UK IMMIGRATION 2010 - THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH

In recent years the British people have been increasingly denied their democratic rights. On issue after issue, the views of the majority of British people have been ignored and overridden by politically correct elite with its own agenda. All this in a country that invented modern Parliamentary democracy.

On immigration, on capital punishment, on the surrender of British sovereignty to the EU and in numerous other areas, democracy has been eroded as politicians fail to offer the British people real choice on such vital issues.

We are owed that choice and we should restore and defend the basic democratic rights we have all been denied. More REAL democracy, not less, at national, regional and local levels is what is required.

Unchecked, mass immigration at the current level will mean that Britain will become a Third World nation well within two generations. All these facts point to the extinguishing of the British identity through immigration. Something must be done if the British people are to retain their homeland and identity.

We have compiled the facts about the scandal of UK immigration in our latest report. To view or download a copy, click here. This report should be read in conjunction with our previous report "The Disgraceful Truth of the Labour immigration Strategy" The latest report is also available in the "View Our Reports" sidebar on the right of this page.

The current unrestricted, uncontrolled immigration has led higher crime rates, demand for more housing, extra strain on the environment, traffic congestion, longer hospital waiting lists, lower educational standards, higher income tax, lower wages, high unemployment, a loss of British identity, a breakdown in community spirit, more restrictive policing, higher council taxes, a shortage of council homes, higher levels of stress and unhappiness and a fragmented community.

These are some of the consequences of uncontrolled immigration, a massive financial burden on the taxpayer that should be spend on UK solutions, a broken criminal justice system, prison overcrowding, a broken society with a rapidly eroding sense of national heritage and culture.

The problem of immigration has nothing to do with race, creed or culture.

It has everything to do with overcrowding and a politically motivated attempt by ministers to transform the fundamental make-up and identity of this country. The Government immigration strategy of ethnic cleansing was devised and implemented with the deliberate intention to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions.

It was done to destroy what it means to be culturally British and to put another 'multicultural' identity in its place. And it was done without telling or asking the British people whether they wanted their country and their culture to be transformed in this way.

6 KEY FACTS ABOUT IMMIGRATION

• A migrant now arrives nearly every minute.

• We must build a new home every six minutes for new migrants.

• England is already the most crowded country in Europe (except Malta)

• Immigration will add 7 million to the population of England in the next 20 years – that is the equivalent of 7 cities with the population of Birmingham.

• To keep the population of the UK below 70 million, immigration must be reduced by 75%. Government measures so far may reduce it by 5%.

Source http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/

THE COST OF IMMIGRATION

According to figures from the Office of National Statistics, immigrants send home about £4 billion a year in remittances back to their home countries. When this is added to the previously estimated cost of immigration to Britain of £8.8 billion, the grand total of £12.8 billion is reached.

Immigration costs Britain £12.8 billion per year: 10 times the NHS Deficit and 40% more than the foreign aid budget.

WHERE ARE WE HEADING?

Given current demographic trends, we, the indigenous British people, will become an ethnic minority in our own country well within sixty years – and most likely sooner.

All the signs are there:

• 84% of all current UK citizenship applications are from the Third World
• 14%of all primary school children do not have English as a mother tongue
• 316 primary schools in England have a majority of children whose first language is not English
• Non-indigenous births will soon account for more than half of all the babies born in Britain
• Over the next twenty five years, immigration will account for 40% of all new households in this country
• 3.7 million legal migrants have entered this country since 1997 – and 2.5 million are from outside the EU
• At least 20% of the currently resident population was either born overseas or are descendants of foreign-born parents.

According to the House of Commons Hansard entry for March 7 2009, there were 27,525 new citizenship applications being processed by the UK Borders Agency.

23,062 are from Third World nations

• 1,715 were born in the UK, applying for UK citizenship, and their parents’ country of origin is not stated
• 269 of these applications are from people born inside the European Union1904 are from traditionally majority European countries which are outside the EU
• 361 applications are from South Africa, of which the majority is likely to be of European or British origin.

The breakdown of the countries of origin of these applicants is contained in the report.

SIR ANDREW GREEN of Migrationwatch on immigration comments:
"In the past 10 years we have seen a massive increase in immigration to the UK. Together with Holland, we are now the most crowded country in Europe, and the increase in our population is putting pressure on our primary schools, our maternity wards and our housing. The EU’s expansion to the east has brought around 500,000 extra people to the UK, but in the long term the issue will be with people arriving from the rest of the world — from Asia, Africa and the Far East. There are clearly some cultural and economic benefits from immigration, but there is no question that the failure of the government’s immigration policy over the past 10 years has played directly into the hands of right-wing extremists like the BNP, whose strongest card is the chaos of the immigration system and the way in which working-class areas are being changed beyond recognition. We are at a turning point, and it is for the main political parties to decide whether they are going to adopt serious immigration policies and take the sting out of the extremists or continue to hide away from the issue." June 1, 2009

IMMIGRATION AND CRIME

Take a look at the foreign nationals in our prisons:

Population in prison by nationality – 30th June 2009

• All nationalities 83,454
• British nationals 71,231 85%
• Foreign nationals 11,350 14%
• Not recorded 874 1%

The Foreign National Prison Population is represented by :

• Africa 2,897 3%
• Asia 2,456 3%
• America 302 0.36%
• N America 137 0.16%
• Europe 3,617 4%
• Middle East 595 1%
• Oceania* 52 0.06%
• W Indies 1,289 2%
• Other 5 0.01%

*(Australia, New Zealand, Fiji) (We have the numbers by individual country).

14% of our prison population is foreign nationals. The Prison Service states that each prisoner is housed at a tax payer cost of £30,000 per year. That is a staggering total of £340,500,000 per year.

If these foreign criminals were returned to their country of origin, this would solve the prison overcrowding problem, and empower our courts to impose correct sentences for UK offenders who, all too often get away with a judicial slap on the wrist. Issues associated with immigration add further massive burdens on our police and judicial system, not only in financial terms (including the many millions required to provide interpreter services), but also with regard to the additional crime committed by this sector of the community.

There are those that say (including certain diversity obsessed Chief Officers of Police), that crime has not risen disproportionately when measured against the population increase. HOGWASH! The fact remains, that these are additional crimes committed by visitors to this country, who abuse the hospitality and generosity extended to them. At the moment, the criminal fraternity, including the law breaking element of the foreign national community is laughing at the farce of British justice.

Immigration is way out of control. Britain’s population is now over 60 million and rising. Not only is Britain increasingly overcrowded, but a country is the product of its people, and if you change the people you inevitably change the nature of the country.

CORRELATION BETWEEN CRIME AND IMMIGRATION

When key criminal justice and immigration facts for England and Wales are compared alongside each other, the picture becomes clear. The net migration figure (the inflow less the outflow) has more than doubled in the last ten years.

Recorded crime has reduced, however as we have reported from these pages previously, in the article "Top Cops Are Fiddling The Crime Figures" recorded crime statistics can no longer be given any credence.

The increased prison population is a measure of the success of our front line police officers. The startling statistic, supporting our view that immigration has a major impact on crime, is the percentage of prisoners that are foreign nationals. This figure has stood at 14% for 5 years, having doubled since labour came to power, costing the taxpayer a staggering £1.7 Billion across the period.

Whilst not included in this report, we have compiled the recorded crime, police strength, population growth, prison population and foreign national and immigration statistics for the 12 years of Labour Government. The composite picture when all the statistics are viewed together is a sad indictment on how they have decimated the social fabric of our nation.

CONCLUDING COMMENT

The latest report contains the recommendations of Migration Watch and Balanced Migration, the two main apolitical organisations responsible for so much of the excellent information collated over recent years.

We want Britain returned to the way it has traditionally been. Britain always will have ethnic minorities and most have no problem with this as long as it does not change nor seek to change the fundamental culture and identity of the indigenous majority.

The current unrestricted, uncontrolled situation has contributed to higher crime rates, increased pressure on the police and criminal justice system, prison overcrowding, a demand for more housing, an extra strain on the environment, traffic congestion, longer hospital waiting lists, lower educational standards, higher income tax, lower wages, high unemployment, a loss of British identity, a breakdown in community spirit, more restrictive policing, higher council taxes, a shortage of council homes, higher levels of stress and unhappiness and a fragmented community.

A measure of immigration and cultural diversity is indeed good for a country. Sadly, the immigration strategy of the Labour Government had nothing to do with enhancing British culture and society by broadening the mix. It was implemented for perverse political reasons that risk the destruction of its defining character altogether.

Other countries would not tolerate millions of immigrants taking over their society and miminising the value of its tradition, heritage and culture. Japan would not do it; China would not do it; India would not do it; Pakistan would not do it – so why should Britain?

Each nation has the right to maintain its own traditional culture and identity. The right of India to remain Indian, the right of China to remain Chinese, the right of Pakistan to remain Pakistani and the right of Saudi Arabia to remain Saudi does not mean that any of these nations have to “hate” anybody else. All it means is that they wish to preserve their identity and national existence.

This is all we want for Britain – the right to be British and the right to openly celebrate events like Christmas that we have celebrated for centuries, without fearing the imaginary offence this might cause.

Is this such an extreme request? Is this so unreasonable? – NO! In fact, it is perfectly normal and completely in line with the rights granted to every other nation and in accord with international law.

POLICE SHOOTING Watch The Video BEFORE You Read all the text.

POLICE SHOOTING Watch The Video BEFORE You Read all the text. Watch the video first - two or three times if you want - THEN read the text below.... DONT LOOK UNTIL YOU WATCH THE VIDEO!

You have to watch this one several times. But please remember the cops had to act in real time. THE SUSPECT DOES GET SHOT BY A POLICE OFFICER. This is for real.

*DO NOT scroll down and read until you see the video!

Watch the video and what do you see? Officers ordering the suspect to put the assault rifle down and it appears he is complying and then he is shot!

Is that what you see?

Want to know what it is like to work the streets and what risks you face daily?

Watch the video again and watch the suspect's right hand while he places the rifle down with his left hand. What you don't see, but the officer behind the suspect does see, is the suspect pulling a hidden handgun from his rear pants with his right hand. Watch as the bad guy goes down, the handgun is still in his right hand. Just a reminder - what you think you see at first does not always tell the truth. Watch it again, and learn!

Then pass this on to EVERYONE on your email list so they can do the same. Its time Mr Citizen and the press has a better understanding of why this guy REALLY got shot not to mention the cops laying their lives on the line...

CONSERVATIVE PROMISE - IN A NUTSHELL

Following on from the rousing Conservative party conference in Manchester last week, here, in a nutshell, are a selection of observations, quotes and pledges from the speeches of David Cameron and Chris Grayling on the plans they have to reform the Criminal Justice System. 

• Criminals aren't caught because the police are stuck at desks doing paperwork.
• Violent offenders, sex offenders and heroin dealers get off with cautions because it’s the least hassle.
• Even if they go to prison, the Government releases them automatically after a fraction of their sentence to reoffend on the same streets as before.
• People think our criminal justice system is broken.
• Worrying too much about the criminals and not enough about the justice.
• It makes me furious. It makes you furious. And law abiding, decent, people are asking - who’s looking after me?
• That’s why need radical reform in every part of the system. The police. The CPS. The courts. Prisons. Probation. We need to sort it out, so there's no more excuses, no more buck-passing, no more nonsense. We need a criminal justice system that is focused on fighting crime and that is exactly what we plan to deliver.
• No one thinks that the Government’s 24 hour drinking regime has led to the creation of a “continental café culture.
• We’re not talking about stopping people enjoying a few drinks in the pub. But things have gone far too far. Our town centres on a Friday and Saturday night can be battle zones for our police. Local parks and local estates are blighted by gangs of young troublemakers…. fuelled by alcohol given to them by irresponsible adults.
• I have talked to people up and down the country whose lives are being ruined by antisocial behaviour. It’s time we stood up for them.
• We’ll start with the problem of fourteen year olds hanging around with bottles of super-strength beers or ciders. It’s much too easy for them to get very drunk quickly and cheaply.
• We will increase the price of a four pack of super strength lager by £1.33. We will more than double tax on super strength cider. And our planned increase on alcopops will raise the price of a large bottle by £1.50. These tax changes will not hit responsible drinkers.
• We’ll tear up this Government’s lax licensing regime. Right now virtually anyone can get a licence to sell alcohol. We even have all night takeaways selling more drink to people as they stagger home from the pub. We will change that.
• We’ve also got to deal with those who commit the acts of antisocial behaviour and disorder as well. Right now they can offend again and again and just get away with it.
• Our criminal justice system is sending all the wrong messages. We need real punishments for young troublemakers. Not to send them home with a rap over the knuckles. That’s why we are working on a range of instant punishments for antisocial behaviour.
• Like grounding the offenders for up to a month. Or making them do community punishments, like cleaning up local parks. Real consequences for the trouble they’ve caused. But that’s for low level offences.
• For the more serious incidents, things must be different. We were all shocked by the tragic case of Fiona Pilkington. But let’s be clear. What happened to her wasn’t antisocial behaviour. It was criminal.
• Giving someone a caution or a fixed penalty notice means box ticked, case closed, another solved crime. But we know the system is being misused.
• But when serious offenders, like people carrying knives, also get off with a caution, when they should be behind bars.
• I think anyone who assaults a police officer should end up in court facing time behind bars.
• It’s time for a new deal with our police. We’ll deal with the things that frustrate them. We’ll get rid of the mountains of bureaucracy that make it easier to cut corners. We’ll provide them with proper protection against violence. We’ll get rid of the target culture that makes it easier to issue a caution than to prosecute. And we’ll give them back more power to charge criminals themselves.
• But in return we want real action against the troublemakers. And we want them to be more accountable to the communities they serve. The next Conservative Government will get rid of Britain’s caution culture. And will demand real moves to tackle antisocial behaviour. It’s time justice was really done on our streets.
• We will tear down Labour's big government bureaucracy, ripping up its timewasting, money-draining, responsibility-sapping nonsense.
• The police, the prosecution services, the prisons … is failing under the weight of big government targets and bureaucracy. The police aren't on the streets because they're busy complying with ten different inspection regimes.
• The police say the CPS isn't charging people because they have to hit targets to reduce the number of unsuccessful trials.
• And the prisons aren't rehabilitating offenders because they're focused on meeting thirty three different performance indicators.
• This all needs to change. I'm not going to stand here and promise you a country where nothing bad ever happens. I do not underestimate how difficult it will be to deal with this problem of crime and disorder.
• We cannot rebuild social responsibility from on high. But the least we can do the least we can do is pledge to all the people who are scared, who live their lives in fear and who can't protect themselves, that Chris Grayling, with Dominic Grieve, will reform the police, reform the courts, reform prisons.
• I see a country where you're not so afraid to walk home alone, where you're safe in the knowledge that right and wrong is restored to law and order.
• But if we pull together, come together, work together — we will get through this together.
• And when we look back we will say not that the government made it happen … not that the minister made it happen … but the businesswoman made it happen … the police officer made it happen … the father made it happen …the teacher made it happen.

You made it happen.

 

Right now it seems that the Conservatives are closest to the real issues and have the desire to bring about the reforms that are essential if we are to enjoy a more peaceful society. The message we would send out to whichever party is elected at the next election is this. Show us that you have learned from the lessons, mistakes and errors of judgement of the past. Waste no time on party policital spin, we've had a belly full of it. Ditch the blame culture once you have cleared the decks. Show us the truth about the state of the Criminal Justice System as it stands now, then waste no time on blame, show us with your actions that you are healing the wounds inflicted on this country over recent years. Then you will have our blessing, support and confidence. 
 
One last thing. There will be sectors of society waiting for you to trip up. Show us your guts and determination to succeed for us all. Don't give them the ammunition to shoot you. There will be those who will accuse you too, of having your noses buried deeply in the trough. Be aware of that. Act with transparency and honesty so that we will not feel our trust is misplaced.   
 
The Crime Analysis Team
Nice 1 Limited
 
 

CRIMINAL JUSTICE FARCE

A man has been charged with causing criminal damage to two hamburgers worth £5 after an alleged doorstep dispute with a fast food firm.

Stephen Morgan, 31, of South Wales, underwent a police grilling after he was arrested and taken from his home in handcuffs at the weekend.

He is due appear at Swansea Magistrates' Court, in south Wales, next Monday.

Morgan was at home in Culfor Road, Loughor, near Swansea, with partner Michelle Owen on Saturday evening.

The couple, who have two children, planned to stay in and watch ITV1's The X Factor with other family members.

A dispute is alleged to have started after an order of food with a local pizza parlour arrived minus two hamburgers.

Mr Morgan claims it was agreed the group should wait for the rest of the order, he told the South Wales Evening Post.

A dispute is alleged to have started with a delivery man who came to the house later, and £15 compensation was eventually paid out, he claims.

Police visited the address later that evening and arrested Mr Morgan on suspicion of robbery. He was taken to Swansea Central police station where he was questioned about the incident and held overnight.

A South Wales Police spokesman confirmed that a 31-year-old man was arrested on Saturday evening and has since been charged with causing criminal damage to food valued at £5.

COMMENT

Yet another example of the farcical abuse of the Criminal Justice System and complete and utter waste of police and judicial resources. C'mon Mr Johnson get it sorted for crying out loud!!! Ah well, at least the Home Office auditors will be pleased they got another detection.

HAGUE WARNS AGAINST TORY COMPLACENCY

William Hague delivered a powerful first day speech at the Conservative Party Conference in Manchester today.

To download the full speech click here.

Mr Hague said Labour would run a "wholly negative" campaign characterised by smears and playing on people's fears.

He told the Conservative Party conference that if Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, won the election "the last traces of hope and optimism and confidence about our national future would drain away".

Despite the opinion poll leads and local election successes, senior Conservatives have been careful to avoid sounding as if the general election was already won.

Mr Hague, effectively the Tories' deputy leader, said: "Whatever our successes and however much the country cries out for change, we must never allow one morsel of complacency to creep in to our campaign.

"We must be conscious that the system is stacked against us - that Labour only have to draw to win a majority in the House of Commons but we have to win by some two million votes to do the same.

"We must be conscious too that this election, as we saw in Brighton last week, will bring forth from Gordon Brown's Labour a wholly negative campaign - barricaded in the Downing Street bunker they will fling any dirt, stoke any fear, spread any smear and peddle any distortion to scare people into thinking that change is dangerous, honesty frightening, and the fresh air of new leadership actually poisonous for the people of Britain.

"This campaign will have ups and downs, it will have moments of difficulty, when we will need to keep our nerve, calm our friends, and make sure that we always march in step towards the goal of a better government for our country."

After the Prime Minister's conference speech last week, in which he reeled off a list of Labour's achievements, Mr Hague gave his own version detailing the Government's failures on public finances, crime and health.

He mocked Mr Brown over the "goats" that joined - and subsequently left - the Government of All the Talents.

"The arrival of a string of ministers from outside politics - Lord Malloch-Brown, Lord Darzi, Lord Digby Jones, was hailed by Gordon Brown as showing it was a Government of All the Talents.

"It turned out they were so talented that after working with him for a short time they left, and so we now have a Government of All the Talents with all the talents taken out of it."

Mr Brown and his Government "do not possess the quality of honesty, directness, decision-making and leadership necessary to make this country great and successful again".

Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, who Mr Hague said had given "new meaning to the word chumps", was singled out during an attack on the Government's lack of accountability.

"The Prime Minister nobody ever elected has been kept in office by a deputy nobody in the country had voted for at all, making up a Government with the least moral or democratic authority to govern in our lifetime."

COMMENT

Very persuasive Mr Hague. The fear the British public will have is how long the commitment to transparency and honesty will last once in office. The country will be looking for the next Government to prove by their actions that they will deliver on their plan. We have read the Conservative Plan for Social Reform (see links opposite & previous posts). The proposals for change will be challenging and require a courageous and committed team to implement them.

The priciples are sound. Should the Conservatives be successful at election time, we only hope that they will not provide the opposition and the public with the same ammunition for doubt, suspicion and ridicule that Mr
Brown and co have evidenced diring their rule.

We look forward to Chris Graylings' speech on Law & Order at 11.15am on Wednesday 7th October. We hope to see that Messrs Cameron & Grayling have a firm grasp of what is needed to fix the broken Criminal Justice System in this country and evidence that they will deliver the transparent and honest solutions so badly needed.

Over the coming weeks and months, where gaps in the Law & Order strategy seem evident, reports and communications will be posted directly to Mr Grayling from this site.

To see the full agenda for the Conservative Conference click here

The Crime Analysis Team

Nice 1 Limited

ARE YOU READY FOR THE TRUTH ABOUT POLICING IN THE UK?

One of the better police blogs is http://200weeks.police999.com/ which burst into life on September 9th 2005. The site was created by a rEgular police officer who has dedicated his life to the force and area that he serves.

In his own words, the site author has spent his entire life "in the trenches" as a front line officer. In February 2009, the author hung up his boots and truncheon, and after 30 years service, became a civilian in his police force control room, a vantage point from where he is able to continue his insightful reports on policing as it really is in the UK today.

A prolific and intelligent writer, "200" posts regular articles that provide an honest and informed view of the challenges that face police officers in their attempts to deliver a fair system of justice, despite an ever increasing burden of bureacuracy and idiotic procedures.

The articles reprinted below are two fine examples from "200" of real world of policing in Britain in 2009.

NOT IMPORTANT ENOUGH

The dreadful case of Fiona Pilkington whose life was blighted by anti social youths on her estate to such an extent that she took her own child’s life & committed suicide by setting fire to her car as they sat in it, will have some far-reaching repurcussions. The surprise is that, in the two years since this tragic event happened, there has been just about zero change in the way police deal with anti-social behaviour.

I spend every late shift in every town I control not sending police officers to anti social youths. This is despite the fact that I know what an effect it can have on people’s lives let alone their peace. I’m almost ashamed to say but I have anti social behaviour in my street & I never report it to the police, the reason purely & simply is, I know there is little chance of the police arriving before the youths have moved on. If it’s gotten too bad I have gone out there myself & given some ‘advice’, though I don’t like doing this in my own street. (I tend to climb over my back fence & appear from somewhere not near my house so they don’t know where I live).

The apalling crux of the matter is one of mathematics. We have X-amount of officers & we get Y-amount of jobs which take Z-amount of time. When Y x Z > X we cannot possibly get to all the jobs on time, if at all. We either have to make people wait, in some cases days, or we just don’t go.

The problem with antisocial behaviour is that it doesn’t fit in with any targets & we don’t get to tick any boxes. When Jay sends a text message to his ex-girlfriend Leah saying she’s a slag, that’s threats to violence or damage, malicious communications or a domestic, all of which are recordable & may result in a detected crime. When Mrs Miggins is fed up to the back teeth with a bunch of teenage yobs who spend every night shouting & swearing outside her bedroom & pissing up against her fence, that’s just a bit of ASB. Guess which one gets an officer sent to it whether they want one or not & which one gets closed off 2 hours after the youths have gone elsewhere with a ‘no officer available’ closing.

Mrs Pilkington did not have the protection afforded to certain groups within society. Had she been black or Asian, Jewish or gay, she would have had an officer every single occasion she phoned. There are teams within each police force whose sole job it is to look at ‘hate’ crimes against minority groups. I well remember a case of some kids throwing snowballs at a Jewish shop, on a day when the kids were throwing snowballs at everyone & anyone & we didn’t have the resources to deal with all the accidents & crime let alone kids chucking snowballs. Most of the snowball jobs just got closed off because there was absolutely no chance of us sending anyone; we had more important & immediate things to do. The Jewish shop had to remain open because the racism word had been mentioned. Within an hour the Inspector in charge of the diversity unit was on the phone to the control room inspector demanding to know why this racist incident hadn’t been assigned within the 1 hour requirement of force policy.

Nobody phoned up from any police unit who sit on their arses looking at logs in some office somewhere at HQ on behalf of all the other people being taunted by kids with snow. The fact that Mrs Pilkington had a disabled daughter, much of which taunting was aimed at, doesn’t seem to have cut any ice with the local constabulary.

I’ve blogged before about the unfairness of diversity policy & have argued that everyone should be treated on their own merits only. It completely baffles me that, for instance, a 6′6 Afro-Caribbean nightclub bouncer with years in the nighttime entertainment trade, who gets called a rude name is entitled to a better service than a vulnerable teenage girl who may be, unknowingly to us, considering suicide because of some bullying. How can a rule written on a policy somewhere at police HQ possibly differentiate between the effect on these two people & class one as somehow more deserving of a higher response than the other. Where is the leeway to attend based on the individual potential effect on the victim?

Just occasionally, someone will come up with a local operation to target antisocial behaviour. Extra resources will be called in & they will be tasked for ASB jobs alone, unavailable for RTCs, assaults or domestics. This is a clear acceptance of the importance of tackling such behaviour, but if it is important, why isn’t important all the time & on every estate.

Antisocial behaviour is the key to so many more problems in society. Someone who grows up not having consequences for their behaviour will learn that they are entitled to do what they want, when they want, to whom they want. They will grow up with a me, me, me attitude & will spend the rest of their lives demanding everything they can get. A child who grows up to respect other peoples needs & rights will end up as net givers to society.

When I was on the street I actually enjoyed helping to make other people’s lives a little better. One of the reasons I wanted to join the police was to help people who couldn’t help themselves. I held that belief until the day I retired. I still believe it. I am unable to do it because I do not have the resources nor the will from those who run the show to sort the matter out.

After the story of Mrs Pilkington, I will be wondering if the next job I fail to send an officer to will end up with someone murdering their child & topping themselves. That’s simply not fair & I don’t have the power to address it properly.

Time will tell whether the fallout from Mrs Pilkington will make any difference.

AND SO IT GOES . . . .


Twenty years ago Mrs Pilkington would have had a much better service than she got in the years leading up to 2007. There were many thousands less police officers. In March this year there were 144,000 police officers. In March 1987 there were 120,000.

We have 24,000 more police officers yet those available for front line policing have been slashed dramatically. I don’t have access to any figures for the amount of officers available for day-to-day policing calls so I can only go by my own experience. In 1987 one division I worked in paraded 18 officers split between 4 police stations. This did not include 3 rural cars which covered the villages, 1 officer in every neighbourhood beat & a rural officers who shared all the villages between them. We put out 9 patrol cars in the division plus a walker in each of the town centres & the police stations were open 24 hours a day.

Now those same 4 towns have a maximum of 8 officers between them, we are lucky if they can put out 5 cars in the whole division, all of the police stations are closed longer than they are open.

Back in the day the village bobby lived on the patch & knew everyone & everything there was to be known. He probably looked after 2 or 3 villages. Every estate had a neighbourhood officer who lived on their patch, they often had a little police office attached to their house, they too knew everyone, they were a vast source of information. What they knew & what they did couldn’t be recorded in an exel spreadsheet yet their value to policing was enormous.

Then someone in a wendy house somewhere decided that the only way to measure the success of an organisation was to match its performance against a written down set of criteria & the way to do this was to count beans. Suddenly, the value of everything was measured in beans & rural/neighbourhood officers didn’t grow any beans on their patches. Add to that the fact that they lived in expensive police houses.

The theory went that if you did away with neighbourhood & rural officers not only could you pull them all back to the nick where they could produce a few beans, you could also save the expense of maintaining their houses, sell them off & plough lots of lovely lolly into all the new & dynamic projects which were about to hit the world of UK policing. We lost a generation of intelligence which we are only now getting back, amazingly enough, through local PCSOs, who will, within a few years, be just as valuable a tool to police intelligence as the old village bobby.

It made good political – read voting – sense to increase the number of bobbies, so every government promised more. More bobbies means more votes ‘cos we all want more bobbies on the streets, only they never made the streets. They all went into disparate little ‘remit’ teams. You know the teams, they are the ones you ask for help when you’re struggling to meet all the frontline priorities who turn round & say “sorry, mate, not my remit”.

So we had the burglary squad, set up to specifically target burglary beans, the robbery squad busy collecting robbery beans, sexual offences squad, paedophile squad, computer crime squad, diversity squad, more officers means more potential for naughty goings-on so the rubber heel squad was boosted. We had the serious crime units, the bloody serious crime units, organised crime, it goes on. Then there are the units who monitor the other units, who count the beans, who supervise those who count the beans, who make sure the right beans are being counted.

So every time an Inspector of Constabulary comes a-calling & says, “now look here Mr Chief Constable, your force is doing particularly low in detections of spanner-wielding credit-card thieves” we have to have a department whose soul aim is to reduce spanner-wielding credit card thefts.

The problem for those on the front line is that most of the calls we get don’t lead to all the remit-beans. Nobody measures the prevention of crime, nobody measures kids who piss up your garage & chuck eggs through your windows, nobody measures depressed people who threaten suicide but never go through with it. You don’t get a bean for sitting outside a row of shops stopping the kids from spitting at people with special needs.

And if they’re not measured, they’re not important.

If the next Inspector of Constabulary comes round & says “Now look here Mr Chief Constable, the behaviour of teenage yobs in this area is apalling, this chart shows a 150% increase in bad language in front of old ladies, get it sorted” you’ll have so many shiny-arses out of their offices that the problem could be sorted in a year.

It ain’t gonna happen, though.

COMMENT

The authors of this site have been contacted by senior politicians who are capable of introducing effective criminal justice reforms. They tell us that they are interested and paying regular attention to the content on these pages. Whilst the statistical analysis contained in the reports from these pages is our work, the majority of the real life experiences are inspired by or drawn from people at the coal face of British policing, such as the author of the 200 site, Inspector Gadget, PC Bloggs and others contained in the "Thin Blue Line" links opposite.

To the politicians, Home Office civil servants and senior officers that may read these pages, we would invite you to spend some time reading some of the enlightening articles contained on these and other front line policing sites. Be prepared to confront the real world head on through these pages. We invite you to step out of your environment for a while, so that you may empathise with the challenges and obstructions faced by the front line officer. The content is an often colourful, honest view of the framework within which our guys at the coal face of society perform their increasingly difficult duty.

Listening is not enough. Take what you hear to heart. Then take the effective action only you are empowered to take, to make the necessary reforms that may ultimately restore public confidence in the Criminal Justice System that should be the bedrock of a decent, peaceful society.

We know the challenge is a difficult one that will require all your reserves of courage and direct thought. We know it involves accepting openly and honestly that mistakes have been made. Only by applying this level of honesty and transparency in any reforms you consider are appropriate, will your efforts bear the fruit in transforming society.

Britain is broken. You have the power to fix it. Cut through the distractions and obstructions that have plagued modern policing. Let us hear less of the minority projects and more of firm and effective use of police resources. Show us evidence that our taxes are being well spent, that the ratio of frontline officers actually available for real policework, dramatically exceeds those tied up counting beans, creating flow charts and ivory tower projects to justify the perpetuation of departments crammed with wasted resources.

Spend our money wisely. Show us the real value we deserve to see. You will find you have a much greater degree of public support and confidence from the wider public than you may have imagined.

We hope to see evidence of your efforts very soon.

The Crime Analysis Team
Nice 1 Limited

FIONA PILKINGTON - SOCIETY WITH A BROKEN MORAL COMPASS

The tragic story of the suicide of Fiona Pilkington and her daughter Francesca shocked the nation this week. Media attention returned to the events of that fateful day, following an inquest earlier this week when a coroners inquest ruled that police inaction had contributed to their deaths.

Years of torment from young neighbors led the despairing single mother to kill herself and her disabled daughter. Fiona Pilkington, 38, and her 18-year-old daughter, Francecca Hardwick, died when Ms Pilkington set fire to their car in Leicestershire in October 2007.

The ringleaders of a gang of children that terrorised Fiona and her daughter continue to be a menace in the area, the court heard. The children, who have virtually no parental control, are said to remain the root cause of antisocial behaviour on the street where they tormented Fiona and her severely disabled daughter, Francecca, for almost ten years. Fiona Pilkington suffered more than a decade of abuse from a gang of youths who terrorized her family by urinating on her house, taunting her developmentally challenged daughter and beating her severely dyslexic son. The family lived for more than 10 years under siege. A 16-strong gang of yobs regularly pelted Fiona’s house with eggs, they set fences on fire, pushed fireworks through the front door and taunted Francecca.

Most of us will never understand the mentality of feral yobs who stalk our streets. Though we’ve seen enough examples of lawlessness to know these knuckle-trailing neanderthals exist in increasing numbers and have utter disregard for the norms of a polite, civilised society.

Undoubtedly, the Leicestershire force will remain under the spotlight as a result of the crtiticism levelled against them. Time will reveal the degree of responsibility they must accept for the tragic events.

Superintendent Steve Harrod told the inquiry how low-level anti-social behaviour is now a local council’s responsibility. And the objective of British justice is to avoid criminalising young people.

COMMENT

Not so many years ago low-lives looking for trouble would have been hauled before courts or had the living daylights scared out of them by coppers determined to keep their beat problem-free. Now yobs tear up Asbos and mock authority. They consider the law a joke and who can blame them? While vile thugs circled Fiona’s family like wolves baying for blood her local force stand accused of doing nothing.

If the police were negligent in their duty, then those responsble should be identified and the appropriate action taken to prevent further similar occurrences involving vulnerable members of society.

The root cause of the problem though is symptomatic of policing in the UK in 2009. In exploring why the police might have failed in their duty it is essential to look beyond the front line officers who attended or dealt with calls.

The current state of the police is not the fault of good officers who want to do a proper job but are hamstrung by the burdens of paperwork and successive Government legislation, the latest being the excessive number of new offences brought in during the last twelve years by this Government.

Due to politically motivated control, bureaucracy and cost, the entire criminal justice system is corrupted from the top downwards starting with the treasury who hold the purse strings, and the Home Office who are allegedly in charge of policing.

Literally thousands of articles and posts echoing these sentiments have proliferated online forums during recent years. They can't all be wrong. There is something radically amiss with police priorities and modus operandi but, much more pertinently, they and the politicians are fully aware of it. There are plenty policemen and women imbued with moral integrity and sound motives. There are many police blogs where officers attempt to convey this very message to the public they serve.

Whichever Government is in charge, there needs to be an urgent and comprehensive review of policing in the UK and fast.

The sad case of Fiona Pilkington and her family are symptoms of a society whose moral compass is badly broken. It can be fixed but the repair work required needs to be more than the cosmetic surface level damage. A previous post from this site talked of the spoiled society, where some sectors of the younger generation are badly in need of a firm hand with a return to back to basics discipline and control. click here to read the article

If the Government are to start the task of fixing our society, then surely there is no better place to start than here. By instilling some firm handed forgotten disciplines within the "spoiled sector" of our youth, there will at least be a glimmer of hope that the UK may once again be a pleasant, less threatening place to live.


The Crime Analysis Team
Nice 1 Limited

IN SUPPORT OF INSPECTOR GADGET

http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/

Inspector Gadget is a real life senior police officer, fed up with the fiasco of manipulated crime figures & detections, mountains of paperwork that keep his team off the streets doing the job they love (locking up the bad guys), and all the crazy, politically correct nonsense and bureaucracy that is thwarting the delivery of justice in this country. For the first time ever, a senior policeman – writing under an assumed name for fear of exposure – breaks ranks to tell the truth about the collapse of law and order in the UK.

Anyone who has taken the trouble to read his book, "Perverting the course of justice" will have detected that the man behind it and his long running, extremely popular blog, cares a great deal about the standard of policing the tax payer receives.

With access to statistics about frontline police strength (much lower than you think), exclusive inside information on the political targets and interference which are bedevilling officers and detailed analysis of the lies politicians and senior police officers tell, his explosive book and blog reveals how bad things really are.

THE TRUTH THE HOME OFFICE DON'T WANT YOU TO HEAR

Make no mistake, the truth of policing and the Criminal Justice System in the UK in 2009, make for a truly sad indictment of how low this country has sunk in its self destructive pursuit of all things politically correct.

There is a delicate balancing act involved in a country that promotes civil liberties and yet seeks to deliver an effective justice system. Whilst both sides contribute valued and informed views to the debate, extremism on either side results in a lack of confidence from one section of the community or another.

The front line police officer is an excellent barometer of public opinion on the matter. Inspector Gadget tells some home truths about the decline of the justice system in an articulate, persuasive and informed manner.

Witnessing and dealing with society at its worst, more often than not without complaint or descension, the front line officer is well placed to form an accurate opinion of the state of our nation. There are well informed and articulate officers trying their level best in the face of considerable adversity to protect our society from moral decay. It is immensly frustrating to commit your life to an honourable cause, only to find the way blocked by extremist views that often serve to obstruct the delivery of the quality of justice and policing that is required.

Having read Gadgets' book and followed his blog for some time, the authors of this site were dismayed to witness an unwarranted attack on his character by a clearly frustrated civil liberties extremist over the last 24 hours. We won't dignify this extremists views by naming him. He has the right to public expression, and gadget, as the owner of the blog has the right to veto, delete and moderate comments that appear on the pages. This particular extremist takes pleasure in colouring his views with an all too often condescending and attacking flavour. Under different identities, this person makes attacking comments on other sites. It is hardly suprising therefore that his comments receive scant respect from other contributors. In a most recent act of defiance against gadget, this person has threatened to make a complaint against the police for "improper conduct".  A truly desperate measure from an individual with extremist views who is clearly desperate to have those views aired, regardless of the mass of contrary opionion.

On the basis of all that we have seen, we would openly condemn the activities of this individual and offer our support and encouragement to "Inspector Gadget" and other good spirited police bloggers forced into anonimity by the system.  Your identity is of no interest to us, and this persons desire to have you "outed" is scurrilous and serves no useful purpose for the public interest.  

EXCESSIVE & INAPPROPRIATE EXPRESSION OF CIVIL LIBERTIES

The introduction of PACE (the Police and Criminal Evidence Act) was a sledgehammer to crack a very small minority nut of police officers. Since its introduction, the civil liberties supporters have developed an extremist element whose beliefs are not representative of the community as a whole. Certain sections of the civil liberties communities have created an anti police - anti authority stance, which threatens the admininstering of justice and the right to a peaceful, undisturbed quality of life. No one could deny the need for adequate civil liberty in a civilised society. No right minded police officer would argue with the principle. However, there comes a time, when extremist views threaten to damage the fabric of society.

Article 10: Right to freedom of expression - The Human Rights Act


1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by a public authority and regardless of frontiers.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for the maintaining of the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.


When public safety is compromised, when disorder threatens to erupt, when the balance shifts in favour of criminal activity, when the right of the majority to live a peaceful existence diminishes, then it is time to consider whether the balance has shifted so far toward politically correct activity. We must consider whether the extremist activity of the civil liberty supporters is having a damaging effect on the nation as a whole.

Politicians need to take a few steps back in order to take the country forward. Ask the public what they want on this seriously important issue. Let true democracy speak for the nation.

If there is disatisfaction and declining confidence with the public sector departments, including the police service, politicians need to be absolutely transparent and honest about possible solutions. Face up to the fact that there have been some serious errors of judgement and direction, compounded by excessive political influence and many would say interference. When pointing the finger of blame at the police service, look at the hand doing the pointing . . . .  invariably, one finger is pointed at the "accused" with three more pointing back toward the "accuser".  For honourable politicians reading these words, please listen to what the public are pleading for, HEAR what is being said, and take swift and decisive action to deliver the quality of democracy the majority of society is silently praying for.

The authors of this site are pleased to report that its contents are being monitored by senior politicians who have the welfare of this country and society at heart. Our plea to you at this juncture, is to listen to the silent voice of the general public. If the voices are too low to hear, please don't wait until they become a scream for help. Ask for their opinion, get the consensus you need, deliver true and transparent democracy and watch the public support and confidence return.

The Crime Analysis Team

Nice 1 Limited

OFFICER SPEAKS OUT ABOUT LOW POLICE MORALE

LOW morale, not enough officers and a failing justice system are among the sentiments of rank and file police, a serving officer said today.The experienced officer did not want to be named, but spoke out amid a backdrop of crushing financial pressure from the government for the constabulary to slash millions of pounds from its budget. 

The modern police service faces many more challenges to its morale than ever before and many of the matters talked of here echo the sentiment of other articles from these pages. If the escalating problem of low police morale is the effect, what are the causes? 

Behind the scenes at this site, we are compiling hundreds of examples of officers voicing the same concerns about the decline of the service they love. The problem is not confined to a few disillusioned officers in small pockets of the country. This is a growing problem across all police forces in the UK, from an ever increasing number of rank and file frontline troops.

The balanced observations of one front line officer sum it up well. 

A POLICE OFFICERS VIEW FROM THE STREET

“I still love the job as much as I did when I first joined, but things have changed and not necessarily for the better. We see many times in the course of our careers all that is wrong with society and how inhuman people can be. Often a smile or joke can be a release valve. It seems more and more that we are not allowed an opinion or a sense of humour.

One thing that I have noticed more than anything is morale. I have never seen it so low. I talk to officers with five to six years service counting down the time they have left and that should not be.

My opinion for it being so low is down to a number of things; staff shortages, excessive workloads, a feeling of being let down by a seemingly uncaring senior hierarchy, the inability of the service in general to stand up for itself, and being let down by the judicial system.

I can say hand on heart that the vast majority of officers I have worked with over many years have been professional, caring, keen, and take great delight in locking up the bad guys.

On staff shortages, if you read the headlines from certain quarters they say we have no staff shortage problems. If the general public really knew that almost on a weekly basis and in some case daily, major towns have no officers to deploy to incidents as they are tied up on jobs or stuck in the custody areas.

It is not uncommon for officers to be drafted in from other areas leaving them short of cover, with specialist departments being used to backfill. Custody is regularly filled so that detained persons are taken to other stations. If this is the case then two officers are sent for escort and booking in.

Then the amount of time the booking in process takes, and then if that person is deemed as at risk he/she is put under constant supervision with a police officer. That means yet another officer down. You don't have to be brilliant at maths to see what the consequences are especially when I have known up to three constants on the go at the same time.

Officers who take crime reports are then allocated them to investigate. Obviously the more serious and involved are taken up by CID. As you can imagine an officer is not just given a couple to sort out but the list can be quite extensive.

The problem is that the list will continue to grow as more and more are allocated to that officer. With all the best will and dedication in the world some are not going to be investigated perhaps as fully as they could be.

This is not because the officer does not care. With time restraints and supervisory pressure, workloads must be trimmed. And I think you can guess the consequences.

The fact that a lot of offenders do not go to court is not down to the individual investigating officer or the service. It is down to the government department charged with prosecuting of suspects at court. They too have pressure to increase their conviction rates, so if they are not satisfied that there is a more than good possibility of a conviction they drop it straight away.

This is despite all the paperwork submitted, numerous interviews, and sometimes compelling evidence in the officers' eyes - and, most important of all, the expectations of the victim.

It does seem to be that before long they will only take on the guilty pleas.

Do I feel that we at times let the victim down? Yes. But we are not entirely to blame, the system is. I believe the system is squarely on the side of the offender rather than the victim. The younger and persistent offenders I come into contact with have no fear of the system or its punishments.

They look on young offenders' institutions as a holiday camp where they get free food, free games, free gym membership and are even allowed to keep together with their friends. They do what ever they like, when they like.

As police officers we are paid a good wage, and I for one have enjoyed every minute of it. I love my job and the satisfaction of getting a good result for the people who we serve. I feel the senior hierarchy needs to back us more and listen, not just preach. Yes, like all organisations or firms money is tight and cuts and financial savings have to be made, but not at the expense of the officers on the beat who are the backbone of the service and the ones getting the flak day after day on the streets.

We are the ones that have to face the job and all it entails face on and not from the comfort of a desk.”

Source : http://www.eveningstar.co.uk/

To read the full article, comments from his Chief Constable and Crown Prosecution Service click here.

COMMENT

Critical areas of police service policy and procedure is not only affecting officers morale. Many of the problems highlighted here are having a severly detrimental effect on public confidence in the police as a whole. Regrettably, the front line bobby is the thin blue line where the public aim their dissatisfaction. The target should really be the politicians and senior officers who set the policy these officers have to work with.

The general public want to see a more visible police presence, improved response times and common sense policing. Despite protestations from the Government to the contrary, there remains an excessive "performance culture" within the job. Combined with a lack of discretionary policing this has resulted in a service that is more consumed with political correctness and meeting statistical targets than the 'back to basics policing' the public and front line officers would like to see.

A disproportionate amount of time and resource is wasted on issues that affect a minority of the public. Meanwhile, the Government and senior officers perpetuate the the 'con' about declining crime figures and rising public confidence. The general public are not stupid. They are not taken in by statistics that are manipulated for the media or surveys that are not representative of the real public view.

The time for transparency is now. Clear the decks. Accept that the service has become swamped with bureaucracy and the quality of our society needs fixing fast if the country is not to slip into irreversible moral decline.

This will not happen within the time left with this Government. It seem likely that another party will be in power before any significant change will be seen. Will they be any different? For as long as politicians keep using crime and policing as a convenient political football to grow their overstaffed and excessive empires, then the answer is no.

A radical, honest and transparent approach is needed if public and police confidence is to be restored.

Acceptance that a system is not working is a first step. Forget blame, we don't care what or who caused it, we just want it fixed. Learn the lessons that are staring us in the face. Dismiss the performance culture policing, listen, HEAR and ACT upon what the front line coppers are telling us is inherently wrong with the service. Make every effort to eliminate committees and projects that detract from basics. Reverse the trend of spending 90% of the time and resource planning how you will improve things and 10% of  the time actually doing it. Stop giving us statistics and headlines we stopped trusting long ago. Give the police their dicretional common sense freedom that will enable them to do the job they joined for.

Are there any politicians and senior officers courageous enough to take the action needed? 


Crime Analysis Team
Nice 1 Limited

POLICE FEDERATION BLAST LIBYA POLICE TRAINING AS NAIVE

The decision to send UK police officers to train their counterparts in Libya was "naive and insensitive", the chairman of the Police Federation said.

Paul McKeever said the scheme would spark anger over the killing of Pc Yvonne Fletcher.

She was shot 25 years ago outside the Libyan embassy but the Government has allegedly agreed her killer would not be tried in Britain.

He said: "Whilst it may be customary for countries to look to the UK police to provide expertise and training I find it incredible that the Foreign Office has been so naive and insensitive imposing this particular request on the National Policing Improvement Agency.

To read the full press association article click here.

Crime Analyst Team
Nice 1 Limited

Crime Statistics - A Measure Of Public Confidence?

Click the image to see larger (also contained within the full report - see below)

Nice 1 Ltd have complete a further analysis of Home Office crime statistics, comparing British Crime Survey results with offences notified to the police in the 2008/09 period. To see the analysis click here.

Closer scrutiny of the Home Office statistics reveals a massive disparity between the crime experienced in society and that actually notified to the police.

The British Crime Survey is the source of data relied upon by the Government as being the most accurate reflection of crime in England & Wales.

Whilst 4.7 million crimes were reported to the police, the survey suggests that the actual number of notifiable incidents is nearer to 10.7 million and that a mere 41% of comparable crimes are actually reported.

Of those interviewed who admitted they had not reported being a victim of crime, 76% said they felt the police would not or could not do anything.

If the problem of public confidence in the police were compared to the layers of an onion, the front line bobbies, with all the obstructions they face to delivering the service they want to give, are the outer layer. Inside that layer, lies the core of the problem.

The more layers of the onion are removed, the closer we get to the heart of responsibility for the state of policing and crime in England & Wales. The Home Office lies at the heart, which is a political department as well as being at the heart of the Criminal Justice System.

The thin blue line of front line officers, constables, sergeants and inspectors deal with the real problems at street level. It is they who are best qualified to comment on the state of the society they police. Yet they are continually obstructed by the infrastructure, paperwork and procedures designed, influenced and implemented by those within the inner layers, conveniently, those who are higher up the hierarchy and furthest away from the coal face.

Not only do the thin blue line have to deal with the outer layer of the problems of society, but they also face the full force of the lack of public confidence, caused by the very procedural obstructions created by the inner layers. So the designers of these processes don't even have to face the consequences of their handywork.

The layers of the onion must be peeled away to bare the warts n all facts that lie at the heart of the problem.

The problem and solution lies not within the thin blue line, but in the very heart of the matter, where fanciful procedures and strategies, committees and project teams are wasting millions of taxpayers money. Strip away the layers of adminstration and unnecessary obstructions. Give the police the freedom and resources to return to 'common sense back to basics' policing, without the influence and interference of politicians and external agencies who are bleeding the country dry and feeding us manipulated headlines to keep them in office.

When the police can realise their true effective potential, with optimised use of their resources, reporting the accurate picture of society, good and bad, we may see the green shoots of public confidence start to return.

Crime Analysis Team

Nice 1 Limited

Home Secretary Sets Out His Position On Policing

Earlier this week the Home Secretary spoke to the Superintendents' conference about the future of UK policing...

Alan Johnson MP addresses Police Superintendents conference


In his address to the Police Superintendents Association conference, Home Secretary Alan Johnson said:

"Your association was indeed the first Home Office-linked organisation I met after becoming Home Secretary. In that short meeting with your executive, I had the luxury of not being expected to know anything and the benefit of hearing from people who knew an awful lot.

Since its formal recognition in 1952, the Superintendents’ Association has been a crucial influence not only in advocating on behalf of superintendents, but in shaping modern policing as we know it today.


I have been indebted to Ian and his colleagues for their advice and insight over the last few months. I don’t want my address today to be a simple recitation of flattering statistics, but it would be remiss not to mention the significant reduction in crime over the last 12 years – a fall of 39 per cent since 1997.

It is important to mention it because it is a real and genuine achievement. It’s your achievement and it is testament to the incredible commitment and dedication of Britain’s police. But crime is the area of government policy where statistics matter the least and perception matters the most.

The achievements in crime reduction need to be balanced against the fact that people's concern about crime isn’t declining at the same rate. And fear of crime, as well as being debilitating in itself, dilutes public confidence. The police have always had to ride two horses; a police force for those who break the law, and a police service for the law-abiding public.

As Sir Robert Peel once said: “the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen.”

It is testament to this legacy that while in many other countries in the world, the police are feared and reviled, in the UK, they are respected and admired. While the renewed focus on the relationship between the police and the public through neighbourhood policing echoes the fundamental purpose of the police, as articulated so well in the 19th century, some of the challenges faced by modern police forces would be unrecognisable to Peel and his colleagues.

When the first modern police forces were established, they had to confront the impact of industrialisation and urbanisation – people flooded to cities like London, Manchester and Glasgow - where the demand for cheap, unskilled labour was insatiable. Overcrowded, squalid slums quickly became breeding grounds for violent gang wars as rival “Scuttlers,” as they were called, in Manchester, terrorised people with their sustained and brutal street fights.

If the challenge was industrialisation in the 19th Century, then it’s globalisation in the 21st. Terrorists and criminal networks pay scant attention to national borders. On Monday, the three ring leaders of the airline bomb plot, who planned unimaginable carnage, were sentenced to 40 years, 36 years and 32 years respectively – sentences they fully deserved.

The success of Operation Overt is a salient reminder both of the unprecedented and international scale of the challenges we face. It also highlights the fact that our police and security forces are a precious national asset that we diminish or constrain at our peril. While the primary duty of the state, as exercised by the Home Secretary and the police, has always been to keep people safe, fulfilling that duty, under the threat of terrorist attack, has never been more complex.

We in the UK have a long experience of terrorism. But the sustained nature of the threat we face today, has taken us into new territory, and demonstrated the extraordinary capacity of the police to adapt to changing circumstances. But they need the right tools to do the job. Having considered the House of Lords Judgement, I have to decide whether control orders should be abandoned or maintained. They are not and never were intended to be the first line of defence.

Where an individual is suspected of terrorist activity, our first objective will always be for that person to be tried and prosecuted in an open court, or deported if they are foreign nationals. But there is a very small number of people who undoubtedly pose a substantial threat to public safety, and who for good reason, we can neither prosecute nor deport.

In handing down his judgement on control orders on 10 June this year, Lord Justice Scott said: “The duty of the courts … is not … to protect the lives of citizens. It is…to apply the law.” It is however, my primary duty to do both.

So while the courts are bound to be an impartial arbitrator of how the law is applied, it falls on police and security services to protect the public. In their efforts to prevent dangerous individuals from doing harm, they must use a range of measures which the law allows.

Control orders are a practical and proportionate legislative tool that can be applied in such cases. They are not perfect and one day, I hope they won’t be necessary. But for a handful of people, they remain the best option we have for ensuring the public is safe and our security services are able to do their work effectively. That is why I have decided to maintain their availability within the constraints of the House of Lords judgement.

There are those who claim that a global sense of purpose sits uneasily with the renewed focus on neighbourhood policing and public confidence. But every police officer knows that it is only through earning the trust of local communities, that their cooperation can be secured in tackling organised crime, gang violence, and yes, even terrorism. We know that public confidence is at its highest in areas where the police are a constant visible presence; where they make themselves accessible to local people, and where they explain what they are doing to tackle crime whilst listening and responding to people’s concerns.

The surveys show that those who feel properly informed about the measures that the police are taking in their area are nearly twice as likely to believe that crime is being effectively addressed.

Having completed my first three months in this job, I am very clear from all that I’ve seen and heard that there’s no need for more central targets, radical reorganisations or eye-catching initiatives. We need to further consolidate that which is already in place, and we need to do more, much more, to tackle antisocial behaviour.

Petty acts of vandalism, fly-tipping, abandoned cars, intimidating or threatening behaviour – these are not trivial or, as they are sometimes dismissed, “low-level problems.” For the people who have to live with them on a daily basis, they are far from trivial - they have a profound impact on their health and wellbeing.

But in a lot of communities, there’s a “why bother?” sentiment. They don’t raise these issues with the police or others because they think they think it won’t make any difference. Or even that it will make the problem worse. This is despite the fact that the police and local authorities have more powers to deal with antisocial behaviour than ever before and the statistics tell us that after any kind of intervention, two thirds of perpetrators desist. After 3 interventions, all but the most persistent 7 per cent desist. But if we cannot convince the public to come forward, because past experience tells them their complaint will be passed from the local authority to the police and then back again, then we are fighting a loosing battle.

Everyone has the right to feel safe where they live. Tackling antisocial behaviour must be a priority for the police and local authorities and the public need to believe that their complaint will be acted upon. Last Friday, I spent some time with Merseyside Police. They have a taskforce dedicated to tackling antisocial behaviour in areas where it’s a big problem. As well as taking tough action on the perpetrators, police officers regularly visit the victims of antisocial behaviour to check that they are satisfied with the action the police have taken. It can be no coincidence that public confidence in this area has increased from 50 per cent in September last year to 56.9 per cent in March this year. The police also say that being tough on antisocial behaviour is helping them to address other issues like gang violence and gun crime, because often those involved in antisocial behaviour are connected to more serious crimes too.

The White Paper, which will be published shortly, won’t be an overwrite of the Green Paper but will embed those principles further and I hope resolve the issues which are making their implementation more difficult.

I know that one of the Green Paper issues that is at the forefront of your concerns is accountability. I’m adamant that there’s no case for elected members of police authorities, and neither this nor elected commissioners will feature in the White Paper. Ian is wise to warn us to be wary of those who offer simple solutions to complex problems.

When the public say they want the police to be more accountable, that doesn’t mean they want the dubious delights of elected police boards. It certainly doesn’t mean they want politicians pulling the strings, or telling the police how to do their jobs – in London or elsewhere. Locally, they want a name and a number they can call about problems they see in their neighbourhood and they want that problem to be dealt with quickly, preferably by a police officer with a familiar face.


If they think that a police officer hasn’t followed up the crime they’ve reported, or failed in some other way, they want their complaint dealt with quickly and proportionately. Most would rather have a speedy apology and an assurance that something similar won’t happen again than a lengthy investigation into that officer’s conduct. They also want to see the criminal justice system working for victims, not, as 79 per cent of people believe, for offenders. This is why Justice Seen, Justice Done is so critical. It is no coincidence that when people see criminals and perpetrators of antisocial behaviour being brought to account, their confidence in the police goes up.

Whilst as Home Secretary, I will advocate remorselessly on the public’s behalf, I would be doing them and the police a disservice if I thought that meant telling police officers how to do their job.

Similarly, I’m very clear that while centrally imposed targets may have once been necessary, that phase is over. There is now only one central target on public confidence and there are no accompanying government diktats about how this target will be delivered.

I recognise your concerns that the single confidence target will somehow be undermined by more complex arrangements for monitoring police performance. Simultaneously holding the police to account, while allowing for freedom and flexibility, will be a difficult balancing act. The Policing Pledge is not just another list of targets , and neither will it be monitored by the Home Office as if it was. The Pledge sets out the minimum that the public can justifiably expect from their local police force, to ensure that consistent standards are applied across the country. But I am clear, that whatever arrangements HMIC agree with you about how performance is monitored, it must not place unnecessary bureaucratic burdens on the police.

Over the last few years, we’ve made huge efforts to cut the laborious and unnecessary paperwork that chains police officers to their desks.

Thirty-six data collection requirements have either been removed or significantly reduced.

Scrapping activity-based costing alone has saved around 260,000 hours of police time.

The foot-long Stop and Account form has gone – saving another 690,000 hours.

The hand-held devices which are steadily replacing the iconic bobby’s notebook mean that police officers can do on the beat what could once only be done back to the station, saving half an hour every shift.

Analogue radios have been replaced by infinitely more powerful airwave handsets, making it easier for police officers to communicate, even on the London Tube network and saving more time for officers.

In addition, we will also explore whether we can reduce the requirements of the Stop and Search form. Currently, regardless of whether someone who is stopped and searched is arrested, police officers still have to fill in the form. It’s obviously essential to record the ethnicity of the person and the reason they were stopped, so that any complaint can be properly considered. But there should be no need for the police to record anything further.

In the forthcoming Policing, Crime and Private Security Bill, we will take the first steps towards radically slimming down the form for such incidents.

Despite these developments, I know the bureaucracy dragon has not yet been slain. Central government may have been slashed, but we were never the only manufacturer of red tape. Local requirements are often, equally, if not more burdensome, and these need to be addressed too.

To give one example, while the Stop and Account form has been abolished, I have heard of instances where neighbourhood police officers are still filling in the form even though it’s no longer required.

The confidence target was introduced to ensure that police officers could focus on what really mattered – that they were chasing criminals, not statistics, and so that they can exercise their professional judgement in making their communities safer. We have rightly been challenged by you and others to go further in reducing bureaucratic burdens on the service. But making further inroads will require more action at force and authority level. It is on this element that Jan Berry’s forthcoming review will concentrate.


I want to end by saying something about a subject that I’m sure has caused much discussion during your conference – future funding. I know it must feel like an uncomfortable squeeze between meeting rising public expectations and improving efficiency. When we talk about greater productivity and efficiency, commentators find it convenient to interpret this as a euphemism for cutting frontline staff. But when 43 police forces have between them, many hundreds of IT contracts, when many of those forces have separate arrangements for buying uniforms, vehicles and equipment, you cannot convince me that improving efficiency means abandoning neighbourhood policing.

We have not spent the last 12 years building frontline police numbers to record levels to see all these advances reversed.

I don’t believe that the way to respond to this tighter financial climate is to hang the sword of Damocles over frontline officers. The three year settlement up to 2011 is a good one, and in contrast to our political opponents, we have no intention of cutting into it The three year pay deal will be honoured, and because we recognise that we are asking you to deliver a challenging agenda, I can tell you today that the Basic Command Unit Fund will not be scrapped. It will continue in 2010/11, providing £40 million for the police, working in partnership with local authorities, to improve public confidence in communities they serve – whether that’s by tackling antisocial behaviour or investing more in neighbourhood policing.

I began by talking about the complexity of modern police work. How the challenges faced by police officers don’t just go from neighbourhood to national, but from local to global; from antisocial behaviour to terrorism. All are of equal importance to the public. But the overriding principle is very simple. Keeping people safe, providing them with security and serenity in their lives is the most basic duty that any government owes its citizens. The principles at the heart of the creation of the modern police service in the 19th century are as relevant today.

It is through greater engagement in neighbourhood policing, genuine accountability, collaboration and strong leadership that we can ensure that policing is carried out both with and for the public.

It is my role as Home Secretary to support the police in their difficult and dangerous work, and I will fulfil that role to the best of my ability."

Reprinted from :-

http://www.policeoracle.com/news/Home-Secretary-Sets-Out-His-Position-On-Policing_20278.html

Comment :-

Some fine words Mr Johnson. We feel sure they were received with rapturous applause. However, the frontline bobbies and response troops have heard these words before. ACTION is what is needed and speaks louder than any of your famliar force fed platitudes. Forgive us if we reserve our trust for the word of this Government, but we will not raise our expectations until we see positive results and action.

The list of reasons for doubting the word of this Government is endless. Years of "Jobs for the boys" in the form of expensive and doubtful community projects where funding would be better spent on real frontline resource allocation, manipulated crime statistics (and make no mistake, the word is out), the MP expenses scandal, the lack of support for the National Victims Association families, the treacherous trading of justice for the Libyan killer of WPC Yvonne Fletcher, the worldwide condemnation for the release of the convicted Lockerbie murderer to name just a few of the more recent betrayals that have eroded trust in words alone.

From a policing perspective, there needs to be a clean slate. That requires an immediate acceptance that the crime figures you happily broadcast have been consistently manipulated for political benefit for many years and the time has come to spill the beans and start afresh. If you are sincere about seeking the return of public confidence, YOU MUST EARN IT. That requires a brave man and a brave party, but better the public knew the full truth, and adequate funding is allocated for policing that this fanstasy world in your headlines that crime is decreasing. This only perpetuates the problem.

Mr Johnson, you mention the disparity between the the reported crime figures and actual crime. You make the statement "They don’t raise these issues with the police or others because they think they think it won’t make any difference. Or even that it will make the problem worse".

What you don't say is WHY they feel it won't make a difference. Once again you fall back on the political cushion of  the extra police powers that have been introduced. That is all very well, when they get the chance to use them, (and believe us they would love to) when they are not chasing detections, protecting their own backs against petty internal attacks, tied up for hours with paperwork that is largely excessive.

Can you not see, this is what lies at the very core of public confidence. The very system that has been created down the years has drifted away from common sense and the back to basics approach must be taken seriously if the service is to recover from its current malaise. The public have seen for themselves that through no lack of commitment or desire on the part of the response officers, public calls for help all too often go unanswered due to the tangled web of obstructions to justice that have evolved down the years.

Accept that as a Government minister, it is unlikely that you will live in proximity or circumstances where you will come face-to-face with the violent and criminal face of Britain. That does not mean you should shut your eyes to what the average tax payer sees every day at the corner shop, on the High Streets or in the town centres.

An open and honest start would be to create a forum where police officers from the front line can speak openly and honestly about the real issues preventing the return to common sense back to basics policing, without fear or reprisals of threat to their career. You have started with the Superintendents, now deliver your message the the constables, sergeants and inspectors, ALL OF THEM, especially those on the front line, the response officers, who deal with real life policing every day. Create an environment where they are unafraid to voice their concerns. If you turn up with Chief Constables' or SMT Officers in tow, you can hardly expect officers to put their neck on the line and openly criticise the hierarchy, bureaucracy and processes that obstruct them from delivering the policing the nation deserves and you so speak of wanting.

The truth of policing in the UK will not be discovered in your office or that of senior officers, but out there on the street, where the real problems are being handled by real coppers every day. If you are to gain the confidence of these officers, get out and meet them, one-to-one, see the real world that they have to deal with. You will find the picture is far worse than you could ever imagine or are being fed by the SMT's, many of whom are part of the problem that needs solving.

We do not imagine for one moment that you would actually turn up on the wildest parts of London, Manchester, Birmingham and Bristol to see the situation for yourself, but until the word of the experienced frontline bobby is taken more seriously and action is taken, the state of our society will spiral ever downward taking the aspiration of public confidence down with it.

Whether you are in office for twelve months or for years to come, the time to start is now.

LESS PROMISES MORE ACTION.

The Crime Analysis Team
Nice 1 Limited