IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Khan Juna out of Thames Valley police commissioner election, The former chairman of the Thames Valley Police Authority has pulled o
NWNREADER
post Oct 23 2012, 05:44 AM
Post #21


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Weavers Walk @ Oct 23 2012, 12:15 AM) *
Just perusing some links up on 'the other forum' they are obviously from the 'Labour' perspective, but this Councillor does seem a little 'economical with the truth' somehow.


Stansfeld Effect?

It is always valid to drill down into any claim of activity to examine what role the individual played. Being on a panel, even as Chairman, is no guarantee that individual made ant difference, let alone a positive one.

The problem is the Conservative bumpf will hold their candidate as the 2nd Messiah, all the others will deem him/her as the Spawn of Satan - purely because the Party alignment.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Oct 23 2012, 09:48 AM
Post #22


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



QUOTE (Dodgys smarter brother. @ Oct 22 2012, 11:55 PM) *
More recently we had the assault of a woman at the end of Parkway which happened right in front of the camera (in broad daylight) and yet no useful pictures were able to be obtained.

Sadly, the list goes on.


That will be beacuse CCTV is not an all seeing eye.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rusty Bullet
post Oct 23 2012, 03:24 PM
Post #23


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 120
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Inside WBC
Member No.: 53



QUOTE (dannyboy @ Oct 23 2012, 10:48 AM) *
That will be beacuse CCTV is not an all seeing eye.


Certainly not here in Newbury.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Oct 23 2012, 04:28 PM
Post #24


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Rusty Bullet @ Oct 23 2012, 04:24 PM) *
Certainly not here in Newbury.


Or anywhere....... Get used to it, unless the operator knows to look at something then if the camera is not looking that way it will no more see what is happening than if you were stood there yourself.
CCTV is partly used to replace police officers on patrol, but as they cannot hear, look around and then react to what is then seen, they will always be a poor substitute.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Oct 23 2012, 05:20 PM
Post #25


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Oct 23 2012, 05:28 PM) *
Or anywhere....... Get used to it, unless the operator knows to look at something then if the camera is not looking that way it will no more see what is happening than if you were stood there yourself.
CCTV is partly used to replace police officers on patrol, but as they cannot hear, look around and then react to what is then seen, they will always be a poor substitute.

Do you think the CCTV upgrade and current monitoring system was a sensible idea and an improvement on the monitoring system we had before?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Oct 23 2012, 05:47 PM
Post #26


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Oct 23 2012, 06:20 PM) *
Do you think the CCTV upgrade and current monitoring system was a sensible idea and an improvement on the monitoring system we had before?

The CCTV technical upgrade made sense, but I do not know enough about the functionality of the monitoring system to judge.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Oct 23 2012, 06:07 PM
Post #27


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Oct 23 2012, 06:47 PM) *
The CCTV technical upgrade made sense, but I do not know enough about the functionality of the monitoring system to judge.

While I am in the same boat as you, one of the complaints at the time was the possible loss of the service levels we had, so while the CCTV might have been poor quality, it was apparently a useful service which enable the monitoring station, police, and door men, to keep in contact. I have heard stories of the monitoring staff actually coordinating police movements on occasion. The feeling I get, and I could be wrong, is that the new outsourced system has wrecked the collaboration model of old.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rusty Bullet
post Oct 24 2012, 07:45 AM
Post #28


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 120
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Inside WBC
Member No.: 53



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Oct 23 2012, 06:47 PM) *
The CCTV technical upgrade made sense


In what way?

QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Oct 23 2012, 07:07 PM) *
While I am in the same boat as you, one of the complaints at the time was the possible loss of the service levels we had, so while the CCTV might have been poor quality, it was apparently a useful service which enable the monitoring station, police, and door men, to keep in contact. I have heard stories of the monitoring staff actually coordinating police movements on occasion. The feeling I get, and I could be wrong, is that the new outsourced system has wrecked the collaboration model of old.


Talk to any of the 'old' coppers or ex-Security staff and they will agree with you that it was a mistake.

The 'cameras are not a be all and end all' brigade are of course right, however, they do not always equate like with like. Under our old system there were 4 cameras covering Parkway, so, in the example above, although one may not have caught the incident, there would have been a better chance of at least one of the others picking something up. 4 chances are better than 1.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Oct 24 2012, 04:01 PM
Post #29


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



From what I understand some 100+ cameras around W Berks were replaced by 40 or so higher quality cameras and the control moved from Newbury to Windsor.

Obviously 40 cameras could not cover everything 100 cameras could - so there was a definite loss of service in that manner.

Control room staff in Windsor would also be unfamiliar with W Berks characters, trouble makers etc and not have the rapport with the local police, bouncers etc. One would hope that they would, over time, develop the familarity and rapport. In theory this loss of service would be temporary.

The new cameras, being higher quality should improve the service in the area they cover.

Of course the bottom line was the massive cost savings.

It seems to me that the spin at the time 'no reduction in service, massive reduction in cost, haven't we done well'. Was a lie, service has been lost in areas that are no longer covered. I won't be voting for the man who headed this programme and set out to deliberately deceive me in this manner.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Oct 24 2012, 06:14 PM
Post #30


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



Who in their right mind would vote for someone that had been associated with the antics of our local council over the last few years especially if it has anything to do with controlling law and order - the mind boggles? blink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Oct 24 2012, 06:35 PM
Post #31


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Oct 22 2012, 09:21 PM) *

If his résumé is anything to go by, I don't see Geoff Howard getting very far.

Having voted in virtually every national, local and European election (when I have been able) to date, I think this one is going to be a first for me. And I shan't even feel guilty about it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Oct 24 2012, 07:36 PM
Post #32


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (blackdog @ Oct 24 2012, 05:01 PM) *
From what I understand some 100+ cameras around W Berks were replaced by 40 or so higher quality cameras and the control moved from Newbury to Windsor.

Obviously 40 cameras could not cover everything 100 cameras could - so there was a definite loss of service in that manner.

Control room staff in Windsor would also be unfamiliar with W Berks characters, trouble makers etc and not have the rapport with the local police, bouncers etc. One would hope that they would, over time, develop the familarity and rapport. In theory this loss of service would be temporary.

The new cameras, being higher quality should improve the service in the area they cover.

Of course the bottom line was the massive cost savings.

It seems to me that the spin at the time 'no reduction in service, massive reduction in cost, haven't we done well'. Was a lie, service has been lost in areas that are no longer covered. I won't be voting for the man who headed this programme and set out to deliberately deceive me in this manner.


Wonder what a real post investment appraisal would demonstrate? You know, cost of crime without cameras v cost with.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Oct 24 2012, 07:43 PM
Post #33


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (On the edge @ Oct 24 2012, 08:36 PM) *
Wonder what a real post investment appraisal would demonstrate? You know, cost of crime without cameras v cost with.


Try requesting information on how many times the new CCTV system has assisted in conviction of crimes as opposed to the old system! You will not get an answer but I am able to assure you that the new system may just as well be switched off for all the assistance it has offered. rolleyes.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Oct 24 2012, 07:56 PM
Post #34


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



Think you are absolutely right!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Oct 24 2012, 08:21 PM
Post #35


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Cognosco @ Oct 24 2012, 08:43 PM) *
Try requesting information on how many times the new CCTV system has assisted in conviction of crimes as opposed to the old system! You will not get an answer but I am able to assure you that the new system may just as well be switched off for all the assistance it has offered. rolleyes.gif

Have you made an official request?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Oct 25 2012, 03:45 PM
Post #36


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Oct 24 2012, 09:21 PM) *
Have you made an official request?


Yes! The reply was they do not keep that information on record!!!! blink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Oct 25 2012, 03:54 PM
Post #37


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Cognosco @ Oct 25 2012, 04:45 PM) *
Yes! The reply was they do not keep that information on record!!!! blink.gif

IOW - an utterly inept solution. Well done Newbury.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ruwan Uduwerage-...
post Oct 29 2012, 08:37 PM
Post #38


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 390
Joined: 26-August 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 303



If you are keen to find out more and ask some questions of the Police and Crime Commissioner candidates seek out their Facebook accounts.

I have been posing some questions to Mr Stansfeld, but sadly he seems not willing to respond. If he is not willing to answer questions now, what on earth will he be like if he is voted in.

Remember that one of the alleged reasons for the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners is to improve public engagement.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Oct 29 2012, 09:04 PM
Post #39


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera @ Oct 29 2012, 08:37 PM) *
......Remember that one of the alleged reasons for the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners is to improve public engagement.


So allegedly was community policing!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Oct 29 2012, 09:13 PM
Post #40


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera @ Oct 29 2012, 09:37 PM) *
If you are keen to find out more and ask some questions of the Police and Crime Commissioner candidates seek out their Facebook accounts. Good idea - let them think more than their 100 signatories give a ****

I have been posing some questions to Mr Stansfeld, but sadly he seems not willing to respond. Poor chap can't win - If he answers questions he'll be nailed for failing to deliver his promises, if he doesn't answer he gets nailed for not communication. At least he isn't lying If he is not willing to answer questions now, what on earth will he be like if he is voted in Exactly the same - as will all of the candidates.

Remember that one of the alleged reasons for the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners is to improve public engagement. That is the public statement, truth is the objective is to put a political controller in every police HQ

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 13th April 2024 - 06:00 AM