Scudamore Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7649815.stm Your thoughts? About bloody time if you ask me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 I don't have a particular opinion one way or the other except for this: It's a very black day indeed when the appointment or dismissal of a high ranking police chief is subjected to political interference ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. It's a slippery slope IMO. Smacks of the US where the sherriff is a political appointment. Comparable appointments would be health or local authority Chief Executives and as far as I'm aware, they're appointed by independent committees. This should be the case with the police too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 Just imagine being Ian Blair in that meeting whit Boris Johnson telling you that he felt it was time for change in the Met Police. How could you possibly take him seriously? He must be absolutely gutted to have been done out of a job by a complete moron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 3 October, 2008 Author Share Posted 3 October, 2008 Just imagine being Ian Blair in that meeting whit Boris Johnson telling you that he felt it was time for change in the Met Police. How could you possibly take him seriously? He must be absolutely gutted to have been done out of a job by a complete moron. My boss is a complete moron... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 The other thing is this. Barmy Boris is the chair of the MPA. I would have thought the MPA itself should have met to debate and agree any course of action. Boris is a bit of a dictator, methinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Special K Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 I'd have someone like DCI Burnside from The Bill in there instead of some poncy, touchy feely, fag-loving Oxford graduate as the Guv. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toofarnorth Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 He wasn't sacked he resigned. If he had any balls he could stand up to Boris Johnson of all people, who doesn't actually have the power to sack him. I'd have just stayed to p*ss him off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 Always seemed alright to me, shame he has been pushed in this way. What happened to Charles De Menzes(sp?) was terrible, but with all due respect I think it has been totally overexaggerated how responsible he was for it though it was an almighty **** up, make no mistake about that. I think during a career everyone had bad times, but I think you just need to look at the good events and things that came out of his tenure and they faaar outweigh the bad. (sorry if this is very muddled, I have had VERY little sleep) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 Always seemed alright to me, shame he has been pushed in this way. What happened to Charles De Menzes(sp?) was terrible, but with all due respect I think it has been totally overexaggerated how responsible he was for it though it was an almighty **** up, make no mistake about that. I think during a career everyone had bad times, but I think you just need to look at the good events and things that came out of his tenure and they faaar outweigh the bad. (sorry if this is very muddled, I have had VERY little sleep) Yes it was appalling but TBF to Blair, he'd only been in post for 6 months and was operating under the guidelines established by his predecessor. Apparently he's instigated a lot of good things during his tenure. But the CRUCIAL point is - this should not be a political decision. And, FWIW, I would have said the same thing had dear old Ken bullied a CPO into resigning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 But the CRUCIAL point is - this should not be a political decision. And, FWIW, I would have said the same thing had dear old Ken bullied a CPO into resigning. The problem is, Ian Blair is a politician. He has been all his career. Ironically, the very thing that got him to the position in the first place is the same thing which brought about his downfall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 The problem is, Ian Blair is a politician. He has been all his career. Ironically, the very thing that got him to the position in the first place is the same thing which brought about his downfall. Are you suggesting that no public servant should have a political view? I've just read the BBC version of his career. Much of what he's achieved is praiseworth, some of what he's done is dubious. But everybody, no matter what their job, has a political point of view and his successor will have too (no doubt he'll be more right wing to attract Boris' support). This is what I thought to be the case with regard to the appointment / dismissal of a CPO: "The formal procedure for removing the commissioner of Britain's biggest police force is that the authority must seek the home secretary's approval." So, to repeat my concerns, the appointment of a CPO should not be a political decision, whatever the political hue of the decision-maker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 I don't have a particular opinion one way or the other except for this: It's a very black day indeed when the appointment or dismissal of a high ranking police chief is subjected to political interference ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. It's a slippery slope IMO. Smacks of the US where the sherriff is a political appointment. Comparable appointments would be health or local authority Chief Executives and as far as I'm aware, they're appointed by independent committees. This should be the case with the police too. You're confusing 'Political' with 'publicly accountable'....Here, 'we' the public, elect our sheriff's, Police Chiefs and DA's and then hold them accountable every four years.....If we don't like them we kick them out.......It's what Democracy is all about Far better that the unaccountable, Quango, job for life, 'politicaly influenced' system in the UK.....Part of the reason the Country has fallen so far as it has Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 You're confusing 'Political' with 'publicly accountable'....Here, 'we' the public, elect our sheriff's, Police Chiefs and DA's and then hold them accountable every four years.....If we don't like them we kick them out.......It's what Democracy is all about Far better that the unaccountable, Quango, job for life, 'politicaly influenced' system in the UK.....Part of the reason the Country has fallen so far as it has The main reason being your emigration, no doubt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 Are you suggesting that no public servant should have a political view? I've just read the BBC version of his career. Much of what he's achieved is praiseworth, some of what he's done is dubious. But everybody, no matter what their job, has a political point of view and his successor will have too (no doubt he'll be more right wing to attract Boris' support). This is what I thought to be the case with regard to the appointment / dismissal of a CPO: "The formal procedure for removing the commissioner of Britain's biggest police force is that the authority must seek the home secretary's approval." So, to repeat my concerns, the appointment of a CPO should not be a political decision, whatever the political hue of the decision-maker. There's a difference between having a political point of view, which as you say everyone has, and making public statements. And on your second point, firstly he wasn't sacked he resigned, and secondly is the home secretary not a politician also? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 There's a difference between having a political point of view, which as you say everyone has, and making public statements. And on your second point, firstly he wasn't sacked he resigned, and secondly is the home secretary not a politician also? You're right - he did resign but, in any other situation I'd call it constructive dismissal, wouldn't you? And you're right - the Home Secretary is a politician but is also the ultimate Head of Service. If the dismissal of a CPO is the perogative of the Home Secretary, then that's how it should have happened. I reckon he's got a case for constructive dismissal here, together with damages because procedures weren't followed. Boris really has to learn to think before he opens his gob IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Martini Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 I don't have a particular opinion one way or the other except for this: It's a very black day indeed when the appointment or dismissal of a high ranking police chief is subjected to political interference ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. It's a slippery slope IMO. Smacks of the US where the sherriff is a political appointment. Comparable appointments would be health or local authority Chief Executives and as far as I'm aware, they're appointed by independent committees. This should be the case with the police too. +1 Although I don't really care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 The main reason being your emigration, no doubt Well you're probably going to see an escalation in the speed of the decline. More and more Brits every year, who were trying to hold things together are just giving up and leaving in frustration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 Well you're probably going to see an escalation in the speed of the decline. More and more Brits every year, who were trying to hold things together are just giving up and leaving in frustration. Well, if ever I thought about emigrating instead of staying in the country I love so much and trying to do my bit, the last direction I'd travel in would be westwards, I can tell you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Secret Site Agent Posted 3 October, 2008 Share Posted 3 October, 2008 I don't have a particular opinion one way or the other except for this: It's a very black day indeed when the appointment or dismissal of a high ranking police chief is subjected to political interference ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. It's a slippery slope IMO. Smacks of the US where the sherriff is a political appointment. Comparable appointments would be health or local authority Chief Executives and as far as I'm aware, they're appointed by independent committees. This should be the case with the police too. I have met Sir Ian Blair a couple of times and I am surprised that he has lasted this long. The man is more left of centre than our present Prime Minister and he is too interested in the politics of the job than catching wrong'uns. I would prefer a more hard nosed Chief Police officer who targets crime and would not tolerate 'no go' zones. Our current encumbant, Paul Kernahan, is like that, and I knew him a good few years ago. Shame he is retiring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint George Posted 4 October, 2008 Share Posted 4 October, 2008 Well, if ever I thought about emigrating instead of staying in the country I love so much and trying to do my bit, the last direction I'd travel in would be westwards, I can tell you. heh ...Thats for sure.......Non stop to Moscow would be far more your ticket I can understand why you wouldnt want to leave tho......What with working so hard to help make Britain the great Socialist Nany State it is today ....Oh and good luck with those Windmills ......hope the wind blows for ya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 4 October, 2008 Share Posted 4 October, 2008 heh ...Thats for sure.......Non stop to Moscow would be far more your ticket I can understand why you wouldnt want to leave tho......What with working so hard to help make Britain the great Socialist Nany State it is today ....Oh and good luck with those Windmills ......hope the wind blows for ya Because free market America works a treat doesn't it!? No need at all for State intervention. Thankfully our nation is all the better for your exit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now