sector prisons have always been private.

The whole situation is just a farce.

[Burnie]

Sorry to sound like a stuck record but of course the G4S chief would say that theres going to be more privatisation. He's represented by the company who employ the man who just released 2 reports which encourage privatisation (without using the word privatisation).

He also runs the largest private sector security company so will likely end up with some of the contracts

[Shogy1]

Where should CID/MIT/VPD/SB/PPU etc be? Should they be on the streets being all visible and engaging with the public? Or should they be stuck in a Custody suite somewhere for hours on end doing the trivial things like evidence gathering and interviews? Your naiveity is truly saddening if you think all there is to Policing is the uniformed aspect meeting Mrs Miggins for a brew and a natter and clipping scallywags round the ear. I nicked 5 for robbery last week, seized their clothing and did their hand swabs etc, would you class that as wasting time in Custody? I consider it part of my job in putting together a professional and expedient investigation.

Of course there is a place for the CID etc, I'm sure under even the privatised section they would still be responsible for the more serious investigations, ie Murder, Rape Terrorisim etc. I'm quite sure that even the privatised teams would be under some form of police supervision.

As for nicking 5 robbers, wow..Did you do it all yourself? Did no one assist you? Did you do the full investigation yourself or was it handed over? What is decribed there is a clear case where that sort of thing is expected of any police officer at the moment. Once Notes, clothing and forensics are done why couldn't it be handed over to a team to investigate and interview and the let the officer back out on the street?

I would just like to say that I am not naive at all. Just open to new ideas and not resistant to change.

[Sam Vimes]

Yes... Handed to CID. A team of Detectives with - in most cases - at least a decade of experience in dealing with serious offences. Accountable to the public, answerable to PSD, unable to down tools and go on strike while the PACE clock was ticking. You know... Police Officers?

Police work should be left to the Police; and that includes more than arresting people and getting 'back out on the street' (whatever that means).

[Shogy1]

Yes... Handed to CID. A team of Detectives with - in most cases - at least a decade of experience in dealing with serious offences. Accountable to the public, answerable to PSD, unable to down tools and go on strike while the PACE clock was ticking. You know... Police Officers?

Police work should be left to the Police; and that includes more than arresting people and getting 'back out on the street' (whatever that means).

Well if you don't know what getting back out on the street means in policing terms I worry...

What difference would there be in a team of civillian investigators supervised by Police doing the interviews and case work rather than Police officers? The CPS are still going to require the same level evidence to charge.

I do not think for one minute you are going to have untrained people doing it. In somecases I would agree that some of them may be inexperienced however that can be said of probationers when they first start. How do they learn? By doing the job, asking people. The same as even experienced officers do when they come across something that they know little about, such as CID coming across Traffic stuff and vice versa for example.

[CmdKeen]

And is all the work those detectives do work that must be done by them? Why do we need someone with decades of experience doing a CCTV review? There are investigative tasks that require experience and warranted powers, and there are investigative tasks that don't. I'd wager all police forces already use some form of civilian investigation under the management / supervision of a warranted officer - eCrime is the one that springs to mind.

But also lets not pretend that robberies are the only offences that require lots of investigative work and paperwork. Far less serious cases still can be massive time sinks.


PS. The police are pretty much not "accountable to the public". But that's for another thread...

Edit add: I'm not in agreement with Shogy though. I'd want grizzled detectives doing the interviewing for instance. But they should be doing that not being snowed under with a pile of stuff that is better done by someone who hasn't had 10+ years of training in the dark arts of investigating.

Edited by CmdKeen, 22 June 2012 - 09:41 AM.

[Sam Vimes]

Well if you don't know what getting back out on the street means in policing terms I worry...

What difference would there be in a team of civillian investigators supervised by Police doing the interviews and case work rather than Police officers? The CPS are still going to require the same level evidence to charge.

I do not think for one minute you are going to have untrained people doing it. In somecases I would agree that some of them may be inexperienced however that can be said of probationers when they first start. How do they learn? By doing the job, asking people. The same as even experienced officers do when they come across something that they know little about, such as CID coming across Traffic stuff and vice versa for example.

No please, define 'on the street' for me. Because taken literally the only time I'm 'on the street' is when I have nothing to do. Attending incidents takes me off the street, arresting people takes me off the street, doing warrants takes me off the street, taking victim and witness statements takes me off the street, seizing evidence takes me off the street, going on training courses takes me off the street, attending Court takes me off the street, bedwatches and constant obs take me off the street, making missing person enquiries takes me off the street, babysitting PPO'd children takes me off the street, preserving crime scenes takes me off the street, following injured victims to A&E for continuity takes me off the street. But all have played their part in securing convictions.

You want your Police 'back on the street', so please, define it and tell me which of the above you don't want me to do, and which you'd like G4$ to be doing in my stead to the same level to enable me to get 'back on the street'.

As to the idea of a team of civvie investigators supervised by Police Officers; if your civilians are employed by G4$ and are bound by the terms of their contracts, who are the Police Supervisors to discipline them? They aren't even working for the same company, will a Police DS be able to sack a civilian investigator employed by G4$? Will the Police now be expected to learn all about the dos and don'ts of the civilian's contracts? What happens when overnight you fill Custody up only to find that at 6am your civilian staff are commencing a day of industrial action? Will you expect your PCs to get called in to do interviews and file builds? I'm sure they'll not be rusty after not having done an i/v in months. Who will be 'on the street' while these Officers are back-filling the civilian roles?

As to the difference between civilian investigators doing the work instead of Police Officers; we know the people we lock up. We know the crime trends, we know where they drink and who they're sleeping with and who they buy from and sell to. We know who they're likely to have hiding their goods, we know where their stash points are, what motors they're driving, who has beef with who and what it's likely to be over. We follow hunches and listen to what people have to say to us, something you won't find sat on your rear in a side office at Custody, with CPS on speed-dial. I have lost count of the number of times I have had a result based on gut feeling or word of mouth or simple copper's nose; be it recovered stolen property, hidden gear, locating wanted people, or abstracting complaints from anti-Police victims. Ask any PC or Special with any decent amount of service and they'll tell you the same.

And if you think you're going to get the same standard of work, you are wrong. I can guarantee you will get better quality statements and a more convincing MG5 from an Officer who has attended the job and led the investigation, than you will from a civilian who doesn't really care about the result either way. Not to mention the skills honed by attending thousands of incidents and meeting thousands of people, day in day out, in all states of emotional distress and turmoil.

Probationers may not know anything when they start, but they have joined the job wanting to be Police Officers, wanting to lock up scum and look after the vulnerable. They under-go a nationally recognised training plan, supervised by tutors and Sgts with years of experience and they are exposed to a variety of jobs. They go through a fairly strict selection process; do you really think it's going to be anywhere near as selective with G4$ when all they want is bodies on the ground, probably earning not more than minimum wage? What sort of person do you think that lower salary is going to attract? Non-achieving school-leavers and people desperate for work, who will leave once a better offer comes along. You will end up with a bunch of people who were just looking for a job, not seeking a vocation, and the Police Service will be all the worse for it; I pity the first person who tells me "it's not in my job description" when I ask them to do something. Come to think of it, will I have the ability to direct a civilian investigator, or will they direct me to go out and get what they need for their file?

These people can expect zero help from me if this is the way it ends up going, and I won't be alone in that view.

[Shogy1]

No please, define 'on the street' for me. Because taken literally the only time I'm 'on the street' is when I have nothing to do. Attending incidents takes me off the street, arresting people takes me off the street, doing warrants takes me off the street, taking victim and witness statements takes me off the street, seizing evidence takes me off the street, going on training courses takes me off the street, attending Court takes me off the street, bedwatches and constant obs take me off the street, making missing person enquiries takes me off the street, babysitting PPO'd children takes me off the street, preserving crime scenes takes me off the street, following injured victims to A&E for continuity takes me off the street. But all have played their part in securing convictions.

Your list includes many things that could be done by a civilian. and does not require the powers of a police officer, Yes there are things that take police officers off the street and into the station or wherever. However things can be taken off them as happens now and is handed over to and dealt with by other police officers. The reason at the moment they are handed over to other police officers is because that is the way the system works. If you bring in civilians to do the work that is handed over then you get back out on the street quicker and get more officers out on the street dealing with things. That is not say there is not room for, as you said before, CID etc they would be more focussed on serious crime.


You want your Police 'back on the street', so please, define it and tell me which of the above you don't want me to do, and which you'd like G4$ to be doing in my stead to the same level to enable me to get 'back on the street'.

Attending incidents takes me off the street, (Part of everday police work) arresting people takes me off the street, doing warrants takes me off the street, (Part of everday police work) taking victim and witness statements (Can be done by civilians) takes me off the street, seizing evidence takes me off the street,(Part of everday police work) going on training courses takes me off the street,(Part of everday police work) attending Court takes me off the street,(Part of everday police work) bedwatches and constant obs take me off the street,(Can be done by civilians) making missing person enquiries takes me off the street,(Can be done by civilians) babysitting PPO'd children takes me off the street,(Can be done by civilians) preserving crime scenes(Can be done by civilians)



As to the idea of a team of civvie investigators supervised by Police Officers; if your civilians are employed by G4$ and are bound by the terms of their contracts, who are the Police Supervisors to discipline them? They aren't even working for the same company, will a Police DS be able to sack a civilian investigator employed by G4$? Will the Police now be expected to learn all about the dos and don'ts of the civilian's contracts? What happens when overnight you fill Custody up only to find that at 6am your civilian staff are commencing a day of industrial action? Will you expect your PCs to get called in to do interviews and file builds? I'm sure they'll not be rusty after not having done an i/v in months. Who will be 'on the street' while these Officers are back-filling the civilian roles?

Police deal with civillian contracts at the moment, so I doubt much will change, PCSO's, DDO's, Civillian staff etc. I doubt much would change in that regard. The terms in which police supervised / dealt with staff would have to be something which would no doubt be negotiated in the contract. Of course police would have to backfill in the event of industrial action. As we do now so no change there.

As to the difference between civilian investigators doing the work instead of Police Officers; we know the people we lock up. We know the crime trends, we know where they drink and who they're sleeping with and who they buy from and sell to. We know who they're likely to have hiding their goods, we know where their stash points are, what motors they're driving, who has beef with who and what it's likely to be over. We follow hunches and listen to what people have to say to us, something you won't find sat on your rear in a side office at Custody, with CPS on speed-dial. I have lost count of the number of times I have had a result based on gut feeling or word of mouth or simple copper's nose; be it recovered stolen property, hidden gear, locating wanted people, or abstracting complaints from anti-Police victims. Ask any PC or Special with any decent amount of service and they'll tell you the same.

And how do we find out these types of information. By being out there to nick them / speak to them in the first place.


And if you think you're going to get the same standard of work, you are wrong. I can guarantee you will get better quality statements and a more convincing MG5 from an Officer who has attended the job and led the investigation, than you will from a civilian who doesn't really care about the result either way. Not to mention the skills honed by attending thousands of incidents and meeting thousands of people, day in day out, in all states of emotional distress and turmoil.

While I agree to that in a certain extent around the standard of work in the initial set up of these schemes these skills / techniques can be gained and learned as police officers do. In your example of the 5 robbers whoi completed the MG5 for the case file you or someone else? In the vast majority of cases I would suspect it is the officer the case has been handed to.

Probationers may not know anything when they start, but they have joined the job wanting to be Police Officers, wanting to lock up scum and look after the vulnerable. They under-go a nationally recognised training plan, supervised by tutors and Sgts with years of experience and they are exposed to a variety of jobs. They go through a fairly strict selection process; do you really think it's going to be anywhere near as selective with G4$ when all they want is bodies on the ground, probably earning not more than minimum wage? What sort of person do you think that lower salary is going to attract? Non-achieving school-leavers and people desperate for work, who will leave once a better offer comes along. You will end up with a bunch of people who were just looking for a job, not seeking a vocation, and the Police Service will be all the worse for it; I pity the first person who tells me "it's not in my job description" when I ask them to do something. Come to think of it, will I have the ability to direct a civilian investigator, or will they direct me to go out and get what they need for their file?

These people can expect zero help from me if this is the way it ends up going, and I won't be alone in that view.

The selection procedures for these jobs would again be down to the contract negotiations. so I cannot comment on that really. I am saddened really at such negative comments at the end.

Sorry for the bold and underlining It was just easier to separate the Q's & A's

Quite a good example of how Police and private could work together I thought.

[Mr45G]

Of course, this would never happen in real life.

Edited by Mr45G, 22 June 2012 - 11:12 AM.

[Sam Vimes]

<snip>

Clearly we have a difference of opinion and aren't going to agree. I have never been a fan of this 'handover' culture, nor will I ever be unless a job is specific or serious enough to require a specialist unit take it over. To you it would seem acceptable to put the responsibility of prosecution, detention, and a host of endless other roles into the hands of people whose sole purpose will be to maximise profit... I consider this unacceptable, however you obviously don't, which is your choice.

As to my sad comment at the end... their introduction is at the demise of my career, and I will defend my career and it's interests as best I can, only a fool would do otherwise.

Can I ask your experience of Policing to be basing your opinions on? Special, regular, etc?



Edit: sorry, the video didn't show up first time.

A good way of it working? And if that bloke turned violent? Spat, punched, kicked, bite...? Required DNA and fingerprints taking by force? Are they going to call me to go and lend a hand are they?

Edited by Sam Vimes, 22 June 2012 - 01:02 PM.

[darthcheese]

As to the idea of a team of civvie investigators supervised by Police Officers; if your civilians are employed by G4$ and are bound by the terms of their contracts, who are the Police Supervisors to discipline them? They aren't even working for the same company, will a Police DS be able to sack a civilian investigator employed by G4$? Will the Police now be expected to learn all about the dos and don'ts of the civilian's contracts? What happens when overnight you fill Custody up only to find that at 6am your civilian staff are commencing a day of industrial action? Will you expect your PCs to get called in to do interviews and file builds? I'm sure they'll not be rusty after not having done an i/v in months. Who will be 'on the street' while these Officers are back-filling the civilian roles?

As to the difference between civilian investigators doing the work instead of Police Officers; we know the people we lock up. We know the crime trends, we know where they drink and who they're sleeping with and who they buy from and sell to. We know who they're likely to have hiding their goods, we know where their stash points are, what motors they're driving, who has beef with who and what it's likely to be over. We follow hunches and listen to what people have to say to us, something you won't find sat on your rear in a side office at Custody, with CPS on speed-dial. I have lost count of the number of times I have had a result based on gut feeling or word of mouth or simple copper's nose; be it recovered stolen property, hidden gear, locating wanted people, or abstracting complaints from anti-Police victims. Ask any PC or Special with any decent amount of service and they'll tell you the same.

Sam your mistaking the problems with G4S with the problems with Civi Investigators. There are lots of Civi Investigators working with the Police (i'm one of them) they are as hard working and dedicated to Policing as any PC I know. They (I'm new so I don't count) know as much about our customer base as a PC with the same length of service. When the affray alarm goes off they are legging it down the stairs with the PC etc to help out. During the Unison strike last year most of them went into work, because they care.

Now we can't tell what will happen after G4S might take over, maybe service will go down, maybe it won't, maybe the quality of the people that are hired will drop, maybe it won't. Frankly I'm not keen to find out.

But please don't say that because your against G4S this makes civi staff less committed to the job as a PC.

[Sam Vimes]

Sam your mistaking the problems with G4S with the problems with Civi Investigators. There are lots of Civi Investigators working with the Police (i'm one of them) they are as hard working and dedicated to Policing as any PC I know. They (I'm new so I don't count) know as much about our customer base as a PC with the same length of service. When the affray alarm goes off they are legging it down the stairs with the PC etc to help out. During the Unison strike last year most of them went into work, because they care.

Now we can't tell what will happen after G4S might take over, maybe service will go down, maybe it won't, maybe the quality of the people that are hired will drop, maybe it won't. Frankly I'm not keen to find out.

But please don't say that because your against G4S this makes civi staff less committed to the job as a PC.

I disagree, and whilst I'm not as against the role of civilian investigators per se (providing they are employed by the Constabulary), I still believe investigations should be conducted by Police Officers.

To you in an office these people are to all intents and purposes just names and figures coming through a revolving door. To us in uniform these are our problems, they are the people who terrorise our areas and blight our neighbourhoods with crime. To some extent it's Us v Them, and it can get very personal, which is why I am sure in the majority of cases you will get better and more convincing arguments from Officers than you will Civilians. You will get Cops pushing for harsher charges, not content with slaps on the wrist for lesser offences, you will see Cops imposing more relevant and convincing bail conditions, you will see more frequent remands... because to us it isn't just a case of processing that person and getting a tick in the box. We are responsible for what they do outside of Custody and we know the potential implications of them being turned out and put back on the street 3 hours later.

I have a variety of nominals I take a personal interest in; I hate them, I hate what they do to people, and if the chance arises I go to the n'th degree in securing as strict charges and remands as I can. My files are strongly worded and I will argue the toss with CPS to try and get the decisions in my favour. I've seen these handover teams and Civilian Investigators at work... they're interested just in clearing the board as quickly as possible, and if theres an easy option at charging my experience is that in the majority of cases it's taken. Not to say it's always the case, but that's my experience, and my experiences are all I have to base my opinion on.

But case investigation is just a small aspect of what is being proposed; G4S Neighbourhood Patrols, G4S Major Investigation Teams, G4S Surveillance Officers, G4S Intelligence Analysists, G4S Dog Handlers.... Anyone who cannot see the pitfalls of these is blind - and all these services are already on offer from G4S!

[darthcheese]

Why would a Officer make a more convicing arguement?

majority of cases you will get better and more convincing arguments from Officers than you will Civilians. You will get Cops pushing for harsher charges, not content with slaps on the wrist for lesser offences, you will see Cops imposing more relevant and convincing bail conditions, you will see more frequent remands... because to us it isn't just a case of processing that person and getting a tick in the box. We are responsible for what they do outside of Custody and we know the potential implications of them being turned out and put back on the street 3 hours later.

I don't buy your because they care line at all. Had a DV yesterday, would you have spent 30 mins explaining to her why she should make a statement,a dn a further hour and a hlaf taking that statement? Of course you would, so why when I do it because I'm a civi, this should be seen as the exception rather than the norm? I went to court recently in my own time to see a GBH case I'd worked on from start to finish (on my own) get tried. Why? Because I wanted to see he guy get what he deserved that's why, and to make sure that the CPS didn't get cold feet at the last minute and push for ABH instead.

I hear what your saying about your opinions based on your experiences. All I can say is that I feel sorry that your staff don't hold themselves to a higher standard.

Frankly i can give a counter and an example to each line of your arguement, and I'm sure you can do the same to mine. I'm also sure we could both do the same for SC's. But I think it's safer to say that in the real world there are good and bad PC's, SC's and Police Staff. The good ones need a pat on the back and the bad ones need a kick up the bum.

Lastly please don't think that this is my being precious about my job, as it's really not.

[Pete999]

Privatisation only equals one thing, profit making. I can see huge losses in ability and training simply to save on money. There won't be a care for a result of a job but simply how much money can be made or saved from it.

[Dave SYP]

Privatisation only equals one thing, profit making. I can see huge losses in ability and training simply to save on money. There won't be a care for a result of a job but simply how much money can be made or saved from it.

I agree with you Pete999 it shouldn't be just about saving money. As with numerous 'contracted out' jobs, there inevitably WILL be a fall in standards and all the so-called cynics in the media and on here will have their day. The police can get ready for some serious ridicule when it all goes terribly wrong.

[Obsidian_Eclipse]

When all the Constable has left is the power to arrest and all else is done by contractors, someone somewhere will come up with a truly smashing idea.. Why pay £25k for a body who's sole remit is to be directed to arrests when we've got people who do so many other tasks for less?

Remember there was a council a few years ago who employed (in a paid capacity) SCs to patrol in uniform around its markets etc and work along side trading standards. They got away with all the 'conflicts of interest' as forces/councils do when it suits purpose. Without scaremongering, I can at least foresee someone coming up the idea in the near future.. Attest a load of G4S staff, give them a couple of days paid leave on provision they do special duties. Lots of extra warranted staff at a fraction of the costs - they can even do there staff jobs when between arrests..