Rights and Responsibilities

Before the result of the last election Cameron told voters that the three party leaders would decide who should be prime minister likening it to “Tweedledum talking to Tweedledee, who is talking to Tweedledem”.

The same could now be said over the undignified row between the PM and Home Secretary on one side and Acting Commissioner Godwin and ACPO President Hugh Orde on the other. Like me you might very well ask yourself just who the bloody hell dictates public order policing tactics these days, not just in London but nationally?

Allegations that the Met officers were initially ‘too timid’ are contemptible and Godwin is right to refute this. But, slow to react to the disorder in the early stages? Almost certainly but this would not have been a tactical option taken by the rank and file – they would have been simply following orders and those orders would without doubt have been the end product of a wider tactical response formulated by a very senior officer based on restraint, containment and you guessed - human rights concerns.

It would have been a brave senior police officer indeed to authorise a zero tolerance approach from the outset last week even with the limited resources available. Why? Well who came to the defence of the Met when they got stuck into the G20 ‘demonstrators’ earlier this year? And there in a nutshell is one of the many problems laid bare by the current back stabbing between the police and the politicians.

The Home Secretary has insisted the police must accept the Government’s authority, she said: “Ministers must ensure the police know what the public expect of them.”

There should not be a single Chief Constable out there who is not aware of what the public in their own areas expect of them – some acutely more aware than others after the last seven days. To put it bluntly the public want to see arses kicked and scumbags taken off the streets.

Ministers and Chief Police Officers all too often hide behind the principle of ‘policing by consent’ and use it bizarrely as an excuse to do nothing. They were at it all last week talking bollocks as to why water canons were not a good idea and using plastic bullets was not even considered. There could not have been a more resounding message coming from the majority of decent minded people all week – you have our consent now get out there and do something positive with it!

It wasn’t just last week’s disorder, as serious as it was. This has been going on for decades. Politicians have consistently ignored what the law-abiding majority in this country want and Theresa May quite frankly is talking out of her arse claiming Ministers must ensure the police know what the public expect of them as if it’s the police and the police alone who can deliver those expectations. Ministers as well as Chief Constables have a duty to respond to the expectations, concerns and frustrations experienced by the public in everyday life.

When was the last time you heard anyone from the Conservatives let alone the coalition talking seriously about removing the UK from the malevolent influence of the European Parliament and its corrosive Convention on Human Rights. Correct, you haven’t.  

There is silence too among the Police Chiefs. How many of them have you heard speaking out publicly against the culture of political correctness, happy to go along with what politicians serve up to them, perpetuating the risk averse approaach but steering well clear of criticising and opposing it, in principle if nothing else. As always, to do so would threaten their own career prospects and pensions – far more important than what their public actually demands.

Just as the majority of the general public were crying out for robust policing last week with water canon and plastic rounds, they might also very well be thinking what could possibly be wrong in seeking the advice of American Bill Bratton who when he was a Chief Officer in New York and Los Angeles, had proven success tackling gang culture.

With an almost co-ordinated sense of indignation, several Chief Constables have already dismissed the idea. ACPO President Hugh Orde, with breathtaking arrogance has actually questioned and mocked the success rates of Bratton and in a single comment he just about sums up the whole British approach to law enforcement, both from a political and policing perspective.

Hugh Orde suggested that the European Convention on Human Rights may prevent Britain adopting Mr Bratton’s “zero tolerance” policing. Priceless!

Have you even thought about what the public might think about Mr Bratton’s ideas Mr Orde? Of course not – wouldn’t want to jeopardise your chances of becoming the next Metropolitan Police Commissioner now would you?  Although having said that I wouldn’t think you have done an awful lot to convince the Home Secretary you’re the best candidate now somehow.

Apologies for ranting on this long but as I’m sure you appreciate – we have all had something to say about recent events and will no doubt continue to do so in the days, weeks and months ahead. So to finish on a lighter note what could be more appropriate in the circumstances than the spookily prophetic words of DCI Gene Hunt giving Lord Scarman both barrels;

“Well you can take this home in your Harrods pipe and smoke it! In twenty years time, when the streets are awash with filth, and you're too frightened to leave your big, posh Belsize Park house after dark, don't come running to me, mate! Because I'll be in Alicante, oiled up, skin sizzling in the midday sun like a burnt sausage!

You can despise us, you can disown us, you can even try and close us down, but you will never break us! We are police officers! We are brothers! We are UN-BLOODY-BREAKABLE!”