Essex Police Chief Constable tweets his forces' bad parking

[peterwalkley]

BBC article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-38102904

Much as the intention is right, I have to say from the photo on the article getting that van into one of those spaces looks a tight squeeze. I don't think there would be room to open the doors to get in and out if someone parked next to it.

 

[Hotwired]

Well if the van parked exactly in the box the car on the left who is parked on the line would have to get into their car through the passenger door or not at all.

 

[Dis86]

Do love the attitudes of some people. He's striving for his force to be more public friendly and all they can do is complain. Ass hats.

 

[Housey]

Do love the attitudes of some people. He's striving for his force to be more public friendly and all they can do is complain. Ass hats.

The British disease. If moaning were a national game we would have more cups than any other nation.

 

[Conscript]

Do love the attitudes of some people. He's striving for his force to be more public friendly and all they can do is complain. Ass hats.

I have to agree. If anyone else had shared that photo, people would be joining them in ridiculing the subject for being inconsiderate.

 

[Gaygle]

Are the general public seriously that concerned about this that their Chief Constable has had to take to his Twitter to lambast his own staff so he can attempt to gain a few browny points with the regular moaners?

Or are the public concerned about not having enough officers to attend their crimes? Recently in Essex there was an armed burglary where a man was shot in the leg in his own home, and a firearms car had to drive from the other side of Essex to attend taking well over an hour I believe.

The public are also quite concerned about their council tax going up to pay for the police - but their Chief Constable is happy to claim £37,000 on expenses on top of his £200,000 salary last year...

Let's face it, he thinks he's seen an opportunity to score a couple politician points with the public when really he's just succeeded in ****ing off all of his staff and officers.

 

[Dis86]

I claimed £30k in expenses last year and I don't run an entire police force. Provided the expenses are justified what's the problem?

 

[Gaygle]

Do love the attitudes of some people. He's striving for his force to be more public friendly and all they can do is complain. Ass hats.

How exactly?? The van wouldn't fit in the parking space all allow the occupants to open the doors! This isn't about being public friendly, this is about being willing to throw your own staff under the bus to score some politician browny points.

If he was that bothered by it, he could have had a word with the civilian member of staff and have done with it? But instead he's pretended like parking over two spaces is akin to the Hillsborough disaster and seen fit to give a heartfelt apology to the people of Boreham - who I presume couldn't have cared less?

 

[Gaygle]

I claimed £30k in expenses last year and I don't run an entire police force. Provided the expenses are justified what's the problem?

He receives a Chief Officers Allowance of £17600.

He is not required to provide any receipts or invoices for this but states the money went on "home internet and phone bills, private medical insurance, and contributions to his lunches, coffees and snacks." Quite how you spend 17 GRAND on coffee, snacks and home internet I do not know. I can only presume the other £16500 has been spent on something lavish if Essex Police wouldn't go into any further detail...

Sounds justified to me. On top of this, amongst other things, he has also made other subsistence claims of nearly £100 for dinner and nearly £7000 for housing allowance on his million pound house, then has received some extra tax back for this at like £5000.

He also accepted a payrise of £26000 this year, or 15% or so. Every other public sector worker got 1%.

His force are struggling with officer retention and to get a grip on protecting vulnerable people due to lack of suitably trained police officers.

In a time of austerity and when the PCC is regularly using his power to increase our council tax by 2%, we are struggling on a daily basis to have police officers go to house burglaries and serious crimes - you can honestly say that that is "justified"?

 

[Dis86]

I never said his salary was justified however expenses claims resulting from work are. You brought them up as he he's wrong to claim back costs incurred just because he's very well paid.

 

[Gaygle]

I never said his salary was justified however expenses claims resulting from work are.

You've conveniently ignored the 80% of my post which talks about his expenses. His salary was given as background information, because if he was earning £40k a year, there is an argument that it may be unreasonable for him to spend his own money on coffee, biscuits or broadband (not a good argument). But when he is earning £200,000 (or a take home pay of nearly £10,000 a month) and he's still wanting the tax payer to pay for his lunches and home internet, whilst in the same breath asking the rest of us on a 1/10th of his salary to pay more in council tax - you seriously think that that is justified? The issue of people at the top of councils/police/NHS getting these sorts of expenses on top of their huge salaries is, to me, a much bigger issue to the general public than what he is highlighting.

You brought them up as he he's wrong to claim back costs incurred just because he's very well paid.

He's a public servant - it isn't like the private sector (trust me, I've worked in both and it's a different world). Every public servant is currently under scrutiny to justify every. single. pound. and are answerable to the public as a whole. A chief officer having a £17500 "slush fund" in which he doesn't need to produce *any* receipts or invoices to prove what he spent it on is completely out of touch with how hilariously stretched budgets are. He has admitted to spending part of it on private medical insurance, coffee and biscuits which i think is ridiculous, but if he's still prepared to admit to *that*, how lavish are the other things he *hasn't* admitted to? The answer - we don't know because he could spend it betting on the horses and we'd be non the wiser. And as we all know, public servants given little known expense accounts with no oversight leads to bad things - if you want to spend your afternoon reading more about, feel free:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_parliamentary_expenses_scandal

However, this thread obviously isn't about the Essex CC's expenses - but the point of it is, why did he need to publicly shame his entire force, about such a non incident? He's more than wiling to to post up to his 3000 followers when a Police Postman parks across a white line so he can actually get out of his van, but not about when an officer gets assaulted, or when an excellent job is done.

It's such a non incident that most CC's rightly would pass it straight to a local supervisor to deal with. Which means his only motivation was to try and get some easy points with the serial police moaners at the expense of his tarring his officers/staff with the "you think you're above the law but you ain't" brush.

 

[Nasher]

That space looks so narrow that they wouldn't be able to open the driver's door if someone parked next to them. Look how tight it is just for that white hatchback on the left.

Anyway, it sounds like police funding and expenses are a mess. The MOD don't allow people to do crap like that, they even cap how much you can spend per day on accommodation and food while on official bussiness. The guy in charge gets his own fund, but they aren't allowed to just go and blow it on whatever they like. They have to use it to maintain the site, infrastructure, equipment, etc.

 

[neoboy]

Not sure he quite picked the right battle there.

 

[Dis86]

Stuff

It's such a non incident that most CC's rightly would pass it straight to a local supervisor to deal with. Which means his only motivation was to try and get some easy points with the serial police moaners at the expense of his tarring his officers/staff with the "you think you're above the law but you ain't" brush.

And yet that's the number one complaint levied against the police. Here's a chief saying and showing that they're not and yet you're whinging.

They literally cannot win.

 

[Gaygle]

And yet that's the number one complaint levied against the police. Here's a chief saying and showing that they're not and yet you're whinging.

They literally cannot win.

I note you haven't chosen to reply to my points about why his expenses are outlandish and out dated in a modern day public sector post. Have you changed your views on this?

The number one complaint against the police is that they are above the law and think they are allowed to park where they want? Really? Who are the people making these complaints? If you're referring to high profile cases where the police, mostly historitcally, have not acted properly theb absolutely, but why make this stand against a civilian driver who just wanted to be able to open his door without smashing it into someone's car? Like a commenter said, he's picked the wrong thing to make a valid point on.

You clearly are so far removed from how public services work and the very reason why the private sector simply cannot slot into the services like the NHS/ambulance/police. There is just far too much idealism and theory that just doesn't work because it's just not the same. And i say that as an ex private sector worker (who once could claim thousands on expenses too!). Dealing with the public is different animal completely because everyone's got an opinion about everything, but the vast majority don't have any experience in it.

 

[muon]

Not sure he quite picked the right battle there.

He can hardly pick something serious though can he.

 

[Dis86]

I note you haven't chosen to reply to my points about why his expenses are outlandish and out dated in a modern day public sector post. Have you changed your views on this?

The number one complaint against the police is that they are above the law and think they are allowed to park where they want? Really? Who are the people making these complaints? If you're referring to high profile cases where the police, mostly historitcally, have not acted properly theb absolutely, but why make this stand against a civilian driver who just wanted to be able to open his door without smashing it into someone's car? Like a commenter said, he's picked the wrong thing to make a valid point on.

You clearly are so far removed from how public services work and the very reason why the private sector simply cannot slot into the services like the NHS/ambulance/police. There is just far too much idealism and theory that just doesn't work because it's just not the same. And i say that as an ex private sector worker (who once could claim thousands on expenses too!). Dealing with the public is different animal completely because everyone's got an opinion about everything, but the vast majority don't have any experience in it.

Yawn.

I never said parking was the number one issue did I? I'm referring to numerous cases where police officers have committed crimes of any scale and believe they can carry it out because they're the police.

You don't have any proof or sources as to what his expense claims were for. As I said earlier - as long as they're valid then there's no problem.

 

[The_Dark_Side]

You don't have any proof or sources as to what his expense claims were for.

As I said earlier - as long as they're valid then there's no problem.

I think Gaygles point is If the person in question doesn't provide receipts then how can their expenses be deemed to be valid? Claiming back expenses is commonplace, but someone will look at an expense claim to ensure it is legitimate before reimbursment. In the public sector this is even more relevant as monies claimed back comes from the taxpayers coffer and not from corporate ebitda.

 

[Gaygle]

Yawn.

Great response - I'll assume you're out constructive arguments (did you even have any?).

I'm referring to numerous cases where police officers have committed crimes of any scale and believe they can carry it out because they're the police.

Thankfully we now have a CC in Essex who will put an end to all of this corruption in the police! Ohhhh it starts with parking across two spaces at Sainsburys, but soon enough that Police postman will be selling secrets to drug gangs - mark my words!

Do you not even see how ridiculous it is drawing a parallel between some slightly dodgy parking and genuine corrupt behaviour? No one would have had an issue if the CC posted up that an officer had been fired for tipping off criminals or something, but he has made a valid point about a ridiculous non incident. How can you not see this?

You don't have any proof or sources as to what his expense claims were for. As I said earlier - as long as they're valid then there's no problem.

Are you trying to be obtuse? How do we know they are valid or not unless they are able to be audited!? Even in the private sector my boss was able to audit what I expensed and signed it off, yet a public servant earning £200,000 can spend an additional £17500 on whatever the hell he wants a year and no one knows or is able to find out what it is? Apart from the coffee, snacks, lunches and private health insurance he's paid for he's already admitted to of course, but it's the stuff he hasn't admitted to which is more concerning. Perhaps he's done his house up with it? Or gone on holiday to the Bahamas?

I think Gaygles point is If the person in question doesn't provide receipts then how can their expenses be deemed to be valid? Claiming back expenses is commonplace, but someone will look at an expense claim to ensure it is legitimate before reimbursment. In the public sector this is even more relevant as monies claimed back comes from the taxpayers coffer and not from corporate ebitda.

Exactly. I'm not gonna lie - I thought it was me going mad for a second there.

 

[Dis86]

I think Gaygles point is If the person in question doesn't provide receipts then how can their expenses be deemed to be valid? Claiming back expenses is commonplace, but someone will look at an expense claim to ensure it is legitimate before reimbursment. In the public sector this is even more relevant as monies claimed back comes from the taxpayers coffer and not from corporate ebitda.

How do you know he hasn't provided receipts, gaygle is basically forming an argument based on nothing but assumptions. He also seems to have a strange obsession with how much this guy is getting paid.