Forum Topic

Brooksie, I cannot see how you can maintain that the Home Office is apolitical, especially in the governance of the Met Police - it enacts government policy and is directed by the government putting the Home Office share of governing the Met police firmly in the lap of Miser Sunak and his cronies: The Home Office’s Role:The Home Office is a ministerial department of the Government of the United Kingdom1. It plays a fundamental role in the security and economic prosperity of the UK.Its mission includes tackling terrorism, cutting crime, and controlling immigration.Political Nature:The Home Office is inherently political because it operates within the framework of government policies and decisions.It is directed by elected officials, including the Home Secretary, who is a member of the government.The Home Office’s policies, priorities, and actions are influenced by the political party in power.Chains of Control:The Home Office is accountable to Parliament and the public. It is subject to scrutiny by parliamentary committees, such as the Home Affairs Committee.The Home Secretary oversees the department’s day-to-day operations and policy implementation.The Home Office collaborates with other government departments, agencies, and public bodies to fulfil its responsibilities.Long-Term Plans and Political Context:While the Home Office may have long-term strategies, these plans are still shaped by political considerations.Policies and priorities can change with shifts in government, public opinion, and external events.The idea that the Home Office sees all politicians as transitional is an oversimplification. Political dynamics influence decision-making.In summary, the Home Office is not apolitical. It operates within the political context, responds to government directives, and is accountable to elected representatives and the public. While it may have long-term plans, these are still influenced by political realities.

Mark Hammond ● 40d

Brooksie, you say that 'the home office is apolitical', I am intrigued by this assertion. Let's look at this a little deeper -The Home Office in the United Kingdom is a ministerial department of the government. It plays a crucial role in various areas, including immigration, security, and law and order. Let me break it down for you:Responsibilities:Immigration: The Home Office oversees immigration matters, including visas, asylum, and citizenship applications.Security: It is responsible for government policy on security-related issues such as counterterrorism, drugs, and other security threats.Law and Order: The Home Office manages policing in England and Wales, fire and rescue services in England, and the Security Service (MI5).Leadership:The Cabinet minister in charge of the Home Office is the Home Secretary. This position is considered one of the Great Offices of State.The Home Office is managed day-to-day by a civil servant known as the Permanent Under-Secretary of State.Organizational Structure:The Home Office comprises several directorates that help fulfil its responsibilities:Border Force: Controls migration at ports and airports across the UK and overseas.HM Passport Office: Provides passport and civil registration services in England and Wales.Immigration Enforcement: Enforces immigration law within the UK.UK Visas and Immigration: Processes visa, asylum, and citizenship applications.Migration and Borders Group: Responsible for immigration policymaking.Public Safety Group: Handles policy areas related to fire, policing, and crime reduction.Homeland Security Group: Develops policy and collaborates with law enforcement and intelligence services to reduce risks from terrorism, state threats, and organized crime.In summary, while the Home Office operates within the government framework, its specific policies and actions are influenced by political decisions made by the ruling elected government. Therefore, it is not entirely apolitical but operates under the direction of elected officials.

Mark Hammond ● 40d

Well, that's interesting the Met appears to be controlled by the Mayor, the London Assembly as well as the Home Office (The Tories):The Metropolitan Police (commonly known as the Met) operates under a governance structure that involves several bodies. Let’s explore who controls and oversees the Met:Mayor of London:Since January 2012, the Mayor of London has been responsible for the governance of the Met through the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC).The Mayor sets the strategic direction for policing in London through the Police and Crime Plan.Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis:The Met operates under the leadership of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.The Commissioner is directly accountable to both the Home Office and the Mayor of London through MOPAC.The Home Secretary and the Mayor hold the Commissioner accountable for the delivery of policing services.London Policing Board:A new addition to the Met’s governance structures, the London Policing Board, plays a role in oversight.The London Assembly also provides a formal check and balance on policing in London through its Police and Crime Committee.The committee publicly scrutinizes MOPAC and matters related to policing in London.Financial Oversight:MOPAC oversees the Met’s financial accounts through the Investment Advisory Board (which also monitors estates) and the MOPAC/MPS Audit Panel (which holds the Met accountable for various governance areas).The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) oversees complaints made about the Met and ensures public confidence in police complaints.In summary, the Mayor of London, MOPAC, and other oversight bodies collectively control and monitor the Met’s operations and funding. Digging around all this would certainly be interesting

Mark Hammond ● 41d

Let's face it The Met is crap and needs to be fixed. Our problem is our old boy networks, Freemasonry, deadwood, you name it. Anyone who has had the misfortune to deal with the SNT sergeants, inspector or the SNT rank-and-file in Ealing know that it is a total disaster. For example, late night Ealing is out of control, in particular the bars around Ealing Green and the crowds of druggies that gather there every night on the Green. If anything happens it is a one hour response time. Again you go on my ideology, what ideology Brooksie, White, and the others. Not everyone's life is polarised by party politics some of us don't actually believe what we are told by the political parties and look beneath the surface. Overall, Tory cuts have affected policing massively in this country, though Khan and London bears some further scrutiny:  Sadiq Khan, the Metropolitan Police, and real estate sales. Metropolitan Police Recruitment Funding:The Metropolitan Police faced recruitment challenges, and the government had earmarked funding for police recruitment across the country under the Police Uplift Programme.However, the Met was the only force in the country that failed to meet its recruitment targets. As a result, it lost £30.8 million in Home Office grant funding for the scheme in 2022-231.Sadiq Khan’s office has emphasized that he is committed to supporting the Met’s recruitment efforts. Despite government cuts, he has invested significantly in elevating police officer numbers in London1.Real Estate Sales and Funding:The Met Police has raised approximately £600 million through the sale of real estate since Khan came to power2.However, it’s essential to consider the broader context:The Met has faced challenges, including high-profile incidents that affected public trust and confidence3.Khan has been accused of financial mismanagement, but it’s crucial to recognize that the situation is multifaceted.Khan’s administration has also focused on quality over quantity when it comes to police officers, aiming for the highest standards rather than merely meeting recruitment targets.Crime and Public Perception:Crime rates in London are nuanced. While some accuse Khan of allowing crime to soar, data shows that someone is less likely to be a victim of crime in London than across the country as a whole.The murder rate in London has dropped in recent years.In summary, the situation is complex, and attributing it solely to “Tory cuts” or Khan’s management oversimplifies the challenges faced by the Met. Financial decisions, recruitment efforts, and crime prevention strategies all play a role. It’s essential to consider multiple factors when evaluating the performance of any administration

Mark Hammond ● 41d

Eat that Brooksie! YOU do some research.. Try researching the Tory's policies of austerity and lettuce-worshipTitle: How a Decade of Austerity Has Squeezed Council Budgets in EnglandBy Michael Goodier, Carmen Aguilar García, and Richard PartingtonPublished: Mon 29 Jan 2024More potholes on the roads, fewer bus services, and libraries and leisure centres shutting their doors for good: the evidence of squeezed local government budgets has been growing across England for more than a decade. Our exclusive analysis of 13 years of council data reveals how local spending patterns have changed under austerity budgets1.Between 2010-11 and 2022-23, net spending per person on various essential services faced significant cuts:Cultural Services: Net spending per person on cultural services was slashed by 43% in real terms.Roads and Transport: Spending on roads and transport was cut by a staggering 40%.Housing: Housing budgets suffered a 35% reduction.Planning and Development: Funding for planning and development was curtailed by a third.Sport and Leisure Facilities: After adjusting for inflation and population growth, net spending on sport and leisure facilities plummeted to just £7.09 per person in 2022-23 – a 44% decrease from the £12.66 during the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government’s tenure.Swimming Pools: England has lost almost 400 swimming pools since 2010.Community Recreation and Parks: Spending on sports development, community recreation, parks, and open spaces also suffered substantial cuts.While some changes in spending are due to evolving responsibilities (such as education funding shifting to central government due to school academization), others are a direct result of budgetary pressures. The Institute for Government reports that even after the recently announced extra £600 million uplift, core money available to councils will still be 10% lower than in 2010-11. Some councils are even worse off: Great Yarmouth’s core spending power more than halved between 2010-11 and 2023-24, followed by Hastings, Hyndburn, and Burnley1.Councils find themselves caught between belt-tightening and the duty to spend more on critical areas like child social care (which has increased by 36% per person since 2010-11) and homelessness (where spending has more than doubled). Consequently, the axe has fallen elsewhere, affecting libraries, museums, galleries, theatres, and other public entertainment venues1.In summary, the real issues lie in the combination of central government funding cuts and the increasing pressure on local councils to maintain essential services. As the evidence mounts, it’s clear that local government budgets have been stretched to their limits, impacting communities across England.References:How a decade of austerity has squeezed council budgets in England | The GuardianI hope this analysis sheds light on the challenges faced by local councils in the UK and this will help you understand what is going on

Mark Hammond ● 41d