A step in the right direction?
Discussion
ananova said:
Clarke aims to cut police red tape
There is too much bureaucracy in the police service, Home Secretary Charles Clarke has admitted.
Mr Clarke conceded that a lot of the bureaucracy came from the Home Office and pledged to ease the burden.
Addressing rank-and-file police officers at the Police Federation's annual conference in Blackpool, Mr Clarke said he recognised that red tape was the number one concern of most officers.
He said: "I accept the arguments of those who say there is too much bureaucracy in the police service.
"It exists for a variety of reasons. Very little of it coming from the police officers in the Police Federation, a lot of it coming from the Home Office and management in different ways."
Mr Clarke said the "central challenge" of this Parliament was to address neighbourhood policing and crack down on the anti-social behaviour which blighted many communities.
He said police would lead a wider policing team of Community Support Officers (PCSOs), neighbourhood wardens, special constables, voluntary groups, neighbourhood watch and faith groups in helping to beat the kind of crime and disorder which made people feel unsafe.
He said the aim was to create safer communities where ne'er-do-wells could not flourish.
Mr Clarke stressed that police would have the leadership role in neighbourhood policing teams but said some change was necessary to beat the fear of crime among ordinary people.
He said: "To me it is the central challenge of this Parliament in my opinion, because we cannot go into another General Election campaign in three, four, five years time from now with people feeling as they are - uncertain, unsafe in certain respects, worried about anti-social behaviour. We have to solve this problem."
Pity they have let it get into this state in the first place.
Mrs Fish said:
Pity they have let it get into this state in the first place.
They make it get into that state. It's an old marxist tactic, and I was warned about it by a wise old physics teacher who taught O level physics. They f
k everything up in as stealthy a way as possible, so that they can then fix it (or rather bodge it as only they know how) so they can say "look, things were really bad, now they're much better aren't they". They rely on people having the memories of gold fish, and their policies are designed to appeal to such people, and those of other less honourable motive.
JagLover said:
A feature of Labour is to always increase regulation and bureaucracy.
Much of the paperwork burden on the police, such as the stop forms were created by Labour
Now they will reduce the burden?-I will believe it when I see it.
you missed the point
they will create more PCSOs to handle the work and improve the employment figures at the same time whilst mr PC has a supervisory role.
I saw old Twitchy Brunstrom on some news program last night, talking about running his force like a commercial business - i.e. farming out resources to the public (driver training, printing? and some other load of inconsequential guff).
He said "I'm sick of (police chiefs) moaning about lack of funding and how they could do much more if they had more money. What I'm saying is 'what can we do with the money we have?'....."
So, they're using tax-funded police resources to generate private income? Who gets to regulate what they spend it on and how come they have the spare capacity/resources in the first place?
Something smells.
He said "I'm sick of (police chiefs) moaning about lack of funding and how they could do much more if they had more money. What I'm saying is 'what can we do with the money we have?'....."
So, they're using tax-funded police resources to generate private income? Who gets to regulate what they spend it on and how come they have the spare capacity/resources in the first place?
Something smells.
JagLover said:
A feature of Labour is to always increase regulation and bureaucracy.
That isn't totally fair.
Its a feature of Government to extend Government.
Which is why you only get the dissolution of Government departments during the first years of a new Governments first term. Once the blood letting is over the ministers settle down to become friends with the senior civil servants and did you ever see one of them volunteering himself out of a job?
Nope.
Which is why we have to hope the Tories get in next time - with a complete slash and burn programme pre-planned which they implement quickly.
By the time they've been in for five years they won't be able to dissolve things too.
Don said:
A feature of Labour is to always increase regulation and bureaucracy.
That isn't totally fair.
Its a feature of Government to extend Government.
The Tories have had problems I admit, but it is far worse under Labour. They are control freaks of the highest order.
I've been thinking about civil service efficiency. The problems are manifold. They are encouraged to build empires. Bad staff are retained. The object is not to get the work done but to look good in office politics. There is no measure or discipline of performance. Etc, etc. They employ at least twice as many people as are necessary to do the job and probably a lot more than that.
So I have a solution. They all have ranks like in the army. So overnight just make a few of the ranks redundant. As in out of the door. You would still have functioning departments and the other ranks would have to do a bit of work but the end result would be lower taxes for all of us who actually work in the real world.
There is nothing that radical about this proposal. In management speak it is called de-layering and private enterprise did it years ago. We live in the communication and information age so a pyramid like hierarchy is no longer needed.
So I have a solution. They all have ranks like in the army. So overnight just make a few of the ranks redundant. As in out of the door. You would still have functioning departments and the other ranks would have to do a bit of work but the end result would be lower taxes for all of us who actually work in the real world.
There is nothing that radical about this proposal. In management speak it is called de-layering and private enterprise did it years ago. We live in the communication and information age so a pyramid like hierarchy is no longer needed.
bruciebabe said:
I've been thinking about civil service efficiency. The problems are manifold. They are encouraged to build empires. Bad staff are retained. The object is not to get the work done but to look good in office politics. There is no measure or discipline of performance. Etc, etc. They employ at least twice as many people as are necessary to do the job and probably a lot more than that.
So I have a solution. They all have ranks like in the army. So overnight just make a few of the ranks redundant. As in out of the door. You would still have functioning departments and the other ranks would have to do a bit of work but the end result would be lower taxes for all of us who actually work in the real world.
There is nothing that radical about this proposal. In management speak it is called de-layering and private enterprise did it years ago. We live in the communication and information age so a pyramid like hierarchy is no longer needed.
i take it you've never worked in the public sector then?
I used to work for the mod but decided it was a stifled environment where changes were hard to implement so moved on to "the real world" in the form of a global manufacturing company and leader in their field.
Net result, even harder to implement change, far more blinkered attitudes and far too many "ranks" alot of which add no value but cover the ar5e of the rank above.
This is not an uninformed view of a socialist, bmw driving, amateur underwater photograper, smoker but an honest view from someone who has "been there and done that"
btw i am the latter 2 of your pet hates
FHCNICK said:
I've been thinking about civil service efficiency. The problems are manifold. They are encouraged to build empires. Bad staff are retained. The object is not to get the work done but to look good in office politics. There is no measure or discipline of performance. Etc, etc. They employ at least twice as many people as are necessary to do the job and probably a lot more than that.
So I have a solution. They all have ranks like in the army. So overnight just make a few of the ranks redundant. As in out of the door. You would still have functioning departments and the other ranks would have to do a bit of work but the end result would be lower taxes for all of us who actually work in the real world.
There is nothing that radical about this proposal. In management speak it is called de-layering and private enterprise did it years ago. We live in the communication and information age so a pyramid like hierarchy is no longer needed.
i take it you've never worked in the public sector then?
I used to work for the mod but decided it was a stifled environment where changes were hard to implement so moved on to "the real world" in the form of a global manufacturing company and leader in their field.
Net result, even harder to implement change, far more blinkered attitudes and far too many "ranks" alot of which add no value but cover the ar5e of the rank above.
This is not an uninformed view of a socialist, bmw driving, amateur underwater photograper, smoker but an honest view from someone who has "been there and done that"
btw i am the latter 2 of your pet hates
I didn't say the private sector is perfect. Much of it, especially where there are virtual monopolies, can be just as bad. However look at what Lord Browne did at BP. He started with a bloated and beurocratic institution and turned it into a lean and efficient profit machine. One of his key tools was de-layering.
bruciebabe said:
bruciebabe said:
I've been thinking about civil service efficiency. The problems are manifold. They are encouraged to build empires. Bad staff are retained. The object is not to get the work done but to look good in office politics. There is no measure or discipline of performance. Etc, etc. They employ at least twice as many people as are necessary to do the job and probably a lot more than that.
So I have a solution. They all have ranks like in the army. So overnight just make a few of the ranks redundant. As in out of the door. You would still have functioning departments and the other ranks would have to do a bit of work but the end result would be lower taxes for all of us who actually work in the real world.
There is nothing that radical about this proposal. In management speak it is called de-layering and private enterprise did it years ago. We live in the communication and information age so a pyramid like hierarchy is no longer needed.
i take it you've never worked in the public sector then?
I used to work for the mod but decided it was a stifled environment where changes were hard to implement so moved on to "the real world" in the form of a global manufacturing company and leader in their field.
Net result, even harder to implement change, far more blinkered attitudes and far too many "ranks" alot of which add no value but cover the ar5e of the rank above.
This is not an uninformed view of a socialist, bmw driving, amateur underwater photograper, smoker but an honest view from someone who has "been there and done that"
btw i am the latter 2 of your pet hates
I didn't say the private sector is perfect. Much of it, especially where there are virtual monopolies, can be just as bad. However look at what Lord Browne did at BP. He started with a bloated and beurocratic institution and turned it into a lean and efficient profit machine. One of his key tools was de-layering.
I take your point on bp brucie, just wish you wouldn't make sweeping statements based on not alot more than your political views and what you have read in the FT.
Personally i think its a shame that such companies as bp,bt, britash gas etc etc couldn't have been run more efficiently under public sector management so that everyone could have benefitted from the cost cutting.
Unfortunately there is a stigma attached to the public sector and lets be honest at the time of massive privatisation there weren't that many private sector companies that were being run at the leanest most efficient way. a mixture of events (far eastern manufacturing being the biggest) hit the majority of uk business at about that time and the public sector was witch hunted because they were too slow in reacting as the rest of the uk went leaner and fitter.
I believe the private sector is inherently more efficient than the public sector because of the profit motive.
There can be a problem with large complex organisations however, which can be solved by ensuring that the interests of senior management are aligned with those of the shareholders via a properly executed performance pay scheme.
There can be a problem with large complex organisations however, which can be solved by ensuring that the interests of senior management are aligned with those of the shareholders via a properly executed performance pay scheme.
JagLover said:
I believe the private sector is inherently more efficient than the public sector because of the profit motive.
There can be a problem with large complex organisations however, which can be solved by ensuring that the interests of senior management are aligned with those of the shareholders via a properly executed performance pay scheme.
granted a fundamental motivator for sure, my experience of the private sector though is of a very large organisation that has had it too good for too long (they've recently realised this and a global panic mode ensued) with happy share holders raking it in over the years ergo levels of waste (materials and people) imo in excess of those i witnessed when working for the mod.
JagLover said:
JagLover said:
I believe the private sector is inherently more efficient than the public sector because of the profit motive.
Hmmm Railtrack.......?
Hmmmm Notwork Rail, which spends twice as much as Railtrack.
>> Edited by JagLover on Thursday 19th May 14:05
I think anything to do with the rail system is a white elephant in the debate, public or private its on a hiding to nothing.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff