This is the official blog of Sgt Ellie Bloggs, a real live police sergeant on the front line of England. It's not the official opinion of my police force, but all the facts I recount are true, and are not secrets. If they don't want me blogging about it, they shouldn't do it. PS If you don't pay tax, you don't pay my salary.


(All proceeds from Google Ads will be donated to the Police Roll of Honour Trust)

Thursday, September 29, 2011

All Hail the Independent Review

You know the Opposition has run out of ideas when the only policy they can put forwards is an independent review of the police.

It is not exactly clear what Labour hopes to achieve by this review, nor what it will actually be reviewing, but it does align closely with Police Federation calls for a Royal Commission that was dismissed by the Government earlier this year.  And, true to form, the head of the Federation has immediately backed the idea.

Perhaps Paul McKeever should point out that Labour has had twelve years of Government in which to hold this supposedly independent review.  And that instead they simply spent over a decade imposing more and more bureaucratic police targets and restrictions, whilst contributing to a culture of mistrust and resentment of the police.

Perhaps Paul McKeever should point out that it is the height of hypocrisy for Labour, of all people, to declare that the Prime Minister "should be backing, not sacking the police", after twelve years of total disdain shown by their party towards uniformed officers.  And to hark back to "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime", when their government's sentencing policies have led to the kind of scenes in Tottenham and other areas in August, where 75% of those caught had prior criminal convictions.

As a front-line officer who has been assaulted twice in the last 3 months out on the streets of Blandmore, and who has gone through three cans of PAVA spray this year alone, I am not reassured or excited by the prospect of a review - royal or otherwise.

The truth is that the London riots have done more to help the cause of the front-line officer than any government minister ever will.  As someone who joined up to lock up people who perpetrate that sort of violence, that's a pretty sad indictment.


PS In case you're wondering about the long absence, I was catching up on my work emails following a few days off.  The advantage of being off for more than one week is that you can safely delete anything over 10 days old, knowing that the emails that have come the next week will have reversed whatever instructions the original ones contained.



------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
'Diary of an On-Call Girl' is available in some bookstores and online.

13 Comments:

Anonymous Copperface said...

What is also apparent is that there appears to be no fixed date for a conclusion - 'maybe' around 2015/6 - so it is quite clear that this will be a review that will be kicked into the long grass if its findings do not tally with Labours, and more probably just forgotten about as it has no statutory basis.
Oh yes, and very true re the emails.....

29 September, 2011 09:23

 
Blogger dickiebo said...

Clever politics - by the Labour Party. Not too sure about the police, though!

29 September, 2011 12:56

 
Blogger Kimpatsu said...

... whilst contributing to a culture of mistrust and resentment of the police....
Oh, be fair. It wasn't Zanu-Labour who murdered Harry Stanley, Jean Charles de Menezes, or Ian Tomlinson. It was the thugs in blue. I don't trust you because you kill innocent people. Until you personally come out in total condemnation of this "shoot first" policy, the police will never be trusted by those of us who are friends of freedom like, you know. civil liberties and such...

29 September, 2011 14:29

 
Anonymous Old Codger said...

How 'independent' is a review headed by an ex police chief?

29 September, 2011 17:02

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't recall anyone called Tomlinson being shot? So how can police officers condemn something that didn't happen?
Perhaps Kimpstsu, your problem is you believe too much of the rubbish, and don't look at facts.
Perhaps you should go away, read the investigation reports into the first 2 people you mention, and wait for the trial of the third.
The first 2 are based on evidence, of which there is none of murder, and the third is about to go on trial for manslaughter, as again, there is absolutely no evidence of murder. If you'd bothered to read those, then you'd already know there's nothing to condemn on the first 2 and lets wait and see what a jury say about the third, before jumping to conclusions...Or wouldn't that be as good fun?

29 September, 2011 17:33

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh no a half-wit doesn't trust me! I shall resign immediately with all my colleagues and he can live in the utopia that is a police-free country.
Jaded

29 September, 2011 17:51

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I don't trust you because you kill innocent people."

Kimpatsu, you must realise that every death is rigorously investigated and in the end a court decides whether it was a lawful killing or not. Do you really want to live in a society where the police are not allowed to shoot first? If you do, then I’m afraid you’re stuck, because I’m pretty sure no country on the planet would have such a rule for reasons which are obvious to any reasonably minded person.

I’ve yet to be given an instruction to kill an innocent person – although with this government anything is possible!

29 September, 2011 19:42

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ho hum. Trolled again. It's quite flattering that someone is prepared to waste their free time impersonating another (fairly) anonymous person on the internet. Still if it fills those long lonely hours for them, at least it's better than robbing grannies or phoning in complaints about harassment on Facebook.
I imagine it might also confuse Melv in his quest to compile lists if all those objectionable police posters :-)

Apologies to Kimpatsu. I'd never call him a twat (well not without explaining why ;-)

Tang0

29 September, 2011 19:56

 
Anonymous Retired Dinosaur said...

An Independent Review, undertaken by carefully selected people handpicked by politicians playing at nothing other than heeadline grabbing petty Party Politics?

What a joke, especially when it comes from Yvette Balls who is desperate to position herself as a candidate in any future leadership contest.

What makes it more rediculous is that the very people who are pretending they are going to search for a solution are the very people who were the cause of the disasterous problem in the first place.

29 September, 2011 23:59

 
Blogger guthrie said...

New labour is intellectually bankrupt. A good example is the wibble about student fee's - "We'll cap them at 6,000£". Not stand up for the previous arrangement, or demand a return to grants and fewer uni places or something, just a capitulation to the condems view of the world but with a bit of niceness added to make them look a little better.

30 September, 2011 09:46

 
OpenID inspectorgadget said...

I would like to personally come out in FAVOUR of a 'shoot first' policy.

Thank you.

30 September, 2011 21:44

 
Anonymous Rufus said...

I'm not entirely convinced of the necessary merits of a "shoot first" policy, I can see the potential flaws either way.

I am, however, most definitely in favour of a "shoot last" policy - if it becomes necessary in the eyes of a trained firearms officer to shoot someone (which is when they are an immenent danger to the officers or MoPs, or if they are absconding with nuclear material)then it's fair to say that the desired result is for them to be rendered incapable of operating a firearm or resisting ASAP.

05 October, 2011 12:44

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I guess it will be as 'independent' as the 'independent' Police Complaints Commission or the 'Independent' newspaper.

18 December, 2011 15:05

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

 

View My Stats
eXTReMe Tracker