WM Police Privatisation

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

All due respect to John Hemming, but he was not at the last Police Authority meeting when it was announced that we are now in a situation of potential compulsory job loss for some officers, the number will be known in June.

Under A19 we lost officers that had done more than 30 years, because it was up to an officer if they wished to continue beyond 30 years of service, we now have only those officers that reach 30 years service going as they reach that point. A19 is not now providing enough officers to meet the required manpower reduction that is needed.

I would of course agree with Bunnyson as to what was said at the meeting as his knowledge and understanding of police issues is far superior to mine.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

The B'ham Post article on privatisation and the potential risk if the PCC does not agree has some sharp comments:http://www.birminghampost.net/news/west-midlands-news/2012/04/05/the-5m-police-gamble-on-private-partnership-plans-65233-30696243/2/

All the sharp comments appear to by local Labour MPs or those Labour MPs on the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee; I wonder what the other members said - we shall I think have to wait till the Committee report to read the transcript.

I note Jack Dromey has calculated:

Quote:

Five million pounds would give us 166 bobbies back on the beat.

The number of potential police officers is less than that, as the privatisation scoping is being funded by West Midlands, Surrey and the Home Office - even so I'd estimate WMP would gain at least seventy officers.

Given the extensive work done by Lincolnshire Police Authority and a large number of other police authorities on privatisation I still am puzzled why WMP Authority decided it was necessary to have another conceptual scoping exercise. Lincolnshire has already started their privatisation process, which is subject of this police blogsite entry:http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/2012/04/02/not-a-police-state-a-private-police-state/

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

johnhemming wrote:

gerry wrote:

I find it a disgusting state of affairs that officers risking their lives and risking injury, to protect us go on duty not knowing if in the summer their bravery will be rewarded by a P45.

My understanding is that only officers who have done 30 years service are expected to leave under the A19 process. Those officers know who they are.

John,

Yes officers who are approaching thirty years service have known since approx. October 2009 that WMP has used the A19 compulsory retirement power and can plan accordingly. My understanding of A19 is that it - for legal reasons - it is in theory a decision made individually and is not a continuous authority to retire officers.

Some months ago there were suggestions that the local Superintendents Association was taking legal action against WMP on A19 and less certainly some individuals were thinking of legal action on the basis it was an "ageist" process.

Ever since cuts to police spending have been on the agenda there has been an official examination and calculation whether officers with less than thirty years service could be dispensed with and those who are on 'Restricted' duties. The Winsor Report Part Two if implemented will allow an incredibly wide power for a Chief Constable to sack officers, especially those who are injured on duty.

It is quite clear that what is in prospect is far more than A19. Now how that impacts individual officers performing their duties is unclear.

ianrobo · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 15:55 **Posts:** 5298

and the police fed knows that and hence a ballot on being able to go on strike. If that goes for a YES vote it will be a massive problem for the govt. If you are injured in the line of duty you should not be treated as a cheat.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

A Swedish friend's comment:

Quote:

Privatization is a fact here in some ways already. We have a private security company guarding our house. Their convincing sales pitch was that they have fourteen squad cars in our part of town whereas the police have two...despite having some of the highest taxes in the world in one of the richest countries in the world.

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

The number of private security firms and private security firm employees in the UK vastly exceeds the number of police forces and number of police officers in the UK. Police premises in the West Midlands are protected by security firms.

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

South Yorkshire Police are considering, rebranding PCSOs as Local Beat Officers (LBOs), to become the public's "First line of contact" and to replace police officers in that role.

Could we see West Mids doing this and making trained Police Officers, surplus to requirements to be replaced by LBOs or even replacing PCSOs with private security firm personnel, as first point of contact on the beat?

Fergus · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 11:52 **Posts:** 838

gerry wrote:

South Yorkshire Police are considering, rebranding PCSOs as Local Beat Officers (LBOs), to become the public's "First line of contact" and to replace police officers in that role.

Could we see West Mids doing this and making trained Police Officers, surplus to requirements to be replaced by LBOs or even replacing PCSOs with private security firm personnel, as first point of contact on the beat?

Could we (to cross over from another thread) see gerry doing a very creditable impression of a bouncing bomb on Edgbaston reservoir? Well, it's possible, I suppose..... :roll:

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

Fergus, I don't care what anyone says about you I think you are a very nice guy and a lovely person, just as I don't care that people say I have terrible judgment about people and that I am always wrong in what I post on this site.

Can I have your magazines when you are finished with them, I would like to learn about accountancy from them?

Fergus · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 11:52 **Posts:** 838

gerry wrote:

Fergus, I don't care what anyone says about you I think you are a very nice guy and a lovely person, just as I don't care that people say I have terrible judgment about people and that I am always wrong in what I post on this site.

Can I have your magazines when you are finished with them, I would like to learn about accountancy from them?

Don't recall ever having had any magazines in the Council House, except those local government-related ones left in our Group Room. You'll know I'm bored if you ever see me reading them.

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

Luckily for the people of South Yorkshire a Labour MP is against the use of PCSOs as LBOs.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

Gerry's original comment was:

Quote:

South Yorkshire Police are considering, rebranding PCSOs as Local Beat Officers (LBOs), to become the public's "First line of contact" and to replace police officers in that role.

Could we see West Mids doing this and making trained Police Officers, surplus to requirements to be replaced by LBOs or even replacing PCSOs with private security firm personnel, as first point of contact on the beat?

The proposals by South Yorkshire Police appear to be "testing the water" for local implementation, but policing practice in England & Wales shows that what is seen as a good thing rapidly spreads around, especially if the Home Office see it as good too. If enough "water" is poured on the proposals nothing will happen, so the initial reaction by a few MPs may suffice. So yes WMP could copy the proposal.

What is often overlooked is that the Met started using Community Support Officers for one role, the guarding of Whitehall-Westminster, which was absorbing a large number of police officers; this was a very limited "eyes & ears" role and quickly spread across England & Wales, with far wider roles and powers assigned.

Neither Northern Ireland or Scotland have PCSOs.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

Many posts ago The Guardian reported on the plans and cited an EU required document in part. A campaign group has now obtained a full copy, under FOI; it is a baffling corporate document, some maybe interested:http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/108098/response/264454/attach/2/BPP%20MEMORANDUM%20OF%20INFORMATION%20FINAL%20version%201%20Feb%202012.pdf

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

Unison will be holding a petition signing event this afternoon outside Birmingham Cathedral up to 3pm. The petition is against proposals to increase private company involvement in west midlands police.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

Circulated on a police blogsite today a link to G4's current offers, which for example includes a Child Protection Officer, a role that is not 'back office' and involves using police powers professionally:http://www.policingsolutions.co.uk/

G4S and other private providers clearly operate to make a profit, for example charging WMP thirty pounds per hour and paying the hired, sometimes ex-police officers twelve pounds per hour. A nice tidy profit.

Less reliably there is a rumour that when Winsor Part Two emerged (pay, conditions, pensions and far more) ACPO held a vote on them and decided to vote in favour.

A very different stance from the last wholesale reform package, known as the Sheehy Report, when ACPO publicly opposed the package.

ianrobo · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 15:55 **Posts:** 5298

well with no Brum Mayor vote at the sametime, a police election in darkest november, the turnout is going to be 10% I reckon and extremists could get in

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

10% that high, you identify a very important point with, and I agree with you because you are very accurate in these things, the possibility of a marginal group or even a smaller political party such as the Greens getting a vote out to elect their PCC.

In a democracy we have to accept who wins.

I feel people did not understand what a police authority was all about and in fact the vast majority would not even know we had a police authority and the PCC will be a complete turn off.

Without personalities such as Mike Olley as a candidate, the main parties will struggle to get a party vote out in any significant amount.

barnardhobbit · **Joined:** 29 Sep 2010, 21:19 **Posts:** 4340

A controversial US firm is in the running to run services for West Midlands Police

A MAJOR US firm that helped build the infamous Guantanamo Bay detention centre is bidding for a role in a police privatisation scheme involving the West Midlands force.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

The report on KBR being a prospective bidder for policing services is to say the least potentially damaging, although:

Quote:

KBR...said a “completely new management team” had been put in place since it split from Halliburton.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

The WMP's Deputy Chief Constable has a regular blog and under the headline 'Winsor and Hutton and Business Partnering' gives the official viewpoint:http://dccdavethompson.wordpress.com/2012/05/04/winsor-and-hutton-and-business-partnering/

The last paragraph refers:

Quote:

Business Partnering still remains subject to considerable inaccurate gossip or reporting. I remain convinced that in an environment where we will have less money and people we will have to work differently. Using ICT and information more effectively will be central to this. We have not always been effective at making complex changes quickly, and there are other commercial sectors with better expertise in these areas. We can provide some aspects of our work better in partnership with others. However the bit we are best at and that will remain sacrosanct is policing. The idea that we would surrender the patrolling of the streets or other vital policing functions to a contractor is misplaced. As we progress in this project, the focus will become clearer. I think it genuinely offers options for better policing and some savings. It is not about making policing cheap.

How this squares with the G4S advertisement and what another police force has done (Lincolnshire) is 'inaccurate gossip or reporting' to the author.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

I doubt this will appear on the BBC News, here is Yvette Cooper's speech today at the annual Police Federation Conference:http://www.labour.org.uk/speech-to-police-federation-conference-2012,2012-05-15

A number of good points made, but on privatisation she said:

Quote:

Time and again the Government is failing to value the office of constable or to recognise the complex mix of skills, experience and judgement the police workforce need.

We see it too in their plans to force through widespread privatisation of core public policing with no safeguards in place. Public private partnerships can be very effective. The police can and should work closely with business on new technology and developing new ways of working. There is important work for the private sector to do. But government needs to draw a line – in the interests of public confidence and public safety too. Core public policing – such as neighbourhood patrols, serious criminal investigations, or assessing high risk offenders – should not be contracted out, no matter how cheap the contract price.

British policing is based on consent and it depends on the confidence of the communities being policed. The public need to be confident decisions are being taken in the interests of public safety, the community or justice, not distorted by contract or profit.

We don’t want private companies on the beat on our public streets, we want crown servants, public servants, police officers doing the job to keep us safe.

The Home Secretary is expected tomorrow and may get some airtime, more if there is a walk-out or stony silence.

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

On the agenda for the next meeting of the Police Authority, on Thursady 24 May at 11am, Lloyd House is the Business Partnership Programme (privatisation).

The Home Secreatry was given a hard time today.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

Both lunchtime regional TV news programmes had an item featuring WMP on privatisation, complete with posters adorning a vehicle parked outside Lloyd House - oddly the poster is similar in style to the Police Federation's, which has a different message!

Chris Sims, the Chief Constable, stressed what was sought were: logistics, skills and technology. His Deputy chimed in to say a lot of the comments to date were simply wrong.

(Added) There is now a WMP Press Release:http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/latest-news/press-release.asp?ID=3489 and a BBC News item:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18105253

Their message is clear on one of the documents for the WMPA meeting:

Quote:

We are the experts at policing. Policing will not be privatised and is not for sale. It is and will remain a public service under the direction and control of an accountable Chief Constable. Police officers responding to your calls, officers and PCSOs patrolling your streets, officers investigating your crimes are the backbone of the finest police service in the world.

The paper gives several examples, a couple of which are odd as much of the technology has been available for years, but not used by WMP and can simply be purchased.

I suspect that WMP plan to persuade the WMPA and later the PCC that the technology cannot be purchased, due to budget constraints, so will be PFI'd or leased. How pursuing this approach actually reduces the pensions burden that underpins the strategy is far from clear and can only be achieved by private partners taking over existing staff.

Link:http://www.west-midlands-pa.gov.uk/documents/committees/public/2012/07_PolAuth_24May2012_Business_Partnering_for_Police_Programme.pdf

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

Birmingham Mail quotes Chris Simms as saying, " We are not for sale. we are owned by the public and always will be", so if I own it can I use the Helicopter this weekend?

It would appear also that Surrey police are taking a step backwards in their 'privatisation' efforts.

Could this sea change indicate that the police leadership might think that the support for them would be less from the public if parts of the police service were privatised or could the police feel that their best future is in taking a political attack position over the cuts and police reforms in an effort to prevent police reform and prompt an increase in funding next year from the government?

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

West Midlands Police claim that a project in the East of the city, Washwood Heath, involving faith leaders aimed a reducing crime and anti-social behaviour is not a replacement for police officers.

Faith Watch has been operating since March of this year. It involves the community and faith groups working in partnership on street patrols which already operate in other parts of the country.

A spokes person for the police said it was not a case of the community carrying out the forces work.

That may be so but West Midlands Police are trying to introduce in the East of the city a scheme that involves community members patrolling the streets in Hi visibility jackets with a radio link to the police and to patrol the streets when there is no cover from Neighbourhood Police teams.

This is unequivocally the community doing the job of the police, what does the chief constable have to say to this situation. It is not privatisation of the police it is ending of the police as we know them and going back to the days before Sir Robert Peel.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

Gerry,

Such citizen-based patrolling has appeared in B'ham before, notably many years ago in Handsworth, including at one point joint patrolling with volunteers from a Rastafarian group and my recollection was that after publicity they have a habit of disappearing - without any publicity.

Further back there was the direct action taken by citizens in Balsall Heath to counter on-street prostitution, which the police were not that enamoured with, but was popular locally.

This latest scheme appears to be a variation on the "street pastors' scheme used in public entertainment areas., which involves some "eyes & ears" and offering a non-law enforcement option. From the very short film clip the impression I gained it was engaged in fixing local public space issues, far from ASB and crime, with BCC being the primary agency being informed.

Dominator · **Joined:** 28 Sep 2010, 15:54 **Posts:** 2886

gerry wrote:

West Midlands Police claim that a project in the East of the city, Washwood Heath, involving faith leaders aimed a reducing crime and anti-social behaviour is not a replacement for police officers.

Faith Watch has been operating since March of this year. It involves the community and faith groups working in partnership on street patrols which already operate in other parts of the country.

A spokes person for the police said it was not a case of the community carrying out the forces work.

That may be so but West Midlands Police are trying to introduce in the East of the city a scheme that involves community members patrolling the streets in Hi visibility jackets with a radio link to the police and to patrol the streets when there is no cover from Neighbourhood Police teams.

This is unequivocally the community doing the job of the police, what does the chief constable have to say to this situation. It is not privatisation of the police it is ending of the police as we know them and going back to the days before Sir Robert Peel.

I have to say that this is quintessential Robert Peel - specifically - The police are the public and the public are the police -

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

In his latest posting the WMP's Deputy Chief Constable seeks to reassure police staff in particular about potential changes. For those within I expect this phrase will sound rather hollow:

Quote:

We are trying to avoid the feeling of review after review for staff in these areas.

His writing style is rather contorted in my view:http://dccdavethompson.wordpress.com/author/dccdavethompson/

gerry · **Joined:** 01 May 2011, 20:52 **Posts:** 1576

Bunnyson, I am aware of previous community and police integrated, 'Patrols' and the Rastafarian community Patrols still go on and I am aware of street pastors as a national scheme.

The second project in the East, of the city is worrying as it does not include the police or joint community police patrols, it is purely selected, volunteer members of the community in the Bordesley Green and Small Heath areas that will 'patrol' in High Visibility vests and have a radio linked to the nearest police station and they will 'Patrol' when there are no Neighbourhood Police officers available due to things like abstraction.

Today the Police Authority in their Private sitting were covering the potential to get out of the lease for the empty maisonettes at the Tally Ho ground, which are costing us the Council Tax Payer as they are empty.

There is a house at 470 Pershore Road on the Tally Ho Estate are they also paying for a lease on this empty house if so they should dispose of it and save us a few more, valuable pounds.

bunnyson · **Joined:** 01 Jul 2011, 23:05 **Posts:** 780

Catching up on today's WMPA meeting I found a 2.5 mins short video by Unite:http://youtu.be/XFcnraGjBpI. and a press release too, which starts with:

Quote:

Unite, Britain's biggest union, has welcomed the West Midlands police authority's decision to delay a crucial vote on whether to proceed with privatisation in order to allow public consultation on the plans.

Link:http://www.unitetheunion.org/news__events/latest_news/west_midlands_police_authority.aspx

Since very few even know of the police authority how they will conduct a 'public consultation' is open to question. I expect given their previous practices a series of meetings at council chambers, maybe a few focus groups with business & others.

(Added)

Strangely it would appear there were two separate WMPA meetings today, if you follow the WMP Press Release entitled:

Quote:

Authority approves recommendations for business partnering

Link:http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/latest-news/press-release.asp?ID=3517

Finally, perhaps we can rely on the BBC's report, which is headlined:

Quote:

Police privatisation plans in the West Midlands put on hold

Re~Stirred Forum

WM Police Privatisation

Who is online