Plans drawn up to privatise UK police forces

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Privatised trains in the UK are the most expensive to travel on and the worst in Europe for service.

Privatised energy companies in the UK are the most expensive for gas and electric bills compared to our European rivals. Even though we've been sitting on a ton of north sea oil and gas for decades.

The bill to privatise chuncks of the NHS has been described as 'shambolic' and is opposed by around 80% of the major health organisations in the UK

I could go on, but given that the above has been such a runaway success for the average UK citizen, then it comes across as no surprise that the Coalition government should turn it's attention to the police force. In David Cameron, we have probably the most inept Prime Minister in living memory. That takes some doing when you consider how bad Gordon Brown was.

Anyway, enough of my ranting. Here's the article. And no, it's not April the first.

From the Guardian Newspaper

A radical plan to give private companies responsibility for investigating crimes, patrolling neighbourhoods and even detaining suspects will have "catastrophic consequences", the leader of rank and file officers has warned.

Simon Reed, vice-chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said the privatisation proposals would jeopardise the chance of successful investigations and convictions and lead to the "destruction of the finest police service in the world".

West Midlands and Surrey have invited bids from G4S and other large security companies on behalf of all forces across England and Wales to take over the delivery of a wide range of services previously carried out by the police.

The list of policing activities up for grabs includes investigating crimes, detaining suspects, developing cases, responding to and investigating incidents, supporting victims and witnesses, managing high-risk individuals, patrolling neighbourhoods, managing intelligence, managing engagement with the public, as well as more traditional back-office functions, such as managing forensics, providing legal services, managing the vehicle fleet, finance and human resources.

Chief superintendent Phil Kay, who is overseeing the joint West Midlands/Surrey "transformation" programme, said it was about dealing with the challenging financial conditions the force currently faced.

"We want to explore how working with people in the private sector might be able to give us a new dimension and help us transform our service.

"We also want to see what areas of business there are where we can work with partners in the private sector to deliver in a way that is more cost-effective, efficient and helps to improve the service."

The West Midlands police are already planning to cut 2,764 police jobs over the next three years and the privatisation programme is not designed to meet the immediate budget gaps. Savings are anticipated after 2014.

Labour shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper expressed concern that the programme was being pursued for financial reasons rather than to improve performance.

She said: "The possibility of including the management of high-risk individuals, patrolling public places or pursuing criminal investigations in large private-sector contracts rather than core professional policing raises very serious concerns.

"It is fundamental to British policing that it has the trust of the people. That means policing decisions are impartial, in the interests of justice, stopping crime and catching criminals."

The contract is the largest on police privatisation so far, with a potential value of £1.5bn over seven years, rising to a possible £3.5bn depending on how many other forces get involved.

The proposals follow the imposition of a 20% cut in Whitehall grants on forces by the home secretary, Theresa May.

She has said frontline policing can be protected by using the private sector to transform services provided to the public, but this is the first clear indication of what that will mean in practice. May said on Thursday that she hoped the "business partnership" programme would be in place next spring.

A 26-page "commercial in confidence" contract note seen by the Guardian has been sent to potential bidders to run all services that "can be legally delegated to the private sector". They do not include those that involve the power of arrest and the other duties of a sworn constable.

A number of other forces, including Cleveland, Avon and Somerset, and Cheshire, have been exploring the services that might be offered to the private sector.

Cleveland police have a 10-year contract with IT firm Steria to provide call handling, front desk staffing, and aspects of the criminal justice system on top of computer services, finance and training. Reliance security runs Cleveland's custody suites.

Avon and Somerset had a contract with IBM, called South West One, which suffered problems in its first three years. Some services are to be taken back in-house. Cheshire has a more traditional contract with Capgemini to provide finance, facilities and fleet management.

**Relapse**

Wasn't the idea of a privatized police force made fun of on a British Comedy show a while ago?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think it was Frye and Laurie.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Yeah, it was. The legal and moral ramifications of private security firms investigating crimes or even arresting suspects does not bear thinking about. It would completely change the relationship between citizen and government.
The conservatives have lost the plot.

**Albatross**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Privatised trains in the UK are the most expensive to travel on and the worst in Europe for service.

[citation needed]

Privatised energy companies in the UK are the most expensive for gas and electric bills compared to our European rivals.

[citation needed]

The bill to privatise chuncks of the NHS has been described as 'shambolic' and is opposed by around 80% of the major health organisations in the UK

That isn't what the bill is primarily for. Also, politically-motivated trade union organisations manufacturing poll results in order to attack the government on NHS reform is not surprising, nor does it prove anything other than that vested interests are keen to protect their fiefdoms.

I could go on, but given that the above has been such a runaway success for the average UK citizen, then it comes across as no surprise that the Coalition government should turn it's attention to the police force.

This is a local decision made at the discretion of the local police authorities in question.

In David Cameron, we have probably the most inept Prime Minister in living memory. That takes some doing when you consider how bad Gordon Brown was.

What absolute rubbish. Blair and Brown presided over the probably greatest erosion of British civil liberties in modern history, they trampled over habeas corpus, free speech, self-determination, they colluded in torture, kidnapping and initiated an illegal war on the basis of false information, the author of which died in suspicious circumstances. They also sold off a significant chunk of our gold reserves at the bottom of the market, shortly before the price climbed to an all-time high, and presided over the worst financial crash to befall Britain in a round a century, all the while letting public spending soar. They wasted literally billions on pointless schemes like the Millenium Dome, the NHS IT revamp (a particularly expensive cock-up), ID cards... I could go on and on.

Seriously, you need to have a word with yourself. Where've you been for the last decade?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Yeah, it was. The legal and moral ramifications of private security firms investigating crimes or even arresting suspects does not bear thinking about.

Well don't worry, that's not what's happening.

It would completely change the relationship between citizen and government.

How, incidentally?

**Gorskar.da.Lost**

Albatross wrote:
What absolute rubbish. Blair and Brown presided over the probably greatest erosion of British civil liberties in modern history, they trampled over habeas corpus, free speech, self-determination, they colluded in torture, kidnapping and initiated an illegal war on the basis of false information, the author of which died in suspicious circumstances. They also sold off a significant chunk of our gold reserves at the bottom of the market, shortly before the price climbed to an all-time high, and presided over the worst financial crash to befall Britain in a round a century, all the while letting public spending soar. They wasted literally billions on pointless schemes like the Millenium Dome, the NHS IT revamp (a particularly expensive cock-up), ID cards... I could go on and on.

Seriously, you need to have a word with yourself. Where've you been for the last decade?

Normally, I'd be more than happy to agree with anyone who bashes the Tories, but I have to admit, as godawful as Cameron is, he hasn't yet committed us to an illegal war.
Nor is he as utterly vicious as a certain lady comprised of ferrous material.

**Albatross**

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

Normally, I'd be more than happy to agree with anyone who bashes the Tories,

Why? Class prejudice? Good old-fashioned tribalism? It's funny that the left don't have a problem with tribal hatred, as long as its of Conservatives. And it is hatred, ignorance and prejudice, make no mistake about it.

**Gorskar.da.Lost**

Albatross wrote:
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

Normally, I'd be more than happy to agree with anyone who bashes the Tories,

Why? Class prejudice? Good old-fashioned tribalism? It's funny that the left don't have a problem with tribal hatred, as long as its of Conservatives. And it is hatred, ignorance and prejudice, make no mistake about it.

In my case, it's probably class prejudice. My family are working-class, and what's more, Northern.
Well, that and ideologically I have nothing in common with David Cameron, but I suppose that's no reason to hate him.

**Seaward**

Please, please, please name the corporations responsible either Lone Star Security Services or Knight Errant Security Services. Then I can finally get my wired reflexes and become a shadowrunner.

**Albatross**

Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
Albatross wrote:
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:

Normally, I'd be more than happy to agree with anyone who bashes the Tories,

Why? Class prejudice? Good old-fashioned tribalism? It's funny that the left don't have a problem with tribal hatred, as long as its of Conservatives. And it is hatred, ignorance and prejudice, make no mistake about it.

In my case, it's probably class prejudice. My family are working-class, and what's more, Northern.
Well, that and ideologically I have nothing in common with David Cameron, but I suppose that's no reason to hate him.

Or me. I'm Northern, working class and a Tory. Like most people who hate the Tories, you probably have more in common, in terms of ideology, with David Cameron (and modern Tories in general) than you're conscious of.

**Gorskar.da.Lost**

Albatross wrote:
Or me. I'm Northern, working class and a Tory. Like most people who hate the Tories, you probably have more in common, in terms of ideology, with David Cameron (and modern Tories in general) than you're conscious of.

Maybe. To be fair, I've never looked into it too closely. In general you could say this of any person in Britain, given how closely aligned our political parties are.
New Labour is a particularly annoying example of this phenomenon, I've found.

**purplefood**

Not a fan of new labour and so far not totally against what the Tories have done... I would even agree with a few things and this is coing from someone who is fairly anti-Tory.
Though there are several issues where they have messed up IMO.
Privitisation is not a good thing not for the NHS or for the police service. It's not that i don't think it wouldn't be better, it might be. The problem is i don't trust a private company...

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Albatross, by the sounds of things you must be the only person in the UK who has never travelled by train!! Have you ever tried getting London by train for 9am??

You ask for citations. Well, last year I was in Greece, and even with all their problems they were still running a better train service than us!! A day ticket, first class from Cornwall to Aberdeen, bought on the day, will cost you in excess of £600 pounds and take around 12 hours to get there. This is a similar distance from the top of France to the bottom of France and would cost a 1/3 of the UK price and take a quarter of the time. I've done it.

Also, Albatross, you must be solar powered. How else can you explain your attitude towards energy companies in the UK (most of which are foreign owned) Have you ever paid a gas or electric bill before? When pensioners are freezing to death in their homes every winter because bills are too expensive, are you still suggesting that privitisation of the energy companies was a good thing?

I agree with everything you say about New Labour, they were a disgrace. But Cameron is Blair lite, a PR man pretending to be a PM and not making a good job of it. The guy's made more U turns than the Italian army!!
If it's not nailed down, the tories will sell it.
You may think I'm ranting, you may think I'm bitter but growing up in the 1980s and being black, well, the Tories didn't give two hoots for people like me.

I hope this explains my suspicions of this scheme.

**Albatross**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Albatross, by the sounds of things you must be the only person in the UK who has never travelled by train!! Have you ever tried getting London by train for 9am??
You ask for citations. Well, last year I was in Greece, and even with all their problems they were still running a better train service than us!! A day ticket, first class from Cornwall to Aberdeen, bought on the day, will cost you in excess of £600 pounds and take around 12 hours to get there. This is a similar distance from the top of France to the bottom of France and would cost a 1/3 of the UK price and take a quarter of the time. I've done it.

I'm not disputing that there might be cheaper and more efficient public transport programs in other European countries - you made a very specific claim (that we have the most expensive, least efficient service in Europe) and, as such, need to provide specific evidence to back that claim up if you want your point to be taken seriously. It sounded like hyperbole to me.

Also, Albatross, you must be solar powered. How else can you explain your attitude towards energy companies in the UK (most of which are foreign owned) Have you ever paid a gas or electric bill before?

Yes. And see above.

When pensioners are freezing to death in their homes every winter because bills are too expensive, are you still suggesting that privitisation of the energy companies was a good thing?

Evidence? And are you suggesting that elderly people didn't die in winter before utility privatisation? That's before you get into a discussion about state monopolies...

I agree with everything you say about New Labour, they were a disgrace. But Cameron is Blair lite, a PR man pretending to be a PM and not making a good job of it. The guy's made more U turns than the Italian army!!

Again, more unsubstantiated claims! U-turned on what, exactly? And why is a 'u-turn' always seen as a negative, for that matter?

You may think I'm ranting, you may think I'm bitter but growing up in the 1980s and being black, well, the Tories didn't give two hoots for people like me.

I'm working-class and grew up in the 80s, in an industrial heartland in a dyed-in-the-wool Labour family. I mean, I have former Labour policians in my family. When something's wrong, it's wrong - it doesn't matter what tribe one belongs to. You of all people, given your perspective, should know better than to succumb to prejudice. The Labour party has been proven wrong on the economy time and time again. It ALWAYS falls to the Tories to sort the mess out, and they always do. I think part of the reason for the Tory hate is that some people fall into a certain emotional type which regards all figures responsible for doing that which is neccessary but unpopular as the villain, be it teachers, the police, parents - they behave like children being told to eat their vegetables:

"WAAAHH, I don't wanna!"

**Phototoxin**

Privatised forensics are a bit of a joke TBH. The customer is the police, and customer satisfaction is important...

Privatised police will be scary. Loyalty = highest payer

**Sturmtruppen**

Well, all that's left is the fire-service. Good old fire insurance plaque system for that, I suppose.

**biccat**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:A radical plan to give private companies responsibility for investigating crimes, patrolling neighbourhoods and even detaining suspects will have "catastrophic consequences", the leader of rank and file officers has warned.

Is it illegal to hire private security companies to patrol areas and detain suspects in the UK? Or is this proposal simply to use public money for the cause?

If the latter, what's the difference between the city hiring cops and the city hiring a company to hire cops?

Seaward wrote:Please, please, please name the corporations responsible either Lone Star Security Services or Knight Errant Security Services. Then I can finally get my wired reflexes and become a shadowrunner.

Omni Consumer Products.

Oddly enough, Detroit is worse now than the near future portrayed in that movie.

**Orlanth**

Guardian = Daily Mail for the left.

**Gorskar.da.Lost**

biccat wrote:
Oddly enough, Detroit is worse now than the near future portrayed in that movie.

Well, in this reality, they don't have officer Alex Murphy taking care of business. That's the problem, right there.

**notprop**

Phototoxin wrote:Privatised forensics are a bit of a joke TBH. The customer is the police, and customer satisfaction is important...

Privatised police will be scary. Loyalty = highest payer

Privatised forensics firms are already employed in the Uk, certainly in Essex and I would suggest elsewhere too. Im not aware of any distaerous effects in their use.

**filbert**

This sounds a lot like a story being exaggerated for political gain (and from the Guardian - quelle surprise!)

One of the Police forces currently running a feasibility study on this is Surrey Police. The chief constable was interviewed on South Today recently; what they are proposing is to replace some of the back-office staff/systems with private firms - G4S, I believe. Ultimately, this should mean that the back-office admin stuff can be completed for less money if a private company does it, meaning more of the force's budget can be spent on front line policing. At no point did the chief commissioner suggest that any key policing duties were about to be handed over.

It's a bit of a shame that 'privatisation' has a bit of a dirty taint associated with it. It is not always a bad thing in and of itself; private companies can often contract services more cheaply and efficiently than their government funded counterparts.

**Albatross**

Well, this is exactly the point - if it's more cost effective to contract outside companies to perform admin duties instead of using police officers in that role, surely that's a good thing? It would also free up more officers for frontline duties - again, a good thing. It's got to be worth a try.

**filbert**

Albatross wrote:Well, this is exactly the point - if it's more cost effective to contract outside companies to perform admin duties instead of using police officers in that role, surely that's a good thing? It would also free up more officers for frontline duties - again, a good thing. It's got to be worth a try.

Precisely. I can't remember the exact figures quoted in the interview but the chief commissioner suggested it could save them several millions, which in these current economic times is certainly worth a shot. The only concern I would have is if the contract is made unduly long-term with no get-out clause; some of private/public initiative contracts that Labour handed out in hospitals, for example, seemed to be a good idea on paper but in reality ended up costing more money and the contracts were set to run for ages.

The Queen Alexandra hospital in Portsmouth is a good example; it was funded under a Private Finance initiative and the NHS trust has to pay some £33 million per year in rent for the next 35 years compares to the £236 million it cost to build it.

**Electro**

The real problem is the nature of the saveings, rather than what they will be changing.

It will be back office staff, forensics and the like. The real problem for me is more race to the bottom. The money will be saved by these companys paying less, laying people off left right and center, keeping as many people as possible as temps and excepting lower standards with higher work loads. At the same time people running ese companys will make millions for little more than having money to build these companys in the first place.

Unfortunalty it seems to be a Tory idology that the public sector can never be efficient and that the private sector always is, dispite the train companys showing othewise.

Many public sector area exist because there is no proffitable market, or they are in a sector where paying more should not get you a better serivce, e.g. Should the rich get a better fire service than the poor (as with the old fire plaques)?

Equaly telephone services have improved since the days of BT, but they had to go through pains. Also, the other side (labour) think that public sector is always a good thing, and everything is better in public hands. Just look at the massive groth in the public sector over the last 20 years, with hundreds of pointless jobs and the massive funding of charitys (just look at people like dance groups and theater clubs complaining about funding being cut. Pay for your own hobbies, or start paying for my plastic crack!).

To much ideology and to little balance. There is a line in what should and what should not cross this line, and for me this crosses this line.

Fyi, Maggy T was Northen and the daughter of a shop keeper, so where you are from and what you do should not define your party of choice.

**Aquaterry**

Oh that's cool, it won't affect me...Wait, Surrey?
Damn.
Looks like my luck is back to normal, figured it would balance itself out

Anyways, yeah, this doesn't look good at all

Aquaterry

**Joey**

Remember before the election when the Tories said "vote for us and we'll privatise everything"? No, me neither.
The people do not want or need this wholescale privitisation.
Expect everywhere outside of the South East to become an uninhabitable wasteland after this government is through with it.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Electro wrote:The real problem is the nature of the saveings, rather than what they will be changing.

It will be back office staff, forensics and the like. The real problem for me is more race to the bottom. The money will be saved by these companys paying less, laying people off left right and center, keeping as many people as possible as temps and excepting lower standards with higher work loads. At the same time people running ese companys will make millions for little more than having money to build these companys in the first place.

Unfortunalty it seems to be a Tory idology that the public sector can never be efficient and that the private sector always is, dispite the train companys showing othewise.

Many public sector area exist because there is no proffitable market, or they are in a sector where paying more should not get you a better serivce, e.g. Should the rich get a better fire service than the poor (as with the old fire plaques)?

Equaly telephone services have improved since the days of BT, but they had to go through pains. Also, the other side (labour) think that public sector is always a good thing, and everything is better in public hands. Just look at the massive groth in the public sector over the last 20 years, with hundreds of pointless jobs and the massive funding of charitys (just look at people like dance groups and theater clubs complaining about funding being cut. Pay for your own hobbies, or start paying for my plastic crack!).

To much ideology and to little balance. There is a line in what should and what should not cross this line, and for me this crosses this line.

Fyi, Maggy T was Northen and the daughter of a shop keeper, so where you are from and what you do should not define your party of choice.

The privisation happening under the tories is a direct continuation of New Labour's policy. They were a tory government committed to privatising as much of the public sector as possible.

**Albatross**

Joey wrote:Remember before the election when the Tories said "vote for us and we'll privatise everything"? No, me neither.

I don't remember it either. Which is why I'm relieved that isn't happening.

**Joey**

Albatross wrote:
Joey wrote:Remember before the election when the Tories said "vote for us and we'll privatise everything"? No, me neither.

I don't remember it either. Which is why I'm relieved that isn't happening.

True, they're only privatising the NHS, schools, prisons, the MOD, the police.
Correction; semi-privatising. Then they can under-fund the state part to make it inefficient, then use that inefficiency as an excuse to privatise further.
Obviously this is a continuation of New Labour's policies. There's not a single major party that opposes privitisation, despite public opinion being opposed.

**Manchu**

Albatross wrote:"WAAAHH, I don't wanna!"

I think you mean "we don't need no education."

Seaward wrote:Please, please, please name the corporations responsible either Lone Star Security Services or Knight Errant Security Services.

I've got a better idea:

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

A number of top policemen in the UK have been found guilty of corruption these past months, so god knows what it's going to be like if private companies run the show!

Equally, if private companies are looking after neighbourhoods, will it be in their interests to have more crime or less crime?

**Easy E**

Seaward wrote:Please, please, please name the corporations responsible either Lone Star Security Services or Knight Errant Security Services. Then I can finally get my wired reflexes and become a shadowrunner.

That's exactly what I was thinking about. Problem is, I don't think I would be a runner. I think I would be a Salariman.

In other news, wasn't this done back inthe late 18oo's in the US. I think they were called the Pinkerton Detective Agency?