Brunstrom's force crash more......
Discussion
http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_styl...
‘Traffic Taleban’ force is top of league for costly crashes by police drivers
He is the controversial police chief who has earned the ire of motorists and road-safety campaigners alike for his love of speed cameras and his decision to display photographs of dead accident victims.
But Richard Brunstrom, Chief Constable of North Wales, was last night under pressure to explain why his own force, labelled the “Traffic Taleban” for its fervent pursuit of speeders, finished top of a league table for accident-prone police services.
Statistics obtained by The Times show that Mr Brunstrom’s force has paid hundreds of thousands of pounds in compensation for crashes – more than any other comparable police service for which data was available.
Critics also questioned why no police driver has faced internal disciplinary proceedings in the past ten years, despite the fact that the force has paid out nearly £500,000 in compensation since 2000 – an average of more than £70,000 a year.
Similarly sized rural forces such as Norfolk and West Mercia constabularies paid out £21,800 and £30,000 respectively last year. Grampian Police paid out just £425 in the past three years. Even South Wales Police, which is about twice the size of its northern neighbour, has paid an average of £28,000 in compensation claims over the past eight years, despite policing a more urban region.
More than two thirds of North Wales Police’s compensation payouts were paid in 95 personal injury claims.
In the past seven years, six North Wales Police officers have been prosecuted for driving offences committed while on duty, according to the force. Last year, 16 officers from the force were prosecuted for speeding, though it is unclear how many were on duty at the time.
Mr Brunstrom’s zero-tolerance approach to the crime has led to North Wales drivers being the most fined in the country. The force charged fixed-penalty notices for speeding that equated to £6 for every resident last year.
North Wales Police argue that the zero-tolerance policy had saved lives, but Mr Brunstrom sparked controversy earlier this year when he showed journalists and campaigners a picture of a crash victim’s severed head, still in its motorcycle helmet. The man’s family had not given permission for the photograph to be used.
Martyn Jones, MP for Clwyd South, said: “It is clear that something must be done about what may be described as a lack of internal discipline resulting in needless waste.”
Analysis by The Times using statistics disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act shows that the amount of compensation paid by police forces after crashes involving their vehicles reached an estimated £10 million last year. The sum was extrapolated from the responses of the 25 police authorities that held compensation records.
The findings also show that last year there were 15,000 accidents involving police vehicles. The average number of crashes per force has risen 14 per cent since 2000, though the figure has fallen after a peak of 452 per force in 2004.
Ian Shannon, Assistant Chief Constable of North Wales Police, who is also head of driver training standards for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said: “Standards of police driving are taken extremely seriously in North Wales. We rigorously apply the ACPO policy in relation to pursuits. We also have a very highly regarded driving school with a structured programme of training, including refresher training.” Last year the number of deaths from police crashes rose to 52, 40 of which were the result of pursuits, prompting the Independent Police Complaints Commission to claim that police drivers were taking too many risks. Police said most were caused by dangerous civilian drivers.
Accident payouts
North Wales: £70,393
Dorset: £50,313
Suffolk: £38,444
Lincolnshire: £30,325
Northamptonshire: £25,000
Source: Annual average from statistics released by police forces (only forces without significant urban areas have been included)
‘Traffic Taleban’ force is top of league for costly crashes by police drivers
He is the controversial police chief who has earned the ire of motorists and road-safety campaigners alike for his love of speed cameras and his decision to display photographs of dead accident victims.
But Richard Brunstrom, Chief Constable of North Wales, was last night under pressure to explain why his own force, labelled the “Traffic Taleban” for its fervent pursuit of speeders, finished top of a league table for accident-prone police services.
Statistics obtained by The Times show that Mr Brunstrom’s force has paid hundreds of thousands of pounds in compensation for crashes – more than any other comparable police service for which data was available.
Critics also questioned why no police driver has faced internal disciplinary proceedings in the past ten years, despite the fact that the force has paid out nearly £500,000 in compensation since 2000 – an average of more than £70,000 a year.
Similarly sized rural forces such as Norfolk and West Mercia constabularies paid out £21,800 and £30,000 respectively last year. Grampian Police paid out just £425 in the past three years. Even South Wales Police, which is about twice the size of its northern neighbour, has paid an average of £28,000 in compensation claims over the past eight years, despite policing a more urban region.
More than two thirds of North Wales Police’s compensation payouts were paid in 95 personal injury claims.
In the past seven years, six North Wales Police officers have been prosecuted for driving offences committed while on duty, according to the force. Last year, 16 officers from the force were prosecuted for speeding, though it is unclear how many were on duty at the time.
Mr Brunstrom’s zero-tolerance approach to the crime has led to North Wales drivers being the most fined in the country. The force charged fixed-penalty notices for speeding that equated to £6 for every resident last year.
North Wales Police argue that the zero-tolerance policy had saved lives, but Mr Brunstrom sparked controversy earlier this year when he showed journalists and campaigners a picture of a crash victim’s severed head, still in its motorcycle helmet. The man’s family had not given permission for the photograph to be used.
Martyn Jones, MP for Clwyd South, said: “It is clear that something must be done about what may be described as a lack of internal discipline resulting in needless waste.”
Analysis by The Times using statistics disclosed under the Freedom of Information Act shows that the amount of compensation paid by police forces after crashes involving their vehicles reached an estimated £10 million last year. The sum was extrapolated from the responses of the 25 police authorities that held compensation records.
The findings also show that last year there were 15,000 accidents involving police vehicles. The average number of crashes per force has risen 14 per cent since 2000, though the figure has fallen after a peak of 452 per force in 2004.
Ian Shannon, Assistant Chief Constable of North Wales Police, who is also head of driver training standards for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said: “Standards of police driving are taken extremely seriously in North Wales. We rigorously apply the ACPO policy in relation to pursuits. We also have a very highly regarded driving school with a structured programme of training, including refresher training.” Last year the number of deaths from police crashes rose to 52, 40 of which were the result of pursuits, prompting the Independent Police Complaints Commission to claim that police drivers were taking too many risks. Police said most were caused by dangerous civilian drivers.
Accident payouts
North Wales: £70,393
Dorset: £50,313
Suffolk: £38,444
Lincolnshire: £30,325
Northamptonshire: £25,000
Source: Annual average from statistics released by police forces (only forces without significant urban areas have been included)
Slightly off topic, but is there any result on the investigation of the shocking use of those biker pics for propaganda purposes earlier this year? The fact that the family had hidden this dead riders' decapitation from his mother (until 'clutching at straws' Bruntrom revealed all) being particularly insensitive. BB
Chrispy Porker said:
I see a certain irony in this but I don't see a link between compensation payouts and speed cameras really.
There might not be, but then again one might expect that the more they talk bo
ocks about road safety the more they would crash. They might even be infected by a culture of talking and believing utter boocks.safespeed said:
Chrispy Porker said:
I see a certain irony in this but I don't see a link between compensation payouts and speed cameras really.
There might not be, but then again one might expect that the more they talk boocks about road safety the more they would crash. They might even be infected by a culture of talking and believing utter boocks.Without knowing the NUMBER of crashes we can't say much.
Chrispy Porker said:
I see a certain irony in this but I don't see a link between compensation payouts and speed cameras really.
Perhaps all his officers were so keen to avoid getting nicked for speeding they weren't too occupied with inconveniences like other road users etc.. and crashed? Would certainly be interesting to see the stats/details.Chrispy Porker said:
safespeed said:
Chrispy Porker said:
I see a certain irony in this but I don't see a link between compensation payouts and speed cameras really.
There might not be, but then again one might expect that the more they talk boocks about road safety the more they would crash. They might even be infected by a culture of talking and believing utter boocks.Without knowing the NUMBER of crashes we can't say much.
But at least we can postulate a plausible linkage mechanism (or three).
Much more seriously my work indicates that there must be strong links between cultural values and risky road behaviour. Where there exists a worse 'safety culture' we should expect worse crash rates.
Chrispy Porker said:
safespeed said:
Chrispy Porker said:
I see a certain irony in this but I don't see a link between compensation payouts and speed cameras really.
There might not be, but then again one might expect that the more they talk boocks about road safety the more they would crash. They might even be infected by a culture of talking and believing utter boocks.Seems they also perform poorly in other areas of Policing, maybe thay have the wrong priorities? 
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk:80/news/wales-news/...
"Trafficking rap for North Wales cops
AMNESTY International has slammed North Wales Police, claiming that they are failing to deal with sex trafficking.
A new report published by the human rights activists alleges that the force is not monitoring the situation as effectively as Gwent and South Wales Police.
It cites the case of three 18-year old women from China, Malaysia and Namibia who were arrested for working as prostitutes.
It says that they were released by North Wales Police after just 10 hours and claims that the police have no idea whether they are still working in the sex industry.
But last night the force hit back, claiming Amnesty’s report had not been thoroughly researched.
North Wales’ Chief Superintendent Chris Corcoran said: “It is disappointing that Amnesty International has not properly researched the local situation nor approached the force before making its criticisms.
“North Wales Police has played a comprehensive and active role in protecting victims of the sex trade and dealing with those who prey on them.”
But an Amnesty International spokeswoman said the charity had been in consultation with North Wales Police before the report was published, as well as other forces across Wales.
The report also found that there are around 60 women at any one time in Cardiff who have been trafficked for the sex trade.
And it also discovered smaller but “significant” numbers of trafficked women in Swansea and Newport."
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk:80/news/wales-news/...
"Trafficking rap for North Wales cops
AMNESTY International has slammed North Wales Police, claiming that they are failing to deal with sex trafficking.
A new report published by the human rights activists alleges that the force is not monitoring the situation as effectively as Gwent and South Wales Police.
It cites the case of three 18-year old women from China, Malaysia and Namibia who were arrested for working as prostitutes.
It says that they were released by North Wales Police after just 10 hours and claims that the police have no idea whether they are still working in the sex industry.
But last night the force hit back, claiming Amnesty’s report had not been thoroughly researched.
North Wales’ Chief Superintendent Chris Corcoran said: “It is disappointing that Amnesty International has not properly researched the local situation nor approached the force before making its criticisms.
“North Wales Police has played a comprehensive and active role in protecting victims of the sex trade and dealing with those who prey on them.”
But an Amnesty International spokeswoman said the charity had been in consultation with North Wales Police before the report was published, as well as other forces across Wales.
The report also found that there are around 60 women at any one time in Cardiff who have been trafficked for the sex trade.
And it also discovered smaller but “significant” numbers of trafficked women in Swansea and Newport."
Edited by catso on Sunday 14th October 22:57
Heard Brunstrom on Radio 4's PM this evening being interviewed about his suggestions for drug policy. He did rather well, failing to rise to the "what would the victims families think?" drivelly questions. Just because he vocally promotes a road safety policy with which many disagree, doesn't mean everything he suggests is badly thought through.
The only reason current drugs policies arent working is because they aren't currently enforced.
Its grossly insulting to say the current methods don't work when they aren't even being enforced.
Pete Doherty anyone? How many times has he bent for the soap in the showers?
See.
The policies aren't followed through but rather than admit they are making a pig awful job of their responsibilities its so much easier to say..
er we tried that and it didn't work.
I have worked in private enterprise and the commercial worl all my life and if anyone ever worked with the dilligence offered by our current judicial pile of shite they would be sacked for imcompetence if not corporate manslaughter.
Just like that grinning buffoon blair anyone with an IQ above subnormal can see huge holes in policies that the originators so clever they are didn't even see in the first place.
So we legalise drugs.
So all the jumkies noone will employ anyway who weren't even looking for work will suddenly be able to afford NHS subscriptions will they.
Instantly become worthwhile members of society.
At some stage we have to drop this attitude that in some way drug users are victims of society.
We have to start cutting loose the crap and give the right to decide back to the moral majority and the taxpayers.
Its grossly insulting to say the current methods don't work when they aren't even being enforced.
Pete Doherty anyone? How many times has he bent for the soap in the showers?
See.
The policies aren't followed through but rather than admit they are making a pig awful job of their responsibilities its so much easier to say..
er we tried that and it didn't work.
I have worked in private enterprise and the commercial worl all my life and if anyone ever worked with the dilligence offered by our current judicial pile of shite they would be sacked for imcompetence if not corporate manslaughter.
Just like that grinning buffoon blair anyone with an IQ above subnormal can see huge holes in policies that the originators so clever they are didn't even see in the first place.
So we legalise drugs.
So all the jumkies noone will employ anyway who weren't even looking for work will suddenly be able to afford NHS subscriptions will they.
Instantly become worthwhile members of society.
At some stage we have to drop this attitude that in some way drug users are victims of society.
We have to start cutting loose the crap and give the right to decide back to the moral majority and the taxpayers.
mark69sheer said:
Its grossly insulting to say the current methods don't work when they aren't even being enforced.
That sentence literally makes no sense, but I think I can see what you were trying to say ... and you'll be glad to hear I think that that doesn't make any sense either.If you can point to a single example of a country that has ever suceeded in controlling any drug's use based on a policy of prohibition, I'd be interested to hear it. Plenty of countries have tried extremely draconian methods of implementation (that would be entirely unacceptable in the UK) and they invariably only have a marginal impact on drug use. They clearly offer no prospect of managing, let alone solving, the problem.
It is also stupid to try to blur "legalisation" into equation with "easy access", "social acceptability", "implied victimhood", "increased use", etc. Legalisation does not imply any of those things.
Ok is there another country where class A drugs are legal?
perhaps their shining example should be followed by all ,
er hang on you mean we would actually be the first to ever try it?
eek!!!
You will never eradicate the drug problem only have varying degrees of control.
But to think that legalising it is the answer is only to display a very limited experience of how human nature works.
If its legal , more people will try it with varying levels of addiction.
What you must remember is not to apply adult levels of responsibility into areas where decisions are made by teenagers.
EG
Despite the level of anti cigarette publicity teenagers still start smoking.
Exactly the same scenario will exist with drugs.
Drug users don't wait till they are 25 years old before trying their first spliff or injecting their first fix.
Addiction starts while people are immature and irresponsible and need the state to use everything in its power to protect them from themselves.
When the state absolves this responsibility then its a sad sad day for children.
perhaps their shining example should be followed by all ,
er hang on you mean we would actually be the first to ever try it?
eek!!!
You will never eradicate the drug problem only have varying degrees of control.
But to think that legalising it is the answer is only to display a very limited experience of how human nature works.
If its legal , more people will try it with varying levels of addiction.
What you must remember is not to apply adult levels of responsibility into areas where decisions are made by teenagers.
EG
Despite the level of anti cigarette publicity teenagers still start smoking.
Exactly the same scenario will exist with drugs.
Drug users don't wait till they are 25 years old before trying their first spliff or injecting their first fix.
Addiction starts while people are immature and irresponsible and need the state to use everything in its power to protect them from themselves.
When the state absolves this responsibility then its a sad sad day for children.
ATG said:
mark69sheer said:
Its grossly insulting to say the current methods don't work when they aren't even being enforced.
That sentence literally makes no sense, but I think I can see what you were trying to say ... and you'll be glad to hear I think that that doesn't make any sense either.If you can point to a single example of a country that has ever suceeded in controlling any drug's use based on a policy of prohibition, I'd be interested to hear it. Plenty of countries have tried extremely draconian methods of implementation (that would be entirely unacceptable in the UK) and they invariably only have a marginal impact on drug use. They clearly offer no prospect of managing, let alone solving, the problem.
It is also stupid to try to blur "legalisation" into equation with "easy access", "social acceptability", "implied victimhood", "increased use", etc. Legalisation does not imply any of those things.
Now, with no control at all, I would bet the problems would seriously escalate and I for one wouldn't take that risk.
To turm your question, can you point to a country where total legalisation has improved the situation, measurably?
DSM2 said:
ATG said:
mark69sheer said:
Its grossly insulting to say the current methods don't work when they aren't even being enforced.
That sentence literally makes no sense, but I think I can see what you were trying to say ... and you'll be glad to hear I think that that doesn't make any sense either.If you can point to a single example of a country that has ever suceeded in controlling any drug's use based on a policy of prohibition, I'd be interested to hear it. Plenty of countries have tried extremely draconian methods of implementation (that would be entirely unacceptable in the UK) and they invariably only have a marginal impact on drug use. They clearly offer no prospect of managing, let alone solving, the problem.
It is also stupid to try to blur "legalisation" into equation with "easy access", "social acceptability", "implied victimhood", "increased use", etc. Legalisation does not imply any of those things.
Now, with no control at all, I would bet the problems would seriously escalate and I for one wouldn't take that risk.
To turm your question, can you point to a country where total legalisation has improved the situation, measurably?
Do we have uncontrolled sale of tobacco and alcholo in the UK?? No. Are they legal? Yes.
What degree of control have we managed to exercise over heroin? The governemnt estimates they manage to capture 10% of the heroin being brought into the UK. So 90% gets through and onto the streets. That is not control.
Why on earth do you think more people would start taking class A drugs just because there was a legal way of obtaining them? Would you for example start taking them?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff