Police Federation crying wolf over cuts, says Theresa May

[Red]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32806520

Has anyone here noticed any tangible decline in services? I haven't, but then I don't really look into it or hear about experiences of policing levels.

 

[silkyman]

It's improved in Cheshire according to that, so it's nothing I'd have noticed.

 

[Stevencc]

I live in London - all I hear all day is sirens anyway so I'd go crazy if I had to start gauging what's going on. I don't see as many PCSOs on "the beat" but that seems to have been a gradual process going on since before the election and I'm not sure how useful they are anyway aside from a very minimal increase in visible officers.

 

[SaddlerJonny]

 

[silkyman]

That does seem pretty consistent with a of of conservative campaigning through the election in that they have just tried to shut down the debate. I'm mildly surprised she didn't blame the SNP or a bacon sandwich.

 

[Red]

The government are saying that crime is falling, but how much of that might be indicative of the fact that less crime is being detected or stumbled upon , as in in this video because of cuts to staffing.

 

[Toffee_Joe]

Theresa May gave a brilliant speech. The best bit:

"I know that the theme of this year’s Police Federation conference is “cuts have consequences”. I know too that delivering more with less can be challenging and difficult.

Over the past five years, we have had to make some tough and difficult decisions. We have reformed your pay and pensions, reduced police spending, and yes, there are fewer officers overall. But – despite the predictions of the Federation, and despite the predictions of the politicians who wanted to sell you a false dream of ever more spending – crime is down by more than a quarter since 2010, according to the independent Crime Survey for England and Wales.

This weekend, the Federation warned that spending reductions mean that we’ll be “forced to adopt a paramilitary style” of policing in Britain. Today, you’ve said that neighbourhood police officers are an “endangered species”. I have to tell you that this kind of scaremongering does nobody any good – it doesn’t serve you, it doesn’t serve the officers you represent, and it doesn’t serve the public.

In 2002, you said David Blunkett had “done more harm to the police in five minutes than others have taken years to do.” In 2004, you said Labour were going to “destroy policing in this country for ever”. And in 2007, you said the government had “betrayed the police”. Now, I disagree with Labour policies – but even I don’t think those things are true.

You said police officers were “demoralised” in 2002, 2004, 2007 and 2012. You warned of police officers’ “anger” in 2002, 2005 and 2008. And you warned that the police – and the public – were being put in danger in 2001, 2004 and 2007. The truth is that crime fell in each of those years, it’s fallen further since – and our country is safer than it has ever been."

 

[St Nick]

our country is safer than it has ever been."

yet you want to censor TV programmes before they are broadcast
http://www.theguardian.com/world/20...rogrammes-condemned-by-tory-cabinet-colleague

 

[Ebeneezer Goode]

The government are saying that crime is falling, but how much of that might be indicative of the fact that less crime is being detected or stumbled upon , as in in this video because of cuts to staffing.

I reckon if anyone were in a position to fudge the numbers, and it's not difficult, then it would be the police. I remember watching a documentary not to long ago with an undercover policewoman and you basically saw a conversation where she was being taught to record one instance of burglary with say four offenders, as if it were four instances of burglary.

Anecdotally I do think crime has gone down somewhat. Definitely where I live anyway. It's no where near as bad round ere as it was before they banned drinking and open containers in public.

There's also an interesting theory about lead in the roads and the crime decrease that correlates with it's reduction all over the place.

 

[Roly]

The issue is, the police don't just deal with crime. They are the service of resort for pretty much everything.

Ultimately it'll be up to the public as to if they want a reactive rather than proactive police service.

 

[mowgli]

Most people don't bother reporting low level crimes as they know the police won't do anything about it, drive a bit faster than you should and you're fined on the spot or go to court. I've lost count of the amount of times i've read about sex offenders and people commiting violence get a caution and that's how this deceitful government can claim that crime is down, utter bollocks!

 

[slaphead]

... I've lost count of the amount of times i've read about sex offenders and people commiting violence get a caution and that's how this deceitful government can claim that crime is down, utter bollocks!

That though is not down to the Police, they are as frustrated with the CPS as are the general public. For one officer to spend all night arresting, interviewing and then charging someone with an offence only for some faceless lawyer at the CPS to tell them to caution them because they can't be bothered to do their job undermines the police effort.