The future is BIG policing
Discussion
bluepolarbear said:
Why?
Why does have an integrated force mean having less police stations?
Shutting police stations will occur regardless of hight the management is structured?
Partially because the more divorced the CCs are from their population, the easier it is to close them.
bluepolarbear said:
Do you have to walk miles for a supermarket? NO
Do you have to walk miles for a post office? YES
Actually it's the other way round.
bluepolarbear said:
Both have a national management structure.
They same applies to your other arguments - they just don't hold water as one does not flow from the other.
There's some truth in this ; the collapse in Policing round here (towns have Police contact points in Post Offices and there is no visible BiB presence ever anywhere) may not be directly linked to the endless restructuring, though the costs of that do impact, because every public bureaucracy will pass the costs onto the tips ; less BiB, less Copshops, never less bureaucrats.
I think the problem is perhaps not so much that in that the endless fiddling is not addressing the real problem with the Police - which is common to every public body - of being in hock to stupid targetism, managerialism, and the "stat of the day" mentality. There probably is a reckoning coming (this is not just the Police, btw) because the PR vs Results things only can work for so long.
bluepolarbear said:
"Thinking local while being global" is one of several business models that is practised by a number of companies very sucessfully. There is nothing in nationalising the police force that prevents them from providing a local service.
It does mean having one fat cat CC and not 30+, it does mean having consistent policing throughout the UK and it does mean that all information is shared which should prevent people dying when their local force does not have the information held by another - which is happening today.
They don't provide a local service now.
It is naive to say there will be fewer fat cat CCs IMO. All these PS reorganisations claim to reduce bureaucracy and managers. They never do, numbers go up to handle the changeover, ostensibly, and stay there.
The reason the Police are ineffective is not it's BiB ; it is because it is chasing CG money via the associated targets, and is not particularly interested in whether it's results have any real worth or not.
WildCat said:
Bigger the force ...less the number of open police station - and only open Mon-Sat 9 to 5....
Crime does not happen only in traditional office hours....
Again why? The open hours of a police station do not flow from the size of the force. The current police forces vary in size from large to small. Do the small forces have 24/7 opening and the larger ones 9 to 5?
wildcat said:
Yes - and only the big ones on edges of the National Park are those 24 hour ones.....
I think you will find this is more to do with the planning laws applying to national parks rather than management structure of the supermarket.
My point is the number, size and open hours of police stations is not linked to the size of force. Any current police station can be closed now if the local force decides to close it.
What you get from a nationalised force is a) efficiency in back office process and b) integration of serious crime preventation.
wildcat said:
Do have pal who work for one of big chains... they have head office in same way as police have head office in shape of Home Office. Rest of structure ist in local store management (local store manager ist like Chief Super or whatever.. und the regional manager if you like ist like the CCin their structure - bit like police divisions....if you like...
The are not the same.
The difference is your pal won't have his own little back office empire eg financial systems, training, procurement, logistics. He won't have these because they are more efficient being served from a national basis. What he has control over is the local presense of the store and ability to tailor the service delivery to the needs of the local area he serves.
Exactly the model being proposed for the police.
wildcat said:
car theft is rifer on pockets of Manchester than other pocket of Manchester and certainly the crime would be different in Hulme, Moss Side and Wythenshawe area than the leafier suburbs on other sides of M60....und M56 - and crime in Middlesborough ist also rougher in nature than would be case further down A19 in Thirsk.... How would an officer based in say call centre in York be able to identify criminal element further up A19 and vice versa?
Not sure how a call centre agent would identify a crinimal from the end of a phone regardless of their physical location. However, if does make a difference then keep local call centres. Having a national management structure does not imply some single huge police station in the middle of the country dealing with the whole of the UK
WildCat said:
GMP did close a lot of stations - and built a huge modern one... near a town hall and residential area in Pendlteton area of Manchester -per Manchest local paper.
GMP just covers Manchester area. As you hold this as an example of what happens when you go big I assume that even this area is to big for a single police force in your eyes?
So what size is to large? Should a police force be tied to towm / district / street / house?
Management incompetence occurs regardless of the structure.
autismuk said:
I think the problem is perhaps not so much that in that the endless fiddling is not addressing the real problem with the Police - which is common to every public body - of being in hock to stupid targetism, managerialism, and the "stat of the day" mentality. There probably is a reckoning coming (this is not just the Police, btw) because the PR vs Results things only can work for so long.
100% agree and these things are not linked to the structure of the force. I believe you can give better service at lower cost (to the tax payer) through a intregrated national force.
bluepolarbear said:
What you get from a nationalised force is a) efficiency in back office process and b) integration of serious crime preventation.
What you get from a nationalised *anything* is claims of efficiency in the back office, coupled with massive extra expenditure and cost overruns due to incompetence.
autismuk said:
What you get from a nationalised *anything* is claims of efficiency in the back office, coupled with massive extra expenditure and cost overruns due to incompetence.
Maybe in the public sector and maybe that is the issue.
I can assure you in private industry it works and works well.
Two worries.
1) It is civil service with all that implies in the empire building stakes. The rigours of a true market won't (and never should) apply.
B) A central police force would be easy meat for the government to manipulate. Or the CPO would become a demi-god. A disaster either way.
1) It is civil service with all that implies in the empire building stakes. The rigours of a true market won't (and never should) apply.
B) A central police force would be easy meat for the government to manipulate. Or the CPO would become a demi-god. A disaster either way.
bluepolarbear said:
What you get from a nationalised *anything* is claims of efficiency in the back office, coupled with massive extra expenditure and cost overruns due to incompetence.
Maybe in the public sector and maybe that is the issue.
I can assure you in private industry it works and works well.
Oh, yes, I agree it can, but in the private sector you can be sacked if you screw up.
In the public sector the tips of the trees can be sacked (in the Police this would be our BiB, of course) but the dead wood in the centre is never cut out. Our local Hospital (same problem) is like this, Nursing etc. is being hacked like there's no tomorrow, small hospitals are being closed, managers sacked, none.
There's an article in todays Sunday Telegraph, basically despite the requests for cuts in bureaucracy, many government departments have not made one single redundancy anywhere.
Well folks, I don't believe it's rocket science. Since the days of "The Thatch", there has been an army of low paid and unemployed in this country. They used to be "tax payers" but now either don't earn enough and need "top ups" or can't find a job because there are none!
The Rich on the other hand "will not" pay tax and use every way of tax evasion possible.
So. the poor can't, the rich won't, and the few of us in between can't pay enough on our own to fund the nations services. So....cuts all round, only,... the well paid ones at the top, never cut theirs.......Start with a few thousand low paid eh? throw them on the dole and create another drain on the taxpayer........then call them all lazy dolite scroungers I despair.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Sunday 18th September 12:55
The Rich on the other hand "will not" pay tax and use every way of tax evasion possible.
So. the poor can't, the rich won't, and the few of us in between can't pay enough on our own to fund the nations services. So....cuts all round, only,... the well paid ones at the top, never cut theirs.......Start with a few thousand low paid eh? throw them on the dole and create another drain on the taxpayer........then call them all lazy dolite scroungers
I despair. >> Edited by 8Pack on Sunday 18th September 12:55
bluepolarbear said:
Bigger the force ...less the number of open police station - and only open Mon-Sat 9 to 5....
Crime does not happen only in traditional office hours....
Again why? The open hours of a police station do not flow from the size of the force. The current police forces vary in size from large to small. Do the small forces have 24/7 opening and the larger ones 9 to 5?
Bigger the organisation - less the number of "outlets"
Manchester is large police force - but they still closed lot of stations where they were needed and none are open to customer covenience - hence the reports of sirens at all hours - usually in wee small hours after some fracas in nearby Manchester boozeland... to the new station in leafy Pendlebury.... (per the Manchester paper.) Speaking of the drunks - these will take up manpower no matter what kind super sized police force we have.
bluepolarbear said:
Yes - and only the big ones on edges of the National Park are those 24 hour ones.....
I think you will find this is more to do with the planning laws applying to national parks rather than management structure of the supermarket.
True - ist not an area where you can do what you like. Live in listed building - any modifications have to be in line with the house and its preservation. But you said I was in walking distance of supermarket - but I have some drive to these kind of stores where I stock up the stuff the local shops do not sell on a big more occasional shop.
bluepolarbear said:
My point is the number, size and open hours of police stations is not linked to the size of force. Any current police station can be closed now if the local force decides to close it.
Und my point ist that we shall see many more of such closures under such proposals.
Possibly less Bobbies on beat as those in office cry wolf all the time. Beside - we had a very good example of "intelligence" from large force being shockingly poor - with very tragic result.... Large force with misinformation from size und too remote major incident or pursuit management could lead to more of these "mistakes" which lead to someone dying "by mistake"
Not good enough! ....
Cumbria ist different in each way to Lancs - area's localised crime - not the same as in Lancs. We could end up with even longer waits....
bluepolarbear said:
What you get from a nationalised force is a) efficiency in back office process and b) integration of serious crime preventation.
Ist
mit the rosey coloured spectacle you live in here.... What make you think this? Ist in theory maybe - but reality would be different... Only need to look at catalogue of documented failures in FBI/CIA reality (und not Hollywood happy ending -riding off into sunset fiction)
Data base and updated computer intelligence and so on will not be any better updated or managed - as we may well find less staff employed to do this or same staff level coping with more ...not a rose coloured scene - but what happen in reality and not what happen in brain of Jim Thackerite single brain celled politico....
Also - my own line of work - base on what should happen in theory =- far different when we test and then another slant when go to trials und collect the data from this ....
bluepolarbear said:
wildcat said:
Do have pal who work for one of big chains... they have head office in same way as police have head office in shape of Home Office. Rest of structure ist in local store management (local store manager ist like Chief Super or whatever.. und the regional manager if you like ist like the CC
The are not the same.
The difference is your pal won't have his own little back office empire eg financial systems, training, procurement, logistics. He won't have these because they are more efficient being served from a national basis.
DVLA ist classic example of the "inept" Also MBI und other "national data"...
Beside we are not talking of "national" force. We are talking of merging Cumbria with Lancs. Warks mit West Mids/ Hants with Dorset/Wilts... Cambs/Suffolk/Norfolk...all 4 Welsh forces to one single (and that's one large area...and all one ist extremely incompetent and the others so-so - what make you think they improve? Ist like merging 4 failing schools into one big one - and creating a huge fail zone...Same staff ... same BiBs ... and which incompetent CC will they choose to run this? One of the existing ones or a new one - who may be even more arrogant...
We are talking of merging Durham/Cleveland/North Yorks or Northumbria with N Yorks may joining West Yorks (who prosecute people for low (not empty) screen wash whilst car ist in residential driveway...
Yup ... step in right direction there ... not...! Ist not the utopia you think... und in a police force serving needs of local peoples - this ist exactly what we want:
bluepolarbear said:
What he has control over is the local presense of the store and ability to tailor the service delivery to the needs of the local area he serves.
Exactly the model being proposed for the police.
Except that the last sentence will not apply as these bigger forces will not be in tune with local issues. Lancs ist far far different to Cumbria and we will lose our officers to deal with binge drinking in their big towns no doubt....
bluepolarbear said:
car theft is rifer on pockets of Manchester than other pocket of Manchester and certainly the crime would be different in Hulme, Moss Side and Wythenshawe area than the leafier suburbs on other sides of M60....und M56 - and crime in Middlesborough ist also rougher in nature than would be case further down A19 in Thirsk.... How would an officer based in say call centre in York be able to identify criminal element further up A19 and vice versa?
Not sure how a call centre agent would identify a crinimal from the end of a phone regardless of their physical location. However, if does make a difference then keep local call centres. Having a national management structure does not imply some single huge police station in the middle of the country dealing with the whole of the UK
Yes it does - because everything become centralised and managed from one centre - costs time and lives as they mess around with logistics and locating nearest BiB for call ... because that ist exactly what happens all the time with these ...you ever tried calling the AA? Or NHS Direct?
But ist about reducing to 24 large forces instead of current 43 - and rural areas like Cumbria, Wales, Durham, N Yorks, Lincs and the others will suffer as result - as crime tend to be more of the minor "petty" nature but still mattering very much to us. Ist not all about handful of organised terrorists blowing selves up on buses und trains....as those puppet master in No 10 wish us to believe. (Und there are supposedly other intelligence persons who are supposed to keep tabs on this ...which are indeed "National" und "International"
und much more specialised than BiB allegedly ... )autismuk said:
What you get from a nationalised force is a) efficiency in back office process and b) integration of serious crime preventation.
What you get from a nationalised *anything* is claims of efficiency in the back office, coupled with massive extra expenditure and cost overruns due to incompetence.
National Coal Board....nationalised industries of 70s as I seem to remember from reading papers and listening to the grow-ups as kitten..seemed to hold to ransom by series of strikes....
Ist why Thatch I think had the early success as she smashed through all this - with direst consequences for many ...but the measures .. like everything else - appeared to show success and end appeared to justify means eventually ... then, inevitably - it crumbled....
New labour also completed the privatisation of Railways ... so if National ist so much better... why make small private concerns out of once national network? Only reason why these new smaller companies had severe problems - down to inherited mess...?
I'm afraid that the "privatised railways" get more subsidies now than they did when they were nationalised, that is a fact although the level escapes me for the moment.
Many would wish that we still had our coal mines when it's costing us increasingly more to import coal on the world market whilst paying the miners kids to sit at home on the dole because the mine was the only employer.
I live within sight of a railway where there are 2 merry-go-round coal trains passing every hour, 50 hoppers at a time, 100 per hr. with coal from Venezuela.
I'm sorry it just does not make sense to me, added to which the coal beneath our feet is gone forever flooded and unworkable. I started work in the mines as an electrician, and I know that the miners were NOT lazy, they were NOT overpaid. The trouble started when a N.American man was brought in as Boss.... come to think of it, that was true of the railways as well!..
Don't forget the "inherited mess" of the private railways after the war and the vast amount of investment required to rebuild it, Wildy.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Sunday 18th September 15:20
>> Edited by 8Pack on Sunday 18th September 15:24
Many would wish that we still had our coal mines when it's costing us increasingly more to import coal on the world market whilst paying the miners kids to sit at home on the dole because the mine was the only employer.
I live within sight of a railway where there are 2 merry-go-round coal trains passing every hour, 50 hoppers at a time, 100 per hr. with coal from Venezuela.
I'm sorry it just does not make sense to me, added to which the coal beneath our feet is gone forever flooded and unworkable. I started work in the mines as an electrician, and I know that the miners were NOT lazy, they were NOT overpaid. The trouble started when a N.American man was brought in as Boss....
come to think of it, that was true of the railways as well!.. Don't forget the "inherited mess" of the private railways after the war and the vast amount of investment required to rebuild it, Wildy.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Sunday 18th September 15:20
>> Edited by 8Pack on Sunday 18th September 15:24
You know I used to get admonished on a regular basis by Madame FiF for ranting about the ultimate feckwit namely one D Blunderkit, but jug ears........
It has just taken 3 years to revise HM Courts Service in order to try and create a unified magistrate, crown and county court service. Major part of reform was to restructure organisation into 42 areas. Yes! The intention being to correspond to the local police force areas to give a better service based on local needs.
Joined up Govt.........
You just could not make it up.
Comment on DVD's furry chinned remark re Clarke.
I do know someone who will never employ anyone with facial hair and particularly stubble on the basis that if he is too idle to shave then he's too idle to do his job properly.
In the case of the Home Secretary I have some sympathy with that view.
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Sunday 18th September 20:58
It has just taken 3 years to revise HM Courts Service in order to try and create a unified magistrate, crown and county court service. Major part of reform was to restructure organisation into 42 areas. Yes! The intention being to correspond to the local police force areas to give a better service based on local needs.
Joined up Govt.........
You just could not make it up.
Comment on DVD's furry chinned remark re Clarke.
I do know someone who will never employ anyone with facial hair and particularly stubble on the basis that if he is too idle to shave then he's too idle to do his job properly.
In the case of the Home Secretary I have some sympathy with that view.
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Sunday 18th September 20:58
8Pack said:
I'm afraid that the "privatised railways" get more subsidies now than they did when they were nationalised, that is a fact although the level escapes me for the moment.
Many would wish that we still had our coal mines when it's costing us increasingly more to import coal on the world market whilst paying the miners kids to sit at home on the dole because the mine was the only employer.
I live within sight of a railway where there are 2 merry-go-round coal trains passing every hour, 50 hoppers at a time, 100 per hr. with coal from Venezuela.
I'm sorry it just does not make sense to me, added to which the coal beneath our feet is gone forever flooded and unworkable. I started work in the mines as an electrician, and I know that the miners were NOT lazy, they were NOT overpaid. The trouble started when a N.American man was brought in as Boss....
Don't forget the "inherited mess" of the private railways after the war and the vast amount of investment required to rebuild it, Wildy.
>> Edited by 8Pack on Sunday 18th September 15:20
>> Edited by 8Pack on Sunday 18th September 15:24
Ja - 8 pack Liebchen.... lot of the hype of "baddy" rebel miners - stuff again media directed perhaps by government of day - but probably Scargill did not help matters - in instance of demise of the coal mines. Part of problem there to bigger extent - think Scargill und predecessor played parts - cannot remember his name but was only child at time of the battle between the Heath v Wilson v various unions of the 70s und of course was growing up in Swiss Alps - so never affected - but was news item as I recall. But even so - part of modern history which cannot be ignored. But would guess lot of finance problem down to state led red tape too. If money guaranteed in way of governmnet cash - und maybe imprest or top up system each fiscal year - not incentive to make money und profit. Was one of the problem which I observed around me in both Moscow und Leipzig as far as economy appeared to me...part of which also due to war aftermath. Lot of GDR was not rebuilt - only the bits they allowed visitor to see...which ist why joining of the two post war Germanies overstreched the mighty West German "Rheingold" to some extent as well as much complacency....perhaps.
But a "Wirtschaftswunder" cannot run to infinity anyway... Also this economic miracle - based on major rebuilds - UK rail/factories severely damaged in Blitz... Germany and Europe used Marshall Aid better perhaps on rebuild of essentials.... like rail, utilities und manufacturing plants - worked outward from there - using profit generated and residue of the Aid to build their welfare state - which due to higher direct taxation at least pays in return for the cash. Also the tax subsidise the rail and bus - ist case in Switzerland - why they use it to get money's worth
Britain - it seem from reading the history books - neglected all these and may be remembering incorrectly from my old long forgotten studies ...but seem to recall reading the aid was used to set up early welfare state...instead of investing in rebuild of war damage. So we still paying for inherited mess 60 years after the events....
And still paying high costs for welfare state which does not deliver as overstretched by those caught out by lack of investment in essential services and those who manipulate sytem too...in shape of some rather seemingly incompetent management and hjjobs for the boys at one end und the bone idle at the other end... Nationalising it cost more money to run and no investment to improve made - made it less efficient - so they privatise with subsidies - and still does not work...and capital to improve still missing. Dingsbums... Will be same with this police force proposal...Not as simple as merging Cumbria with Lancashire.etc. They will have to design new managerial systems - perhaps even new ranks .....more managers....and the rank and file will be the ones to be cut to pay for the fatter cats. jobs for the boys, and admin "back up" or whatever.
Will not be the capital invested to improve anything. Probably we see bigger und more pratnerships too. 
It's not the point of the post Wildy, so I'll keep it brief. I just wanted to answer your point about the "Marshall plan" and destruction after the war.
After WW2 the Americans poured millions if not billions of US dollars into Germany and I think Japan.
Not so Britain, a Marshall plan for it's ally was refused by the yanks. Britain was on it's knees and bankrupt. after a few years they agreed to offer us "a loan" with interest to be paid and "conditions" attached.
Strangely enough, they are the self same "conditions" being offered to countries now by the American lead "world bank"......
Is it any wonder that we didn't recover when our "buddies" bled us dry?
After WW2 the Americans poured millions if not billions of US dollars into Germany and I think Japan.
Not so Britain, a Marshall plan for it's ally was refused by the yanks. Britain was on it's knees and bankrupt. after a few years they agreed to offer us "a loan" with interest to be paid and "conditions" attached.
Strangely enough, they are the self same "conditions" being offered to countries now by the American lead "world bank"......
Is it any wonder that we didn't recover when our "buddies" bled us dry?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff