PCCs and the End of Politics

Posted on 01/11/2012 by samchapman

Today I have updated the entries for Northamptonshire so that visitors to this site will know that Lee Barron is not a real choice in these elections, following his decision to ‘quit’ yesterday. As it happens, it’s too late formally to withdraw, yet it’s not possible for him to become a PCC either, if what he has said about his own criminal conviction is true.

The sorry story does however point up another issue. This is the update to the site:-

Lee Barron– Barron is believed ineligible to take office as a PCC after revealing details of a conviction from 1990. His attempt to withdraw was too late, and his name remains on the ballot.

If you go to the official ChooseMyPCC website however you will find this – his candidate statement in all its glory, alongside the others, just as if he really was a candidate who you could elect and everything. If you look at the Returning Officer’s statement, you will not only see that there will be no explanation given of the situation to voters by the Returning Officer, you will also see that the press release does not even tell you which candidate is now an unsafe option!

Call me picky, but I think that is tantamount to a deception on the electors of Northamptonshire. It looks like this candidate can’t take office, but public agencies are still inviting people to vote for him and hoping that the private and voluntary sectors in the shape of mainstream and new media can get out a message that they themselves refuse to give.

There are other problems with the public sector approach. ChooseMyPCC, the Home Office and others do not link to alternative sources of information such as yours truly. Apparently we could be biased. And they, whose wages depend on a constant flow of public funding are not?

ChooseMyPCC have decided to give candidates’ web addresses, but not present them as hyperlinks. So you have to cut and paste in order to check out more than the 300 words! How many people will do that? The site, which has been heavily advertised so that it will be the default visit by those who can be bothered to find out more ends up providing less information that places like here, PoliceElections and YourNextPCC.

ChooseMyPCC also lacks candidate statements from Richard Davies in Lincolnshire and from Neil Eyre in Humberside, the first because of a dispute as to whether the email arrived, and the second because he was put-off by all the rules that had to be followed implying the possibility of censorship. No such problems if you click on the links in their names here.

And let’s not forget that ChooseMyPCC went live with candidate statements in late October – whereas TopOfTheCops has been carrying them since February. No wonder we see tweets like this from BBC Home Affairs correspondent Matt Prodger :-

“The @ukhomeoffice police commissioners website is woeful http://www.choosemypcc.org.uk/  Better off heading to @TopOfTheCopsCom for info just now.”

ChooseMyPCC is looking less like a good investment.

It is 10 years since Douglas Carswell put forward the idea that is now PCCs. He’s trailing a new book now, about how traditional politics is finished and how the internet enables people to do things better than the government. How apt that the Government’s implementation of the PCC idea has made his case for him.

Posted in Perspectives | Tagged | 2 Comments

Barron’s On The Ballot

Posted on 01/11/2012 by samchapman

For any who missed the update to yesterday's post –

Update Thursday 1 November

I have spoken to the Northants PARO team and note their Press Release following Lee Barron’s ‘withdrawal’.

The main points are:-

  • Barron cannot withdraw – it’s too late.
  • Barron’s name will be on the Ballot Paper
  • The returning officer and staff will not be advising electors what to do – so no notices in Polling Stations saying that he wants to withdraw or is disqualified.
  • The Election Count will go on unaffected.
  • The PARO isn’t saying what will happen if Barron gets the most votes.

I tried to get a statement to say whether he is viewed as withdrawn or as disqualified. They only say that he cannot withdraw at this stage.

This has a bizarre impact on the election.

Labour activists will not be campaigning, but Labour supporters will still get postal ballots and polling cards. When they turn up at the polling station or otherwise cast their votes, whether they know about Barron’s situation will depend on whether they follow local news or gossip. They will cast their votes.

If Barron wins the vote (now unlikely) it seems he is disqualified from taking office. Does the office move to whoever comes second, or does there need to be a fresh election?

If Barron comes second on the first ballot (still possible) he could benefit from second preferences which could help him win, but in so doing he will exclude the candidate who has come third, who is the candidate who ‘should’ be the real second, and have a chance in the run-off.

If he comes less than second his votes will move to whoever they have put as their Supplementary Votes. But you only get one Supplementary Vote – so effectively this situation deprives Labour voters of their second preference.

A real mess – how did we get to this place? It’s nearly 3 months since I last raised the matter of whether anyone would check criminal convictions before nominations were accepted.

 

Yet another update

The BBC report the Home Office view in this report:-

“The Home Office said if a disqualified candidate won there would have to be a by-election.

The post would become vacant straight away and an acting PCC would be appointed by the Police and Crime Panel until the by-election was held, which would be within 35 days.”

 

Posted in Perspectives | 3 Comments

Union Barron won’t be Police and Crime Commissioner

Posted on 31/10/2012 by samchapman

When TopOfTheCops launched a campaign in August to get PCC candidates to 'fess up' as to whether they had a problem by having the wrong type of criminal conviction over 40 candidates answered the call.

In Northamptonshire, of the candidates we knew about in August who made it to being nominated, only union official and Labour candidate Lee Barron did not make a declaration to this site, (UKIP's Jim MacArthur hasn't either, but he was not known as a candidate in August and so was not approached).

Now perhaps we know why. Today in an extraordinary development Barron is reported to have 'quit', and the Labour party has withdrawn its support of him as it has been revealed that Barron had a conviction, apparently for obstructing police, from an incident in a pub in 1990.

There are mixed messages in the report though.

1. A Labour spokesman said: “We are disappointed to learn from Lee today he has a previous conviction which bars him from standing as a candidate. He has been suspended with immediate effect and we have withdrawn our support pending an investigation.”

Compare this with

2. The Chron understands Mr Barron informed the Labour Party of the incident before he was selected

In order to be nominated Barron will have needed to make a statement regarding his qualification to be nominated. Making a false statement is a criminal offence. There will need to be an investigation. But this article suggests that officers may also need to investigate what the Labour party knew, to see whether anyone else aided, abetted, counseled or procured this statement from Barron. On a bad day for the Labour party that is some further news they may need to digest.

The reason being given for the 'mix up' is that the conviction didn't disqualify him until guidelines changed following last year's riots.

I cannot in mere words convey the stupidity of that statement. The Act says a conviction for an imprisonable offence is a disqualification. It defines an imprisonable offence as follows

(a)“imprisonable offence” means an offence—

(i)for which a person who has attained the age of 18 years may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment, or

(ii)for which, in the case of such a person, the sentence is fixed by law as life imprisonment;

 

Put simply, sentencing guidelines don't matter here – they determine what is likely to happen in any given case, not the limit of what may happen in all cases – the statute does that.

We can all feel for Barron, whose efforts to become a PCC will be unrewarded because of a £20 fine many years ago, but we are also entitled to expect better from candidates, political parties and their legal advisers.

The likelihood is that Northamptonshire residents will be deprived of a Labour choice. With the withdrawal date passed a week ago, and postal ballots going out immanently Mr Barron may still be on the ballot paper but cannot be elected, which will be particularly confusing. There was ample time to sort this out before nominations closed. One can only feel real pity for the returning officer, the election staff, the people of Northamptonshire and the remaining candidates. This is Labour's mess.

Makes the Northants race a bit more interesting now though, doesn't it?

The remaining candidates who could be elected are:-

Jim MacArthur – UKIP

John Norrie – Independent – TopOfTheCops Candidate Statement

Adam Simmonds – Conservative – Website

Paul Varnsverry – Liberal Democrat – Website – TopOfTheCops Candidate Statement

Compare with this area on ChooseMyPCC, Your NextPCC and PoliceElections

I wonder how the info about this conviction and Barron's controversial speech on law-breaking came to be known, and how many other candidates have got a little secret conviction they hope we don't find out about.

Update – Tony Clarke says he knew about Barron's situation months ago and criticises the Labour party for dropping him. Is Clarke on the lst of witnesses for the Northamptonshire Police investigation? (Assuming they accept Barron does not have to be investigated by another force?)

Update Thursday 1 November

I have spoken to the Northants PARO team and note their Press Release following Lee Barron's 'withdrawal'.

The main points are:-

  • Barron cannot withdraw – it's too late.
  • Barron's name will be on the Ballot Paper
  • The returning officer and PARO will not be advising electors what to do – so no notices in Polling Stations saying that he wants to withdraw or is disqualified.
  • The Election Count will go on unaffected.
  • The PARO isn't saying what will happen if Barron gets the most votes.

I tried to get a statement to say whether he is viewed as withdrawn or as disqualified. They only say that he cannot withdraw at this stage.

This has a bizarre impact on the election.

Labour activists will not be campaigning, but Labour supporters will still get postal ballots and polling cards. When they turn up at the polling station or otherwise cast their votes, whether they know about Barron's situation will depend on whether they follow local news or gossip. They will cast their votes.

If Barron wins the vote (now unlikely) it seems he is disqualified from taking office. Does the office move to whoever comes second, or does there need to be a fresh election?

If Barron comes second on the first ballot (still possible) he could benefit from second preferences which could help him win, but in so doing he will exclude the candidate who has come third, who is the candidate who 'should' be the real second, and have a chance in the run-off.

If he comes less than second his votes will move to whoever they have put as their Supplementary Votes. But you only get one Supplementary Vote – so effectively this situation deprives Labour voters of their second preference.

A real mess – how did we get to this place. It's nearly 3 months since I last raised the matter of whether anyone would check criminal convictions before nominations were accepted.

Yet another update

The BBC report the Home Office view in this report:-

“The Home Office said if a disqualified candidate won there would have to be a by-election.

The post would become vacant straight away and an acting PCC would be appointed by the Police and Crime Panel until the by-election was held, which would be within 35 days.”

Posted in Perspectives | Tagged , | 8 Comments

Candidate Statement of Craig Mackinlay

Posted on 30/10/2012 by samchapman

Craig Mackinlay is Conservative Candidate for Police and Crime Commissioner in Kent

Craig Mackinlay background

Craig is 46, married, born in Chatham, educated locally and then at the University of Birmingham. Following University, he returned to Kent and has been resident ever since. He is a Chartered Accountant and Chartered Tax Adviser and a partner in a Kent professional practice. He is additionally a magistrate on the North Kent Bench and was, up until close of nominations for this election, a member of Kent Police Authority. He is additionally ward councillor for River ward on Medway Unitary authority.

Priorities

I want to bring crime down and make people feel safer. We have got to be tougher on criminals and put the victims of crime first. I am on the side of those who live by the rules, respect others and pay their share.

I shall hold Kent police to account and ensure the views of residents are reflected in Kent’s policing priorities. At the same time, I want to release police from the stifling bureaucracy that keeps them away from the job that they signed up to do. I have a unique plan to address rural crime and to increase police visibility through a doubling of the number of Specials.

My key priority will be zero tolerance to crime, particularly drugs and anti-social behaviour. As a long-serving magistrate on the North Kent bench, I have first-hand experience of how the justice system works, and how it can be improved.

We must also, in austere times, look for efficiency and value for money. As a Chartered Accountant I am best placed to identify those savings, and with real action on cutting out bureaucracy, am convinced that I can deliver better policing even under a tough budget. More of the same is not an option, new thinking and reform is required.

The ….and Crime part of the role creates opportunities to break down the barriers between the myriad of agencies working across Kent, and also the charitable and voluntary sectors. The PCC mandate will be a strong one to make these partners finally work together and to judge success on outcomes as the main priority.

www.craigmackinlay.com

 

Posted in Candidate Statements, Conservatives | Tagged | 1 Comment

Posted on 28/10/2012 by samchapman

bernardrix's avatarBernard Rix - mostly re policing...

An article by Andrew Gilligan in today’s Sunday Telegraph mentions Labour PCC candidates’ support by UNISON. It quotes the union’s Yorkshire and Humberside regional officer, Chris Jenkinson as saying:

We are supporting them because it is extremely important we have strong representation at the highest level.

“Strong representation at the highest level”? Is the idea that these PCC candidates then reciprocate UNISON’s support upon election, and support UNISON in some way?

The article explicitly mentions three Labour candidates – in Humberside,  South Yorkshire and in West Yorkshire. It appears that these three are supported by the union’s Yorkshire and Humberside branch. There is no information on which Labour candidates are supported by other UNISON branches.

Spot on comment at the end of the article by Sam Chapman, who runs the excellent Top of the Cops website:

It doesn’t feel right – you’re going to have to make decisions about…

View original post 142 more words

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Candidate Statement of Richard Davies

Posted on 26/10/2012 by samchapman

Richard Davies is Conservative candidate for Police and Crime Commissioner in Lincolnshire. This is his website. He has no statement listed on the official ChooseMyPCC website, so feel free to use the share buttons below.

For the first time since the modern police force was formed the people of Lincolnshire will have the opportunity to decide how they are policed. Having been born and raised in Lincolnshire I have a deep affinity and connection to public concerns in relation to crime. Running a small business in the county and raising a family here means I am acutely aware of the issues that have been ignored for too long by our London-centric policing system. The three years I spent working at the heart of Lincolnshire Policing has shown me first hand how the systems work and also where they fall down.

The role of Lincolnshire Police and Crime Commissioner brings with it key powers but also huge responsibility and the opportunity to make a really significant difference to the lives of Lincolnshire residents. The priorities I would set match the needs, hopes and fears of the people who actually live here, not distant experts and bureaucrats. My no-nonsense approach will cut through the excuses and indifference that has left many people disillusioned with the police.

My priorities are simple

Visible policing – get the police out of the stations into our communities where they can deter criminals and protect people and property.

Crime prevention – to reduce the number of victims of crime we need more crime prevention.

On November 15th we can make the choice to improve our community, make people feel safer and cut the number of people who become victims of crime. I firmly believe we can improve both how Lincolnshire police perform and how the people of Lincolnshire view our police.

Prepared by Janice Hill on behalf of Richard Davies, both of Conservative Office, North Street, Bourne, Lincolnshire, PE10 9AJ

Posted in Candidate Statements, Conservatives | Tagged | 6 Comments

Candidate Statement of Neil Eyre

Posted on 26/10/2012 by samchapman

Neil Eyre is an Independent Candidate for Police and Crime Commissioner in Humberside – see his website here. He has no statement listed on the official ChooseMyPCC website, so feel free to use the share buttons below.

When elected, I will commit to ensuring that the Police force will not only strive to protect and serve the people of Humberside, but it will also give the people of Humberside value for money. Like you I’ve had enough of public funds being squandered by politicians on projects like the Fire Control Call Centre scandal.

Most manifesto pledges are vague so that politicians can argue that they are delivering ‘plausible promises’. I don’t agree with this kind of political trickery.

I ask you to look at the other candidate’s manifestos and question whether or not what is being pledged is clear and understandable. I do not believe it is, like you I’m sick of politicians and their political babble, and I tend to end that here and now.

My pledges are not only specific but also measureable. The last thing I want is for what I’m saying to be not understood or confusing.

Firstly, I will not make claims for personal expenses. All my friends and family are sickened by the amount of public funds wasted on paying expenses to politicians and their advisors. The salary is already considered by most to be too high so expenses can come from this, as will the £20,000 extra pension contribution. This is unnecessary and unrealistic compared to what normal working people can expect.

I will not sanction any cuts to front line policing. As far as I’m concerned the most important of these services, frontline policing protecting residents and businesses from crime, should not be affected in any way shape or form. Everyone I talk to says there should be more police on the beat, I agree and this will be a top priority.

I don’t agree with any of the other candidates that “cuts must be made”. If I’m approached and told that police numbers have to be cut the first question I’ll ask is: why? The second question will be: Can it be taken from a less essential service?

I, like you, refuse to accept the same old answers politicians give us ‘because it has to’ or ‘because there is no money’. There is money, but what we need is a new way of looking at how that money is spent and allocated, we need a commissioner who will honestly look at how the money will benefit the public first and foremost, a commissioner who is one of us, not one of them, and that is why I am standing, for what I believe.

Posted in Candidate Statements, Independents | Tagged | 1 Comment

Candidate Statement of Paul Varnsverry

Posted on 25/10/2012 by samchapman

Paul Varnsverry is the Liberal Democrat candidate for Northamptonshire.

Paul Varnsverry considers the role of PCC requires three different types of experience: in policing, in politics and in business.

Paul has worked with the Police and other peacekeeping and public security organisations worldwide for much of his career. In 1998 he was tasked to set up and chair the British Standards committee for police riot, ballistic and stab protection. Post 9/11, a high level recommendation led to Paul working on first responders' protection from a terrorist “dirty bomb”. Paul was also a special technical advisor to an ACPO subcommittee from 2002 – 2011.

He has worked alongside frontline officers and those of ACPO rank, so he understands policing and maintains close links with many of his former colleagues, one of whom recently provided this testimonial: “I understand [Paul] is standing as a candidate for election as a Police and Crime Commissioner and I believe that in terms of his personal capabilities he has everything that is required to fulfil this role.”

Paul became involved in politics in 2006, was an elected councillor from 2007 – 2011 and deputy leader of Northampton Borough Council from 2009 – 2011. Paul is the most politically-experienced Northamptonshire candidate, yet he has made clear he respects the service too highly to politicise the police.

Paul was a key member of the team that took Northampton Borough Council from “The World's Worst Council” to one of the most improved, so he knows how to effect positive change in a large public sector body. A senior officer at the council provided this testimonial: “Paul always worked very hard for the benefit of the public of Northampton and is without doubt a capable, intelligent and high integrity individual.”

Paul runs his own business, working with the Police and other government bodies as well as the private sector, so he understands business management. A client said: “Paul leads by example and many people and businesses have found his enthusiasm and dedication both inspiring and motivating. As part of his own business and political work, Paul has worked hard to build authentic relationships with those who have either elected him or employed his expert services.”

Paul possesses the combination of skills and experience required to deal with the challenges the PCC will encounter. This is an entirely new position, with an opportunity to set a high benchmark, as Paul has consistently achieved throughout his career.

Further details at:

www.paul4police.co.uk

www.facebook.com/paul4police

@Paul4Police

 

Posted in Candidate Statements, Liberal Democrats | Tagged | 1 Comment

Expect More?

Posted on 25/10/2012 by samchapman

Mervyn Barrett's campaign slogan was 'Expect More', and we did – about another 3 weeks more, but his campaign has come to a sudden and premature end which you can explore by reading the following:-

Andrew Gilligan's Sunday Telegraph Article on the people behind Mervyn – which details the claims of Mervyn's ex-campaign manager 'Matthew De Unger Brown' who styles himself as a neo-conservative, claims links with groups seeking to extend privatisation and reveals lavish spending plans for the election. I was not privy to Gilligan's conversation with Matthew, but I can reveal that I wasn't surprised by the contents, having myself had an apparently similar conversation with Matthew several weeks ago, and having concluded he was a sufficiently curious character to justify some basic internet research.

Like Gilligan, I didn't have enough good quality information on Matthew to publish, but I did manage to cover issues raised by Gilligan's article, with notes on loose ends.

Gilligan used his blog to follow up on Mervyn's withdrawal from the campaign, sharing the legal difficulties in saying more about Mervyn's ex-campaign manager, but he also pointed to an extraordinary blog post from an anonymous blogger who decided to take the risk of sharing an astonishing list of allegations about Matthew. I don't know what's true here – that post may be fantasy – it is certainly 'fantastic', but the blogger in question is himself cited here as a well-respected legal blogger.

Mervyn's withdrawal statement, was issued not on his website, but on Russ Webster's, by Gillian Radcliffe, PR professional, and former would-be Independent candidate for South Yorkshire – both of whom have a long-standing interest in the PCC election. It alleges that Mervyn's entire campaign has been a confidence trick by Matthew, and that Mervyn is trying to work out to which police force it should be reported.

I have spoken to Gillian today, as part of her effort to help Mervyn in a time of need. The difference now that Mervyn has an experienced representative was very evident. Mervyn has confirmed to me what she has said about him, and she has added some detail herself. The result is in italics after some context from me:-

In early August TopOfTheCops broke a story about a senior judge banning magistrates from being PCC candidates. It was very rapidly taken up by the wider press and within 24 hours Mervyn's team had been in touch, taken legal advice, and banded together with a few other PCC candidates, including some magistrates, to arrange a meeting with that senior judge to discuss the issue. The candidates at that meeting were Mervyn Barrett, Gillian Radcliffe, Julie Iles and Craig Mackinley.

Gillian tells me that Matthew was also in attendance, and that after the meeting he tried to persuade her that he should be her campaign manager. She declined, not having the finances, and he suggested that surely she must have a wealthy relative. She disclosed that she had, but that she had decided not to approach this person to fund her campaign.

Subsequently, she says Matthew “contacted me several times over the next few weeks to try to persuade me to change my mind. In some ways, it prompted me to withdraw sooner than I might otherwise have done. After withdrawing, I felt relieved that I wouldn't have the pressure of his persuasive tactics any longer.”

There is also some further detail from Mervyn. Last Friday, having been told by Matthew of 'negative polling results', Mervyn was ready to pull out of the Lincolnshire race, and Matthew agreed with this course of action, but the Sunday Telegraph story broke before Mervyn could withdraw from the election.

Mervyn says he was largely funding the campaign himself, and that Matthew had given
him reason to expect funding from Matthew personally and from a 'rich relative' of Matthew's for certain items. It is now unclear whether these items were ever ordered.

Mervyn says Matthew had complete control of campaign finances, and Mervyn is
currently playing catch-up to see how much money has been spent and on what. He has frozen his bank account.

Yesterday, (Wednesday), Gillian sent a number of tweets (here is one) indicating that Mervyn would be releasing a statement. Matthew called her very soon after. He seemed to be calling from a US number, she thinks New York. He sounded distressed and sorry, but wanted to know whether Mervyn was going to the police.

I don't know what to make of this extra-ordinary story. It is heartening to see some of the people I have dealt with in PCC world over the last few months standing together and supporting each other. That may restore some of your faith in humanity.

Some of us are perhaps too suspicious of people. I'm an ex-cop. I think it goes with the territory. Gillian has worked plenty with the police in the past, which is probably enough to make anyone suspicious!

Mervyn, on the other hand, has worked for NACRO, and they are all about the Care and Rehabilitation (or is it resettlement) of Offenders. He has spent a career doing what he can to change people for the better. That involves an ability to hope for the best, possibly a tendency to be a little too trusting sometimes.

Andrew Gilligan closed his original blog post today with the words “I have a feeling this might be a story that keeps on giving”.

As Mervyn Barrett used to say, 'expect more'.

 

Posted in Independents, Media coverage, Perspectives | Tagged , , | 11 Comments

Candidate Statement of Ken Lupton

Posted on 23/10/2012 by samchapman

Ken Lupton is the Conservative Candidate for Police and Crime Commissioner in Cleveland.

The problems in the Cleveland Police Force over recent years, culminating in the dismissal of the Chief Constable and the ongoing investigations into the former Chair of the Police Authority, clearly identify the need for a change in governance and this new position of Police and Crime Commissioner will be your opportunity to elect a strong individual who will provide leadership and accountability.

I believe that this is not a party political position but one that requires an individual with experience of managing and governing large diverse public sector organisations and the ability to create and work in partnerships. The role of PCC requires the commissioner to be beyond reproach and independent of influence with the highest of public and professional standards. I know that I can fulfil these requirements.

I come from a hard working Teesside family with strong connections with the four boroughs making up the Force area and am passionate about the region having lived and worked in the area all of my life. If elected in November I will make the residents priorities, in relation to fighting crime and anti- social behaviour, the Force’s priorities. I will be committed to working with the Chief Constable and our partners to improve the well being and safety of our residents and the communities in which they live and work and provide a cost efficient service that values the work of serving officers and staff.

Go to www.kenlupton.co.uk to find out more about me and my manifesto.

 

Posted in Candidate Statements, Conservatives | Tagged | Leave a comment