Reply to: Sacked!

[vetran]

Why would I have a different one?

The person in charge is complaining that she is doing a bad job but it's other people's fault.

It's always someone else's fault.

They were doing a bad job long before she turned up.

Cast your mind back:

Institutionally racist, misogynist, corrupt & incompetent.

Even she couldn't have racked that up in just under a year.

We need someone exceptional to fix this with the full backing of the cabinet, I am not sure Ms Braverman is that.

Where is Maggie or Norman when you need them?

[WTFH]

The Home Secretary. ...

Well that's the standard answer and the one I got when working for one of the constabularies. You, of course, will have a different one.

Why would I have a different one?

The person in charge is complaining that she is doing a bad job but it's other people's fault.

It's always someone else's fault.

[malvolio]

Who is in charge of/responsible for policing in the UK?

The Home Secretary. Beneath her the Chief Constables (the Met have their own title but it's the same job) and their Deputies (one for operational, one for logistical) and beneath them the Gold/Silver/Bronze command structure. The top two layers are the ones who set policy, the rest put it into practice. Ignore the Police Commissioners (most police do), they are merely window dressing.

Well that's the standard answer and the one I got when working for one of the constabularies. You, of course, will have a different one.

[WTFH]

And how do they get put before the CPS for prosecution? Oh yes, the police arrest them...

So your point is?

Who is in charge of/responsible for policing in the UK?

[malvolio]

I'm not going to call you a clueless Muppet but the police don't choice who to prosecute, that's the Crown Prosecution service.

There are rather a lot of clues in the name Crown Prosecution service

And how do they get put before the CPS for prosecution? Oh yes, the police arrest them...

So your point is?

[eek]

The police need meddling with. Their selective choice of who to prosecute and who to buy teas for is simply wrong.

I'm not going to call you a clueless Muppet but the police don't choice who to prosecute, that's the Crown Prosecution service.

There are rather a lot of clues in the name Crown Prosecution service

[WTFH]

Sorry the Police employ convicted perverts, ignore widescale child sex abuse (from Saville to Rotherham & beyond), fail to deal with shoplifting, increased knife crime etc, someone has to do something.

The current lot running the country have reduced funding for the police, reduced the number of police (while always claiming the reverse), undermined it at every turn and now want to replace it.
It's almost the same play-book that they are using for the NHS.

[vetran]

I think the issue is the words "Braverman". The person who wants to do tent clearance and is trying to meddle with a screwed up police force amongst other things...

Sorry the Police employ convicted perverts, ignore widescale child sex abuse (from Saville to Rotherham & beyond), fail to deal with shoplifting, increased knife crime etc, someone has to do something.

[WTFH]

Deleted. Not worth it.

[malvolio]

I think the issue is the words "Braverman". The person who wants to do tent clearance and is trying to meddle with a screwed up police force amongst other things...

The police need meddling with. Their selective choice of who to prosecute and who to buy teas for is simply wrong.

As for tent city, the question is how many of those aren't actually homeless. I do agree that lumping them all as one - itinerants, part-timers and genuine in-need people is a grossly unfair act.

So 50/50 for Braverman at the moment...

(There is also a line of thought that she is deliberately provoking a sacking to improv her chances at the next leadership challenge - which will be shortly after Sir Keir ascends to the throne...)

[SueEllen]

Where did I say that? She broke the rules and got fired from a trivial job. I don't share her views or appreciate the inarticulate way she expresses them but nowhere did I say she shouldn't say them.

I think the issue is the words "Braverman". The person who wants to do tent clearance and is trying to meddle with a screwed up police force amongst other things...

[malvolio]

Ah, OK, free speech for all*



*as long as it's the right thing they are saying.

Where did I say that? She broke the rules and got fired from a trivial job. I don't share her views or appreciate the inarticulate way she expresses them but nowhere did I say she shouldn't say them.

[WTFH]

Another over-privilege media luvvie who thinks being isolated from money worries and being famous for an ability to count higher than 20 equates to having a right to lecture the rest of us. She got binned for failing to follow Auntie's latest revision to the social media policies. Glad to see the back of her - except we won't....

Sad thing about Braverman's comments is that she is actually right. She's likely to become the second politician since Edwina Curry to be sacked for telling the truth.

Ah, OK, free speech for all*



*as long as it's the right thing they are saying.

[malvolio]

Another over-privilege media luvvie who thinks being isolated from money worries and being famous for an ability to count higher than 20 equates to having a right to lecture the rest of us. She got binned for failing to follow Auntie's latest revision to the social media policies. Glad to see the back of her - except we won't....

Sad thing about Braverman's comments is that she is actually right. She's likely to become the second politician since Edwina Curry to be sacked for telling the truth.

[vetran]

She definitely used challenging language but the problems exist. It would be funny if Ms Braverman is mentioned in the same sentence as Enoch Powell in future history books.