Conservative MP - Police Rant.
Discussion
DJRC said:
a polite "Morning officers, how are you both today? Im in a terrible rush Im afraid, would you mind opening the main gates quickly for me? I wont be 5 seconds, thankyou ever so much." should be employed.
To which the response would presumably be "Rules are rules and it's more than my job's worth, you'll have to go round the side."JensenA said:
He's a Cabinet Member of the UK Government. The Police are meant to be Public Servants, they are there to protect the government. You would think they would open the gate to let through a senior Cabinet member surely?
Scenario 2: (use your imagination) Large private company, senior Director and Board member, well known to everyone, cycles up to the main gate and says to the Security guard "Morning Fred, can you open the barrier please?" Fred says "No, you can get off your bike and walk through the pedestrian gate". Mr Director get annoyed and curses at the guard. Do we really think that the Guard would have his Trade Union come out and publicly demand that the Director be sacked from his job??
The whole thing is political and petty - I don't blame him for getting annoyed, and if he did anything wrong let the police charge him with an offence and arrst him. It's pathetic, the police are arrogant Jobs worth pratts, who are totally unable to use common sense and discretion.
Indeed, the officers should have been provided with a list of things extremely important people are able to do that not so important people cannot and then table to determine how important someone is.Scenario 2: (use your imagination) Large private company, senior Director and Board member, well known to everyone, cycles up to the main gate and says to the Security guard "Morning Fred, can you open the barrier please?" Fred says "No, you can get off your bike and walk through the pedestrian gate". Mr Director get annoyed and curses at the guard. Do we really think that the Guard would have his Trade Union come out and publicly demand that the Director be sacked from his job??
The whole thing is political and petty - I don't blame him for getting annoyed, and if he did anything wrong let the police charge him with an offence and arrst him. It's pathetic, the police are arrogant Jobs worth pratts, who are totally unable to use common sense and discretion.
Let's not forget Ken Livingstone and the outcome of the trial.
Livingstone said to a reporter: "You are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?"
After complaints against Livingstone and his suspension from office the High Court cleared him and said the right to free speech "does extend to abuse".
Livingstone said to a reporter: "You are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?"
After complaints against Livingstone and his suspension from office the High Court cleared him and said the right to free speech "does extend to abuse".
JensenA said:
TheSnitch said:
Agreed. I am not even sure that the initial confrontation centred on whether he was ''allowed'' to use the gate or not. Frankly, if he could easily dismount and push his bike through the smaller, pedestrian gate, why should anyone open the main gate for him - to allow him to sweep majestically through? There was no justification for his behaviour, and while it doesn't make a difference, and shouldn't make a difference, the fact that he was effing and blinding at a female officer will make a difference to how this is perceived, especially in light of what happened the day before.
He's a Cabinet Member of the UK Government. The Police are meant to be Public Servants, they are there to protect the government. You would think they would open the gate to let through a senior Cabinet member surely?Scenario 2: (use your imagination) Large private company, senior Director and Board member, well known to everyone, cycles up to the main gate and says to the Security guard "Morning Fred, can you open the barrier please?" Fred says "No, you can get off your bike and walk through the pedestrian gate". Mr Director get annoyed and curses at the guard. Do we really think that the Guard would have his Trade Union come out and publicly demand that the Director be sacked from his job??
The whole thing is political and petty - I don't blame him for getting annoyed, and if he did anything wrong let the police charge him with an offence and arrst him. It's pathetic, the police are arrogant Jobs worth pratts, who are totally unable to use common sense and discretion.
I can tell you with absolute certainty that if our MD cycled up and our security guard asked him to use the pedestrian gate he would have no issue with it whatsoever, and there is no suggestion that the police spoke to Mitchell in the abrupt fashion you suggested above. In fact our MD once ticked off the security detail for not checking his security pass - he insisted they treated everyone the same.
One thing he would categorically not do - ever - would be to swear and rant at someone in a similar role. He would regard that as gauche, ill-mannered and a very poor example to set the workforce. Nor would he be so stupid as to refer to the police as ''arrogant Jobs worth pratts'' as you just have. And even if he did, he would spell it correctly.
No matter how this is spun now, what will be remembered is that a stuck up Tory MP called a Policeman a 'Pleb'. He is now toxic, and because he is still in his job, so are the Tories.
let's be honest though, that 'pleb' remark could have been made by any MP of whatever political persuasion - they are all out of touch and live in their own little bubble.
let's be honest though, that 'pleb' remark could have been made by any MP of whatever political persuasion - they are all out of touch and live in their own little bubble.
Countdown said:
Mr Tully doesn't represent most people. If he did then the issue would still be going strong. It will Peter out, unless Mitchell dies something stupid again.
Tulley is a f
kwit and happy to use the recent murders as a political weapon. It's shameful really.. He's still pissed off about the appointment of Tom Winsor! 
Politician should have unreservedly apologised and made a donation to the police benevolent fund (or whatever they have) for being a mong. Bit of a photo opp' and everyone feels better about it.
The police have a job to do regardless how menial it might seem. If you're asked to conform, especially in places like that, just do it. (If the police ask in a rude way, take their number and complain about it formally).
Some people seem to think gobbing off/kicking off is their duty/right.
The police have a job to do regardless how menial it might seem. If you're asked to conform, especially in places like that, just do it. (If the police ask in a rude way, take their number and complain about it formally).
Some people seem to think gobbing off/kicking off is their duty/right.
XCP said:
motco said:
I find it hard to grasp how police notebooks are somehow totally above question when for most of last week the press and media were reporting how the South Yorkshire police altered their records post Hillborough.
What kind of carpet bombing of a subject would the BBC carry out on a really important story? This whole thing is so bloody petty it defies belief.
I don't think anyone is saying they are above question.What kind of carpet bombing of a subject would the BBC carry out on a really important story? This whole thing is so bloody petty it defies belief.
It's comes down to who you think is lying though.
I know who I believe.
Everyone has a bad day, everyone makes mistakes. It's not the making of the mistake, in this case the sweary rant, but what the individual/organisation does afterwards to rectify matters. SYP failed in this respect in the matter of Hillsborough, and are taking the full blame for being presented with a s
t sandwich by a number of other responsible organisations, eg Sheffield Wednesday FC, Football Association, Sheffield City Council and football fans in general to name nut a few.Mitchell had a sweary rant after a bad day, he apologises, well sort of an apology actually,[
] but denies the accusation of swearing and using demeaning language. Then later he privately admits he might have sworn. Then he does other stuff that just makes him appear to be just another wriggling possibly lying politician who can't put his hands up and fully admit he got it wrong when he is found out.If he'd stood up at first instance and said "yes I'd had a bad day, I did rant, I did swear, and I did call them plebs" (or whatever) then the line would have been drawn, and he possibly would have actually gained credit for being a man, admitting fault and taking the lumps of doing wrong up front.
I know who I believe, he has to go. Dead man walking.
JensenA said:
Scenario 2: (use your imagination) Large private company, senior Director and Board member, well known to everyone, cycles up to the main gate and says to the Security guard "Morning Fred, can you open the barrier please?" Fred says "No, you can get off your bike and walk through the pedestrian gate". Mr Director get annoyed and curses at the guard. Do we really think that the Guard would have his Trade Union come out and publicly demand that the Director be sacked from his job??
If Fred was following company procedure then the Director's in the wrong. If Mr Director then used abusive language and/or threatened to have Fred sacked the TU would definitely raise it at the next TU/Mgmt meeting. Ozzie Osmond said:
DJRC said:
a polite "Morning officers, how are you both today? Im in a terrible rush Im afraid, would you mind opening the main gates quickly for me? I wont be 5 seconds, thankyou ever so much." should be employed.
To which the response would presumably be "Rules are rules and it's more than my job's worth, you'll have to go round the side."That would be fair enough. You shrug and say OK and do as requested. If, however, you have had said quiet words in private previously, if you have been a polite chap to them normally, then *maybe* when you are in that little bit extra of a hurry, they say OK and usher you through quickly.
It isnt about *what* its about *how*. The situation has been badly handled all round.
FiF said:
If he'd stood up at first instance and said "yes I'd had a bad day, I did rant, I did swear, and I did call them plebs" (or whatever) then the line would have been drawn, and he possibly would have actually gained credit for being a man, admitting fault and taking the lumps of doing wrong up front.
Precisely.Looking like an ignorant sod isn't nice but now he looks like an ignorant sod and a liar to go with it.
motco said:
What kind of carpet bombing of a subject would the BBC carry out on a really important story? This whole thing is so bloody petty it defies belief.
I would agree with you on the pettiness, but surely the story is being pushed hardest by the Sun, although it's across all media channels right now (unbelievable). I know that there are quite a few million BBC haters on PH, but a bit of balance now and then might go some way to giving your general position a bit more credibility.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff