Police and Crime Commissioners

[mercurydancer 1,104]

I see Paddy Tipping has been elected to PCC of Nottinghamshire.

I live in Durham now where the very fragrant and totally incorruptible Ron Hogg has been reappointed. The equally snow white Barry Coppinger has been re-elected to PCC in Cleveland. *

I nearly gnawed off the corner of my keyboard about this.

Why do we need PCC? Police forces used to have a Chief Constable. Fair one. Now they have a Chief Constable, a Chief Executive Officer and a PCC. So who actually makes the decisions? Or does it end in a bureaucratic mess? I feel it is the latter.

Also, the PCC is a member and representative of a political party. Now this is surely a bias and introducing politics directly into policing. Its idealistic to say that politics was never a factor in policing, but this is a step too far.

This is a pig/trough interface. (Pun slightly intended) but in all reality, what to the PCC do? Very little.

*Both have been heavily involved in the Cleveland Police corruption scandal which was brushed under the carpet.

[radfordred 6,284]

Poor turn out in Nottingham think it was 22% Tony Bates got my vote

[LizzieM 9,514]

Well I voted and it was most definitely NOT for Paddy Tipping. A complete waste of money having a PCC but I will always use my Vote.

[FLY2 10,109]

My sentiments exactly. A complete waste of space, time and money.

[Rob.L 1,090]

PCCs aren't supposed to be politicial offices. In some places, the PCC has no political allegiance.

But, yes, they are a waste of money and only came about because the Police Authorities which preceded them were claimed to be ineffective. I think that someone in Westminster had been watching too many Batman films.

Same story with the idea that to get extra funding from central government, we have to have directly-elected "super mayors" who will have executive control over how councils can spend the money that the government will give them.

[barclaycon 569]

It is simply the civil service (who lets face it, are the power behind the throne of government) absolving themselves of responsibility for anything and everything.

They've created the role of 'police commissioners' so that they can take the flak for badly -funded incompetent police work where only 'major' crime is dealt with and un-important crime (like burglary) isn't.

Remember that idiot Sara Thornton - head of the National Police Chiefs' Council, coming on television and telling us that the police may no longer attend burglaries because they had to prioritise (!).

Must be nice to be on £250,000 a year and not have to do much. Certainly not tackle crime or protect the public - like the police are supposed to.

I'm afraid I have similar contempt for the appointment of Mayors in our major cities.

They are simply visible figure-heads who will add another layer of bureaucracy, cost us more in our Council Taxes and spend money on 'vanity' projects. They will get the blame when things go awry.

Everywhere you look the government is devolving decision-making and funding.

Whether it's police commissioners, mayors or school academisation.

They want to be in power, but they don't want to be responsible for anything.

There are plenty of takers too who don't mind become figureheads - providing of course they get paid an enormous salary.

I see that the government have done a U-turn on academies because they couldn't quite make it wash.

Primary school headteachers on a path to millionaire status for teaching kids how to pass exams (as opposed to 'educating' them).

[DJ360 6,733]

Broadly agree Barclaycorn but I may see it rather differently.

It's partly about simply shuffling responsibility off to local authorities etc., then starving them of funding and blaming then when it all goes pear shaped.

But it is also a lot to do with pushing public funds ( IOW our taxes) into private hands.

The answer of course is simple.

Stop voting Tory.

Col

[mary1947 2,086]

I think we are trying to be too much like America.

Paddy Tipping I would not even go out the house for, when he was on the council of Ashfield he voted for the football

pitchers down Wigwam Road Hucknall to be built on, he was supposed to be for the people of Hucknall not against them.

But first he agreed that they should be kept as football pitches what a turn around.

[philmayfield 6,187]

I didn't vote. I don't agree with the idea. Also the candidates were standing on political footings and I don't go with that.

[DJBrenton 738]

The problem is that unless you stand on a political footing, many people won't vote for you as the majority of votes gathered will be to parties rather than people. You're also less likely to get votes if you stand as an' unofficia'l Labour/Tory. So you get the situation where, whatever your beliefs, Paddy Tipping is already taking up the Labour slot so in order to get votes you'd need to get yourself onto the Tory ticket. For that reason it should not be allowed to campaign on a political ticket as it gives too much advantage to whoever a parrty supports.

Tony Harper and his twin brother are friends of mine, but how many people who voted for him, knew who he was? They voted for the man with 'Conservative' next to his name.

[FLY2 10,109]

I must admit that I voted for Tony Harper purely on the basis that he was a Tory. I don't see anything wrong with that as I'm sure 90% of voters do the same.

[Guest]

I don't live in the UK anymore... but I don't see labour as labour - and haven't done so for years.

[DJ360 6,733]

I don't live in Nottm anymore, so I can't comment on the individuals mentioned. I recognise that this site doesn't really like threads to go 'political', so I will try to make this my last political rant (in this thread... )

I agree that Police and Crime Commisioners can only really be seen as a Tory method of shifting blame from themselves to someone else, whilst continuing to cut funding. It's exactly the rsame thing that they are doing to all services in one way or another and people need to wake up to it.

Ian, I agree that Labour has changed but then so have the Tories. It all changed when Thatcher broke the long established 'consensus' politics between Lab and Con and set about destroying or flogging off much of our country's infrastructure and many of our institutions.

Labour have lurched from left to right and back again in the meantime, whilst the Tories have become increasingly right wing, malicious, authoritatarian and self seeking. It seems they will not stop until they have flogged off everything, including the Downing St cat, to their friends and co conspirators.

I have always been a committed democratic socialist. Mostly that means I've voted Labour because the alternative was too awful to contemplate. But, whoever promises and delivers a fairer, less grasping and more inclusive approach to running the country will get my vote. Those who only want to punish the poor and weak, and create division through lies and spin,while just flogging off all of the services and institutions which we have built up using our collective taxes and goodwill, for the sake of profit for the already wealthy, will never get my vote.

If people were to look at the facts, ( Constant Tory U turns, economic incompetence, withdrawal of funding from local Govt, yet loading it with more tasks and responsibilities, theft of public services and institutions, creeping NHS privatisation,lies about benefits and those on them, erosion of civil liberties and hard won trade union rights, etc., etc.) rather than the constant Corbyn/Labour bashing hysteria of Laura Kuenssberg and her ilk on the BBC, I doubt many would want to vote Tory. For example, their reporting of the election results yesterday was unbelievably biased and distorted. You'd have thought the Tories had won power in Scotland rather than just gaining a seat. And whilst Labour actually did better than many expected in England and Wales, Kuenssberg insisted on spending most of her time bashing Corbyn and speculating on his future. I like the bloke but I too despair at his apparent lack of political guile and 'nous'. However, the elections were about much more than him or his position and the reporting should have reflected that.

Kuenssberg failed to mention that the Tories had lost percentage vote all over the place and that Labour had gained overall. That was only shown briefly as a graphic after about an hour of bias and spin. This is not what I expect from the BBC.

Col

[barclaycon 569]

You've highlighted the poor quality of political reporting DJ.

These journos are over-opinionated, biased and don't seem to be very much in touch with the public mood.

They are supposed to be giving an 'informed' view, but they try to second-guess voters all the time.

Pigeon-holing them, badgering, even castigating people if they don't give a view in line with their own.

The suggestion that the Conservatives lost the London mayoral contest because of 'negative campaigning' isn't the case.

I live in London and I'm here to tell you that Zac Goldsmith lost because the voters didn't want another old Etonian from a rich family in power AND because he wasn't going to do anything about fares - which are ridiculous to say the least.

(£12 for a travelcard - commuters having to spend 20% of their salary on just getting to work).

Fares have more than doubled since Boris came to power.

He didn't do a great job as London mayor despite what they say.

Millions of pounds spent on things like bicycle highways, giving permission to constructors to bulid more and more luxury high-rise flats etc.

It's a more expensive, crowded, and unfriendly city and there doesn't seem to be a 'strategy' about anything.

I think the case in Scotland - where the Conservatives are now the opposition in their parliament (not just one seat), is that there are lots of Scots who recognise the danger of a one party state and don't take the SNP view that belligerence and hating the English is the way to go. More especially, the lack of Labour support is really because, as a party, they have nothing to say!

[NewBasfordlad 3,599]

Disagreeing with most of the left wing rhetoric I shall refrain from saying more.

[barclaycon 569]

Disagreeing is OK.

I don't think I've ever been accused of being left wing before though.

[The Engineer 614]

The important thing in a democracy is always to cast your vote - if only 22% turned out, the other 78% can't complain about the outcome.

I sincerely hope that turnout on 23 June for the EU referendum is significantly more than 22%. The result needs to reflect the desire of the majority of those eligible to vote, not just the majority of those who care to vote.

[Guest]

Why is it considered that a person who doesn't vote,isn't entitled to a say or an opinion?

Putting an X on a ballot paper is not a definitive expression of democracy by any means!!

Just gone through that farce here!...never again..it's just a game.

[The Engineer 614]

Of course everyone can form and hold an opinion on matters of importance and indeed should. That includes those who vote, those who don't (but could) and those who are not allowed to vote for whatever reason. That is quite different from complaining about the outcome of a ballot where one could have voted but choose not to. If an otherwise unknown person had stood for Notts. PCC and those 78% had voted for him, Mr T would now be unemployed.

[DJ360 6,733]

This thread is now discussing schoolboy level stuff.

The Engineer is right to argue that we should use our vote. And I have a lot of sympathy for the view that you really can't complain about the outcome of a ballot in which you were entitled to vote but couldn't be arsed. This is basic stuff.

ISTM that too many people have forgotten that the right for all to vote is barely 100 years old in this country and many many people died fighting for it.

People in many countries of the World do not get to vote at all. Many others only get to vote for bent poiticians in corrupt systems.

Our system is far from perfect, but better than most.

We squander it at our peril.

THE GROWTH OF UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM

TIMELINE 1265 Parliament established. It contains 2 chambers. One is 'the Lords' - unelected aristocrats. The other is 'the Commons'. These Members of Parliament (MPs) are smaller landowners and are elected only by male landowners.

1642-60 English Civil War. This is a war between the Parliament and the King for who has control of the state. King Charles I is executed and England is briefly a Republic. In 1660 the monarchy is returned, but it never regains its power. From now on, the Prime Minister, chosen by Parliament has the most influence.

1707 Act of Union unites England/Wales and Scotland. The United Kingdom is now formed.

1819 The Peterloo Massacre. A mass demonstration in favour of universal male suffrage is attacked by troops and 15 people are killed.

1832 Great Reform Act. Before this time only landowners could vote for MPs to sit in the House of Commons. This meant 1 in 7 men could vote. (440,000 people) After 1832 the male urban middle classes gain the vote, and so the electorate increases to 1 in 5 men (650,000 people).

1867 Second Reform Act. This extends the vote to the skilled urban male working class. The electorate increases to 1 in 3 men.

1884 Third Reform Act. The vote is now given to working class men in the countryside. The electorate is now 2 out of 3 men.

1918 Representation of the People Act. Almost all men over 21 years old, and women over 30 years old now have the vote.

1928Effectively all women and men over 21 now have the vote.

Post Script. 2016 Essentially everyone over 18 has the vote, but election turnout has declined from around 80% to 60% since WWII. It's all here:

http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm

Use it, or lose it.

Col

[Tompa 285]

I love reading all the comments posted by the armchair politicians. But in the end the politicians do as they want........ Democracy !!!! don't make me laugh, at the end of it all you have to accept what they do, and do as you are told.

The end result is staring you in face................. ( The state this country is in )

[FLY2 10,109]

I like it Tompa. Also, there is an earlier reference to people not voting for one reason or another. Well our forefathers fought long and hard to secure a secret voting system, and we should ALL use it. If you haven't used your vote then stop complaining!

[mick2me 3,033]

I wish I had the time to adequately reply to this topic

I dont even have the time to read all the replies!

But when I do!...

[FLY2 10,109]

We await with baited breath Mick.

[philmayfield 6,187]

Use the vote to democratically elect a government - yes definitely. In or out of Europe - yes as well. To have police and crime commissioners foisted upon us and expect me to vote for something that I didn't want in the first place - no way.