ARmy Rumour SErvice

Originally Posted by Daxx

Surely, the only people qualified to stand as PC's are those who have successfully avoided being prosecuted for fiddling their expenses as they 'were allowed to within the rules'.

or leaping from one QUANGO to another version of it?

In the unlikely event more than 20% of the registered voters actually vote for a PC, a decent candidate or two may get in, but I somehow doubt it.

The trouble here is that there are about 52 Police Commisioners up for election so should there only be 2 good ones amongst them then we are knackered!

Originally Posted by BuggerAll

They are selected by election. If we don't like the cut of their jib we shouldn't elect them. I know democracy isn't perfect but it better than any other system. The problem with suspending MPs is that they are the people elected representative. I think there should be something similar to the US 'recall' system but I don't want the state deciding who may or may not represent me and when they may or may not do it. It's all very well when we have relatively benign government as know but can you imagine what Brown would have done if he had been able to disqualify candidates he didn't like?

It's called recall. As for Brown don't forget he like everyone else in the same boat, don't want to rock it.

Originally Posted by Gobbly wobbly

Absolutely spot on, anyone who is eligible to vote should be eligible to stand as long as they aren't convicted of a criminal offence as an adult...

It should still be up to the electorate who they choose to vote for.

Originally Posted by Gobbly wobbly

...However, I don't actually want an elected police commissioner. I want a professional police officer in charge of my police force...

That would certainly be an improvement on the woeful shower at then top of the police 'service' now.

Originally Posted by Gobbly wobbly

...with some civilian oversight from a body of suitably qualified citizens...

Otherwise known as a QANGO. Who is to select that QANGO?

Originally Posted by Gobbly wobbly

I want our police forces to be subject to less political pressure not more. A police commissioner will usually have party loyalties and will set priorities along his party lines. I realise that the home secretary does this today but imagine the poor old chief constable when he has a tory home secretary and a labour police commissioner both with different priorities.

Imagine the poor bloody public when they have a chief police officer who thinks that investigating who put a sticker on another police force's van is more important than dealing with anti-social behavior.

Originally Posted by Gobbly wobbly

The only priorities the chief constable should have is what are the greatest sources of crime, disorder and anti social behaviour in his force area and how do I deal with it.

That would also be the priority of the PC otherwise he/she would not get reelected.

Originally Posted by seaweed

The problem as I see it, Buggerall, is that a candidate will need to backing of a party machine to get his name across and get elected. At that point the Party has the choice of whom it backs. So the process becomes political and we end up with political direction of the police.

Not that, to a large extent, via the Home Office we haven't got that already.

Democracy ain't perfect. In this case, however, if the individual doesn't perform the punters have the option of voting for some one else regardless of party. As some of them have done with directly elected mayors.

Originally Posted by Boumer

...But for readers of the cynical bile I spray over this site, that will come as no surprise. I wish the lot of them would leave those of us stupid enough to stay at the actual coal-face to do our jobs, fuck off and shut up about meaningless crime statistics which are faked anyway (in all likelihood).

On an aside, chatting with a mate of mine who's in High Tech crime we were talking about the latest "truth" out of headquarters about crime falling etc. He was remarking about the local IP addresses he was watching file-sharing child sex abuse imagery that he couldn't get anyone interested in doing anything about.

Wonder what would happen if they were just dumped into the crime system to force someone to do something about it and fuck the statistics.

Pays to be a team player these days though, remember bottom 10% of the force as assessed on annual reports go on action plans to be fired.

Wonder what a Crime Commissioner would do about that? Would they assist staff with the moral courage to expose hypocrisy, even if it proved the crime stats that people get elected on were not the reflection of what was going on?

Fucking no chance. Put that in the too hard bin, and shoot the messenger...

I share your cynicism about statistics. They are heavily massaged by the professional managers who head (lead or command would be the wrong words) the police service and by politicians. A directly elected PC would be in a different boat. You can massage figures all you like but if they don't match the experience of the punters they won't vote for you.

Originally Posted by BuggerAll

They are selected by election. If we don't like the cut of their jib we shouldn't elect them. I know democracy isn't perfect but it better than any other system. The problem with suspending MPs is that they are the people elected representative. I think there should be something similar to the US 'recall' system but I don't want the state deciding who may or may not represent me and when they may or may not do it. It's all very well when we have relatively benign government as know but can you imagine what Brown would have done if he had been able to disqualify candidates he didn't like?

Well that's how it is turning out. Disraeli considered the position of MP a position of trust in society-although of course in reality it had always been a position for those wanting to advance themselves. The Political parties determine who will represent you, all we do is to elect one of the candidates. If that candidate commits a crime then he should no longer be the representative. largely because they are not very clever for being found out and have been caught.

Originally Posted by Gobbly wobbly

. I want our police forces to be subject to less political pressure not more.

Well in an ideal world, but it isn't. The police will always be a highly political force largely because the issue of law and order is central to political control. As a trainee constable you will be told that it is your objective to protect society, use your initiative and to assemble the facts to lay before a court. The reality is you will be told what your priority will be, what will be prosecuted and what local issues are. Your initiative will be chucked out of the window. If you want to see how this can turn out I would recommend you watch "the wire", a very good series set in Baltimore, where police chiefs get elected.

Originally Posted by LeoRoverman

Well that's how it is turning out. Disraeli considered the position of MP a position of trust in society-although of course in reality it had always been a position for those wanting to advance themselves. The Political parties determine who will represent you, all we do is to elect one of the candidates. If that candidate commits a crime then he should no longer be the representative. largely because they are not very clever for being found out and have been caught.

That's all very well when we have a government that is relatively honest. You may recall that the last government tried to prosecute a Tory MP on trumped up charges while they were trying to suppress the MPs expense scandal.

Also whilst I'm pretty cynical I doubt if many people go into politics to advance their own personal positions, apart perhaps from their ego. Most politicians work very hard for relatively modest rewards.

What you say about parties choosing candidates is true and in Parliamentary elections most people will vote for parties because they are really voting for the party leaders but in an election to vote for one candidate for one job, mayor or PC peo0ple will vote for the candidate and they will certainly remove an incumbant they feel is not doing the job.

Originally Posted by BuggerAll

A Labour Councillor called Alan Charles wanted to stand for the post of police commissioner in Derbyshire but is disqualified because he committed a crime 47 years ago when he was 14.

Apparently any criminal offence that could have led to a custodial sentence is a bar to becoming a Police Commissioner. Quite right too, I hear more than a few of you saying - of course a criminal should not be a Police Commissioner but...

We live in a democracy. It should up to the voters who we choose to vote for. If we are perverse enough to want a criminal as PC then that's the way it is. As revolting as it is we have members of the IRA who are voted into parliament because that's what the punters want. It should not be up to the government to decide who we may or may not vote for.

Of course being a Labourite should be an instant disqualification from public office.

My bold: Yes it does seem revolting. But looking at it objectively, back when the "troubles" started in the 60's, Sinn Fein were told that if they wanted to run NI, they would have to get themselves voted in. So eventually they did.

Originally Posted by LeoRoverman

Well in an ideal world, but it isn't. The police will always be a highly political force largely because the issue of law and order is central to political control. As a trainee constable you will be told that it is your objective to protect society, use your initiative and to assemble the facts to lay before a court. The reality is you will be told what your priority will be, what will be prosecuted and what local issues are. Your initiative will be chucked out of the window. If you want to see how this can turn out I would recommend you watch "the wire", a very good series set in Baltimore, where police chiefs get elected.

The Commissioner has delegated you discretion, and (courtesy of the DPS) "you are individually accountable for your actions".

I tend to keep those in mind when dealing with my "seniors". But then given I have no interest or hope or promotion, I have nothing to loose by not being interested in the job's priorities.

Undiscovered crime tends not to be looked for, for then it becomes statistically relevant.