Med Hughes et al and RSS under investigation.
Discussion
Per title even though a Fail link.
To be questioned and books have to be opened over revenue paid by motorists on speed awareness courses.
Various PCCs are wanting them to be investigated over 1.9 million pounds which should have been spent on road safety.
5 - 4 - 3 - 2 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863893/Ex...
To be questioned and books have to be opened over revenue paid by motorists on speed awareness courses.
Various PCCs are wanting them to be investigated over 1.9 million pounds which should have been spent on road safety.
5 - 4 - 3 - 2 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2863893/Ex...
The information in the link is nothing new. Myself and others have posted it on here in the past. In fact, it's been posted across the internet for years. It still doesn't stop the usual suspects on here claiming that it's all perfectly honest and transparent, yet always fail to back up their view.
Nothing will come of it because it involves former police officers and has links to ACPO. It'll just be swept under the carpet again.
Nothing will come of it because it involves former police officers and has links to ACPO. It'll just be swept under the carpet again.
La Liga said:
t's the accusers who need to 'back-up' their view.
The accusations by the DM are insinuendo.I think most people are unhappy with the police being able to profit from prosecutions, or in this case, avoiding prosecutions. I'm all for diversion, but when the group that makes the decision has an incentive to proceed in a certain direction, then it is wrong. I also think that most people are wary of the old boy network where those who instigate a system can leave the police and profit from it.
Policing is not a business and should not be run on business lines. Any diversion decisions should be made either nationally or by individual officers, and not locally or by a quango.
My force used to tow vehicles away if they committed a parking offence. So instead of just getting a £40 ticket, they also received a £110 'charge' for being towed. I can understand this for vehicles causing an obstruction, rather than overstaying, and also for being on a major route or a bus stop, but the contract was put out to tender and the company went for easy targets, those down side streets, the locals who had not moved their car by the 7am start of restrictions.
In my area the limit for prosecutions was dropped in order to catch more drivers for these courses. That was outrageous and the motivation for this is in little doubt.
If this is true and it's clear it's an if there, as I thought the accounts had been reviewed and shown to be all above board, but if it's true it just adds to public perceptions about those in authority.
The police claim, correctly, that they are held to higher standards in professional and personal life than many others in society. That is true and cannot imo be disputed, except by the serial haters.
However there is also evidence of politicians setting themselves up for life outside of Westminster by virtue of decisions or influence whilst in power.
Situations like RSS etc just adds to the "they're all at it" mindset which harms the good work of the massive majority.
The police claim, correctly, that they are held to higher standards in professional and personal life than many others in society. That is true and cannot imo be disputed, except by the serial haters.
However there is also evidence of politicians setting themselves up for life outside of Westminster by virtue of decisions or influence whilst in power.
Situations like RSS etc just adds to the "they're all at it" mindset which harms the good work of the massive majority.
La Liga said:
XDA said:
It still doesn't stop the usual suspects on here claiming that it's all perfectly honest and transparent, yet always fail to back up their view.
It's the accusers who need to 'back-up' their view. 
XDA said:
I think the points raised in the DM link (which have been unanswered for years) back up the view of the "accusers".
It states there's a surplus of money that should be spent on road safety, which presumably means it's held within the non-profit companies with the specific articles. Is that the point unanswered for years?
La Liga said:
t states there's a surplus of money that should be spent on road safety, which presumably means it's held within the non-profit companies with the specific articles.
Is that the point unanswered for years?
There is a surplus of money & there has been for years. Policemen involved with setting the companies up go to work for them on leaving the police, presumably on a very decent salary. I doubt the companies' offices are Spartan.Is that the point unanswered for years?
I believe that the purpose of the DM article was to put forward a view whereby the 'safety' companies are in fact a self-funding, self-perpetuating little empire for its members, which incidentally include those in authority involved with creating them in the first place. I couldn't possibly comment; the investigation will hopefully be able to give an accurate account of the facts.
La Liga said:
I doubt they'd be able to win either way.
If SACs and other courses were internal / public sector then the conflict of interest would be much stronger and the cynicism no doubt amplified.
If SACs and other courses were internal / public sector then the conflict of interest would be much stronger and the cynicism no doubt amplified.
Daily Mail said:
Crime tsars have now ordered an urgent review of the arrangements amid ‘serious concerns’ that private firms may also be profiting from speeding motorists – and that the ex-policemen could have a conflict of interest.
Daily Mail said:
Christopher Salmon, Tory Police and Crime Commissioner for Dyfed-Powys, said the surplus was the result of ‘a murky deal from the days when police forces were not scrutinised properly’. He added: ‘Many PCCs, including me, want a thorough investigation [b]into how so much money from speeding motorists ends up in private hands.’[/]
At the centre of the controversy is Meredydd ‘Med’ Hughes, Chief Constable of South Yorkshire from 2004 until 2011, when the sexual abuse of girls by Asian gangs in Rotherham was at its worst.
Nothing wrong with firms making a profit, as long as it is reasonable and fair, but I think the concern here is that the money is not being spent on any safety measure except that addressing speeding - just 7% of accidents according to Stats 19 figures... while firms are eating at the trough - apparently staffed by former officers!At the centre of the controversy is Meredydd ‘Med’ Hughes, Chief Constable of South Yorkshire from 2004 until 2011, when the sexual abuse of girls by Asian gangs in Rotherham was at its worst.
This was a major concern in Swindon - the first council to set the ball rolling and withdraw funding from speed cameras, in order to address other safety issues.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff