Monday, 7 September 2009

Monstrous Arrogance…

One of Britain's most senior police officers has launched a robust attack on the Conservative Party's proposal to introduce directly elected police commissioners, warning that it could lead to some forces falling under the control of far-right extremists.
Because it’s perfectly fine if they remain under the control of the current bunch of soft left appeasers and greasy pole climbers, I suppose?
Sir Hugh Orde, the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), said he was opposed to the idea and gave a warning that public apathy voting could lead to "lunatics" being elected to take charge of forces.
At least they would be elected, Sir Orde.

Not merely appointed like you, as Raedwald also points out…
…Sir Hugh, Britain's second most senior officer after Sir Paul, has called on the Conservative Party to explain exactly how it plans to alter the leadership of Britain's police forces should it be elected at the next general election.
Sorry…?

Since when does a political party – especially one not in power yet - have an obligation to ‘explain’ anything to the likes of you, rather than to the voters?
Just who the hell do you think you are?
Sir Hugh said: "No one has articulated to me or anyone else what the elected commissioner plan actually looks like. I know that Labour have stepped back from it, but the Conservatives are still committed to it. They need to talk to us about what exactly they are talking about doing.

"Do they think that the public are so interested in policing that they would turn out and vote? And for whom? A politician? Or do they mind if they get a lunatic or a retired copper? All of these questions need to be answered."
Oh, wow. Did you ever see more concentrated disrespect for the people who pay this arrogant, entitled fool his wages in your life?

It’s a wonder he didn’t end that sentence with a ‘Harrumph!’, isn’t it?

Or perhaps he did…
Asked whether he feared that a BNP or far-right candidate could seize upon this, Sir Hugh replied: "Yes, that is a risk. If you have a system whereby anyone can stand to be elected as the local police commissioner, you could have any Tom, Dick or Harriet standing. If they can muster enough support against a backdrop of public apathy, then of course it is a risk."
Frankly, I can’t see how anyone could do worse than your little unelected clique, and if they did, we, the voters, can always toss ‘em out.
Many supporters of the proposal have pointed out that it is similar to apparently successful models in the United States, but Sir Hugh rejected the suggestion that it could work here. He added: "Perhaps people should go to America before saying things like that. I know a lot of sheriffs and they seem to spend a lot of their time canvassing and preparing for elections. Is that really what the public wants for British policing?"
As opposed to what your ACPO members seem to spend their time doing?

Yes. I think it is what the British public would rather see you doing…
"If people seriously think some form of elected individual is better placed to oversee policing, I am interested to see the details of how that is going to work. Every professional bone in my body tells me that it is a bad idea that could drive a coach and horses through the current model of accountability."
No, that’s not the (supposed) ‘professional bones’ in your body telling you that.

It’s the accumulated entitlement that you’ve built up, now you think you see the possibility of some of that privilege slipping away.

And your immediate reaction to the proposals shows that you are not, and never were, fit for the position you hold.

15 comments:

tolkein said...

I hope you don't think that it's only the Right in Britain that's in favour of electing police chiefs. I know quite a few in the Labour Party that think democratic accountability of the police might result in catching more burglars and criminals as police adopt people's priorities rather than those of central government or the professional penology nomenklatura.

And, one day, there'll be a Tory government. I'd rather see local control of police than Cameron's cronies determine policing priorities.

JuliaM said...

"I hope you don't think that it's only the Right in Britain that's in favour of electing police chiefs."

So far, it's been the Tories that have made all the running...

"I'd rather see local control of police than Cameron's cronies determine policing priorities."

Agree with that! Wholeheartedly.

When Cameron gets in - and he will get in - it's going to be a case of 'Meet the new boss, same as...'

Ah, I'm sure you know the words... ;)

James Higham said...

Because it’s perfectly fine if they remain under the control of the current bunch of soft left appeasers and greasy pole climbers, I suppose?

That's exactly what crossed the mind.

Joe Public said...

"Since when does a political party – especially one not in power yet - have an obligation to ‘explain’ anything to ........" a limited Company?

It's "ACPO Ltd" remember.

Ross said...

Hugh Orde is against extremists on policing boards is he? So how come as Chief Constable of the PSNI, he was trying to get Sinn Fein to sit on them?

Deadbeat Dad said...

"the current model of accountability"

Hahahahahahahahaha...

Nice spot, Julia.

Trooper Thompson said...

"I know quite a few in the Labour Party ..."

Well, they had their chance, and decided to use up their political capital in foreign wars.

Now they're on their way out, no doubt it strikes them as a good idea to hand over some of the centralised power they have enjoyed.

I am in favour of electing police chiefs, but the main problem with law and order is not the police, but the courts. The police are busy running around after known and convicted criminals who the courts refuse to adequately punish (e.g. your previous post)

Mark Wadsworth said...

Trooper T makes a good point re the Courts, I think they are far worse than the coppers.

Returning to the topic, the chances of a Green Party member being elected as Police Commissioner are far higher than that of a BNP member being elected.

Which would be good fun, as unlikely as either event is.

North Northwester said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
North Northwester said...

"If they can muster enough support against a backdrop of public apathy, then of course it is a risk."

Oh, no, Commissioner Gordon, it isn't APATHY you'll need to worry about.

It's the absolutely let-down fury of law-abiding citizens who've seen their peace and quiet shattered; their property vandalised and stolen; their privacy ruined by untouchable thugs and public act of indecency; their lives and their children's' lives threatened or ruined and in some cases taken away casually and with impunity whilst the 'Police Service' sold its good name and its soul to the politicians ans sociological shamans of the mystical Left.

Don't you worry about apathy, sunshine - there's anger on its way, and lots of it.

JuliaM said...

"Hugh Orde is against extremists on policing boards is he? So how come as Chief Constable of the PSNI, he was trying to get Sinn Fein to sit on them?"

Some extremists are more equal than others, it seems...

"...the main problem with law and order is not the police, but the courts."

Aren't prosecuters and some judges also elected in the States...? ;)

"Don't you worry about apathy, sunshine - there's anger on its way, and lots of it."

Let's hope so. After all, apathy hasn't got us very far has it?

Mummy x said...

Thankyou for your kind words and thanks for the brilliant guest post.

Mummy x

blueknight said...

There is no point having a locally elected Police chief if that same Police chief has to dance to Nulabor's Central Govt tune.
At the moment the chiefs of the county forces are 'elected' by the local Police authorities which are thmselves formed from locally elected members, but the local Police cannot do what the the local people want.
Each local Police force has Operational independance, which sounds great until you realise that the Nulabor Govt. decides what is and isn't 'Operational'

Von Spreuth said...

GREAT!

Pitty Colonel Colin Campbell Mitchell can no longer stand. (Him being dead does not help).

Rob said...

It's a start. Build more prisons so that the courts can actually jail people. The Establishment bleats the fallacy that, somehow, we cannot build more jails, or that if we do crime will rise - jailing more people is a sign of more crime, apparently.

I believe the opposite - jailing recidivist and violent criminals will reduce crime, for the obvious reason that they won't be free to terrorise their fellow citizens. Couple this with REAL local democratic pressure on police forces to arrest said criminals, instead of sucking up to gay rights or islamist marches, and you have at least part of a solution.

Also reform the Probation Service so that it serves the public instead of criminals - difficult, as it is stuffed full of leftist loonies. Any ideas on that?

Much of the Home Office has to go, too. We need honesty in how crime is recorded and reported. Pro-criminal lobby organistations should have their charitable status abolished, and their spokesmen laughed at in the streets.