UK Politics & Brexit Discussion

[Danny]

3 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

Defund the police will switch off probably over 90% of the electorate before you manage to engage them in a conversation about what it means. It's an easily attackable slogan because it doesn't sum up what you're trying to put across. Even Reform the Police would be much, much better but still very bad. I actually think our police force are a massive positive for the country. Put yourself in their shoes, the vast majority of them go into the job wanting to protect and serve the public. When both the anti-racism protests and the pro-"statue" but actually pro-racism protests went on in London, our police were spat at, abused, attacked, and stood up to it professionally without hurting the members of the public there, even those that actually attacked them. There's no denying that some of them have unconscious biases that don't make them sinister, with a very small minority, as you have in every profession, harbouring some very real prejudices. We all want to change that but you have to do it by parts.

There's no leader who can meet your definition of properly supporting black people, i.e. making everything and everyone in the country perfectly fair in one manifesto and one term of office. Starmer will properly support black people better than Corbyn ever could because he's actually potentially electable. It might not be perfect but wanting the perfect leader before worrying about winning the electorate over is Labour's problem to a tee over the past 5 years, and is one of the reasons we've ended up with Boris Johnson, Brexit and the disastrous handling of Covid.

To an electorate that were pushed to vote Brexit due to a lot of xenophobia and racism no doubt, but the idea is radical and new to the general public, you have to get the message out there and have the discussions as it goes. Defund the police is a good slogan, the message behind it is even better.

This we have a great police force etc etc really does nothing for the conversation, because there are countless examples where the police force have discriminated against communities. Countless examples of how the police are used to only put people in prison, through the system and to ignore the root cause of crime. You’re just doing a number on yourself trying to defend them, of course there are good people in the police and at times they do good work, but as a whole the police force is used to discriminate against non-whites, against the working classes (how many stories do you need to hear about police treating normal football fans like animals) and against people with mental health issues.

I realise Starmer probably won’t get voted in on those sorts of policies, well aware we live in a country that is racist, happy to live with class warfare, sexism, discrimination against people with mental health issues. I get that. Which was my point about Starmer to begin with, he represents all of that because he is the centrist to win back the working class racist demographic that stopped voting Labour and he represents it whilst pretending he supports change for black lives.

There is no long game here, he wants in and he’s willing to throw BLM under the bus to get there

[Inverted]

I don't think it's completely wrong to play the game to a degree and take into account the current prejudices of the population.

But I think the Labour party lacks the vision (and the resources) to totally change the conversation like the Tories do.

5 years ago the EU was a side issue, and since then it has been the dominating issue of our politics, and almost half of the country who previously didn't care, are now frantically certain that we must leave. They're so certain that they will forgive failing in all other areas they previously cared most about - crime, jobs, healthcare etc.

Yes, people do have values and biases which you need to be mindful of in your messaging. But, given the right kinds of suggestion, delivered often enough, you can reorder their priorities in basically any way you like. 

The Tories know that the electorate is putty, and Labour tiptoes around them like they're concrete. 

Edited September 23, 2020 by Inverted

[RandoEFC+]

Utterly, utterly hilarious. I'm very sorry to those people whose lives are going to be impacted by this but I'm actually pissing myself at the incompetence.

[Inverted]

"Nobody is making any good arguments about Britons not loving freedom"

The government: How about we make ANOTHER border INSIDE England as well as strengthening the one between us and France? 

[Dr. Gonzo]

6 hours ago, DeadLinesman said:

In my personal opinion, people who want to defund the police are part of the problem, not the solution.

It’s an argument that’s much better suited to the US than the UK.

The US often asks their police departments to do things that in the UK would be handled by social workers. That’s shit these police aren’t trained for. And on top of it, these police in the US are well armed and, certain departments are particularly militarised and quick to shooting first upon feeling any “threat” - plus the whole American racism component added to the mix.

That’s not to say there might not be a need for police reform in the UK (because chances are, there probably are - there’s usually room for reform in anything tbh), or that there aren’t problems with racism in the UK (there definitely are)...

...it’s just that the “Defund the Police” idea (which I think is a shit tag line, because it’s a more complicated thought than that - it’s defunding police to direct some other funding for adequate social services so police only have to focus on policing) doesn’t fit the UK as well as it does in the US.

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, RandoEFC said:

Utterly, utterly hilarious. I'm very sorry to those people whose lives are going to be impacted by this but I'm actually pissing myself at the incompetence.

I honestly don’t even know what to think about that. It’s just kind of staggering.

[DeadLinesman]

3 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

It’s an argument that’s much better suited to the US than the UK.

The US often asks their police departments to do things that in the UK would be handled by social workers. That’s shit these police aren’t trained for. And on top of it, these police in the US are well armed and, certain departments are particularly militarised and quick to shooting first upon feeling any “threat” - plus the whole American racism component added to the mix.

That’s not to say there might not be a need for police reform in the UK (because chances are, there probably are - there’s usually room for reform in anything tbh), or that there aren’t problems with racism in the UK (there definitely are)...

...it’s just that the “Defund the Police” idea (which I think is a shit tag line, because it’s a more complicated thought than that - it’s defunding police to direct some other funding for adequate social services so police only have to focus on policing) doesn’t fit the UK as well as it does in the US.

In the UK, it’s definitely a stupid fucking idea. The way you explain it in the US though has some merit, especially when they so often act as judge, jury and executioner.

[DeadLinesman]

Just out of interest, who on here has ever worked closely with the police on multiple occasions? I have. I know what I’ve encountered. Who’s got personal experience of both sides? Genuine question.

[Danny]

Again defunding the police means different things in different countries, generally mental health provisions are better in the UK than they are in the US. Police have less guns here. Also defunding the police does not mean get rid of the police altogether, it also doesn’t mean that there aren’t areas where the police do good work.

I don’t want to come across as an expert cos clearly I’m not, but the police are used as the main tool to prevent crime. They do not prevent crime, they just put people through the criminal justice system which by and large does not reform criminals, just creates career criminals. Yet social workers and youth centres, charities have their funds cut when they are the people on the ground doing vital work. That is a valid argument for defunding the police right there, fund community policing, social work, adequate mental health provisions within communities, fund regeneration rather than gentrification.

I was interested in getting into social care but the reviews I’ve been given from people 10-15+ years in are that it’s shot to pieces, stretched too far, too much pressure on one individual social worker. My sociology lecturer literally pursued a career in teaching because of it, and she had been teaching our class unpaid because she was being overworked and overstretched by the college. And she was much happier with that than her previous role. These are the people who are actually doing the work to prevent crime, prevent people taking the wrong steps in life, and there’s barely any funding.

[RandoEFC+]

1 hour ago, DeadLinesman said:

Just out of interest, who on here has ever worked closely with the police on multiple occasions? I have. I know what I’ve encountered. Who’s got personal experience of both sides? Genuine question.

I've had minor experiences with police supporting the school but not worked with them closely. I do know that my cousin and an old friend's missus that previously worked in the police. Both absolutely had the best of intentions, the system was difficult and still is for new recruits over here. Sexism is genuinely a bit of a problem actually. Theres no doubt that there are structural issues in police forces. My experience may not be that relevant though as I live on a backwater island where all the local coppers here are your mate's uncle or your uncle's mate.

What are your experiences?

[Stan]

5 hours ago, DeadLinesman said:

Just out of interest, who on here has ever worked closely with the police on multiple occasions? I have. I know what I’ve encountered. Who’s got personal experience of both sides? Genuine question.

Yep. A lot of work currently is gang related which is the focus these days but also in general drug use. Can't say I've noticed any people being targeted other than because of their involvement in gangs and all thay comes with it

[Honey Honey]

14 hours ago, Inverted said:

How can one meaningfully engage with the proposition that Britons are more freedom loving? It's a meaningless piece of bluster - to engage with it, even if you could somehow empirically refute it, would be to show it respect that it doesn't merit. 

And in any case, the electorate does not respond to measured responses and to argument. They respond to visceral feeling and to emotional responses. By this I mostly mean fear and hate. 

Labour's failing in the last ten years has been an obsession with constructive discussion and fact-based policy-making, and a marked failure to stoke anything like the hate which their opposition merits - and which their opposition stokes towards them. 

Yes you've got your young people online who hate Tories - that's small fry. The Tories have people out in the real world in such a frenzy that elderly Labour activists are attacked in the street and that its politicians are targets for assassination. 

Can you imagine hating and fearing a political party so much that you see their badge and you feel compelled to punch an elderly man on your doorstep? I hate the Tory party to a frightening degree, and even I can't imagine that.

That is the kind of feeling that the Tories have managed to create. This is an enormous political achievement on their part, and you simply cannot achieve it by moderation or by appealing to people's intellect. 

 

Although contrary to two of your points (1) there is most likely political value in being reasoned and appealing to intellect on the basis of statistically measured biases toward members of particular professions with such a reputation (e.g doctors and trust), (2) most Prime Ministers in our history are measured in their approach suggesting there is also something favourable in that, these two aren't really much to do with my actual point in question.

As stressed at the start I am referring to the expression of crap that is detrimental to Labour being in power. It is important for that point to understand why and what that means. It means understanding who Labour needs to understand. 

From a very young age we learn to tailor our words and tone to achieve our own desired outcome from whomever we are encountering. Any functional adult is already consciously doing this with every interaction. Fluctuating in approach from one audience to another. This is no different. 

During the last few years of observation and conversations with a variety of type of Conservative voter, among those who I consider potential Labour votes there is a clear undercurrent whereby their Conservative support strengthens when people associated with Labour talk a particular derisory shite. The topic of which has to of course be a trigger for them. The reason they encounter this is because the speaker does not understand them and how it sounds to them. This could be out of ignorance or a failure on the speakers behalf to calculate that they need these people, be it immediately visible or over a prolonged time in subtle form.

When talking about this particular audience, knowing what I believe I do about them I can't think of a worse type of response to what Johnson said about freedom for the Labour cause than putting down Britain in some way. The more shrewd responses for this audience appear to be those that aim to wrestle the idea of Britain from Johnson in a positive light, those emphasising the great compliance and effort of the nation. Johnson, by chance or on purpose seems to play some Labour associates to his advantage. Particularly when it comes to Brexit. This is an example of it in action. That he can say something which will trigger opponents and in turn that triggering reinforces his own support is quite something to watch. If they weren't easily triggered in the first place the comment probably would never have received coverage. It's mainly the fbpe clickbait outlets that initially spread what he said.

 

[DeadLinesman]

7 hours ago, Stan said:

Yep. A lot of work currently is gang related which is the focus these days but also in general drug use. Can't say I've noticed any people being targeted other than because of their involvement in gangs and all thay comes with it

 

11 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

I've had minor experiences with police supporting the school but not worked with them closely. I do know that my cousin and an old friend's missus that previously worked in the police. Both absolutely had the best of intentions, the system was difficult and still is for new recruits over here. Sexism is genuinely a bit of a problem actually. Theres no doubt that there are structural issues in police forces. My experience may not be that relevant though as I live on a backwater island where all the local coppers here are your mate's uncle or your uncle's mate.

What are your experiences?

I’ve been involved mostly as an appropriate adult for several years now. Get called into support all sorts of vulnerable adults and children as well at the main custody suite. Always do some follow up work as well with the police afterwards. I must be lucky as the guys I’ve worked with have always been polite, responsible, empathetic and knowledgable. 

[Stan]

15 minutes ago, DeadLinesman said:

 

I’ve been involved mostly as an appropriate adult for several years now. Get called into support all sorts of vulnerable adults and children as well at the main custody suite. Always do some follow up work as well with the police afterwards. I must be lucky as the guys I’ve worked with have always been polite, responsible, empathetic and knowledgable. 

Yeah I don't know if I missed the gist of it all but whenever we've needed police to help with situations (even far removed from what I mentioned earlier), I can't question it. Evictions, assistance on visits, access to properties, Intel, general support if required. Can't really knock it to be honest. You get to recognise some officers who attend with you and get to know them, always been supportive and definitely empathetic. Maybe it's just the situations we find ourselves in where it's rare they'll get out of hand but even so, can't knock them for something that hasn't happened. 

Even yesterday, we had someone threaten to burn our offices down. Police were called and went to the guy's house. Stayed with him for an hour supporting and calming him down. 

[The Artful Dodger]

20 minutes ago, Stan said:

Yeah I don't know if I missed the gist of it all but whenever we've needed police to help with situations (even far removed from what I mentioned earlier), I can't question it. Evictions, assistance on visits, access to properties, Intel, general support if required. Can't really knock it to be honest. You get to recognise some officers who attend with you and get to know them, always been supportive and definitely empathetic. Maybe it's just the situations we find ourselves in where it's rare they'll get out of hand but even so, can't knock them for something that hasn't happened. 

Even yesterday, we had someone threaten to burn our offices down. Police were called and went to the guy's house. Stayed with him for an hour supporting and calming him down. 

The Police are excellent when it comes to protecting property, that’s what they were setup to do. Not so good when it comes to protecting people, particularly at the end of the social scale.

I don’t know what the ‘defund the police’ slogan even means, sounds like Anarchist twaddle to me. However, it’s fairly clear the police is pretty much broken here too. There should be a local policeman who patrols, on foot, every few streets or so. Community policing is pretty much dead now, the police are an alien presence among us who come into to deal with the aftermath of crime but do very little to prevent it. 

Edited September 24, 2020 by The Artful Dodger

[Stan]

29 minutes ago, The Artful Dodger said:

The Police are excellent when it comes to protecting property, that’s what they were setup to do. Not so good when it comes to protecting people, particularly at the end of the social scale.

I don’t know what the ‘defund the police’ slogan even means, sounds like Anarchist twaddle to me. However, it’s fairly clear the police is pretty much broken here too. There should be a local policeman who patrols, on foot, every few streets or so. Community policing is pretty much dead now, the police are an alien presence among us who come into to deal with the aftermath of crime but do very little to prevent it. 

I agree with the final few points.

We used to have two PCSOs for each small area/ward of our town. Used to be very productive and beneficial for the communities. It wasn't as if they were just there to only keep people in check. They actually got involved in communities and the visibility they had to be approachable genuinely worked. They actually had respect and even 'kids' didn't mind them being around. They'd have a laugh and a joke and a mess around with them. Take them away and those 'kids' get away with more, get involved in the wrong groups and find themselves in the wrong crowds. Not saying a PCSO presence always physically prevents that and there's other issues at hand but you knew if a PCSO was about, they were reliable and trusted. They were almost the go-between between the communities and higher levels of police. That middle-person and link has gone. Now it's about 1 for the whole south area of the river and 2 perhaps for the north. Such a vast difference in presence and effectiveness. It's partly, albeit perhaps only small, a reason why things like gang culture, serious anti-social behaviour and knife crime is on the up. 

I find the police in this area though are there about protecting people as much as property. Just my experience. They're happy to help out and make sure someone is safe, pretty much what is expected of them from my (work) perspective. 

[Bluewolf]

1 hour ago, The Artful Dodger said:

The Police are excellent when it comes to protecting property, that’s what they were setup to do. Not so good when it comes to protecting people, particularly at the end of the social scale.

I don’t know what the ‘defund the police’ slogan even means, sounds like Anarchist twaddle to me. However, it’s fairly clear the police is pretty much broken here too. There should be a local policeman who patrols, on foot, every few streets or so. Community policing is pretty much dead now, the police are an alien presence among us who come into to deal with the aftermath of crime but do very little to prevent it. 

Used to be back in the day when I was a kid/teen that the police used to patrol the community on foot mostly then they got given pushbikes to get around a bit quicker and our local copper knew everybody by name, who you hung around with and your family and where everybody lived... Even if you had done something wrong they treated you like an adult when talking to you and that bred respect for them in return.. That connection has been lost for some time, as you say you hardly see any of them about these days and you can go weeks without seeing them even driving around in cars.. 

In fairness their workload must be horrendous with all the types of things they probably have to deal with these days it's no wonder they are overstretched.... The 'defund the police' which I will admit is a new one for me is not as silly as it first sounds though if you dig a little deeper, It's not about ridding us of a police presence but using a lot of the funds that go toward policing to be put back into the community so that they can be more effective.. A lot of what's expected of the police force these days they don't have adequate training for and this would relieve them of some of that burden.. 

Communities are where it all begins so it's only reasonable to ensure that preventative measures are taken there where they can be most effective, the police as you rightly say only pick up at the point the crime has been committed which is too late.. 

[DeadLinesman]

I used to live in a small village in the early 80’s. There was a police house and he lived there with his family. Local lad, everyone knew him and his kids. Something the country is missing right now. A connection at the most basic of local levels.

[Dr. Gonzo]

1 hour ago, DeadLinesman said:

I used to live in a small village in the early 80’s. There was a police house and he lived there with his family. Local lad, everyone knew him and his kids. Something the country is missing right now. A connection at the most basic of local levels.

Well I'm not really surprised that the erosion of community connections is pretty commonplace all around the UK. Modern Britain was largely shaped by Thatcherism and generations of Tories that believed in that line "there's no such thing as society." 

[Burning Gold]

One of the reasons you don't see beat cops any more is that budgets won't allow it, which is why calls to "defund the police" are particularly bizarre, especially from the left. An excuse to further cut funding to police departments would be a Conservative's dream if they thought it would fly with voters.

There's certainly a case to be made that communities could be more effectively supported by funding other initiatives, but it's a bit weird to frame that by demanding that money be taken from the police. And it's incredibly naive to think that money taken from the police will be used to fund those things rather than just... not spent. There's a hell of a disconnect between the slogan and the "rationale" which I think is quite revealing.

Even in the US, where police departments are funded through the roof, the focus should be on de-empowering them (is that a word?) and ending things like qualified immunity and officers' general feeling of infallibility.

Defund (or abolish) the police is one of those things @Steve Bruce Almighty was referring to which just turns off moderate or centrist potential-voters

[The Artful Dodger]

Funding is only part of the issue, there has been a fundamental change in how our policing is done. There were actually far less police in the days of them on the beat. Now they’re all in cars, aloof and unknown to anyone. People will frame that as a change in response to how crime has evolved but I would suggest it is the opposite, crime evolves where it sees opportunity. The police are an impotent force now, focussed on stats. They are no longer a part of the community and this is a direct result of the way our country is governed.

[Stan]

He's not wrong.

[RandoEFC+]

It was understandable early on as it was very literally an emergency but yes there's no reason they shouldn't be trying to plan ahead at this stage and debate stuff in the Commons before putting it in place.

[RandoEFC+]

*long sigh*

[Bluewolf]

The home secretary, Priti Patel, is under pressure on multiple fronts following a claim that Boris Johnson’s failure to conclude a seven-month bullying inquiry into her conduct is damaging relations across Whitehall.

The allegation was sent to the prime minister by the FDA union as Patel’s allies said they suspected other ministers may be behind attempts to discredit Home Office plans for asylum seekers by leaking details to the media.

Dave Penman, the union’s general secretary, told Johnson that the delay in publishing the inquiry’s findings was eroding trust between ministers and senior civil servants.

The Cabinet Office inquiry was launched on 2 March by Michael Gove, who told parliament: “It is vital that this investigation is concluded as quickly as possible in the interests of everyone involved.”

7 months??? that's just taking the piss... 

 

 

Edited October 3, 2020 by Bluewolf