Rescuing
Democracy in the United Kingdom from our current Elected
Dictatorship
|
Spin, not
face-to-face confrontations with the voters, is the Government's
chosen method of communication. Ordinary
people are dangerous. Ordinary people might ask a question
which throws a politician 'off message'; the Cabinet member
might reveal himself or herself to be a human being like
us, and not a programmed android. Worse still, he or she
might tell the truth.
Ann Leslie - Daily Mail, September
16, 2004
|
The
mismanagement of the police is a national scandal. Gimmicks and
jargon are now substitutes for action
by Iain Gordon, Former Metropolitan
Police Detective Inspector - Daily Mail, August 12, 2004
The
British police were once renowned as the finest in the world,
exuding self-confidence, authority and integrity. Those qualities
were a central reason why Britain was such a crime-free peaceful
country. But they are rapidly being lost as our police become
increasingly demoralised and leaderless. Unsurprisingly, in a
society where the police have so badly lost their way, crime and
disorder are on the rise.
Police
chiefs are fond of blaming their problems on 'lack of resources'.
Only last week the Association of Police Authorities warned that
because of alleged underfunding, some forces would have to 'look
at cuts' to meet their deficits. Financial difficulties have also
been cited to explain the revelation this week that three police
stations a month have been closing since Labour came to power
in 1997.
But
this is nonsense. The truth is that more money is being poured
into the police than ever before - overall, police funding has
gone up by 30% since 2001 - but so much of it is being wasted
because of mismanagement, bureaucracy, gimmickry and warped priorities.
Disillusioned
I know this because I spent 30 years as a police
officer in London, beginning as a young constable on the beat
and eventually rising to the rank of detective inspector. But
having once planned to spend my entire career in the Met., I eventually
left because I had become so disillusioned with the modern approach
to policing, which appeared to be driven by procedures and political
correctness rather than any desire to tackle crime.
Policing should be a relatively simple job, based
on providing a visible reassurance to the public, but it has been
made unnecessarily complex by a mixture of academic theorising,
fashionable ideology and an obsession with new hardware. And the
results have been disastrous.
The most dramatic change I witnessed during my
three decades in the Met was the withdrawal of the police from
the streets. We employ more officers than ever before, yet they
are distinguished only by their absence. When I began in the mid-Sixties
at Harrow Road police station in West London, working the beat
was by far the most important part of the job. The Superintendent,
who today would probably carry the grand title of 'Borough Commander',
made it clear he expected his officers on duty to be out on patrol
at all times, unless there were exceptional circumstances.
On one occasion, he actually threatened to sack
me when he found me in the station, despite the fact that I had
arrived to report a possible fatal accident. Moreover, he lived
up to his own ethos; he could be seen walking the beat himself
at all hours of the night, something that would be unthinkable
for today's cosseted chiefs. Such was the emphasis on beat policing
that if a serious crime occurred on an officer's patrol, he could
be required to provide a duty statement explaining exactly where
he was at the time of the incident.
But from the Seventies, the beat went out of
fashion. This was partly because of the introduction of the panda
car, which was said to be a more effective way of covering a patch.
But the reality was that, once they were inside their cars, the
police became more remote from the public and less inclined to
take instant action to deal with a crime. I have actually been
with other officers who could witness a suspicious incident but
would prefer to explain it away rather than get out of the car
to investigate.
More importantly, academics told chief constables
and politicians that the beat was an ineffective use of 'resources',
tying up too many officers who had little chance of actually foiling
a crime. This was the same kind of theory which
claimed that small, local stations were a pointless extravagance,
and instead advocated the building of vast urban fortresses. What
the academics ignored was that a real police presence on the streets
is the best deterrence.
It
was not unusual at Harrow Road in the Sixties to see an officer
on every street corner, while 30 of us would go out on patrol
at night. The consequence was a crime rate far below that of today.
Police chiefs talk today about 'intelligence policing', but the
beat actually provides the best intelligence of all, because officers
really get to know the people and problems of the area, something
that is impossible to achieve hiding behind a computer or a steering
wheel.
Failure
But
instead of returning the police to where they belong, the political
and professional elite have come up with yet another gimmick;
the introduction of community support officers. This move is bound
to end in failure, because these new uniformed wardens have no
more powers than the ordinary citizen, and yobs realise that these
pseudo-officers can actually do nothing in the face of criminality.
The
mismanagement of the modern police is nothing short of a national
scandal. Senior officers, fixated by rules and jargon, refuse
to provide adequate support to the rank and file, especially when
anything goes wrong, or some lawyer sounds off about 'human rights'.
When I began on the beat, my senior officers would back me to
the hilt, even if I may have made a technical error. That sort
of loyalty to the troops has utterly evaporated. But then, in
my early days, most of the chiefs were experienced, street-wise
men - often with a background in the armed services - who had
spent years on the beat and knew the reality of crime.
Today,
forces are run by a new breed of university graduates who have
been fast-tracked into senior positions because of their ability
to spout the correct jargon about 'social deprivation' and 'community'.
Instead of concentrating on the real work of fighting crime, they
spend their time building bureaucratic empires or imposing the
rigid new creed of diversity on their forces.
Propaganda
A
friend in the Hampshire constabulary told me recently that the
only time he sees inspectors is when a race or supposedly homophobic
crime occurs. Similarly, the Metropolitan Police last year decided
to organise and subsidise an expensive fashion show at the Tate
Modern gallery for teenagers from South London. The stated aim
was to steer youths away from crime; a far better deterrent would
have been a few more officers on the beat.
Yet
this sort of obscure approach now predominates. So rather than
combating burglary, police chiefs organise elaborate 'victim support'
schemes and counselling networks. Propaganda, mission statements,
and rules have become substitutes for action. Rather than trying
to attract the best recruits, they are obsessed with achieving
the correct gender and ethnic balance. The former is a dubious
goal; it cannot be seriously disputed that, though there are outstanding
female officers, street police-women tend to be less effective
than men, since so much police work involves direct, physical
-sometimes violent - confrontation.
Similarly,
to claim that police officers do not need to be on the streets
is like saying that teachers don't need to be in classrooms. When
I started my career, we were there to serve the law-abiding public.
That should still be the central aim of today's forces. It is
a tragedy that our police leaders no longer seem to understand
this.
Please
click one of the links above to cast your vote
|
Current
and prospective Parliamentary candidates of all Parties running
for election could share a platform at public forums in every
constituency. They would be presented with the results of
polls on this issue expressed by the majority of voters in that
constituency.
The candidates could be asked if their own views and that of their
Party manifesto corresponded with the polls, and if not, how they
intended to represent the will of the majority of local voters.
Local and National Press, Radio and TV coverage would be arranged
and the results published on this web site.
Here
is another powerful strategy for using your vote effectively in
the forthcoming General Election. Send your sitting and prospective
MPs a letter defining your requirements if they want your vote.
This example deals with the proposed
EU Constitutional Treaty.
Your
letters would end: "If you do not answer
this letter, I shall take it that you intend to follow the Government
line. I shall act accordingly in the forthcoming General Election."
Blair's
defiance of the will of the majority of we, the people of the
UK, over the invasion of Iraq must be exposed by voters as a matter
or urgency, and not just in the two by-elections we have had this
July and the European elections in June 2004. But how can this
be done?
The
most effective way of getting our deceitful PM to resign would
be to mobilise the army of Labour MPs currently in the House of
Commons and get them to demand it, the loss of their seat to be
a penalty if they did not. All voters in Labour-held constituencies
need to write a letter along these lines to their local Labour
MPs:
Here's
one to get Tony Blair to resign:
|
Dear
Despite
his absolute and unequivocal assurances over the past year
of the serious risk to our security of Saddam Hussein's
'weapons of mass destruction', Prime Minister Blair has
admitted, that the threat was non-existent. For that critical
error of judgement and for his gross incompetence in handling
this very important issue, I ask you to take immediate steps
to ensure that Tony Blair does the honourable thing and
resign without delay..
I
would therefore be much obliged if you would propose and
help mobilise a Parliamentary vote of 'No Confidence' in
Mr Blair which, despite Labour's huge majority, would leave
the PM with no option but to resign.
If
I get no reply to this letter, I shall assume you will continue
to support Mr Blair as our Prime Minister. In such circumstances
I shall not vote for you in the forthcoming General Election.
Signed:
|
Simple,
non-violent, protest letters along these lines on a variety of
issues could be the basis for re-vitalising our democracy and
increasing voters' interest and participation in politics. Download
a printable copy of the above letter here.
Or
why not create a questionnaire that you send to all the candidates
in your constituency, getting them to give yes/no answers to questions
of your choice, and ending it with the same paragraph(above).
Download
a printable example of the questionnaire.
It
is high time for the people of this United Kingdom to stop allowing
themselves to be manipulated by politicians. We need our representatives
in Parliament to genuinely reflect the view of the majority in
their own constituency, even if this means going against their
personal and/or their party's policy. While they may argue their
case, hoping to change the minds of the majority in their constituency,
they should ultimately be obliged to reflect the majority view
of those who elect them.
It
will be argued by politicians of all parties that most voters
don't have the knowledge necessary to express an opinion on important
subjects at issue, and that our vote is a form of delegated democracy.
We should argue that it is their duty to ensure that we voters
do have ready access to such information as is necessary to form
an intelligent opinion. That, after all, is one main purpose of
Opposition Parties in our Parliamentary Democracy.
Most
important of all, such proceedings would rekindle in voters their
latent interest and obligation to cast their vote, knowing that
the candidate of their choice would be more likely to act in accordance
with their wishes. A much higher turnout in elections would be
the result. Contact your local Party Chairman. Gain
his support for setting up public forums in your constituency
on these, as well as any other relevant topics, well before the
next General Election expected in 2005. You should then, depending
on the integrity of the candidate of your choice, feel fairly
certain that your view on any subject being debated in Parliament
will more accurately be reflected by your representative in that
assembly.
If
you have suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include
in the pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact
the webmaster.
