Sign in to follow this  
careerlid

More with Less?

Recommended Posts

No I don't think it anything to do with the decimation of the Police Service, there would not be enough fully trained armed officers to do the job in anycase. I think for once they are thinking ahead what they may have to unfortunately do in the event of an attack.

 

There are still plenty of Army Personal who they will be able to call on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if its a tacit acknowledgement of the scale of the cuts to the police or the realisation of the amount of effort the French had to make after the Charlie Hebo murders and manhunt, and that the UK police alone could not put in the same level of resources.   It would be interesting to know what powers the army would be expected to use given that they have never been deployed on a large scale on the mainland in peacetime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they restrained the use of the Army to the RMP and the other associated service police units there is legislation from the end of the last war that has as far as I know never been repealed. This was something to giving aid to the civil community during times of emergency. Apart from that, look at the number of military (not RMP etc.) who were on the ground in Ulster, I think around 18,000-20,000 at the peak. Soit seems there would be little problem getting around any legal difficulties.

 

RMP and RAFP were sworn in as special constables in Ulster and were the link (interface) between the Army in general and the then RUC, so I cannot see any reason why that could not happen again..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if its a tacit acknowledgement of the scale of the cuts to the police or the realisation of the amount of effort the French had to make after the Charlie Hebo murders and manhunt, and that the UK police alone could not put in the same level of resources.   It would be interesting to know what powers the army would be expected to use given that they have never been deployed on a large scale on the mainland in peacetime.

 

I think you're right and the penny has dropped. We couldn't mobilise anywhere near what the French did, police or military. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There has always been contingency plans involving the Army in the right circumstances. I thought most officers knew that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they restrained the use of the Army to the RMP and the other associated service police units there is legislation from the end of the last war that has as far as I know never been repealed. This was something to giving aid to the civil community during times of emergency. Apart from that, look at the number of military (not RMP etc.) who were on the ground in Ulster, I think around 18,000-20,000 at the peak. Soit seems there would be little problem getting around any legal difficulties.

 

RMP and RAFP were sworn in as special constables in Ulster and were the link (interface) between the Army in general and the then RUC, so I cannot see any reason why that could not happen again..

 

 I don't remember being sworn in as a Special in 1973. As a ' Snow Drop ' attached to 1 RMP we went straight out on duty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may have dropped through the net, I was there in time for Operation Motorman in Londonderry and were taken to the city court and sworn in before a Magistrate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure that the levels of Police manning would have an impact on the mutual aid between civil and military authorities; as Zulu suggests - there have always been contingency plans for such aid. It was common practice during "The Cold War" for the military to provide aid to the Civil Power in terms of protection of key points. In one appointment I held, we certainly used to "paper exercise" with the military every six months or so. In September 1987, the last (I believe) major home defence exercise "Brave Defender" took place which went beyond the paper stage and I worked (in my Specials role) with a Royal Artillery company guarding some significant key points.

 

I really do not understand why this sort of thing is "news" - what does the media expect that if UK is attacked, the Government ill start worrying about niceties?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's news because we've had numerous terrorist attacks in the past and never needed to resort to deploying troops. Why are they considering it now? Lack of police that's why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's news because we've had numerous terrorist attacks in the past and never needed to resort to deploying troops. Why are they considering it now? Lack of police that's why.

 

I am not sure that you are totally correct. The Iranian Embassy incident was ended by the military; the Balcombe Street siege rapidly came to an end when the news was "leaked" to the broadcast media that the SAS had arrived on scene; the deployment of troops (often the Household Division with their "light-tanks") at Heathrow was a regular occurrence in the 70s and 80s and, during Operation Santa Claus in December 1976/77, there were plain-clothes troops on patrol in Central London - the threat state was very high and all sorts of unusual resources were put into the pot. I would not be surprised if similar situations prevailed in other cities in UK.

 

The reality is that with a largely unarmed Police Force, whatever the numbers of uniformed deployed, there will always be a place for military personnel providing security support to Police. It could be regularised by expanding the Military Provost Guard Service (part of the Adjutant-General's Corps) which provides static and mobile guards for military establishments. The MPSG is staffed by ex-regular and reserve service personnel. Of course, another approach would be to train and deploy the Special Constabulary as a purely KP security force, supervised by armed regular officers?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3177971/Now-police-won-t-visit-home-burgled-Chief-constable-says-public-expectation-needs-change-forces-shift-focus-traditional-crimes-budget-cuts.html

 

I think what I find most disturbing about this article is that the leader of the NPCC is paid over a quarter of a million pounds (GBP252,000) for her job - she isn't in command of a Police Force but rather a co-ordinator / spokesperson for Chief Constables; does the NPCC pay this salary from public funds, from the subscriptions of its members or from the former-ACPO businesses that presumably still thrive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure that you are totally correct. The Iranian Embassy incident was ended by the military; the Balcombe Street siege rapidly came to an end when the news was "leaked" to the broadcast media that the SAS had arrived on scene; the deployment of troops (often the Household Division with their "light-tanks") at Heathrow was a regular occurrence in the 70s and 80s and, during Operation Santa Claus in December 1976/77, there were plain-clothes troops on patrol in Central London - the threat state was very high and all sorts of unusual resources were put into the pot. I would not be surprised if similar situations prevailed in other cities in UK.

 

 

 

Fair point but I still maintain a lot of this has to do with lack of resources. Here's another link demonstrating it... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33686121

Edited by careerlid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There are 2 hidden replies in this thread that you do not currently have access to as a Guest User of our forum. To unlock the forum register for an account for FREE today by clicking HERE
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.