Policing made easy

Policing made easy

Despite numerous emails, comments etc. to the police, speeding cars, HGVs, and motorbikes remain a problem in Botley. 

On 3rd April 2012, an email contained the following:

"Too many HGVs are now using the High Street as a 'rat run' and are increasing the dangers to pedestrians, notably children, using the narrow footpaths.

"We need proper policing in Botley to monitor speed, not civilian volunteers as suggested by the advert in the last Botley Parish Council Newsletter, before someone is killed."

A follow up email, on 5 April 2012, contained:

"Urban myth, assiduously promoted by the police themselves, says the police are so busy elsewhere, in unspecified places (hopefully, not the canteen), that they have no resources available for Botley. This really is a classic “Emperor’s new clothes” tactic.

"The reality is the lack of visibility of law enforcement in Botley has led to drivers of cars, motorcycles and HGVs treating Botley, outside the rush hours, as a place to speed with impunity – and why not?

"Even during the fume-packed rush hours, drivers are seen on a daily basis using handheld mobile phones while driving with one hand. Is it any wonder HGV drivers going through Botley manage to leave the road?

"Volunteers, living in Botley, used for speed monitoring may be subject to intimidation, especially from the rougher elements in the village, to discourage them from treating everyone the same. They will not have the protection afforded by a police uniform. And will volunteers be required to sign a disclaimer absolving the police, local authorities, etc. from legal liability for their safety?"

Before moving on, it's worth considering this - if my car has a problem, I take it to an excellent garage in the village, they fix it and tell me how much I owe them. You probably have similar arrangements.

Now, if you turned up, having prepaid for a car service, would you consider it reasonable to be told your car will be fixed as soon as they can find and give basic training to local labour? Thought not. So why do the police expect us to pay for their services, via income and council taxes, but then tell us a similar story about waiting for volunteers?

Despite two people raising the issue of speeding and the current position on Speedwatch volunteers during the last few weeks, no reply has been forthcoming from the police. 

Now, returning to the garage analogy, wouldn't you at this stage be rushing off to Trading Standards to make enquiries on a refund, at the very least, and possibly whether there were grounds for prosecution for fraud, or deception, for a non-existent service?

Policing myths

The argument goes the police have limited resources and use them judiciously elsewhere on important cases. A reasonable argument, if true, but ignores how well the resources are managed and deployed.

The recent murder in New Addington resulted in police failing to find a body in a small house they had previously searched twice before. Worse, according to a retired New Scotland Yard senior detective, the police failed to secure the house as a potential crime scene, thereby allowing contamination of evidence to occur.

Sky News gave extensive coverage to the hunt for the missing girl. The commentator in the Skycopter spoke, without irony, of the hard work put in on the search while filming 12 police officers sat on the grass verge enjoying the sun. 

Yesterday, 10 police officers were shown hanging around outside the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, no doubt waiting to pounce on Julian Assange if he made a break for it.

But here (http://bit.ly/NSd6IU) is what Peter Walker, former Deputy Chief Constable of North Yorkshire, has to say:

"... For example, "Health and Safety" and "Diversity" advisers abound in the police and have not been cut because Chief Constables are too risk averse to do so. Yet Health and Safety is a core management activity, knowledge of which should be a selection criterion before people are promoted, rather than a "dark art", understood only by the chosen few.


""Diversity" problems are best avoided by setting standards and giving clear leadership, backed up by discipline, rather than sending everyone on "Traveller Awareness" seminars once a year."

"... Above all grind out the efficiencies by making management do what it is paid to do.

"On average, about 40 members of the support staff in my local force are off sick every day, at an annual cost to the taxpayer north of £1m. It is clear there is a level of tolerance for sickness in the Public Sector that is not apparent in Private Sector organisations.

"I have to confess this was a lesson I learned early on when I made the change from public to private sector. I was rather proud of my approach to sickness management as a senior policeman, only to have my hubris exposed when fellow Directors told me not to worry about the issue and then showed me why. The problem simply did not exist.

"Contrast this with a conversation I had not that long ago speaking to a senior staff member at a Public Sector college, who bemoaned the level of sickness she was having to deal with but would not change her approach because she would have "grievance procedures" to deal with if they got tough about managing absence.

"It goes without saying that not only will productivity improve if staff are present all the days they are paid for, but you will probably find that fewer people are required and long term savings can accrue.

"The same applies to support staff numbers and their job roles, the local force (about 1,400 police officers strong) has more than eighty people in "HR", fifty-odd in "IT" and nineteen in a "Futures Directorate". These levels of over staffing can and should be got rid of.

"None of this is glamorous and it's certainly not easy, but if it's glamour or an easy life someone's looking for, being a Police and Crime Commissioner may not be the best career choice. However, it may be that before they put all their faith in "big" outsourcing, they may generate the savings they need and get better support services as a result by adopting a simpler approach."

If you are pessimistic and think things can't change, then be pleasantly surprise to hear of one Police Inspector who regularly challenged officers what they were doing back at base. As a result of this officer's initiative, clear up rates shot up by 60%. 

Not all, but some of the above does apply to Hampshire Constabulary. 

So, please, no more "if only our resources allowed it", or words to that effect. Try managing resources better and cutting out waste. 

Police and Crime Commissioners (PCC)

We have had Police Authorities who saw a significant part of their role as cheerleaders; the Police Federation who are still one of the last bastions for Spanish work practices; and senior police officers who want to tick all the right boxes.

What we do not want are superannuated political has-beens being shoehorned into lucrative posts as PCCs, while watching the once-loved British Police continue on its spiral descent into politically correct policing, while making sure the wealthy and some privileged communities receive a far higher level of policing. 

Can't happen here? It already has. 

Think carefully when casting your vote in November's PCC elections. 

Take on the elderly at your peril

A local lady, age 87, complained to a nationally well-known department store that an expensive mattress purchased less than six years before was uncomfortable. An 'inspector' was sent out and she subsequently received a fairly dismissive letter stating it was 'fair wear and tear'. Not content the lady sent another letter containing the following:





"My age is relevant only in so far that I am, and have been, the only user of the double mattress in question, which makes it more surprising given it has become uncomfortable so quickly in the absence of the the more energetic use it could have expected to receive from a young couple."





It remains to be seen what reply she gets to this letter, but it does reveal a truth that David Cameron and his government - not all elderly people are senile, passive, or prepared to be ripped off by taxes on all the elderly to provide care for those who need it as suggested in Andrew Dilnot's report.





Let's be clear about one thing, this 87 year old lady like many other pensioners endured tremendous hardships as young people during World World II. Either in the armed forces, or working the number of hours outlawed now by the EU in most occupations. They grew up rapidly, faced regular bombings from the enemy, but learnt to fight, and to endure, whatever was thrown at them.





After the war they were subject to food rationing, had difficulty finding housing, and received a token amount of child allowance for one child only. But they dug in and perservered until better times appeared in the late 1950s for them and their children.





Like today, the Coalition Government faced extreme difficulties. After the war, Winston Churchill, the successful wartime prime minister, was voted out of office. The incoming Labour Government, under Clement Attlee, in response to the nation's aspirations, embarked on radical social reform to set up the NHS and provide a welfare benefits safety net to temporarily help those people in real need and to ensure there was going to be no return to the social conditions of the 1920s with semi-starved barefeet children.





This week the Dilnot report suggests pensioners should pay additional taxes to fund their care in old age. This is estimated by Grant Thornton Accountants as adding 2p in the pound, applicable to pensioners only.





Those pensioners with their own homes who need care will still have to pay for their personal care, capped at £35,000, but this will not include "bed and board" costs of residential care estimated at an additional £7,000 to £10,000 per annum.

So effectively the elderly - but only those who worked; were frugal; and paid mortgages - but not those who, in some cases, have received benefits best part or all their lives who will, surprise, surprise, carry on receiving state benefits to cover all costs.

Just to add insult to injury, councils pay an average of £520 a week, while self-funders pay £631 for identical, or worse, care. The difference works out at £5,700 a year, or £17,100 over 5 years - and guess who is really paying for another stealth tax, this time created by local councils to reduce their overheads? Get the picture?





Now by the time these "reforms" are implemented the cap of £35,000 will almost certainly have increased, along with "bed and board" costs, and note no one is talking about minimum standards for care homes. The elderly will have to pay considerable more to upgrade their accommodation.





So the 87 year old and her ilk, if they are one of the 90% who do not need residential care, will have their current standard of living reduced still further by a tax only applied to pensioners - in addition, of course, to all the income tax they are probably paying now! So, Mr Cameron, what happened to "We are all in this together"!





Before anyone bleats, notably from the generation who received generous child benefits, working family tax credits, housing benefits, and a myriad of other benefits not available to those of the older generation, you will also get old and it comes round quicker than you think. Could it be paid for without trying to increase the queues for Dignitas? Yes, it could.





This week the papers carried the story of a foreign national, who had self medicated fertility pills at twice the recommended dose. She boarded a plane, just in time to give birth in London to quintuplets. This cost the NHS £200,000 and is probably irrecoverable as she claimed to be penniless. No doubt once she has seen one of Human Rights lawyers, who will make inroads into legal aid, she may well demand "The right to family life" in the UK. What other country, or government, would allow such an abuse of what was set up as a welfare safety net, but which should be advertised now as something quite different?




Another tear-jerker was the anguish expressed by the Labour Party on behalf of the 40,000 families who may be made homeless, because they will not be able to manage on housing benefits of £26,000 per year. But no one has mentioned the child benefits etc they will carry on receiving. The following is perhaps indicative as to why there is no money left to pay for care for the elderly.





A family of asylum seekers, consisting of the parents and seven children, were costing taxpayers £8,000 per month in housing benefit staying in a £2.1 million luxury Kensington townhouse. They are all dependent on benefits, but no information is available as to whether their lifestyle is one of choice, or because none speaks English.





Then there are all the other payments and taxes, some totalling billions, this Coalition Government chooses to spend money on instead, such as the annual EU contributions; bailouts from the UK to the EU and IMF used to support Greece, Ireland, and Portugal; the plethora of so-called 'green' stealth taxes which have added £200 to your home fuel bill; petrol receipts which are pushing the poorer motorists off the road; International Aid, ringfenced and engorged, including to India and Pakistan; the £ billions spent on Afghanistan and Libya, but not on the sub-standard housing provided to ordinary soldiers, yet the accommodation for senior officers - not in any personal danger - continues to be as opulent as ever; and for the Royal Family where the Coalition Government rushed through FOI legislation to ensure the public were kept in the dark on the content of discussions between the Crown and Ministers, and rushed through changes so the impoverished House of Windsor would, in future, take a percentage of Crown Estates revenue, including leases for windfarms on the seabed.





Democracy only works when politicians listen to the electorate. Today, democracy is simply not working in England and other parts of the UK. When a politician says they are listening, it translates now as "No, we are not."

Time to revolt, stand up for pensioners and fix bayonets. To the barricades!

Let them freeze

Energy Secretary Chris Huhne - Member of Parliament for Eastleigh, which includes Botley village - has shown himself to have a skin thicker than a rhinoceros.

As the Daily Mail's editorial, 13 June 2011, said:

Gas and hot air

"With sheer brass nerve, millionaire Energy Secretay Chris Huhne tells householders they should not take spirally gas and electricity bills 'lying down', but should 'vote with their feet' by finding cheaper suppliers.

"Leave aside that the huge range and complexity of tariffs charged by greedy and ill-regulated power companies make price comparisons all but impossible. The truth is that Mr Huhne's own hidden green taxes, which already add some £200 a year to out bills, are a huge factor in driving prices up.

"Indeed, as more of his stealth come into force and more useless windfarms are built, energy charges are expected to double by 2020 - piling on the hardship and seriously undermining businesses' ability to compete. And he expects voters to take this lying down?"

It may be a rhetorical question for the Daily Mail, but the voters in Botley village, and the rest of the Eastleigh constituency, need to ask whether a change of MP is required. Leaving aside the colourful personal store Chris Huhne has attracted in recent months, his latest outburst sounds like an updated version of Marie Antoinette's "Let them eat cakes" and will be as equally useless when pensioners and families on limited incomes have to choose this winter between eating or freezing.

Botley has many elderly residents and, at a guess, many of these will not have access to the internet in order to use price comparison sites. However, it will be the elderly who will determine the outcome of the next MP for the marginal seat of Eastleigh. Polling statistics show a greater percentage of the over 55s vote than any other group.

Chris Huhne could possibly land up sharing the distinction locally of being, along with Shakespeare's patron the Earl of Southampton, the only ones to have an effigy burnt at a village bonfire night. Still , at least the elderly and the less well-off can huddle round the fire to keep warm.

Community Safety Forum

Also known as the surreal world of policing in the 21st century.

The audience sat patiently in the Market Hall waiting for the Community Safety police sergeant to turn up, so the meeting could begin. A check of my watch showed he was almost 15 minutes late for the start of the meeting, convened to discuss policing of the village. Unkindly, I wondered if the sergeant had problems with his SatNav in finding where the village was on his patch, even though he is based at Hedge Police station (- closed in the evenings, weekends, and, to my surprise, for lunch hours, during the day) some two miles away.

Dressed in jeans and tank top, befitting Dennis the Menace, the sergeant proceeded to explain to the audience how pleased he was to report that his Community Safety team was no longer languishing, more or less, at the bottom of the performance table, but was now in the premier league. No rapturous applause from the audience. More worryingly for the sergeant, a number of the audience actually had the temerity to complain about the service, or lack of it, provided by his team.

One lady from Boorley Green said she had not seen the Community Support Officer - ever. It was, perhaps, a tad insensitive for the sergeant to suggest she needed to get out more often. Compounded by the spotty, callow CSO saying we may not see him, but he was probably cunningly concealed somewhere. Images of the CSO in full camouflage and matching tin helmet, hiding in the bushes, sprung to mind. Inspector Clouseau could not have done better!

Just to round off this inept part of the evening, the villagers were left totally confused by the suggestion to ring various alternative telephone numbers - 999, 0845 0454545, 112 and 101 - depending on the nature of the complaint. To much hilarity, villagers said they had used these numbers, only to find some of the operators rude and indifferent, and worse no feedback from the police to their call. Bring back that irascible, old sod, Jim, our long retired village bobby! No more worrying then about whether ASBOs, human rights of antisocial criminals were being infringed, just good old-fashioned policing - Gene Hunt eat your heart out!

I did venture to suggest that the sergeant sounded more like a social worker - i.e. lots of empathy with poor misunderstood yobs - than a law enforcement officer. Of course, I was proved totally wrong, when our Parish Chairman mentioned an incident of mistaken racial abuse (- in fact, the young lady so abused, owes more to a sunbed than ethnic origin). At this point, I thought the sergeant was about to have an epileptic fit, as he went as stiff as a ramrod, his eyes glazed over, and his mouth started moving. This physical change preceded a text book quote that "Hampshire Police will not tolerate any form of racial or homophobic abuse". Obviously, the sergeant is on his way to becoming a future Commissioner of the Met.

The Parish Chairman - whom I will call Dr Longbow, as he is a PhD, and always brings to mind the power of a longbow when he is about to loose a deadly flight of well-timed sentences - called for questions. Funnily enough, Mrs Longbow drew attention to the wholesale carnage of wing mirrors, windscreens, and keying of bodywork, inflicted on the cars of members of the Choral Society every Wednesday night in the local car park. Nice pincer movement, worthy of Wellington. Dr Longbow added a few subtle sentences, which simply added to the sergeant's increasing discomfort. At this point, the sergeant pointed to various leaflets at the back of the hall, apologised and left stage right.

Did I learn anything? Yes, always get my gay or ethnic friends to make a complaint on my behalf, as it is really the only way for anything to be taken seriously by the police. By the way, I not excluding those who are gay and ethnic, but they are bit thin on the ground in rural communities.

Rubbish knows no bounds!

In the Autumn 2008 edition of Botley Parish Council's Botley News, after being lulled into a warm glow of village life by the efforts and results of the Botley In Bloom competition, there follows the dead hand of bureaucracy. Notably, an article, entitled "Where Is Your Wheelie Bin?" by Eastleigh Borough Council's very own Council Enforcement Officer. Shaking in your boots yet? Well, let's see what this officer has to say - emphasis all his own:

"Please put your bin out before 7am on the day of collection and RETURN IT TO WITHIN YOUR PROPERTY BOUNDARY as soon as possible after collection has been made"

Just in case you haven't got the message, he goes on:

"... To leave the bin on the pavement is also an offence under Section 46 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 which carries with it a fine of up to £100".

Not to mention a criminal conviction; naming and shaming in the local paper; and possibly permanent phone tapping by the council using those statutes you thought Parliament only passed to protect you from terrorists! In contrast, two youngsters who recently burgled Botley's Co-op store by smashing the £700 plate glass door, stole cigarettes and alcohol, were given a Reprimand by the police, which means they have no criminal record.

No doubt the Council Enforcement Officer will ensure his latest edict will be followed up in the best traditions of petty bureaucy, beloved by the State along with parking fines, littering (now referred to as an environmental crime by practitioners) etc.

Some of you will have read stories in the press, followed up on television stations, of frail elderly people asked by their local authorities to drag their wheelie bins over half a mile to a new collection point. Similarly the story of a local Fareham woman of 7 1/2 stone ( - another fine for reverting to imperial measurements!) whose garden refuse bag was deemed too heavy by green refuse collectors - obviously hired from Middle Earth! Enough, let's analyse the new edict instead.

Even allowing for the clocks being turned back an hour at the end of October, the demand to put out bins before 7am means residents risking health and safety by moving them when it's still dark. Also as winter approaches there is the danger of slipping on frosted or iced pavements. The elderly, and not so physically able, may have grounds for suing the council for accidents caused by this directive, especially if pavements are uneven or slippery. Wonder how quickly the council workers' union would react to their members being subjected to unnecessary hazards like this?

At a time when everyone, especially the elderly, are being encouraged to save energy, let's open the door, let the heating out, and go outside to move the wheelie bin at the coldest time of day i.e. before dawn!

A more reasonable approach would be to allow wheelie bins to be put out before light fades the day before collection and wheelie bins moved back as soon as possible after collection, However, the council enforcement officer needs to take on board that for many people not working 9-5 hours, this could be quite late on collection day.

Were any of the elected representatives on the council involved in approving this edict in advance of publication; were they nodding off; or simply have no control over what Council Enforcement chooses to issue?

This week the green collection did not take place on Thursday, but Saturday. Please feel free, Eastleigh Borough Council, to fine yourselves for poor performance and make suitable financial compensation to those residents who pay for this service. Sorry, of course, "Enforcement" is a one-way gate.

Once upon a time council officials fell within the term "public servants", now the term is effectively redundant as those that pay for their salaries are effectively the serfs and will remain so until they roar. And who said the Roman feast of Saturnalia was dead?

Remember:

"Loss of freedom seldom happens overnight. Oppression doesn't stand on the doorstep with toothbrush moustache and swastika armband -- it creeps up insidiously... step by step, and all of a sudden the unfortunate citizen realizes that it is gone." Baron Lane

Death & Taxes

In some places, Botley included, families have lived in the same house for generations. In future, people may have to move in order to pay rapacious Inheritance Tax on their property - assuming they haven't had to sell it beforehand, and paid Stamp Duty, to pay for a place in a care home. Or remortgaged it to afford care in the home; private medical operation; or private prescriptions for medicines denied to pensioners (in reality, for being too old) - and therefore expendable.

The above, of course, does not apply to the very wealthy (and that includes politicians milking the lecture circuit; flogging self-serving memoirs; ignoring dead servicemen; by showing the hard decisions they had to take). The Duke of Westminster's billion pound estate will pass to his heir virtually intact. As for the Royal Family, well ...

Those villagers, who worked all their lives, will have seen the value of their private pensions savagely cut as a result of the tax raid on pension funds by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Some will only have savings accrued, and taxed, during their lifetime as their company pension scheme folded sometime ago, leaving little or nothing. Remember the Maxwell saga, and all-party political support to ensure "it never happens again"? How hollow and empty the promises made. How many company pensions schemes have gone the same way since then? And how silent the politicians are now on the subject.

State pensions, of course, only increase by a derisory amount each year. Not to mention the prospect of compulsorily working onto 70 years of age or beyond. Better hope that B&Q radically grows to meet the demand for jobs from erstwhile pensioners.

How long before Government inspectors lever open coffins to ensure that any gold rings are seized, or the duty paid?

The Barons and Bishops who presented King John with the Magna Carta to sign at Runnymede on 10 June 1215 had far less to complain of than today's oppressed villagers approaching, or of, pensionable age.

The USA's War of Independence followed the imposition of an unfair tax on tea. The Boston Tea Party should serve as a fine example to those who believe in fighting injustice. And nothing is more unjust than depriving people of their own homes by stealth taxes, aimed at the most vulnerable section of society.

The assault on the Houses of Parliament by a massed gathering of zimmer frames will be scheduled for the next opening of Parliament.

Politicians, local and national, are meant to serve their constituents. The reality is that they serve themselves far better - just look at their expenses, pay, and pensions! Instead they are intent on foisting on us unwanted legislation and rules - who wants the Liberal Democrats proposed tax of 1% per annum of the value of their house? Who asked local authorities to electronically tag wheelie refuse bins, so householders could be fined for transgressing any diktat from the town hall?

Forget which, if any, political party you normally vote for, and turn every local and national seat into a marginal. The over 50s actually possess the numbers, and therefore the power, to do this - furthermore it is the most reliable age group for voting.

By potentially taking away the financial trough from politicians, the better the prospects of a decent standard of living in old age.

Whiff of Hypocrisy

Climate warming is taken as a serious issue in Botley. After carefully studying "List of countries by carbon dioxide emissions per capita" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita) it was felt that although the UK, ranked only 38th in the world with 9.4 metric tons per capita in 2003 (- compared to the USA, ranked 10th with 19.8 metric tons per capita, and much maligned China, ranked 109th with 3.2 metric tons per capita), the good citizens of Botley came up with with startling new proposals.

Cows, as noted by no less a person than President George W. Bush, are a major source of methane gas. As from 1st October, all the herds in Botley will be fitted with methane gas collectors and the gas stored until such time as technological improvements allow its use in automobiles.

The current Liberal Democrat proposal to increase tax on 4X4 vehicles to £2,000 per annum does not go far enough in penalising us as rural users. A new tax is proposed to cover the equine set. From 1st January 2007, horses, which also emit methane gas, will be subject to a horseshoe tax of £750 per annum, rising to £1500 for horses over 12 hands. Greenhouse gases emanating from dung heaps will, of course, be subject to a new Royal Commission, following an extensive fact finding tour of various exotic locations by MPs - some whose names even their own political parties have difficulty recognising.

A media law will be introduced in the Queen's Speech, creating a new offence of ridiculing important people, such as the Government, MPs and members of the Royal Family. The European Union will be excluded as that would be stretching credulity too far. Examples of potential offences include:

Questioning whether Chris Huhne, MP and tough shadow Environment spokesman for the Liberal Democrats, or his wife drives a BMW 7 car. And has he installed sources for renewable energy in all of his five properties.

Mentioning Price Andrew's, a.k.a. Air Miles Andy, frequent use of helicopters to travel to and fro golf courses.

Does the Prime Minister really need a motorcade with police outriders to get him from Downing Street to the House of Parliament?

Should Ministers use the Queen's Flight to get to Strasbourg?

Or suggesting that Michael O'Leary would be delighted to find space for all the above on Ryanair.