- Jul 10, 2003
- 26,144
I think we may see one of the largest spoilt vote figures on record
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
PCC Katy Bourne
- Thread starter CEOBHAFC
- Start date
Baron Pepperpot
Active member
Postal votes normally have a high return. Me, I'm going round to spoil my ballot paper.
- Jul 10, 2003
- 26,144
This is what everyone should do if you think the whole thing is ridiculous - get off your arse and go and spoil your paper. Don't sit there whining.
severnside gull
Well-known member
the quality of candidates here is grim - political failures and no hopers looking to jump on the gravy train for a payday at the public's expense. Another layer of bureaucracy to pay for with no discernible purpose or change in outcomes and no attempt to actually engage the public.
Political Defences against a Centralised Police State (or a plum Job for the Girls?)
I am undecided about the merits of such a post. We have Police Committees at present (contain elected politicians and appointed members*). (*Elected members can collectively outvote appointed members by one vote. The cost efficient solution would be to increase the % of elected members.)
However, some of the candidates are so naff they could be dangerous to elect? At least three of them are, one is OK and the other one I do not know about.
Both Fascists and Marxists might be in favour of an authoritarian Police State run by the Home Office (Political Bureau). They will tell you to spoil your ballot papers.
Democratic Socialists and Liberals may advise you to choose your vote carefully. Don't believe the rhetoric and the slogans. Tories may want a local Sheriff (shire reeve (scīrgerefa)) in the traditional role? The current sheriff is a non-elected ceremonial redundant post.
I am undecided about the merits of such a post. We have Police Committees at present (contain elected politicians and appointed members*). (*Elected members can collectively outvote appointed members by one vote. The cost efficient solution would be to increase the % of elected members.)
However, some of the candidates are so naff they could be dangerous to elect? At least three of them are, one is OK and the other one I do not know about.
Both Fascists and Marxists might be in favour of an authoritarian Police State run by the Home Office (Political Bureau). They will tell you to spoil your ballot papers.
Democratic Socialists and Liberals may advise you to choose your vote carefully. Don't believe the rhetoric and the slogans. Tories may want a local Sheriff (shire reeve (scīrgerefa)) in the traditional role? The current sheriff is a non-elected ceremonial redundant post.
Last edited:
Screaming J
He'll put a spell on you
You could - if you wanted to of course. You do NOT need to have a ballot card to be able to vote, just be on the electoral register. You turn up at the polling station and if your name and address is on the list of eligible voters you can. Whether you may want to vote or not is, of course, your choice!
Superphil
Dismember
I did not know that, thanks for the information. Nevertheless, I shall decline to waste my valuable time on such a waste of time.
I'm going to soil mine.
This.
The Birdman
New member
The Birdman
New member
At present it cost over £250000 roughly per 41 Police authorities it should cost approx £80 to 90000 to have a Police Commission per year. saving about £6,500.000 per year that's for a start. Also if they don't perform kick them out next time. At least they are elected by you and not appointed by the Authorities like New York Commission?
response from Ian Chisnall, an independent candidate
Dear Andy
Thankyou for taking the trouble to contact me and ask my views.
It is my view that public services which depend on a 24hr 365 day unpredictable demand cycle are generally unsuited to privatisation. I certainly don't have any plans to privatise any elements of Sussex Police and whilst I am not sure promises are the best way of expressing this I do not sense any interest or desire for privatisation from the existing leadership of the force either. Any such changes would need to involve consultation and full evaluation all of which takes considerable time. I think the Surrey debacle had in any case confirmed the Sussex view that Privatisation is not a great move. I have no plans to speak to G4S or any other organisations let alone work with them.
I currently work on a part time basis for a Company called Ashdown Audio Visual that supplies Sussex Police with their data projectors and similar items. I would cease all connection with that company if I am elected. I have no ongoing personal gain for any work that Ashdown AV might carry out in the future.
Best wishes
Ian
---
Response from Labour's Godfrey Daniel:
-
"I will not privatise core police services - I am happy to give you that assurance.You will find this on my website, together with other issues: www.godfreydaniel.org.uk.
I have no attention of allowing G4S to get involved in running the police and I have no connection to any companies that might be interested in police contracts.
I have devoted my life to public service.
I hope you will give me your 'first choice' vote on 15 November"
---
from David Rogers, LibDems;
-
Dear Andy,
I have no plans to consider privatising any aspect of Sussex police operations. What leads you to think I might?
Nor do I have any connections with G4S or similar.
To address any current lack of information, I attach a copy of one of my leaflets. Please feel free to forward it to family/friends/colleagues/etc if thought appropriate. You could also look at my website www.david4safersussex.com
Regards,
David Rogers.
---
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,255
).At present it cost over £250000 roughly per 41 Police authorities it should cost approx £80 to 90000 to have a Police Commission per year. saving about £6,500.000 per year that's for a start. Also if they don't perform kick them out next time. At least they are elected by you and not appointed by the Authorities like New York Commission?
This website is no longer being updated regularly as police authorities will be replaced by elected Police and Crime Commissioners on 22 November, following elections on 15 November. For more information and the latest on policing oversight, please see: Association of Police Authorities
I think the whole point of these PCC's is to herald in the privatisation of the Police.
The replies Ian Chisnall, Godfrey Daniel and David Rogers gave will one back to haunt them because whoever wins will have no choice but to source out policing roles to G4S.
When I was in the running, I was getting emails from the Home Office saying that I will be in charge of the police budget, and that I will be obliged to choose from a preferred list of suppliers which the Home Office supplied.
The whole process is a tool to extend and progress the corruption which is trickling down from Westminster.
One point I want to make about the David Joe Neilson Crime Files. If his claims of police corruption aren't true, then why hasn't he been taken to court and made to take his websites down?
He's been banging on about this for 25 years and still nothing has been done to stop him.
I'm proud to have been the only candidate to have listened and acted upon the information he has raised.
What kind of PCC will Katy Bourne be if she doesn't pay any attention to claims that Sussex Police have cover-up the murder of Katrina Taylor?
A bad one is my answer. And for the people who say they'll vote for Katy Bourne just because I'm banging on to people not to, I say , 'Crack On. She'll win it with or without your vote....'
The replies Ian Chisnall, Godfrey Daniel and David Rogers gave will one back to haunt them because whoever wins will have no choice but to source out policing roles to G4S.
When I was in the running, I was getting emails from the Home Office saying that I will be in charge of the police budget, and that I will be obliged to choose from a preferred list of suppliers which the Home Office supplied.
The whole process is a tool to extend and progress the corruption which is trickling down from Westminster.
One point I want to make about the David Joe Neilson Crime Files. If his claims of police corruption aren't true, then why hasn't he been taken to court and made to take his websites down?
He's been banging on about this for 25 years and still nothing has been done to stop him.
I'm proud to have been the only candidate to have listened and acted upon the information he has raised.
What kind of PCC will Katy Bourne be if she doesn't pay any attention to claims that Sussex Police have cover-up the murder of Katrina Taylor?
A bad one is my answer. And for the people who say they'll vote for Katy Bourne just because I'm banging on to people not to, I say , 'Crack On. She'll win it with or without your vote....'
Seagull over Canaryland
Well-known member
Whoever gets the PCC job is going to face a horrendous challenge over the next few years given the scale of budget cutbacks facing local government including the police. I don't think the scale of this is widely understood and the potential impact it will have on front line services. It ain't going to be a bed of roses even if the existing Police Authority arrangement had remained in place. I can't help but think that having the existing arrangment would make the difficult decisions more accountable, on the other hand maybe not having a committee approach might actually lead to less fudges and more decisive outcomes. Either way it is hard to see how policing will ever be more effective and significantly reduce crime.
I would like to know how the new PCC will resist temptation to direct the remaining resources to tackling issues within his/her particular own locality rather than County wide?
Interesting to read David Rogers PCC manifesto - he mentions Sussex sharing services with Surrey. I can understand the need to look at partnerships and potential for sharing resources but Surrey already have a rather notorious reputation for cutting public services. There may be trouble ahead.........
I would like to know how the new PCC will resist temptation to direct the remaining resources to tackling issues within his/her particular own locality rather than County wide?
Interesting to read David Rogers PCC manifesto - he mentions Sussex sharing services with Surrey. I can understand the need to look at partnerships and potential for sharing resources but Surrey already have a rather notorious reputation for cutting public services. There may be trouble ahead.........
The subject of cuts and budgets are a red herring.
Sussex Police have met their targets. They have saved 25 million already and are on track to save a further 15 million by 2015.
What they aren't telling you is that Sussex Police is asset rich and in a better position than most forces across the country.
If any candidate banges on about the challenge of budgets etc, they are scaremongering.
About Sussex and Surrey joining forces, they already do. They work closely and broadly with each other. They have too because their counties touch each other in more ways than one.
I've been to he meeting where Giles York the deputy Chief Constable has said they don't do anything without first thinking, what Surrey would do and what Surrey would think.
the only trouble I can foresee is the interference of the PCC with the day to day policing of Sussex.
Sussex Police have met their targets. They have saved 25 million already and are on track to save a further 15 million by 2015.
What they aren't telling you is that Sussex Police is asset rich and in a better position than most forces across the country.
If any candidate banges on about the challenge of budgets etc, they are scaremongering.
About Sussex and Surrey joining forces, they already do. They work closely and broadly with each other. They have too because their counties touch each other in more ways than one.
I've been to he meeting where Giles York the deputy Chief Constable has said they don't do anything without first thinking, what Surrey would do and what Surrey would think.
the only trouble I can foresee is the interference of the PCC with the day to day policing of Sussex.
Seagull over Canaryland
Well-known member
Quite right about cross border working - most responsible authorities should already be doing this, so nothing new in that. However Surrey have already shown their taste for slashing / privatising local government services so the omens are not good. As said earlier the scale and timescale of future savings required by central Govt are more severe than most punters realise. It s good that Sussex have earmarked savings. But will that cover what is proposed?
Interesting point about Sussex being 'asset rich'. That suggests a fire sale approach i.e. a very short term approach as you can only sell surplus assets 'once', whereas the budget savings needed are likely to medium/long term. Hence my fears for front line services.
It will be interesting to bounce this in 2 or 3 years just to see how things are turning out - and what impact there has been on crime levels and Police morale.