politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If Thursday’s S Yorkshire PCC by election is close then CON voters’ 2nd preferences could push the purples across the line
Looking at the result 2 years ago for the South Yorkshire Police and Crime Commissioner the outcome of Thursday’s by election appears to be a foregone conclusion – a LAB HOLD on an even lower turnout.
Had to use my brain to remember that - my wife is from Glasgow.
You'll know by now, surely, that I'm an eccentric Tim B.
Therefore,
I may be either obliged or cliched to ask-
Is she Celtic or Rangers.
Don't worry. I'm from Aberdeen. Those are clearly swear words to the world wide audience - however you're over the Atlantic so it's only me that has to worry...
Had to use my brain to remember that - my wife is from Glasgow.
You'll know by now, surely, that I'm an eccentric Tim B.
Therefore,
I may be either obliged or cliched to ask-
Is she Celtic or Rangers.
Don't worry. I'm from Aberdeen. Those are clearly swear words to the world wide audience - however you're over the Atlantic so it's only me that has to worry...
She's neither - she's not a soccer fan either. She got her US citizenship a few weeks back. Between the three of us (including my daughter) we now have 6 passports - 3 US and 3 UK.
On topic, there are Lab supporters going UKIP, Con supporters going UKIP, Lab voters preferring Con to UKIP, Con voters preferring Lab to UKIP - I'd have thought the second preferences would mostly cancel each other out.
Mike you have the "Conservative party interest" wrong here. The focus of the Conservatives is never again letting the country being ruined by the Labour party. Therefore given a choice between a Labour win and a UKIP win, I think your average Conservative would way prefer a UKIP win.
You are confusing your preference as a Lib Dem with your perception of the Conservatives.
On topic, there are Lab supporters going UKIP, Con supporters going UKIP, Lab voters preferring Con to UKIP, Con voters preferring Lab to UKIP - I'd have thought the second preferences would mostly cancel each other out.
Because they started 7.2% behind and are now circa 2& ahead
Simples
LDs have lost about 10%, UKIP gained over 10%, and the gap has shrunk less than 10%.
How are the Tories level pegging?
Cough so contradict yourself then
Explain very clearly how I contradicted myself.
I said LDs down about 10 (14ish), UKIP up over 10 (15ish), I wasn't accurate, but that's why I said "about" and "over".
True you were not accurate.
UKIP not up 15ish YG Oct UKIP average 15.6% So at GE2010 did they poll 0.6%?
No.
Goodnight
Up 15ish - from 3 to around 18 (17 withYG Thursday & 18 last Opinium) recently FFS... It is, as I quite accurately described it originally, OVER 10% up
Because they started 7.2% behind and are now circa 2& ahead
Simples
LDs have lost about 10%, UKIP gained over 10%, and the gap has shrunk less than 10%.
How are the Tories level pegging?
Cough so contradict yourself then
Explain very clearly how I contradicted myself.
I said LDs down about 10 (14ish), UKIP up over 10 (15ish), I wasn't accurate, but that's why I said "about" and "over".
True you were not accurate.
UKIP not up 15ish YG Oct UKIP average 15.6% So at GE2010 did they poll 0.6%?
No.
Goodnight
Up 15ish - from 3 to around 18 (17 withYG Thursday & 18 last Opinium) recently FFS... It is, as I quite accurately described it originally, OVER 10% up
The good people should concentrate on whichever candidate will be able to sort out the sordid mess that is South Yorkshire policing, whether that be UKIP, Con or ED.
"The blues surely want UKIP to be stopped even if that means LAB winning"
Blue's think the Purples are a bit odd, but most of the peeled off from the right of the tories and the expect them to come back at some point. A whole load of Blue's are quite strongly in sympathy with a lot of the views of the Purples, but not enough that they would leave their current party. The Reds are the dangerous idiots that made the mess we are in now.
There obviously are some CON-LAB switchers, but they are probably mostly WWC type voters, who seem to be amongst the most enthusiastic of the new UKIP converts.
I don't know if this has already been posted, but here is an interesting article from the Washington Post about another 2015 GE battle: Axelrod vs Messina.
The good people should concentrate on whichever candidate will be able to sort out the sordid mess that is South Yorkshire policing, whether that be UKIP, Con or ED.
Quite. Much as I am no fan of UKIP, Labour made such a Horlicks of Rotherham that I doubt Con voters will be worrying about any notional national consequence. That said, I'm not at all sure an ex-copper, like UKIP's candidate, is the man for the job either.....
I don't know if this has already been posted, but here is an interesting article from the Washington Post about another 2015 GE battle: Axelrod vs Messina.
I don't know if this has already been posted, but here is an interesting article from the Washington Post about another 2015 GE battle: Axelrod vs Messina.
Of the four candidates (Lab, Con, UKIP, ED) who has which opening sentence:
ASouth Yorkshire Police needs to change. If we are to have a safe and fair society for all we have to be able to trust our police and pull together as communities. But the police have rightly been heavily criticised for the way they dealt with Hillsborough, Orgreave and, above all, child sexual exploitation in Rotherham.
BElect....... to restore confidence in our Police and drive down crime in South Yorkshire.
........ have a common sense five-point action plan to cut crime in South Yorkshire, so hardworking families feel safer in their homes.
Freeing police to fight crime by cutting red tape and scrapping unnecessary targets. Giving criminals tougher sentences so communities are protected and justice is done. Giving police the powers they need to tackle criminals, using the latest tools and techniques. Stopping people becoming criminals by tackling the root causes of crime. Making police answer to the community to help drive down crime in your area.
CMy aim if elected as police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire would be simple. To re-establish and maintain the public’s trust in the uniform I was so proud to wear for over 30 years.
Following recent criticisms that have undermined public confidence and demoralised South Yorkshire police officers, the people of the county now have the opportunity to seize the initiative and put in place a team that will provide strong leadership and a common sense approach to policing that leaves the old politics behind. This means instilling a new culture, where crimes are investigated without fear or favour.
D....... stood in the 2012 PCC elections......and came in second place: he is a foundry engineer by training and has experience in sales and sales management. .... is married with two children and has lived in Doncaster all his life.
It is his intention to challenge Labour’s corrupt one party state in South Yorkshire and will order the hunting down and prosecuting of all South Yorkshire’s child rapists gangs, but also all those national politicians, councillors, officials, social workers and police officers who might be guilty of offences, including conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in covering up these crimes and for failure in their public duty.
O/T you can still get 250/1 on Southampton for the Premier title. This is half the 500/1 I mentioned a fortnight ago but they are in second place only 4 points behind Chelsea and Ronald Koeman is doing a fine job.
Of the four candidates (Lab, Con, UKIP, ED) who has which opening sentence:
ASouth Yorkshire Police needs to change. If we are to have a safe and fair society for all we have to be able to trust our police and pull together as communities. But the police have rightly been heavily criticised for the way they dealt with Hillsborough, Orgreave and, above all, child sexual exploitation in Rotherham.
BElect....... to restore confidence in our Police and drive down crime in South Yorkshire.
........ have a common sense five-point action plan to cut crime in South Yorkshire, so hardworking families feel safer in their homes.
Freeing police to fight crime by cutting red tape and scrapping unnecessary targets. Giving criminals tougher sentences so communities are protected and justice is done. Giving police the powers they need to tackle criminals, using the latest tools and techniques. Stopping people becoming criminals by tackling the root causes of crime. Making police answer to the community to help drive down crime in your area.
CMy aim if elected as police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire would be simple. To re-establish and maintain the public’s trust in the uniform I was so proud to wear for over 30 years.
Following recent criticisms that have undermined public confidence and demoralised South Yorkshire police officers, the people of the county now have the opportunity to seize the initiative and put in place a team that will provide strong leadership and a common sense approach to policing that leaves the old politics behind. This means instilling a new culture, where crimes are investigated without fear or favour.
D....... stood in the 2012 PCC elections......and came in second place: he is a foundry engineer by training and has experience in sales and sales management. .... is married with two children and has lived in Doncaster all his life.
It is his intention to challenge Labour’s corrupt one party state in South Yorkshire and will order the hunting down and prosecuting of all South Yorkshire’s child rapists gangs, but also all those national politicians, councillors, officials, social workers and police officers who might be guilty of offences, including conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in covering up these crimes and for failure in their public duty.
O/T you can still get 250/1 on Southampton for the Premier title. This is half the 500/1 I mentioned a fortnight ago but they are in second place only 4 points behind Chelsea and Ronald Koeman is doing a fine job.
Ref the convoluted "...an action of itself that could..." stuff in the OP
Wouldn't it be so much better if we had a voting system where everyone voted once for the person they wanted - and the person with the most votes wins?
Seems like a massive improvement over this semi-magical "let's guess what happens if I tick another box" nonsense.
Ref the convoluted "...an action of itself that could..." stuff in the OP
Wouldn't it be so much better if we had a voting system where everyone voted once for the person they wanted - and the person with the most votes wins?
Seems like a massive improvement over this semi-magical "let's guess what happens if I tick another box" nonsense.
The good people should concentrate on whichever candidate will be able to sort out the sordid mess that is South Yorkshire policing, whether that be UKIP, Con or ED.
Quite. Much as I am no fan of UKIP, Labour made such a Horlicks of Rotherham that I doubt Con voters will be worrying about any notional national consequence. That said, I'm not at all sure an ex-copper, like UKIP's candidate, is the man for the job either.....
IIRC Mr SO and (I think), Mr JJ agreed with a post of mine yesterday where I said something to the effect of “anything but Labour” for S. Yorks Police! I note from the quoted site (thanks Ms Vance) that the English Democrat (Ugh) seems to be making the right noises, if crudely, and indeed came second last time. I do wonder, as was suggested to me yesterday, if the fact that the UKIP candidate is an ex-copper, and presumably was a middle rank officer at the time of Hillsborough, means that he might too easily "go native”!
We appear to have confused this PCC by-election with a game of ‘Diplomacy’ ? – on the actual day however, I suspect there will be a low turnout and a lot of voter churn between parties as is the fluid nature of politics at present, but it still looks like solid Labour to me.
Of the four candidates (Lab, Con, UKIP, ED) who has which opening sentence: (snip)
A) Labour? Mention of Orgreave and Hillsborough. Conservative. "hardworking families" C) Obviously UKIP. D) ED by elimination, but could just as easily be UKIP.
Am I the only person who'd like to see them mention more outreach about the sexual and domestic violence abuse issues? Concentrate not only on prosecuting the existing gangs, but sending friendly coppers into children's homes and schools to say: "We are here. If anyone gets you to do anything you don't want to do, or anything illegal, come to us and we'll listen."
Along with procedures to ensure that they are listened to, and their concerns actioned (fairly to both accuser and accused). In particular, commonality between complaints should be noted (to catch offenders with multiple victims, or offenders with similar MOs). HOLMES was developed aft just such failings after the Ripper case in South Yorkshire, ffs ...
For despite these gangs, most abuse of all sorts occur in the home, amongst family members.
We appear to have confused this PCC by-election with a game of ‘Diplomacy’ ? – on the actual day however, I suspect there will be a low turnout and a lot of voter churn between parties as is the fluid nature of politics at present, but it still looks like solid Labour to me.
The good people should concentrate on whichever candidate will be able to sort out the sordid mess that is South Yorkshire policing, whether that be UKIP, Con or ED.
Quite. Much as I am no fan of UKIP, Labour made such a Horlicks of Rotherham that I doubt Con voters will be worrying about any notional national consequence. That said, I'm not at all sure an ex-copper, like UKIP's candidate, is the man for the job either.....
The good people should concentrate on whichever candidate will be able to sort out the sordid mess that is South Yorkshire policing, whether that be UKIP, Con or ED.
Quite. Much as I am no fan of UKIP, Labour made such a Horlicks of Rotherham that I doubt Con voters will be worrying about any notional national consequence. That said, I'm not at all sure an ex-copper, like UKIP's candidate, is the man for the job either.....
Goodness - the thread header is like a kind of establishment memo - how to keep the UK safe from the kippers and protect our cosy dominance of the British political system. Heaven knows I would never vote Kipper 1st choice but as a Tory they'd for sure get my 2nd preference against Labour or LD. Anything which encourages Labour defeats in their heartlands is good news for the Conservatives. I think the rarefied atmosphere of wishful thinking on here is clouding judgement about the real world out there.
Goodness - the thread header is like a kind of establishment memo - how to keep the UK safe from the kippers and protect our cosy dominance of the British political system. Heaven knows I would never vote Kipper 1st choice but as a Tory they'd for sure get my 2nd preference against Labour or LD. Anything which encourages Labour defeats in their heartlands is good news for the Conservatives. I think the rarefied atmosphere of wishful thinking on here is clouding judgement about the real world out there.
Of the four candidates (Lab, Con, UKIP, ED) who has which opening sentence...
It would appear that the electorate are being sold a false prospectus by some of the candidates, including the bizarre idea that Police and Crime Commissioners can alter the criminal law, by increasing sentences or modifying police powers, or by giving directions to police constables on individual operations. They can do neither. Indeed, it is arguable that were a Police and Crime Commissioner to 'order the hunting down and prosecuting of all South Yorkshire’s child rapists gangs...', it would be the duty of every constable so instructed not merely to disregard the direction, but to arrest the Police and Crime Commissioner for attempting to pervert the course of public justice.
Of the four candidates (Lab, Con, UKIP, ED) who has which opening sentence...
It would appear that the electorate are being sold a false prospectus by some of the candidates, including the bizarre idea that Police and Crime Commissioners can alter the criminal law, by increasing sentences or modifying police powers, or by giving directions to police constables on individual operations. They can do neither. Indeed, it is arguable that were a Police and Crime Commissioner to 'order the hunting down and prosecuting of all South Yorkshire’s child rapists gangs...', it would be the duty of every constable so instructed not merely to disregard the direction, but to arrest the Police and Crime Commissioner for attempting to pervert the course of public justice.
Yowzer - I take it Antifrank's not got a blog this morning??
Labour reflect community concerns over grooming Tories pander to the tabloid agenda over grooming UKIP shamelessly exploit the victims of grooming......
Correction to my previous post: the Ripper case was West Yorkshire Police, not South Yorkshire Police. The comment of a HOLMES-style system for abuse cases still holds.
Correction to my previous post: the Ripper case was West Yorkshire Police, not South Yorkshire Police. The comment of a HOLMES-style system for abuse cases still holds.
Labour reflect community concerns over grooming Tories pander to the tabloid agenda over grooming UKIP shamelessly exploit the victims of grooming......
I’m not entirely certain that the first of those constructions is correct!
Labour reflect community concerns over grooming Tories pander to the tabloid agenda over grooming UKIP shamelessly exploit the victims of grooming......
I’m not entirely certain that the first of those constructions is correct!
Correction to my previous post: the Ripper case was West Yorkshire Police, not South Yorkshire Police. The comment of a HOLMES-style system for abuse cases still holds.
I always got confused with the Beatles bassist...
I always get confused with your posts. Come back Fluffy, all is forgiven! ;-)
Carlotta Vance [6.22am] At least one of the candidates is proposing to interfere in operational matters which IIRC the PCC's are specifically prevented from doing.
It's inevitable that sooner or later a PCC will be elected on an "interfering" platform (possibly on a poll of as little as 10%) and this will lead to a head-on clash with the Chief Constable. Would such a clash be good for democracy, the prevention and detection of crime or anything else (other, of course, than the ego of the PCC in question)?
I look forward to the tory Peebies' explanation of why PCCs are needed nowadays when they weren't necessary in Thatcher or Major's time.
Correction to my previous post: the Ripper case was West Yorkshire Police, not South Yorkshire Police. The comment of a HOLMES-style system for abuse cases still holds.
I always got confused with the Beatles bassist...
I always get confused with your posts. Come back Fluffy, all is forgiven! ;-)
If it's because of the spelling mistakes you are a fuckwit.
As a Tory supporter I would have probably wasted my time putting the Lib Dems as a second preference if they had a candidate (a waste because they would almost certainly be eliminated first). Given the alternatives here my second preference would undoubtedly remain blank.
As a Tory supporter I would have probably wasted my time putting the Lib Dems as a second preference if they had a candidate (a waste because they would almost certainly be eliminated first). Given the alternatives here my second preference would undoubtedly remain blank.
Pipe down "Saviour of the Union". No Scot has links to Yorkshire. Stop your hypotheticals.
As a Tory supporter I would have probably wasted my time putting the Lib Dems as a second preference if they had a candidate (a waste because they would almost certainly be eliminated first). Given the alternatives here my second preference would undoubtedly remain blank.
Pipe down "Saviour of the Union". No Scot has links to Yorkshire. Stop your hypotheticals.
As a Tory supporter I would have probably wasted my time putting the Lib Dems as a second preference if they had a candidate (a waste because they would almost certainly be eliminated first). Given the alternatives here my second preference would undoubtedly remain blank.
Pipe down "Saviour of the Union". No Scot has links to Yorkshire. Stop your hypotheticals.
Mr Briskin - have you drunk well, if not wisely?
2 quid min bet - call whatever they call the equivalent to the prime minister in Ireland for the records if you want.
As a Tory supporter I would have probably wasted my time putting the Lib Dems as a second preference if they had a candidate (a waste because they would almost certainly be eliminated first). Given the alternatives here my second preference would undoubtedly remain blank.
Pipe down "Saviour of the Union". No Scot has links to Yorkshire. Stop your hypotheticals.
Mr Briskin - have you drunk well, if not wisely?
2 quid min bet - call whatever they call the equivalent to the prime minister in Ireland for the records if you want.
Not an answer to the question. You certainly seem in high spirits.......
As a Tory supporter I would have probably wasted my time putting the Lib Dems as a second preference if they had a candidate (a waste because they would almost certainly be eliminated first). Given the alternatives here my second preference would undoubtedly remain blank.
Pipe down "Saviour of the Union". No Scot has links to Yorkshire. Stop your hypotheticals.
Mr Briskin - have you drunk well, if not wisely?
2 quid min bet - call whatever they call the equivalent to the prime minister in Ireland for the records if you want.
Not an answer to the question. You certainly seem in high spirits.......
Carlotta Vance [6.22am] At least one of the candidates is proposing to interfere in operational matters which IIRC the PCC's are specifically prevented from doing.
It's inevitable that sooner or later a PCC will be elected on an "interfering" platform (possibly on a poll of as little as 10%) and this will lead to a head-on clash with the Chief Constable. Would such a clash be good for democracy, the prevention and detection of crime or anything else (other, of course, than the ego of the PCC in question)?
I look forward to the tory Peebies' explanation of why PCCs are needed nowadays when they weren't necessary in Thatcher or Major's time.
The same reason we now have votes for women which weren't deemed necessary in Disraeli' s time.
As a Tory supporter I would have probably wasted my time putting the Lib Dems as a second preference if they had a candidate (a waste because they would almost certainly be eliminated first). Given the alternatives here my second preference would undoubtedly remain blank.
Pipe down "Saviour of the Union". No Scot has links to Yorkshire. Stop your hypotheticals.
Mr Briskin - have you drunk well, if not wisely?
2 quid min bet - call whatever they call the equivalent to the prime minister in Ireland for the records if you want.
Not an answer to the question. You certainly seem in high spirits.......
Carlotta Vance [6.22am] At least one of the candidates is proposing to interfere in operational matters which IIRC the PCC's are specifically prevented from doing.
It's inevitable that sooner or later a PCC will be elected on an "interfering" platform (possibly on a poll of as little as 10%) and this will lead to a head-on clash with the Chief Constable. Would such a clash be good for democracy, the prevention and detection of crime or anything else (other, of course, than the ego of the PCC in question)?
I look forward to the tory Peebies' explanation of why PCCs are needed nowadays when they weren't necessary in Thatcher or Major's time.
In Thatcher's and Major's time the police were generally well respected and trusted. There were exceptions, such as miners who felt they had been set upon and of course Liverpool but as a whole they were.
It is tragic how that trust has been undermined and destroyed by forces that have been increasingly politicised, found to be systematically dishonest and institutionally incompetent. The police can only work with the consent of the governed. The PCCs are an attempt to reintroduce that consent and trust. Not a very successful one so far but worth a try. A police force that is only accountable to itself is no longer acceptable. That is the modern world.
Carlotta Vance [6.22am] At least one of the candidates is proposing to interfere in operational matters which IIRC the PCC's are specifically prevented from doing.
It's inevitable that sooner or later a PCC will be elected on an "interfering" platform (possibly on a poll of as little as 10%) and this will lead to a head-on clash with the Chief Constable. Would such a clash be good for democracy, the prevention and detection of crime or anything else (other, of course, than the ego of the PCC in question)?
I look forward to the tory Peebies' explanation of why PCCs are needed nowadays when they weren't necessary in Thatcher or Major's time.
Police and Crime Commissioners are successors to Police Authorities, and broadly exercise the same functions. The platform on which they are elected cannot alter the powers which are conferred on them by Parliament, nor any rule of law concerning the operational independence of the police. As Croom-Johnson LJ said in R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Northumbria Police Authority [1989] QB 26, 39-40:
It is common ground that the chief constable has complete operational control of his force. Neither the police authority nor the Secretary of State may give him any directions about that... The independence of a constable, and a fortiori a chief constable, from outside control, whether by a local authority or the executive, has been repeatedly upheld... This independence of the police goes back a long way. It is not the creation of the Police Act 1964.
The law applies to Police and Crime Commissioners in the same way. It would be open to any police officer to apply to have any unlawful instruction given by a Police and Crime Commissioner quashed in the High Court. In Fisher v Oldham Corporation [1930] 2 KB 364, 372-373, McCardie J gave the following illustration:
Suppose that a police officer arrested a man for a serious felony? Suppose, too, that the watch committee of the borough at once passed a resolution directing that the felon should be released? Of what value would such a resolution be? Not only would it be the plain duty of the police officer to disregard the resolution, but it would also be the duty of the chief constable to consider whether an information should not at once be laid against the members of the watch committee for a conspiracy to obstruct the course of criminal justice.
Carlotta Vance [6.22am] At least one of the candidates is proposing to interfere in operational matters which IIRC the PCC's are specifically prevented from doing.
It's inevitable that sooner or later a PCC will be elected on an "interfering" platform (possibly on a poll of as little as 10%) and this will lead to a head-on clash with the Chief Constable. Would such a clash be good for democracy, the prevention and detection of crime or anything else (other, of course, than the ego of the PCC in question)?
I look forward to the tory Peebies' explanation of why PCCs are needed nowadays when they weren't necessary in Thatcher or Major's time.
it it would also be the duty of the chief constable to consider whether an information should not at once be laid against the members of the watch committee for a conspiracy to obstruct the course of criminal justice.
It would almost be worth seeing the English Democrat get elected so he could be arrested.....
Life in a market town [7.11] Many thanks. That's my understanding of the law, too. I'm merely suggesting that before we're very much older a PCC will be elected on a platform directly contrary to it. Suppose they then quit and successfully seek re-election on a platform of sacking the Chief Constable and replacing them with a "yes man"?
It would be interesting to know what the MPs in South Yorkshire think of all this, but I doubt wild horses could get it out of them...
There is a lot of room for manoeuvre between operational interference and setting priorities.
A PCC could not, just as in LIAMT's example, instruct someone be released. But what if they asked the CC to set a target for the relevant officers of the force for the number of child molesters to be arrested? Targets are an absurd idea but are well embedded into police practice and just might fall within the scope of "policy".
To be honest if there are not some serious fallings out between CCs and PCCs they will have proven to be as much use as the old committees, that is no use at all.
Funerals, weddings and religious events will count as acceptable "exceptional circumstances" but cheaper holidays will not be "a good enough reason".
I don't have kids, but if I did - well some "pilgrimage" would perhaps be in order, to comply with this ridiculous ruling.
As my friend describes it on his FB:
"So, if you don't want to get stung by holiday season prices possibly pushing a holiday completely out of your budget, that's a monetary fine, but if you believe in faeries, and have ironically already compromised the education (what the fine is essentially for) of your children with indoctrination, that's cool. Way to go, spineless beacon of 'tolerance' UK"
I suggestb that it depends how a PCC does it” If he (assuming) at a routine meeting with the Chief Constable gives his opinion that there is considerable public concern about something and ask the CC what the force is doing about and f nothing, why, then how can that be “interfering”? If in the other hand he calls the CC to his office and tells him he wants something done, that; surely is different!
Funerals, weddings and religious events will count as acceptable "exceptional circumstances" but cheaper holidays will not be "a good enough reason".
I don't have kids, but if I did - well some "pilgrimage" would perhaps be in order, to comply with this ridiculous ruling.
As my friend describes it on his FB:
"So, if you don't want to get stung by holiday season prices possibly pushing a holiday completely out of your budget, that's a monetary fine, but if you believe in faeries, and have ironically already compromised the education (what the fine is essentially for) of your children with indoctrination, that's cool. Way to go, spineless beacon of 'tolerance' UK"
I suggestb that it depends how a PCC does it” If he (assuming) at a routine meeting with the Chief Constable gives his opinion that there is considerable public concern about something and ask the CC what the force is doing about and f nothing, why, then how can that be “interfering”? If in the other hand he calls the CC to his office and tells him he wants something done, that; surely is different!
Carlotta Vance [6.22am] At least one of the candidates is proposing to interfere in operational matters which IIRC the PCC's are specifically prevented from doing.
It's inevitable that sooner or later a PCC will be elected on an "interfering" platform (possibly on a poll of as little as 10%) and this will lead to a head-on clash with the Chief Constable. Would such a clash be good for democracy, the prevention and detection of crime or anything else (other, of course, than the ego of the PCC in question)?
I look forward to the tory Peebies' explanation of why PCCs are needed nowadays when they weren't necessary in Thatcher or Major's time.
In Thatcher's and Major's time the police were generally well respected and trusted. There were exceptions, such as miners who felt they had been set upon and of course Liverpool but as a whole they were.
It is tragic how that trust has been undermined and destroyed by forces that have been increasingly politicised, found to be systematically dishonest and institutionally incompetent. The police can only work with the consent of the governed. The PCCs are an attempt to reintroduce that consent and trust. Not a very successful one so far but worth a try. A police force that is only accountable to itself is no longer acceptable. That is the modern world.
Bah, the trust in the police (and politicians, and the BBC, and all the other institutions) is undermined by people having better information about what they really get up to.
This is a good thing. What they really get up to turns out to consist of whatever they can get away with, and the less we trust them the less that is.
Life in a market town [7.11] Many thanks. That's my understanding of the law, too. I'm merely suggesting that before we're very much older a PCC will be elected on a platform directly contrary to it. Suppose they then quit and successfully seek re-election on a platform of sacking the Chief Constable and replacing them with a "yes man"?
It would be interesting to know what the MPs in South Yorkshire think of all this, but I doubt wild horses could get it out of them...
A Police and Crime Commissioner already has the power, under the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, s. 38(3)-(4), to compel a Chief Constable to resign or retire. It is clear, however, from the judgment of Stuart-Smith J in Regina (o.a.o. Rhodes) v Police and Crime Commissioner for Lincolnshire [2013] EWHC 1009 (Admin) that the exercise of the powers conferred on a Police and Crime Commissioner by s. 38 are amenable to judicial review. A removal of the Chief Constable in an unlawful or procedurally unfair fashion would be quashed by the court. The system is by no means perfect, but there are mechanisms available to maintain the independence of the police should the situation arise.
Carlotta Vance [6.22am] At least one of the candidates is proposing to interfere in operational matters which IIRC the PCC's are specifically prevented from doing.
It's inevitable that sooner or later a PCC will be elected on an "interfering" platform (possibly on a poll of as little as 10%) and this will lead to a head-on clash with the Chief Constable. Would such a clash be good for democracy, the prevention and detection of crime or anything else (other, of course, than the ego of the PCC in question)?
I look forward to the tory Peebies' explanation of why PCCs are needed nowadays when they weren't necessary in Thatcher or Major's time.
In Thatcher's and Major's time the police were generally well respected and trusted. There were exceptions, such as miners who felt they had been set upon and of course Liverpool but as a whole they were.
It is tragic how that trust has been undermined and destroyed by forces that have been increasingly politicised, found to be systematically dishonest and institutionally incompetent. The police can only work with the consent of the governed. The PCCs are an attempt to reintroduce that consent and trust. Not a very successful one so far but worth a try. A police force that is only accountable to itself is no longer acceptable. That is the modern world.
Bah, the trust in the police (and politicians, and the BBC, and all the other institutions) is undermined by people having better information about what they really get up to.
This is a good thing. What they really get up to turns out to consist of whatever they can get away with, and the less we trust them the less that is.
Life in a market town [7.11] Many thanks. That's my understanding of the law, too. I'm merely suggesting that before we're very much older a PCC will be elected on a platform directly contrary to it. Suppose they then quit and successfully seek re-election on a platform of sacking the Chief Constable and replacing them with a "yes man"?
It would be interesting to know what the MPs in South Yorkshire think of all this, but I doubt wild horses could get it out of them...
A Police and Crime Commissioner already has the power, under the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, s. 38(3)-(4), to compel a Chief Constable to resign or retire. It is clear, however, from the judgment of Stuart-Smith J in Regina (o.a.o. Rhodes) v Police and Crime Commissioner for Lincolnshire [2013] EWHC 1009 (Admin) that the exercise of the powers conferred on a Police and Crime Commissioner by s. 38 are amenable to judicial review. A removal of the Chief Constable in an unlawful or procedurally unfair fashion would be quashed by the court. The system is by no means perfect, but there are mechanisms available to maintain the independence of the police should the situation arise.
My thanks, once again.
I suppose the scenario I am groping towards is one in which a PCC is elected (and if needs be, re-elected) on a clear platform of destroying police independence but on a low turn-out (say 10%).
But perhaps I am straining at a gnat having swallowed a camel. I have - and I don't suppose anyone else here has - not the slightest evidence that judicial review commands popular support.
Comments
Am I allowed one more White Stripes song?? The same one????
Honestly, how many people can fix a London based Amirican football match.
I, for one, am giving Me and my Gf* some leeway
*Briskin and co
http://youtu.be/4aIp7ZbXZDw
Let's not thread choke though...
Ms Brisky still sleepy.
In English-
Yes
Therefore,
I may be either obliged or cliched to ask-
Is she Celtic or Rangers.
Don't worry. I'm from Aberdeen. Those are clearly swear words to the world wide audience - however you're over the Atlantic so it's only me that has to worry...
(I'm not even joking)
FTR - I'm slamming the Today programme on at 6am on the dot.
I'm not brilliant at lingua franca Tim B-
Sehr Guht - Sehr Guht
You are confusing your preference as a Lib Dem with your perception of the Conservatives.
Please state clearly-
A - Which country you would like bombed.
err, that's it...
Notes to the fans-
A - Ed is crap
Err, that's it...
Anyway, I shall work 6am till 7 (note - under 10 hours)
There was an election in Ukraine (Today programme, Bbc)
Fuck you R B!!!
Blue's think the Purples are a bit odd, but most of the peeled off from the right of the tories and the expect them to come back at some point. A whole load of Blue's are quite strongly in sympathy with a lot of the views of the Purples, but not enough that they would leave their current party. The Reds are the dangerous idiots that made the mess we are in now.
There obviously are some CON-LAB switchers, but they are probably mostly WWC type voters, who seem to be amongst the most enthusiastic of the new UKIP converts.
I don't know if this has already been posted, but here is an interesting article from the Washington Post about another 2015 GE battle: Axelrod vs Messina.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/two-former-white-house-staffers-bring-new-level-of-americanness-to-british-election/2014/10/25/c51155ca-4d85-11e4-8c24-487e92bc997b_story.html
h/t Guido.
Wither Arnie Graf?
http://www.choosemypcc.org.uk/candidates/andrew-donald-clarkson/
Of the four candidates (Lab, Con, UKIP, ED) who has which opening sentence:
A South Yorkshire Police needs to change. If we are to have a safe and fair society for all we have to be able to trust our police and pull together as communities. But the police have rightly been heavily criticised for the way they dealt with Hillsborough, Orgreave and, above all, child sexual exploitation in Rotherham.
B Elect....... to restore confidence in our Police and drive down crime in South Yorkshire.
........ have a common sense five-point action plan to cut crime in South Yorkshire, so hardworking families feel safer in their homes.
Freeing police to fight crime by cutting red tape and scrapping unnecessary targets.
Giving criminals tougher sentences so communities are protected and justice is done.
Giving police the powers they need to tackle criminals, using the latest tools and techniques.
Stopping people becoming criminals by tackling the root causes of crime.
Making police answer to the community to help drive down crime in your area.
C My aim if elected as police and crime commissioner for South Yorkshire would be simple. To re-establish and maintain the public’s trust in the uniform I was so proud to wear for over 30 years.
Following recent criticisms that have undermined public confidence and demoralised South Yorkshire police officers, the people of the county now have the opportunity to seize the initiative and put in place a team that will provide strong leadership and a common sense approach to policing that leaves the old politics behind. This means instilling a new culture, where crimes are investigated without fear or favour.
D ....... stood in the 2012 PCC elections......and came in second place: he is a foundry engineer by training and has experience in sales and sales management. .... is married with two children and has lived in Doncaster all his life.
It is his intention to challenge Labour’s corrupt one party state in South Yorkshire and will order the hunting down and prosecuting of all South Yorkshire’s child rapists gangs, but also all those national politicians, councillors, officials, social workers and police officers who might be guilty of offences, including conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in covering up these crimes and for failure in their public duty.
Perhaps even more attractive you can get 6/1 on them for a top 4 finish: http://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/premier-league/top-4-finish
I'm not saying that either of these will happen, but that they still represent value bets.
Channel Four clearly stated we are not allowed funbets anymore.
Wouldn't it be so much better if we had a voting system where everyone voted once for the person they wanted - and the person with the most votes wins?
Seems like a massive improvement over this semi-magical "let's guess what happens if I tick another box" nonsense.
:
A - sounds like sense
B- Cliche fest
Then its a toss up between Tinfoil E and 'part of the problem 'C'...........
I note from the quoted site (thanks Ms Vance) that the English Democrat (Ugh) seems to be making the right noises, if crudely, and indeed came second last time.
I do wonder, as was suggested to me yesterday, if the fact that the UKIP candidate is an ex-copper, and presumably was a middle rank officer at the time of Hillsborough, means that he might too easily "go native”!
We appear to have confused this PCC by-election with a game of ‘Diplomacy’ ? – on the actual day however, I suspect there will be a low turnout and a lot of voter churn between parties as is the fluid nature of politics at present, but it still looks like solid Labour to me.
If you had a vote...
You would go...
???
Conservative. "hardworking families"
C) Obviously UKIP.
D) ED by elimination, but could just as easily be UKIP.
Am I the only person who'd like to see them mention more outreach about the sexual and domestic violence abuse issues? Concentrate not only on prosecuting the existing gangs, but sending friendly coppers into children's homes and schools to say: "We are here. If anyone gets you to do anything you don't want to do, or anything illegal, come to us and we'll listen."
Along with procedures to ensure that they are listened to, and their concerns actioned (fairly to both accuser and accused). In particular, commonality between complaints should be noted (to catch offenders with multiple victims, or offenders with similar MOs). HOLMES was developed aft just such failings after the Ripper case in South Yorkshire, ffs ...
For despite these gangs, most abuse of all sorts occur in the home, amongst family members.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukip-exploiting-grooming-scandalto-secure-partys-first-police-chief-9819768.html
We should be playing music.
I note I am the only one who is.
Labour reflect community concerns over grooming
Tories pander to the tabloid agenda over grooming
UKIP shamelessly exploit the victims of grooming......
You have stolen that from Yes, Minister. Or maybe Yes, Prime Minister.
Regardless-
We Are Not In Starbucks
So I'll say no.
Good luck women.
It's inevitable that sooner or later a PCC will be elected on an "interfering" platform (possibly on a poll of as little as 10%) and this will lead to a head-on clash with the Chief Constable. Would such a clash be good for democracy, the prevention and detection of crime or anything else (other, of course, than the ego of the PCC in question)?
I look forward to the tory Peebies' explanation of why PCCs are needed nowadays when they weren't necessary in Thatcher or Major's time.
I selectively brief
You leak
He is prosecuted under the Official secrets Act.....
It is tragic how that trust has been undermined and destroyed by forces that have been increasingly politicised, found to be systematically dishonest and institutionally incompetent. The police can only work with the consent of the governed. The PCCs are an attempt to reintroduce that consent and trust. Not a very successful one so far but worth a try. A police force that is only accountable to itself is no longer acceptable. That is the modern world.
Smamry and Antifrank's silly HSX Trans pennine idea gone maintstream (Today programme, Bbc, 0710 Gmtc)
EDITED - Sourced better - PB is the Gold standard...
It would be interesting to know what the MPs in South Yorkshire think of all this, but I doubt wild horses could get it out of them...
The blues surely want UKIP to be stopped even if that means LAB winning
Eh ?
I'd have thought nothing would please Dave more than seeing Labour beaten in South Bloody Yorkshire of all places.
A PCC could not, just as in LIAMT's example, instruct someone be released. But what if they asked the CC to set a target for the relevant officers of the force for the number of child molesters to be arrested? Targets are an absurd idea but are well embedded into police practice and just might fall within the scope of "policy".
To be honest if there are not some serious fallings out between CCs and PCCs they will have proven to be as much use as the old committees, that is no use at all.
Funerals, weddings and religious events will count as acceptable "exceptional circumstances" but cheaper holidays will not be "a good enough reason".
I don't have kids, but if I did - well some "pilgrimage" would perhaps be in order, to comply with this ridiculous ruling.
As my friend describes it on his FB:
"So, if you don't want to get stung by holiday season prices possibly pushing a holiday completely out of your budget, that's a monetary fine, but if you believe in faeries, and have ironically already compromised the education (what the fine is essentially for) of your children with indoctrination, that's cool. Way to go, spineless beacon of 'tolerance' UK"
Tbf - you did warn us of this...
Something Must Be Done!!!!
Pass the Lamberts...
This is a good thing. What they really get up to turns out to consist of whatever they can get away with, and the less we trust them the less that is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Snowden
I'll bill 35 mins
I suppose the scenario I am groping towards is one in which a PCC is elected (and if needs be, re-elected) on a clear platform of destroying police independence but on a low turn-out (say 10%).
But perhaps I am straining at a gnat having swallowed a camel. I have - and I don't suppose anyone else here has - not the slightest evidence that judicial review commands popular support.