Conservatives plan police reserve force

#1
Conservatives plan police 'reserve force'
Telegraph
Link

The Conservatives have drawn up radical plans to replace Labour's controversial "Blunkett's bobbies" with a police reserve force similar to the Territorial Army.

The new force would comprise tens of thousands of paid special constables, all highly-trained with full powers of arrest.

Its creation would lead eventually to the scrapping of police community support officers, or PCSOs, who have attracted widespread criticism for being toothless.
advertisement

The Tory plan, drawn up by David Ruffley, the shadow police reform minister, also proposes recruiting thousands of professional information technology and telecommunications experts to help in the fight against terrorism.

Police reservists would be paid a tax-free, quarterly bonus or "bounty" on completion of a set number of hours per month, and possibly even be given a rebate on their council tax as a reward for their service. Individual chief constables could also choose to pay Christmas bonuses.

The plan is designed to resurrect special constables as the main support to the police, boosting their numbers from the present 14,000 to nearer 30,000. Numbers of specials, who are unpaid, have been declining since PCSOs were launched by David Blunkett in 1998 when he was Home Secretary.

Thousands of would-be specials now sign up as PCSOs instead because of the generous financial package.

PCSOs do not have powers of arrest and receive only limited training. Critics have denounced them as "plastic plods" with little more than the ability to direct traffic and issue fixed-penalty notices. A senior member of the Police Federation last month called for them to be scrapped after two PCSOs failed to help rescue a drowning boy from a pond because they were "not trained" to deal with the incident.

The Tory scheme would not immediately scrap PCSOs, but would make volunteering for the new reserve force more attractive by offering advanced training, some pay, and the opportunity to do real police work.

Reservists would be required to work a minimum number of hours each month and form part of neighbourhood policing teams. But unlike PCSOs they would be able to make arrests and intervene in violent or dangerous situations.

In the event of a terrorist attack, the report says, "they could actually aid officers in front line rescue and recovery duties in a way that PCSOs are less equipped to perform".

Controversially, the report also proposes using reservists in counter-terrorist investigations. It states: "In cases of suspected terrorism, the analysis of forensic evidence (e.g. of calls made from mobile phones and emails from computers) is very time-consuming.

We believe that more civilians with a telecoms or IT background could, if properly deployed, be an added asset in terrorist investigations."

The Tories point out that many IT workers are already security-cleared as they work as government consultants.
Another gimmick?

As it's compared to the TA,and as an aside,would you consider serving in the TA if it weren't paid?
 
#2
Good idea. I've never understood why police don't pay the Specials. They are, after all, the police version of the TA etc. They take many of the same risks, so they should be properly compensated.
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#3
Random_Task said:
As it's compared to the TA,and as an aside,would you consider serving in the TA if it weren't paid?
Not much experience of the TA then R_T?
 
#4
The reasons for such a force have been well thought out as denoted by the statement:

We believe that more civilians with a telecoms or IT background could, if properly deployed, be an added asset in terrorist investigations."
Personnally i would rather have someone with a background in Forensics, Crime Scene Investigation or explosives, maybe just me being picky.
 
#5
Sixty said:
Random_Task said:
As it's compared to the TA,and as an aside,would you consider serving in the TA if it weren't paid?
Not much experience of the TA then R_T?
You're right,that question wasn't very well explained. Let me re-phrase,were one only paid whilst mobilised/for out of expense items associated with training (such as milleage) would there still be the same appetite to serve?

I'm curious as to if paying the specials, (and re branding),making them more like the TA,would have the desired effect.
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#7
Random_Task said:
Sixty said:
Random_Task said:
As it's compared to the TA,and as an aside,would you consider serving in the TA if it weren't paid?
Not much experience of the TA then R_T?
You're right,that question wasn't very well explained. Let me re-phrase,were one only paid whilst mobilised/for out of expense items associated with training (such as milleage) would there still be the same appetite to serve?

I'm curious as to if paying the specials, (and re branding),making them more like the TA,would have the desired effect.

To be fair I knew exactly what you meant but couldn't resist the dig at the TA's track record of paying people on time :D

To the question: Can only speak for myself but I certainly would not have been put off from joining as I don't do it for the money, negligible as it is. However across the board I'd think you'd see a reduction, especially from those who only show for the bounty.
 
#8
I know TA lads who often work unpaid and uncompensated to get the job done, on top of what they are paid to do. Sort of unpaid overtime.

dingerr said:
The reasons for such a force have been well thought out as denoted by the statement:

Quote
We believe that more civilians with a telecoms or IT background could, if properly deployed, be an added asset in terrorist investigations."

Personnally i would rather have someone with a background in Forensics, Crime Scene Investigation or explosives, maybe just me being picky.
Hmm. Let us think back to the Ian Huntley saga. Who was it that confirmed that the two girls were in his house at some point and that their mobile phone had "died" in his house?

Was it an Police Officer trained in

a. Forensics
b.CSI
c. explosives

or was it

d. an IT/Comms specialist with knowledge of the Celluar network?

Mobile phones - the new fingerprints

By Chris Summers
BBC News Online


Ian Huntley's conviction for the murder of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman was based partly on crucial mobile phone evidence - which nowadays is almost as useful to the police as fingerprints or DNA.

Jessica's mobile logged on to a mast at Burwell
Huntley was knowledgeable about some aspects of forensic science - such as analysis of fibres - but it was his ignorance about mobile phones that proved his undoing.


He was not alone in being unaware of how powerful evidence from cellular phone networks could be when it comes to proving where somebody was at a key moment.

In the past five years, dozens of murderers have been convicted partly as a result of evidence about their mobile phones or those of their victims.

Detectives now routinely contact the mobile phone networks and obtain details of phone calls made by and to a murder victim and from the prime suspects.

Trials featuring mobile phone evidence
Stuart Campbell (Dec 2002): Convicted of murdering Danielle Jones
Colm Murphy (Jan 2002): Convicted of Omagh bomb plot
Two juveniles (Apr 2002): Acquitted of murdering Damilola Taylor
Senthamil Thillainathan (Jun 2003): Convicted, along with two others, of killing a Tamil youth
Jack Whomes and Mick Steele (Jan 1998): Convicted of murdering three gangsters in Essex (but seeking appeal based on new mobile phone evidence)

The response varies from network to network.
This is the 21stC. Technology is here, and we need people who understand just like they needed people who understood bloods and fibres for forensics years ago.

Go to the peodo investigations. More geeks than you can shake a stick at, often not full police offiers.
 
#10
Chocolate Frog:

There are very few people out there who have the specialist level required to be of use and those that are on plenty of cash so would be unlikely to want a few extra beens for being a part time copper.

Also such investigations employ GCHQ and the intelligence services.

My point - the original piece about the requirement for TA style coppers is a short sighted, ill researched and random written piece of sh1te.
 
#12
dingerr said:
Chocolate Frog:

There are very few people out there who have the specialist level required to be of use and those that are on plenty of cash so would be unlikely to want a few extra beens for being a part time copper.

Also such investigations employ GCHQ and the intelligence services.

My point - the original piece about the requirement for TA style coppers is a short sighted, ill researched and random written piece of sh1te.
Random as in me or random as in the ST article?
 
#14
They don't need to know the full ins and outs of the technology. Just that it is there.

In reality, certainly for phone masts, it is usually the phone companies themselves that provide the info. To have a Police trained person who can understand the full ins and outs can't be bad.

Otherwise you wouldn't have explosive trained police.

Part Time Specials have often provided extra feet on the ground, something many people want back - not cameras for example. PCSOs are taking money out of the system, and not providing much in return. Specials have long not taken money, but given much.

The idea of paying Specials, who are fully trained Police anyway, instead of the ham strung pCSO is surely the way forward.

In the same way the Army benefits from teh TA bringing additional skill sets to play, so will the police.
 
#15
I had a friend who was a Special, she would work 9-5 in the office then don the uniform on a Friday night and relax by arresting chavs. i think its a great idea.

I joined the TA for the challenge and to serve my country, money did not come into it (buy it does help go towards buying kit).
 
#16
I was under the impression that these volunteer officers can't actually enforce the law but merely take notes and help people where possible...can they actually enforce the law like your average bobby?
 
#17
Zedd said:
I was under the impression that these volunteer officers can't actually enforce the law but merely take notes and help people where possible...can they actually enforce the law like your average bobby?
Special PC's have the same powers as a full time PC.
 
#18
How long before one of the gormless oiks in 'Bottler' Brown's government comes up with this as one of their good ideas?

Wouldn't it be fun if it was the awful little smirking prat who is never on time to have his photo taken, but gets it 'put in' after the event ? Can't remember his name and I have no intention of discovering it.
 
#20
dingerr said:
The reasons for such a force have been well thought out as denoted by the statement:

We believe that more civilians with a telecoms or IT background could, if properly deployed, be an added asset in terrorist investigations."
Personnally i would rather have someone with a background in Forensics, Crime Scene Investigation or explosives, maybe just me being picky.
ok, you're picky. In addition you are ill informed and obviously prone to typing prior to engaging your brain. There are numerous skill sets within the telecomms and IT field that could be brought to bear in a terrorist investigation. Just because you are too dim to think of them does not mean they do not exist
 

Latest Threads

Top