Police to lose 10,000 - Labour figure

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by goatbagthedruid, Feb 6, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. According to Auntie, Labour have suggested that there could be 10000 police front line losses. Now obviously this is Labour scaremongering but may suggest that the police need to look at other areas before cutting 'bobbies on the beat'.

    One area is logistics - there appears to be no approach to collective procurement - different forces have different vehicles for the same task, different uniforms etc. Understand the needs of certain areas but a coherent approach would save money (procuring from a catalogue of types which would allow better discounts to be obtained).



    Sent from my iPhone using ARRSE
    Twitter: @goatbagthedruid

    "When the going gets tough, the tough hide under the table"
  2. I dont know what the arrangements are in England and Wales, but Scotland has a single Scottish Police Services Authority which provides various support services including central procurement for some items. (And there is ongoing debate about force restructuring but that is another issue.) About SPSA - Scottish Police Services Authority

    Prior to the establishment of SPSA, a collective uniform purchase seems not to have been universally popular - perhaps not surprising at £24 per uniform - Police boycott ‘shoddy’ uniforms - Times Online.
  3. Got to do it..............surely its conservative figure
  4. If the police have the time and resources to produce cycling advice booklets, maybe they do have some room for making cuts!

    Police guide to ride a bike: don't forget the lemon curd and watch out for insects - Telegraph

    However I digress, lets not forget where these figures were compiled, by none other than Yvette Cooper/Balls and of course broadcast by our state broadcaster, both parties have an axe to grind with the government.
  5. Napoleon's fault playing the long game. When he kicked off we had one constable to every 14,000 citizens and even got to elect who it would be. We still have the power to take back the power of the people to appoint constables by holding parish elections.

    Anyway back to Napoleon. Across the water he sees a nation of shopkeepers. I don't know the ratio but let us say half a dozen shopkeepers to every constable. First he relies upon the tendency of HM Govts to exaggerate, or even invent, a threat so as to legislate repressive law and take power and freedom from the people. By the 1790s the govt was wanting to suspend habeus corpus (Oh like internment without trial and detention of suspects now then) and passed law like the Unlawful Societies Act.

    Freemasonry did get certain favours under that act but was in the govt spotlight for connections between Irish (Republican minded) freemasonry and English freemasonry. Secret societies were banned for fear of political conspiracy and of Napoleon's agents (perhaps initially cunningly introduced to lodges as Onion Johnnies). Masons were then constrained by law to only meet for charitable ends and to perform ritual dances in the belief they spiritually enlightened their members. Plus they had to register with the local Justices and avail a list of members and records of lodge proceedings. In 1939 the point was raised (In the traditional context of exaggerating a threat to legislate to deal with it) that all masonic lodges founded since 1799 were unlawful conspiracies under the 1799 act because its exemption provisions only applied to lodges then in existence. Flap flap went the senior mason's pinnies. And they suggested a new law saying they had not actually broken the law for 140 years. Govt decided they were too busy after all.

    Anyway back to Napoleon. "Aha" he thinks "The HM govt is passing laws even against the leather pinnie followers of Elias Ashmole. They fear the rise of republicanism. Win or lose I bet they go on to create a state police. And I bet the creation of such a burgeoning police will reflect the paranoia behind the Unlawful Societies Act. They will be Crown servants. That would preserve the balance of powers and the constitutional monarchy. Quite a good idea from the British point of view except one day the police will start referring to itself as a profession and introduce accelerated promotion for graduates and recruit selection by psychometric testing to choose dictatorial pratts. Then a private company will take de facto control and the police will become the cancer within the constitutional monarchy. One day they will even change their oath of office and be such gullible cnuts they think it makes sense. The only thing that might throw a spanner in the works of this state controlled cancer plod is economic cuts. And that could start the British off thinking why do we need one ploddie stormtrooper to every 400 of us when our forebears only had one to 14,000 and got to choose who it would be. That would be the day the British wake up to the fact that their monarch can never be merely a citizen of Europe. And the day when the Home Office groans as it would be in sight of being all powerful over the people through its state polizei only to see the people take power back to the Crown (the people and the monarch). That Home Office knows a thing or two about grabbing power. Introduce a concept like multiculturalism and then say its needs policing. A subtle variation on the usual external theme like Fenians under the beds and Hun agents all requiring an increase of police numbers and police powers."

    Napoleon had all this worked out. Hitler did a similar thing in his strategy of the coming man (rather revealing he had littkle concept of British double entendre humour). And we also fell for that twats long term plan. I refer of course to postwar education and industry and the cult of British management. A good job we have the Pakis here really as the education system is producing such fecking morons we couldn't raise enough sensible home grown folk able to run a retail enterprise. and maintain our tradition of being a nation of shopkeepers. The shelves would be unstocked whilst the twats are furrow browed over their Janet and John media studies course notes. And engineering no hope of recruiting people cos they all at university doing drama studies.

    So Sunday morning Arrsers I commend the use of Napoleon and Hitler as analytical tools. When you see a modern plod "Heil sergeant heil Home Office unter ze guise of respect for diversity ve vill racially type ze people", would Hitler like it ? Yes ? Then you know something is wrong. Similarly would Napoleon like those poor old masons being subjected to a repressive law all those years. Yes? Then you know something is wrong and you know you should be nice to masons cos they cannot help being social inadequates, attracted to state gestapo careers, whose self esteem relies on being able to keep a meaningless secret.

    Answer is now self evident put masons at the top of the list for police redundancy. Give em more time poncing around the lodge defying Napoleonic long term plan. The postwar education system is more problematic. We now don't have anyone who knows useful stuff to teach. But cutting police numbers is a good start. Too long it has been the fall back of the useless products of state education "I don't know anything so I better become a police officer".

    I see hope in this news that police numbers will be reduced.
  6. Are you on drugs? WTF was all that about?
  7. Well the BBC headline has already changed from 10,000 by 2012 to 10,000 by 2013. Will it slip another year or two before the day is out?

    Additionally as you say political spin, therefore probably a load of bollox.
  8. Apparently, Scotland will soon have a single police service. The Scottish gub'mint want to merge all eight forces into one. Needless to say, this has gone down like a BLT sandwich in a Mosque with all the Chief Constables who will lose their own little empires.

    In practice, a single Scottish force will probably be run by Strathclyde, which is one of the biggest in the UK - only the Met and possibly GMP have more officers. I predict Lothian and Borders police having a severe sense of humour failure should this take place...
  9. How many of these 10,000 are Police on suspensions/sickies/crap at their jobs who will just be pushed out? How may of them are GLBT/Pastafarian/Diversity/Tree hugger liaison officers?

    There are 142,363 Police in the UK and figures suggest on 10% are actually employed in front line duties. That would suggest a lot of fat that can be trimmed without touching the front line.

  10. What the hell is this?
  11. Am I the only one to feel a little peeved at the way this is being reported?

    It started off this morning with a report saying that Labour had calculated that up to 10,000 police would lose their jobs as a result of cuts. By lunchtime the headline read 10,000 police to be cut from operational frontline, as if the labour calculation were now fact.

    In my opinion this came about due to the unfair bias the BBC still lend to any comment made by Labour. They are still being treated by the general media as if they are in government and had not just brought the country to its knees by years of financial mismanagement resulting in the cuts in funding which had led to the dicscussion about laying off x amount of policemen in the first place.

    Regardless of how the cuts will be manifest on the police force as a whole and whether one agrees with the rights or wrongs of the case, this unfair and biased reporting is being employed constantly to make the tories the bad lads and make labour seem all warm, fluffy and cosy and is winding me up big style.

    I hasten to add its not just the BBC, Sky and even Yahoo have followed the same theme.
  12. Labour figure.
    No they don't. Not for at least another generation.
  13. The real question is what would Labour be doing if they were still in Government?
    I predict that we would be in similar straits to Greece/Ireland if we had another Brown led government probably with Balls as Chancellor, and that they would be trying to reduce spending without a plan, due to the constraints being placed upon us by the IMF and other lenders. Its all well and good making stories and feeding them to a supine and left wing supporting element of the press, its entirely another having coherent policies to cure the problems in our economy.
    As we saw with Labour's shadow Chancellor Johnson, there isn't much of a clue among the Labour front bench, apart from the odd defecit denier or 2.
  14. jim24

    jim24 Book Reviewer

    FFS is there anyone in this country that is retarded enough to believe anything Labour say