Gordon R Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Management in the public sector is filled with frightened, over-promoted, incompetent bullies, senior managers promote people from below not on ability to "do the job" but those who are no threat to them, will do anything (with a capital A) they are instructed, and will take the flack for their boss when anything goes wrong!......anyone with integrity, and half a brain will never "get on" it's the same in politics....it is perpetual problem that will never change because they run the country and/or are in control, and will always protect themselves, their power and their own interests. Scarily accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Scarily accurate. Sadly, that would have to reflect my personal experiences too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord v Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Scarily accurate. It certainly is. I wouldn't move to the public sector for all the tea in china. Well - maybe if I ever lose the will to live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Scarily accurate. Its true and they are never going to employ or promote people that are better than them so it becomes self perpetuating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Why not? Because the military's expertise is not policing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wandringstar Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Because the military's expertise is not policing. And you feel that the last two berks had expertise, in fact a chimney sweep or bog cleaner would have had a better clue about sorting out crime, I cant get the image out of my head of lord blair walking around with a turban on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 The problem is that the vast majority of the senior police officers have no real policing experience to speak of. Many have been fast tracked through the ranks and spent hardly any time on the beat or in a response role. I cannot remember any of these flyers managing a crime list as they were constantly flitting from one department to another for a few weeks at a time to gain what little experience you could in such as short space of time. So, they haven't any real life policing experience and they have no business experience as most of them joined straight from College or University. If you accept that is correct then you will understand why I advocate experienced business people running police forces not police officers. At least the business experts will have one of the two main qualifications required for the job. They can then leave the operational / legal side to those in uniform. At present the police top brass only learn from those who have gone before them and the same mistakes are being repeated over and over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wandringstar Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 When the menezes man was killed, who said, "houston, we have a problem"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Cressida **** The Policing Board here passed her over for Chief Constable in 2014, preferring George Hamilton as the first local man to head up the PSNI. Gender therefore isn’t everything. She didn't get the job here, probably a blessing in disguise for her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Sometimes candidates are passed over simply because they are obviously too good for the advertised post and the interviewers believe that they will move on or be head hunted should a better position come up. It is possible that they knew that they were unlikely to lose Hamilton to any English police forces given his limited experience outside Northern Ireland. Whereas Cressida Duck could have been tempted by any one of the larger English forces. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 (edited) Sometimes candidates are passed over simply because they are obviously too good for the advertised post and the interviewers believe that they will move on or be head hunted should a better position come up. It is possible that they knew that they were unlikely to lose Hamilton to any English police forces given his limited experience outside Northern Ireland. Whereas Cressida Duck could have been tempted by any one of the larger English forces. I am sure there are lots of different reasons after the de Menezes case, even given the fact was cleared of any blame, looking at the intervene panel it was always going to struggle for her. Plus i thing on this occasion i think they wanted a Northern Irish Chief Constable. Edited February 23, 2017 by ordnance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 If there was any black cloud in relation to the Tube incident she would not have kept her job let alone getting the Met' top job. Perhaps other people see things differently to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 (edited) If there was any black cloud in relation to the Tube incident she would not have kept her job let alone getting the Met' top job. Perhaps other people see things differently to you? I am not saying what i think i wasn't in the interview panel , but what an intervene panel in Northern Ireland might think. Alleged police shoot to kill policy during the troubles is a big thing here for some not me i will add, and if you consider some of the most vocal on the subject were on the interview panel, like it or not the controversy and her role in the tube shooting rightly or wrongly was always going to count against her here. That was obviously not the case for the Met as she got the job good luck to her. Edited February 23, 2017 by ordnance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie to this Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 I can see another thread getting locked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digger Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Argued despite warnings = topic locked. Drag it on to another topic. Let it go, agree to disagree maybe ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun4860 Posted February 23, 2017 Report Share Posted February 23, 2017 Can we please keep Ireland out of every police thread that pops up!!!! If people want to discuss the pro's and cons of it take it to pm How many warnings do you need before a holiday!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canis Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 Because the military's expertise is not policing. sorry to tangentialise, but in the modern world surely the line between the millitary's expertise and policing is narrowing sharpely - granted 36 years ago(i'm thinking the last conventional war - the falklands ) anyone in "our green" was doing their duty if they did their uttermost to kill anyone wearing "their green" providing they carried it out by any means not banned by the Geneva convention. From what i read of our recent exploits in sandy places it would appear that there where such convoluted rules of engagement in place that the enemy could follow our troops about on motorcycles and report intelligence on them- and unless said enemy actually pulled out a weapon and started shooting at our people our boys where unable to touch them. Surely anyone that has been able to cope with doing a job under just that sort of restricted conditions should be able to cope easily with a couple of drugged up non indigenous britons at the notting hill carnival !, certainly more suitable than someone that ticks all the boxes for reading the G!uardian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twistedsanity Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 To be honest the role of Commissioner is more political than to do with policing. Regards the Tube shooting many people don't allow for the fact that at the time of the operation police were hunting for suicide bombers, not gunmen. The best way to stop someone triggering the device and blowing themselves and others up is to shoot them in the head. Now, put yourself in the position of those officers. If the suspect was a suicide bomber and managed to trigger the device they would be killed along with anyone else nearby. The carriage also held many people. Are you going to risk one shot hoping that it would do the job or use the multi shot burst option? And what if your colleague's gun misfired or he bottled it allowing the suspect an extra few seconds to trigger the device? Cressida Duck might have given the authorisation to take the suspect out, but she didn't write the tactics used on the day. The point being he didn't have a device though, let's hope for your sake the police don't ever decide you or yours have a device and assassinate you on a whim because you are just as guilty as he was of an offence at this moment,imagine if he had a deadmans switch on his non existent device.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 The point being he didn't have a device though, let's hope for your sake the police don't ever decide you or yours have a device and assassinate you on a whim because you are just as guilty as he was of an offence at this moment,imagine if he had a deadmans switch on his non existent device.......... But what is the alternative? If you believe that the suspect is wearing a suicide vest in an Underground station you can hardly call him over for a quick chat. Your choice of word "Whim" suggest that you don't fully understand the decision making process that leads to a Firearms Officer pulling the trigger. And you don't appear to understand that someone setting out to do serious harm is different from somebody trying to stop someone doing serious harm. You will never stop mistakes being made. But that should not lead to armed officers being pilloried if they have made a mistake as long as the decision making process is sound. If you read the accounts of the de Menezes incident you should be able to understand why it happened even if you don't agree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lloyd90 Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 When the menezes man was killed, who said, "houston, we have a problem"? Are we allowed to ask what your employment history and area of expertise are? Just curious if that's where your perspective comes from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalahari Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 It isn't really that a mistake was made, but the string of lies told to try and cover it all up. It was complete Cressida up. David. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 It isn't really that a mistake was made, but the string of lies told to try and cover it all up. It was complete Cressida up. David. I think that decision / policy was the work by the then Commissioner Ian Bliar. And some of it was speculative reporting from desperate new hacks. But it didn't show the Met' in a good light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalahari Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 I am afraid that if you and I behaved in the way that the Met did we would be facing charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice. Funny that they weren't isn't it. David. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKPoacher Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 I am afraid that if you and I behaved in the way that the Met did we would be facing charges of attempting to pervert the course of justice. Funny that they weren't isn't it. David. Unfortunately this sort of thing is widespread amongst the senior ranks. It seems that the rules don't apply to them and there is a distinct lack of accountability. But, it has to be said that the Governments of the day have done nothing to make senior officers accountable for their actions so I have come to the conclusion that they are happy to let things ride. It will be interesting to see whether Theresa May, once Brexit is sorted, pursues the aggressive policies towards the police that she employed during her time as Home Secretary. I hope so because there are a lot of honest rank and file officers being let down by corrupt and incompetent senior officers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wandringstar Posted February 24, 2017 Report Share Posted February 24, 2017 Are we allowed to ask what your employment history and area of expertise are? Just curious if that's where your perspective comes from. I don't get the question I am afraid, What perspective? You sure this forum aint mumsnet in disguise,? you give your view and people get all funny. Can you answer my question, and understand why I asked it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts