Posts Tagged ‘Politics’

So, an update.

Following the hiring of Buddy Ed at Cleveland Plod I thought it would be interesting to see if the new Commissioner did in fact follow the rules in his first decision.

According to the act he referenced in his report he should have proposed the appointment of Buddy Ed to the Police and Crime Panel and awaited their response (to be within 3 weeks of the submitted proposal), at which point he can either accept or ignore their report. Given that he sacked the previous Chief exec and gave Buddy Ed the job in less than a week from winning the election this all seems a bit unlikely…

Anyway. I emailed the Chair of the Police and Crime Panel at Stockton on Tees Borough Council, Councillor Norma Stephenson

Cllr Stephenson
I am emailing you in your capacity as Chair of the Cleveland Police and Crime Panel following Cllr Harringtons recent “tweet” regarding the same. (https://twitter.com/cllrharrington)
Following the information he linked to I read the report by PCC Coppinger regarding the recent appointment of a new Chief Executive (Mr Ed Chicken) for the police authority in which he references the requirement of The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, Schedule 1, paragraph 9.

The PCC neglects to reference section 10 of the same schedule http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/13/schedule/1/enacted
(copied for reference)

Section 10
(1)This paragraph applies if a police and crime panel is notified under paragraph 9 of a proposed senior appointment.
(2)The panel must review the proposed senior appointment.
(3)The panel must make a report to the commissioner on the proposed senior appointment.
(4)The report must include a recommendation to the police and crime commissioner as to whether or not the candidate should be appointed.
(5)The panel must comply with sub-paragraphs (2) to (4), within the period of three weeks beginning with the day on which the panel receives the notification from the commissioner of the proposed senior appointment.
(6)The panel must publish the report to the commissioner made under this paragraph.
(7)It is for the panel to determine the manner in which the recommendation is to be published in accordance with sub-paragraph (6).

Given that the PCC was elected on the 16th Nov, and that he confirmed to the BBC on the 22nd Nov (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-20443895) that he had appointed Mr Chicken can you confirm that the Police and Crime Panel scrutinised the firing of Mr Pudney and hiring of Mr Chicken in accordance with the Act? Can you confirm that the Panel was given sufficient notice to examine the PCCs required notification (section 9) and produced a report in accordance with Schedule 1, section 10 of the act? Could you inform me as to the date of the meeting this decision was scrutinised at, where the report was published in accordance with Section 10 para 6 and if possible provide a link to the minutes?

You would think it would be fairly simple to remember if you chaired a meeting in the last 3 weeks regarding the controversial appointment of the brand new Commissioners Buddy Ed?

Apparently not. Although the reply was very quick, it consisited of…

I have forwarded your email to #### ####. Head of Law and Democracy at Stockton Borough Council.
Councillor Norma Stephenson.

We shall see what comes next!

We have a new Police overlord in the socialist utopia of Teesside.

Barry Coppinger took charge as PCC following the elections in November. Surprisingly his first act was to sack the previous Chief exec of the Police Authority, Stuart Pudney. Who was brought in on £90,000 per year contract to help with the mess Cleveland found themselves in when the Chief Constable, the deputy Chief constable and the Authority Chairman were all arrested as part of investigations into corruption.

In his place he immediately appointed Ed Chicken whose vast experience as executive member for community safety at Middlesbrough council was obtained working with, surprise, surprise, Barry Coppinger.

Anyway. This week Coppinger has to meet the Cleveland Police and Crime Panel at Stockton Council. As part of this there are written submissions explaining his actions so far. You can read them here…

It’s interesting to see his reasoning. His report includes…

To consider the appointment of a Chief Executive by the Police and Crime Commissioner, further to the requirement of, Schedule 1, paragraph 9.

I actually looked this up.

It reads

Scrutiny of senior appointments

9(1)A police and crime commissioner must notify the relevant police and crime panel of each proposed appointment by the commissioner of—

(a)the commissioner’s chief executive,

What Commissioner Coppinger fails to note is that under para 10 of the same schedule

10(1)This paragraph applies if a police and crime panel is notified under paragraph 9 of a proposed senior appointment.
(2)The panel must review the proposed senior appointment.
(3)The panel must make a report to the commissioner on the proposed senior appointment.
(4)The report must include a recommendation to the police and crime commissioner as to whether or not the candidate should be appointed.

So the proposed appointment should have been scrutinised by the panels, a report delivered back to commissioner as to whether he could go ahead, and only then was he in a position to appoint his buddy. It would appear that in the first paragraph of his first report he has already broken the rules to continue in the fine Cleveland tradition of giving jobs to mates…

It will be interesting to see if the Panel hold him to account over this, given that it effectively dilutes their authority.

Next….

Following the election result on Friday 16th November, it was necessary to consider, very quickly and carefully, what staffing would be needed both to signal change, and to achieve my manifesto commitments in the context of very considerable public expectation.

No period of finding out what the Police in Cleveland actually need, but straight in with what does he need to fulfil his political agenda…

So having dismissed the Police Authority chief exec summarily, he then details the criteria upon which his Buddy was hired.

1)   Ability to complement my own experience and background.

2)   Shared values in respect of the role of the police service and its accountability to the community.

3)   Considerable experience of community safety and partnership/wider criminal justice landscape.

4)   Understanding of operating within a directly elected individual model environment.

5)   Ability to begin immediately

Obviously you can’t find these anywhere as crass as a job advert, as the post was not advertised. Given that he was appointed within days of Commissioner Coppinger taking over I find it hard to believe that anyone had anything as dull as an interview, and as has been seen already there was no scrutiny as required by the panels.

He then waxes lyrical for some time about buddy Ed’s accomplishments at Middlesbrough Council on each of the criteria. How he pioneered “talking CCTV”, how he “requires the support that this experience brings, to enable me to translate my manifesto commitments into action. I have worked with him for over 10 years and so know that we can work together successfully without risk.” – basically confessing he is not up to the job without his buddy to see him through, and is incapable of forming professional working relationships?

His last justification for Buddy Ed is very telling…

Finally it is important to explain why I felt it essential to have a person I can rely on totally, in place from day one of my term of office; even though this meant displacing the Chief Executive of the former Police Authority. I do not wish to be critical of the former post holder but the post I have filled is different, its scope is far broader. It could be argued that the former post holder could develop and adapt – but time is pressing and there was too much risk associated with that approach. I am only too well aware that I must make some very significant decisions very quickly. The budget position is pressing and a restructure is needed that matches available resources to my priorities. A plan must be produced which you expect to see in January and a Chief Constable must be recruited. I therefore felt that the course of action I took was the only practical way forward. Indeed it is a very common approach taken by politicians entering office at a senior level.

Or to you and me, I wanted my buddy in the job regardless of the previous holder, and wanted it done fast so no-one could argue.

Commissioner Coppinger has already been criticised int he press for this action, but he defended this stating

all contracts would be honoured and pledged there would be no “net cost increase” to taxpayers linked to the appointment of Mr Chicken.

Really? So taxpayers aren’t continuing to pay Mr Pudneys contract which he is rightly entitled to? Or we aren’t paying the taxes to Middlesbrough Council to cover Buddy Ed’s wages whilst on secondment? Or are Middlesbrough council simply doing without an executive member for community safety whilst Buddy Ed is away? Because if they can manage without him for that long, you have to question whether they actually need one at all?

So is he really justified?

Was the previous Chief exec really unsuited for the role?

Stuart Pudney has been chief executive of North Yorkshire, he’d also worked in trading standards and according to the Authority he brought “a wealth of experience in regulatory services, the police and local government”. Considering he was already in position, and continues to be paid by Cleveland Police we can assume he was ready to start work.

So it would appear that that only one of Commissioner Coppingers criteria that he may fail on is

“Ability to complement my own experience and background”

Or in other words, Commissioner Coppinger was not prepared to work with him.

So, back to the report. The commissioner finishes with a flourish…

The role of PCC is designed to be decisive, to cut bureaucracy, and to provide clear accountability. I believe that my actions have demonstrated this

If by that he means take decisions without correct oversight or process, hire cronies over qualified and experienced personnel without proper appointment processes and generally wallow in the mire of corruption and malfeasance that Cleveland Police Senior levels seem determined to cover themselves in.

Could be an interesting first meeting. It should be. I’m guessing it won’t be though.

Big news apparently!
Homophobe and unelected Bishop, son of lady Williams of Elvel, long time oil exec and product of bastions of privilege Eton and Trinity college Cambridge, Justin Welby, to become head of unelected and tax evading cult!

Of course those who claim he was elected are technically right, although despite heading an organisation that profits from centuries of tax breaks and state funding you were not offered a vote, in fact the selection panel consisted of

  • Chair – the Rt Hon the Lord Luce KG, GCVO
  • The Reverend Canon Clare Edwards, elected from the Diocese of Canterbury by their Vacancy in See Committee
  • Mr Aiden Hargreaves-Smith – Diocese of London – elected by General Synod to serve as member of the Commission for a five year period
  • Mr Raymond Harris, elected from the Diocese of Canterbury by their Vacancy in See Committee
  • Professor Glynn Harrison – Diocese of Bristol – elected by General Synod to serve as member of the Commission for a five year period
  • Mrs Mary Johnston – Diocese of London – elected by General Synod to serve as member of the Commission for a five year period
  • Mr David Kemp, elected from the Diocese of Canterbury by their Vacancy in See Committee
  • The Most Revd Dr Barry Morgan, Primate of The Church in Wales, elected by the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion
  • The Rt Revd James Newcome, the Bishop of Carlisle – elected by House of Bishops
  • The Very Revd Andrew Nunn – Diocese of Southwark – elected by General Synod to serve as member of the Commission for a five year period
  • The Rt Revd Michael Perham, the Bishop of Gloucester – elected by House of Bishops
  • The Reverend Canon Mark Roberts, elected from the Diocese of Canterbury by their Vacancy in See Committee
  • Mrs Caroline Spencer, elected from the Diocese of Canterbury by their Vacancy in See Committee
  • The Revd Canon Peter Spiers – Diocese of Liverpool – elected by General Synod to serve as member of the Commission for a five year period
  • The Revd Canon Glyn Webster – Diocese of York – elected by General Synod to serve as members of the Commission for a five year period
  • The Right Reverend Trevor Willmott, elected from the Diocese of Canterbury by their Vacancy in See Committee
  • In addition, the Archbishops’ Secretary for Appointments( Ms Caroline Boddington), ), the Prime Minister’s Appointments Secretary (Sir Paul Britton) and the Secretary General of the Anglican Communion (Revd Canon Kenneth Kearon) are non-voting members of the Commission

In fact much the opposite; You are not permitted any say on the running of his organisation which benefits from state acquiescence on a massive scale, yet since he was appointed to the house of lords he gets to vote on acts of the house and was even appointed to Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards in 2012.
Good to know that we’re moving forward into the 21st century on the whole accountability, transparency and equality things isn’t it?

So if you ignore all fuss about the colonials getting a new warmonger in chief, and the rabid hysteria about everyone in the 1970s being a paedophile you may have noticed a little story about an MP.

Mad religious bat Nadine Dorries figures a good way to represent her constituents, she is going to jet off to Oz for a month, not on some fact finding trip or on political exchange, but to appear in I’m a Celebrity… Get Me Out of Here.

So someone who earns £5,000 a month, plus expenses, and employs her daughter on £40K pro rata as office manager (whilst she is simultaneously studying a law degree – obviously lots of spare time there!) abandons her job for a month to pick up a £40,000 fee for appearing on tv.

Putting her constituents first there… Anyway it has earned her a suspension from the party whip (like she cares) and probably a stiff talking to when she gets back. Personally, wilfully abandoning a job for a month when you already get 82 days off seems to take the piss and should warrant a sacking, but until the electorate get powers of recall not much will happen.

But it did make me think. There is another MP famous for his attendance, or lack thereof…

Nads has voted in just over 70% of votes, some 453 out of 637, and as you would expect from a vacuous self serving publicity whore she manages to speak up a fair bit too

Lets compare that to the member for Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, Gordon Brown.

He has managed just 90 votes out of 637, 14.1% in this parliament. He has spoken in a single debate in the last year and managed just 8 written questions in the last year — so far below average I doubt his one good eye can see it..

So even if he attended every debate between now and new year, and if we were lucky enough for Nads to stay in the jungle she would still have attended, voted and done more for her constituents that him.

Wonder when he’s going to receive his stiff talking to?

But watch who you talk about!

Offensive on twitter and facebook about lost children? 3 months jailtime.

Celebrate 6 soldiers deaths and call for more of them to actually be murdered? Community service…

So if you’re offended by anything, not only can you write to points of view, or worst case a strongly worded letter to the Times. Now you can get the perpetrator locked up. Unless of course they pick on the forces. We all know they’re considered fair game.

How to deliver 10,000lb of diplomacy

Even now, when the memorial to the tens of thousands that died in Bomber Command finally battled through the apologist do-gooders barrage of politically correct AA, the Bomber Command Association have been left holding a bill which may see some of the 90 year old veterans who are trustees face losing their homes.

The Ministry of Defence (MoD) said it had made an exception to contribute more than £1.5m. Big fucking deal. That’s less than £27 per man that gave his life. Thats less than 60% of the annual budget the MoD spends on full time union staff. For an organisation where the men and women in uniform who actually risk their lives cannot even be a member of a union by law.

If MP’s used less than 7% of the amount the greedy troughing bastard ingrates claimed as expenses in the last 12 months (£89,400,000) it would have paid for the memorial in its entirety (£6m), meaning the MoD would not have had to contribute at all.

If we used less than 23% of the money we pissed away in the socialist McCartney-fest of an olympics opening ceremony (£27,000,000) it would have shown we respected the 55,573 men who gave their lives as much as Harry Potter.

These men were forgotten for over 50 years. Their sacrifice deemed unworthy in the post war hand-wringing by intelligentsia and do-gooders. Their families without a memorial to their loved ones. Make no mistake. Without them we would not have beaten tyranny. But unlike so many other services, their memories were swept under carpets, quietly ignored, and made to be a source of embarrassment instead of pride.

So instead of a few extra pints and a kebab that you intended to leave on the pavement over the weekend, how about helping 92 year old RAF Bomber Command veteran Gordon Mellor and his few surviving friends keep their homes now the bastards have dumped the bill on him?

I donated here. RAF Bomber Command Memorial Fund

Political brouhaha of the day is Cleggs draft speech on gay marriage. Allegedly it was to contain the lines

Continued trouble in the economy gives the bigots a stick to beat us with, as they demand we “postpone” the equalities agenda in order to deal with “the things people really care about”. As if pursuing greater equality and fixing the economy simply cannot happen at once

According to the Beeb Former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey said the remarks were “very offensive” and continued

…If he persists in taking that view I and others would be very offended…To be called a bigot is a very offensive statement and I would ask him to recall it…because there are issues here that demand very serious debate

So an ex unelected head of a tax avoiding private members club that wishes to impose it’s views and culture on others objects to being called a bigot?

I think I’ve got news for him. Websters defines bigot as;

a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

I think seeking to prevent an entire group of the population to call their social partnering marriage on the grounds of a collection of fairy tales which is by no means universally regarded and has no place in law qualifies as obstinate intolerance.

In which case he is a fucking bigot with bells on. He should feel free to be as offended as he likes, much as I am sure many in the gay community do at the pronouncements of the sanctimonious self appointed keeper of morals.

Now if only Clegg had the balls to see it through, he may just have won some respect for having convictions.

The Downing Street work experience lad has been spouting off again. Apparently the wealthy need to pay a bucket more tax to solve the crippling debt the politicians caused to buy the feckless idle bastards votes.

He neglects to mention his definition of wealthy, I suspect it will not include politicians, footballers and those with millions enough to enable them to come to arrangements with the HMRC. It may I suspect include you if you inherit grannys house, or manage to scrape a living wage above the maximum state benefit level.

Want something to make it feel better? How about this. In the 25 years the Kinnocks have in the EU between them the troughing scum have pocketed £10,000,000 between them in pay and perks. Ten fucking million. They amounted to nothing except a drain on the public purse over here, so they were rewarded by being sent to the mother of all troughs to fill their piggy paws with as much tax as possible. They have contributed nothing to this world and it will be a better place without them.

Quick sums for you. £10 million over a combined 25 years, means they needed to entire tax contribution of 65 working people at the average 2011 wage (£26,052) just to keep these pampered porkers in enough swill.

Would you like to guess what “profession” their useless spawn married his way into?

Wonder why I hate politicians?

Good article on reuters discussing quantative easing (QE). To you and me, that is the central bank simply printing money.

The Telegraph carries comments from members past and present of the monetary policy committee describing the haphazard and ineffective approach the Bank Of England has taken to the subject. The main problem being that in releasing some £375bn (yes, billions) of cheap money to the financial sector the banks have simply hoarded it to use as cheap capital to underwrite all their previous bad decisions. Preventing the cash from having the boost effect to the economy it was intended to in order to lift the UK economic prospects for growth

The Reuters article argues that since giving this money to banks does not work, why not give it to the people?

It lists several arguments against. Chiefly that people will exhibit the same behaviour as banks and hoard it, or that it will act against the requirement for moral hazard when making spending decisions.

The first argument ignores the fact that in saving the money populations will significantly reduce their debt levels, increases banks capital and free up marginal incomes for spending. Thereby encouraging growth and reducing the overall debt burden. The hoped for effects by a circuitous route.

The second, regarding moral hazard could be valid.

So I propose amending the idea. Instead of simply handing out the cash, use it to cancel all lower rate income tax for a year.

Think about that. No-one pays lower rate income tax. For a year. What you earn you keep.

Expensive? Certainly. But since we have already handed out £375bn to bankers who have track records for being lying thieving amoral scum why not simply leave the money with people who earn it to spend? Surprisingly it would be cheaper as well. According to HMRC income tax yielded £283bn between PAYE and general income tax last year.

Lower rate taxes are far more likely to be used to reduce household debt and get spent on goods. The feel-good factor would also permeate society; the largest impact would be to improve the lot of those in low paid work where the relative gains would be largest.

It would also not benefit those who make no financial contribution to the economy. In short, there would be no extra reward for not working.

So, good news for workers, low paid and in turn it would filter through to companies banks. Good news for the exchequer as it’s cheaper than simply throwing it at corrupt banks. Incredibly simple (and therefore cheap) to administrate…

What’s not to like?

North Korea and China must be kicking themselves. All the time, effort and money on censoring the internet and combating twitter. Turns out all you need is some faux outrage caused by a supposedly free media about someone goading an Olympic athlete

Tom Daley, photogenic media darling of the British Olympic team didn’t win. Apparently the media seem to think that the gold was his by rights I think. Anyway, someone known as ‘Rileyy69’ hit twitter and said: “You let your dad down i hope you know that.”

Now bear in mind Daley lost his father last year and is 17. Upsetting? Certainly. Likely to offend? Almost certainly. But worthy of a police investigation, resources and an arrest? Really? Is there really a need to hunt down each and every comment that may cause offense on the internet? Daley is a public figure. He participates in events that he knew would attract media attention. If it comes as a shock that there may be some people willing to wind him up then how the hell did he survive a playground as a kid? Will we be issuing extradition requests for anyone on the internet in foreign countries who say something the Daily Mail finds offensive? When is everyone just going to grow up and get over it?

Meanwhile, some G4S drone spits at and verbally abuses a soldier who is made to cancel leave and fill in for the great cluster fuck that is G4S by doing their job for them, not so much as a caution so far for what is certainly common assault, and possibly worse.

The internet is dying on it’s arse. Enjoy it while you can before it the likes of the drug fueled Menschotron are able to get their way

Categories