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.
Future War Cultist wrote: He didn't just meet the IRA in the seventies. He was their active cheerleader for decades. He opposed the Anglo Irish agreement and at first he opppsed the Good Friday Agreement too because he didn't think that republicans had to compromise. He calls himself a man of peace but he's a fething lair.
To be fair the Tories did the same thing. They just didn't think the nationalists should have to compromise...its just the same thing but a different side of the coin.
Yes, the management from the very top down are terrible too. But justify this. They're paid from 7:30 to 3:30, with a 45 minute break. Yet they'll go out, do only some of their run, come back in between 11 and 1 (some of the garden and food waste squads come back in at 10!) with hours of work left to do and go 'we're done for the day. Didn't get this this and this done. Sort it out. Bye.' And then they go home, swiping out at a council facility of their choosing. Meanwhile, the council is then forced to use agency workers (who cost them three times as much an hour as their own) to go out to finish the work not done. This is on top of the work they've already had to do anyway. Due to the costs, they are effectively paying four people to do one persons job. And they do this because when pressured, the workers (I use that term losely) immediately threaten union action.
Assuming this is true and not one bad crew being mirrored on all of them then the problem here is bad management. The workers would have no chance at a tribunal if they kept this up because they simply would not be fulfilling there contract they have signed up to. However I'm generally of the opinion that there may be more to this story than is presented here because if it was consistently occurring then the Belfast would be knee deep in garbage. I can accept a few bad examples can occur but that does not mean all the crews should be tarnished with the same brush.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/25 19:54:18
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
Ye. That's much what I was thinking. There is a problem with publicly owned services in that if poor management is not addressed it can run riot, as they are never going to go bust or lose customers, but that's a management and control issue, not a fundamental issue with the concept. It's the same issue that is behind UK companies having 15% lower productivity than other G7 nations. Problematic unions are not normally the cause of issues, but a symptom of a workforce that is poorly managed. Most people are not lazy and want to do a good job, if they are properly managed and motivated. This is something lacking in most U.K. industries.
insaniak wrote: Sometimes, Exterminatus is the only option.
And sometimes, it's just a case of too much scotch combined with too many buttons...
Management are a part of the problem for sure. In this case it's because of how reluctant they are to crack the whip with these guys and the frankly bizarre way the contracts were written up. The two biggest issues? Once a team finished their own round they were allowed to bugger off home, no matter how much work still remained. And all they had to do to avoid doing work was to claim that the cars were blocking the road or in the case of assisted lifts that the gate was locked. The management always took them at their word. I've encountered people on the assisted lift list (eldarly and/or disabled people) who hadn't had their bins emptied in months.
Us agency workers were the only ones holding the place up yet we were treated like the garbage we were collecting. I'll never forget the time I watched the network controller getting chewed out by one of the foremen for daring to criticise their lack of activity, frankly taking it all like a bitch, only for him to then turn around and bite the head off me for being back at the yard. Even though the beater of a lorry we had had sprung a hydraulic leak and I was standing there covered in the oil as proof.
But again we are expensive. We made sure all the work was done by working three times as hard as the full time workers but that cost the council an extra 750000 a year. Money they really don't have.
I found it mildly entertaining this article made it onto the front page of the BBC.
Tories and Labour not being honest with voters: IFS By Chris Johnston
Neither the Conservatives nor Labour are being honest with voters about the economic consequences of their policy proposals, an influential think tank has warned.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies said the Tories had very few tax or spending commitments in their manifesto.
Labour, in contrast, was proposing very big increases in tax and spending.
However, the IFS said Labour's plans for paying for its proposed expansion in state activity would not work.
IFS deputy director Carl Emmerson said neither manifesto gave voters an honest set of choices or addressed the long-term challenges the UK faced.
"For Labour, we can have pretty much everything - free higher education, free childcare, more spending on pay, health, infrastructure. And the pretence is that can all be funded by faceless corporations and 'the rich'," he said.
"There is a choice we can make as a country to have a bigger state - that would not make us unusual in international terms. But that comes at a cost in higher taxes, which would inevitably need to be borne by large numbers of us."
Meanwhile, the Conservatives offered spending cuts the party had already promised, Mr Emmerson said.
"Additional funding pledges for the NHS and schools are just confirming that spending would rise in a way broadly consistent with the March Budget," he told a briefing in London on Friday.
"Compared with Labour, they are offering a relatively smaller state and consequently lower taxes. With that offer come unacknowledged risks to the quality of public services, and tough choices over spending."
The IFS said the Tory plans "imply at least another five years of austerity, with the continuation of planned welfare cuts and serious pressures on the public services including on the NHS".
Labour's calculations that £49bn a year could be raised from the wealthiest individuals and companies were flawed and would raise £40bn at most in the short term, and less in the long term, it said.
he Conservatives' plan to impose what the IFS called "very big cuts" to working-age welfare benefits would save £11bn annually by 2021-22, but would significantly cut the incomes of the poorest working age households.
"Labour's manifesto in fact commits it to cancelling only a small minority of these cuts... changing this would require finding several billion pounds extra from somewhere," the IFS said.
The Conservative commitments to replace the "triple lock" on the state pension with a "double lock" from April 2020 and means-test winter fuel allowance payments represent a "very modest change", according to the think tank.
However, Labour's proposal to maintain the triple lock and to start paying state pensions no later than the age of 66 would be "immensely expensive in the long run - up to £50bn a year in 50 years time" compared with raising the state pension age in line with life expectancy and increasing the pension in line with earnings.
It's not often I agree with Corbyn, but he was spot on today with his attack on British foreign policy, and its possible contribution to terrorist attacks.
British policy in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria, has been a shambles from start to finish
The vacuum we created with the fall of Saddam and Gadaffi, has allowed the void to be filled by these fanatics, who can train, plan, and implement with impunity.
And yet, nothing has changed. Cameron wanted to blow up more camels in Syria, and by all accounts, May is itching to send in the jets if she becomes PM.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
The IFS report.. let's see how that is covered then :
Spoiler:
Grauniad :
but in the mail.....
can't help but think one or two pertinent facts have been omitted here or there....
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
I don't regard the manifesto points as plans so much as aspirations.
Britain can't be really so badly fethed that no-one can create an outline of a workable plan, surely.
We are still the world's fifth (?) largest economy, and that is coming in behind the USA, PRC, Germany and Japan, all of which are much larger, more populous countries.
Thatcher's decision in the 1980s to move away from making stuff and instead opting to let the spivs and speculators take over
corruption
incompetent politicians
abolition of grammar schools
privitization in the 1990s
The Conservative party abandoning conservatism
Black Wednesday
The conservative party
Tony Blair
Blairism
British foreign policy since 2001
Tony Blair
I could go on all day
Automatically Appended Next Post:
reds8n wrote: The IFS report.. let's see how that is covered then :
Spoiler:
Grauniad :
but in the mail.....
can't help but think one or two pertinent facts have been omitted here or there....
The IFS is not as impartial or independent as it makes itself out to be. It came under a lot of fire during 2014's Scottish independence referendum. Some of its claims back then were risible.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/26 14:18:31
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Really? are you proposing that we should go back to enslaving a third of the world again (or shouldn't have abandoned that principle) just to keep the UK 'great'?
The comments are just soundbites of personal opinions and don't mean anything.
I could easily include:-
Invasion by the Roman Empire
Hanging of Charles I
etc etc.
I could also point out that getting rid of grammar schools as benefited more people overall even if a few (mainly affluent) people lost out. The more higher quality education for all could quite easily be why we are 5th and not 10th etc because there is a higher quality pool of people to call on.
Everything has a cost, the real question is who should pay for it. Should it be the poor (through poorer public services, higher overall tax of their income; the wealthy; or a balance so that the more you earn the more you put into society and so everyone pays a share for the service that they may one day need even if it isn't today.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: I don't regard the manifesto points as plans so much as aspirations.
Britain can't be really so badly fethed that no-one can create an outline of a workable plan, surely.
We are still the world's fifth (?) largest economy, and that is coming in behind the USA, PRC, Germany and Japan, all of which are much larger, more populous countries.
What has gone wrong?
Given the timing of the election, the very short timescale to prepare it's not really surprising there are gaping holes everywhere. It's unlikely any of the plans have gone through ultra rigorous checks. It's not also as if they are legally bound to enacting them.
Still it looks like people in the UK are taking action into their own hands and simply leaving before it all goes to hell in a hand basket anyway. It's not just EU citizens either, there is a significant upturn in UK citizen deciding now would be the time to leave before the drawbridge gets raised.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/26 18:54:35
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
The big plus to the exodus is that it makes the immigration target easier to hit.
As in the UKIP manifesto, we won't let a single brain surgeon or rocket scientist into the country until a strawberry picker or cocktail waitress has gone out.
Future War Cultist wrote: Management are a part of the problem for sure. In this case it's because of how reluctant they are to crack the whip with these guys and the frankly bizarre way the contracts were written up. The two biggest issues? Once a team finished their own round they were allowed to bugger off home, no matter how much work still remained. And all they had to do to avoid doing work was to claim that the cars were blocking the road or in the case of assisted lifts that the gate was locked. The management always took them at their word. I've encountered people on the assisted lift list (eldarly and/or disabled people) who hadn't had their bins emptied in months.
Us agency workers were the only ones holding the place up yet we were treated like the garbage we were collecting. I'll never forget the time I watched the network controller getting chewed out by one of the foremen for daring to criticise their lack of activity, frankly taking it all like a bitch, only for him to then turn around and bite the head off me for being back at the yard. Even though the beater of a lorry we had had sprung a hydraulic leak and I was standing there covered in the oil as proof.
But again we are expensive. We made sure all the work was done by working three times as hard as the full time workers but that cost the council an extra 750000 a year. Money they really don't have.
Why so bitter at those lazy union fethers then? Sounds like you'd be out of work if they busted their balls to get the rounds done.
We were once so close to heaven, St. Peter came out and gave us medals; declaring us "The nicest of the damned".
“Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
Of course I don't want the Empire back - good riddance to it.
By loss of Empire, I'm talking about our role, our place in the world, who we are as a people.
Ever since the Americans knocked us from the #1 spot, we've struggled to forge an identity, a role for ourselves.
We had this horrible Atlantic bridge, half-way house approach of trying to hang on to American's coat tails, whilst being the awkward member of the EU.
Sadly, we ended up with neither, because if you try and be all things to all men, people think you're not being serious.
Like I've said before, the EU situation is tragic, because if we had taken it seriously from the start, the UK could have been the driving force, not Germany.
But years of sniping from the sidelines put paid to that...
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Kilkrazy wrote: The big plus to the exodus is that it makes the immigration target easier to hit.
As in the UKIP manifesto, we won't let a single brain surgeon or rocket scientist into the country until a strawberry picker or cocktail waitress has gone out.
Yeah a high quality well thought out concept completely ignoring that both add significant benefits to the Country. Still it looks like UKIP are going to be dead and buried after this election so that's one silver lining we can look forward to (and hopefully less of their tripe on TV).
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
UKIP lost their prime function of being the Brexit party. Despite their rhetoric of the past few months about "keeping the government's feet to the fire" in pursuit of the hardest possible form of Brexit, the new manifesto IMO reveals that their core motivation is anti-immigration.
The opinion polls are narrowing, and the sense of panic at conservative supporting websites is something to behold
It's been a bad week for May, and Fallon seems to be the Tories' answer to Abbott.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kilkrazy wrote: UKIP lost their prime function of being the Brexit party. Despite their rhetoric of the past few months about "keeping the government's feet to the fire" in pursuit of the hardest possible form of Brexit, the new manifesto IMO reveals that their core motivation is anti-immigration.
Yeah, the UKIP manifesto launch was a shambles, with policy being made up on the hoof.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/27 10:13:15
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Corbyn's message is getting through and May's incompetence and cowardice avoiding debate and questioning is beginning to bite. We could end up in another coalition situation, but how would the Liberal Democrats work with anyone given they want a second Brexit referendum and the main parties have ruled it out?
I'm no Corbyn fan, but to his credit, he's walking the streets and getting his message out there, and it's a message that is tapping into the national mood.
Take back the trains, and no more disastrous foreign interventions, is something most people agree on.
And above all, Corbyn actually believes in stuff, even if you disagree with it.
None of this wishy-washy, centre ground Blairite bullgak that Miliband/May/Cameron believed in.
May by contrast has been shambolic. U-turns, cabinet ministers kept out of the loop, and then humiliated on TV by the u-turns, and the hiding away of May from public scrutiny.
I still think Middle England will hold its nose and vote for May, but talk of a landslide is out the window now.
A very small note of consolation for you is that Coryn is a decades long opponent of the EU and probably did vote for Brexit last year.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Howard A Treesong wrote: Corbyn's message is getting through and May's incompetence and cowardice avoiding debate and questioning is beginning to bite. We could end up in another coalition situation, but how would the Liberal Democrats work with anyone given they want a second Brexit referendum and the main parties have ruled it out?
A rainbow coalition of Labour/Libs/SNP/Green/PC would be something to behold
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/27 11:34:56
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
For the record, I think the tories are plain awful too. They're only just slightly ahead of Labour in my esteems. That's how desperate things are these days.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/27 11:38:19
That's highly unlikely as they would need to gain all the seats they lost in Scotland and some areas are still true blue just because. The more likely scenario is you will have a hung parliament if Labour continue the momentum they are building.
It appears that Labour got their car crash interviews out early whereas Tories are still floundering as soon as they go on TV (even Mays TV interview was a car crash and simply wasn't allowed to spout the usual nonsense.
Of course it doesn't help that Tories are now resorting to straight out lying and it's so obvious people have seen it a mile away.
Howard A Treesong wrote: We could end up in another coalition situation, but how would the Liberal Democrats work with anyone given they want a second Brexit referendum and the main parties have ruled it out?
LDs don't want a second referendum on the same thing. They want the people to have a say once we have educated information on what looking like leaving the EU will be and to vote on what the 'deal' is. Given that we had no information of substance from either side that seems a sound plan. After all you can't really have the 'will of the people' if no one is told what it actually mean to leave relative to remain. As I've pointed out before I am generally supportive of a three way vote once the deal is known (go WTO, stay in, take the deal).
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/27 21:09:07
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
Howard A Treesong wrote: Corbyn's message is getting through and May's incompetence and cowardice avoiding debate and questioning is beginning to bite. We could end up in another coalition situation, but how would the Liberal Democrats work with anyone given they want a second Brexit referendum and the main parties have ruled it out?
Parties can change their minds, e.g. the Tories flipping on two major taxation issues in the past couple of months.
However, if a coalition was proposed and refused because of the desire to avoid a second referendum (why, though*?) the government would form as a minority and quickly be defeated and another election would have to be run. The other chance is that no party would be willing to form a government and another election would be needed.
*Is there a genuine worry that a second Brexit referendum would not produce a strong vote for Leave?
I think Middle England knows in its heart that May is way out of her depth.
Sadly, years of anti-left bias from the Daily Mail will result in Middle England holding its nose and voting Conservative, because they'll never elect a Corbyn/Abbott/McDonnell government
Talk of a landslide is way off the mark. It'll be like 2015 again.
In other news, it's good to see troops coming off the streets on Monday. IMO, it was an overreaction, completely against the British spirit of liberty, and another step into turning us into a Banana Republic.
I'm also hearing that Amber Rudd will debate for the Tories on TV, as May has refused to sign up for it.
We'd better hope that the EU doesn't threaten to televise the Brexit negotiations, otherwise May will roll up the white flag.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
In other news, it's good to see troops coming off the streets on Monday. IMO, it was an overreaction, completely against the British spirit of liberty, and another step into turning us into a Banana Republic.
See, the fact they came off the streets so fast actually reinforces my belief in the system. They announced critical status. They did what they needed to do to defuse whatever was clearly going on behind the scenes. Then they repealed it. No fuss, no dragging it out as a state of emergency. It makes me more inclined to believe in it next time, to be honest.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I think Middle England knows in its heart that May is way out of her depth.
Sadly, years of anti-left bias from the Daily Mail will result in Middle England holding its nose and voting Conservative, because they'll never elect a Corbyn/Abbott/McDonnell government
Talk of a landslide is way off the mark. It'll be like 2015 again.
In other news, it's good to see troops coming off the streets on Monday. IMO, it was an overreaction, completely against the British spirit of liberty, and another step into turning us into a Banana Republic.
I'm also hearing that Amber Rudd will debate for the Tories on TV, as May has refused to sign up for it.
We'd better hope that the EU doesn't threaten to televise the Brexit negotiations, otherwise May will roll up the white flag.
They did what was needed to protect the UK in time of emergency.
No 6 month states or suspensions of normal policing with long term army deployment.
When over withdrew.
I believe they did right for country at end of day.
Sgt. Vanden - OOC Hey, that was your doing. I didn't choose to fly in the "Dongerprise'.
"May the odds be ever in your favour"
Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
I have no clue how Dakka's moderation work. I expect it involves throwing a lot of d100 and looking at many random tables.
FudgeDumper - It could be that you are just so uncomfortable with the idea of your chapters primarch having his way with a docile tyranid spore cyst, that you must deny they have any feelings at all.
If May, as Home Secretary, these past seven years, hadn't taken a chainsaw to police officer numbers, we wouldn't need the army on the streets, because we would plug the gap with specially trained firearms officers. The blame for this lack of specialist police firearms officers lays squarely at May's door. The British army is trained to fight the armies of other nation states, not patrol British streets!
Sources and empirical evidence is your best weapon in any argument, so this article from Craig Murray, which references an official British government document, is a real eye opener.
The graphs showing the cut in police numbers in relation to May's time as Home Sec. is heart breaking.
I would recommend that for the sake of your blood pressure, you should not read this article, future war cultist...
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I think Middle England knows in its heart that May is way out of her depth.
Sadly, years of anti-left bias from the Daily Mail will result in Middle England holding its nose and voting Conservative, because they'll never elect a Corbyn/Abbott/McDonnell government
Talk of a landslide is way off the mark. It'll be like 2015 again.
In other news, it's good to see troops coming off the streets on Monday. IMO, it was an overreaction, completely against the British spirit of liberty, and another step into turning us into a Banana Republic.
I'm also hearing that Amber Rudd will debate for the Tories on TV, as May has refused to sign up for it.
We'd better hope that the EU doesn't threaten to televise the Brexit negotiations, otherwise May will roll up the white flag.
They did what was needed to protect the UK in time of emergency.
No 6 month states or suspensions of normal policing with long term army deployment.
When over withdrew.
I believe they did right for country at end of day.
I saw pictures of troops on trains standing next to luggage racks. Do their guns have x-ray machines on them? I ask, because there was no way on Earth that they could detect a bomb hidden in one of those suitcases.
IMO, it was pointless tokenism at its worst.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/28 11:49:21
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
The question of police cuts is really beside the point; namely that they clearly identified a threat, raised the alert status for a short period and deployed extra security, and then lowered it again. Whether you think the security should have come from Organisation A or B is somewhat beside the point.
For the record though, I disagree with your assessment of the effectiveness of the troops in such a capacity. After a decade and a half hanging around in the Middle East in a peacekeeping role, where the proliferation of bombs and those who utilise them is several magnitudes higher, the British Army has considerable experience in dealing with this sort of thing. More than the police, I should warrant. They've dealt with too many IED's and car bombings to be novices at this game.
Kilkrazy wrote: Yes but it's a bit illogical to argue that the Tories are turning the UK into a police state by running down the numbers of police.
They've been running down the numbers of the army too.
OTOH you did say May is incompetent.
The evidence speaks for itself: the clear correlation between May's tenure as Home Sec. and the reduction in front line police officers is there to see. And this is official HMG documents saying that.
Given that we have seen all sorts of draconian spying laws being passed these last years, I'd argue the police state is still a rsik, even if front-line police officer numbers are dropping.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ketara wrote: The question of police cuts is really beside the point; namely that they clearly identified a threat, raised the alert status for a short period and deployed extra security, and then lowered it again. Whether you think the security should have come from Organisation A or B is somewhat beside the point.
For the record though, I disagree with your assessment of the effectiveness of the troops in such a capacity. After a decade and a half hanging around in the Middle East in a peacekeeping role, where the proliferation of bombs and those who utilise them is several magnitudes higher, the British Army has considerable experience in dealing with this sort of thing. More than the police, I should warrant. They've dealt with too many IED's and car bombings to be novices at this game.
Troops are no defence against a bomb tucked away in a suitcase. If, say, for example, I had a bomb stashed away in a bag, and walked past a soldier at a railway station, and pulled the detonator, then sadly, the soldier is not much use in stopping that.
Counter-terrorism really is a case of prevention being better than cure.
As for your earlier point about organisation A or B providing security, it is a relevant point, as only one option was on the table. The other having been cut back to the bare bone!
For me, the bottom line is this: the Tories can't be trusted with this nation's security. They've ran down the armed forces these past 7 years. Historically, they rolled up the white flag to Hitler in the 1930s, and pre-Falklands War, they reduced the defence of the Falkland Isles as to almost invite Argentina to attack.
The irony is that if Argentina hadn't invaded, Thatcher probably would have gave them the Falklands.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/28 12:37:34
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Ketara wrote: The question of police cuts is really beside the point; namely that they clearly identified a threat, raised the alert status for a short period and deployed extra security, and then lowered it again. Whether you think the security should have come from Organisation A or B is somewhat beside the point.
The alternative and perhaps more cycnical view is that they had no intelligence of the attack and it caught them by surprise. Hence there was no knowledge as to whether it was the first of many attacks or a 'one off' lone wolf. As such they took the approach that without additional knowledge to take an assumption that it was the first of a possible wave of attacks and hence put the army on a 'protective' capacity until they had more evidence. Now they have had this (and it's looking more and more likely that it was a very isolated group or person) there is no reason to be on a critical alert because simply the person who made the bomb was the suicide attacker themselves (and hence lowers the risk of any more attacks). As such reduced police could have meant that the critical status was applied for longer (or at all) because there was reduced intelligence.
For the record though, I disagree with your assessment of the effectiveness of the troops in such a capacity. After a decade and a half hanging around in the Middle East in a peacekeeping role, where the proliferation of bombs and those who utilise them is several magnitudes higher, the British Army has considerable experience in dealing with this sort of thing. More than the police, I should warrant. They've dealt with too many IED's and car bombings to be novices at this game.
I can't recall where I heard the quote but once I read/heard a statement that the role of the police is to protect the people. The role of the military is to kill the enemies of the state. If you employ the army to do the police's role then you can quickly end up in a circumstance where the populace becomes the enemy of the state simply because of training. The police are meant to protect using the minimum of force, they ask questions first. They military role is to crush opposition with overwhelming force, they shoot first and ask questions later. You never want the military to take on the role of the police (especially long term).
"Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. " - V
I've just supported the Permanent European Union Citizenship initiative. Please do the same and spread the word!
"It's not a problem if you don't look up." - Dakka's approach to politics
shambles from start to finish 
