If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Its fine for the Police to lobby with us but...
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
On the same day that Police Chiefs were being urged by Clarke to go out and campaign for the Terrorism Bill probation workers were banned from arguing against the new Probation Bill.
Double standards anyone?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4436238.stm
"You should avoid any action that might suggest that you are encouraging staff to lobby against government policy" Roger Hill, Director, National Probation Service
Double standards anyone?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4436238.stm
"You should avoid any action that might suggest that you are encouraging staff to lobby against government policy" Roger Hill, Director, National Probation Service
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
With a side order of lies, please.
But nah, not double standards, just politics...
They should be free, just as anyone else, to contact their local MP, but when they are encouraged (or banned) as a bloc to do what the government wants it gets rid of their inpartiality.
Disagree - the civil service, like other crown servants should not be arguing against Govt legislation. Ministers need to trust that civil servants are not briefing behind their back or the entire system of government collapses and you have to go to a US system where much of the civil service changes every time their is new administration and is replaced with political appointtees.
That said we shouldn't be acting as cheerleaders either. If I write to MP's I do so on behalf of the Government, not as a civil servant who happens to think the Government is right (I've written defending things I believe are mistaken).
On this site (and others) I hardly ever comment on any areas I deal with as a civil servant and even then I tend to stick to very uncontenious statements.
Even then the police, army, fire service, probation service, etc, etc are fundamentally different from the Civil Service. Our main job is politics and we do sometimes need to grubby our hands with it...
If the government was urging the Royal College of Nursing to lobby on a Bill then yes, I would be 'making a fuss' as you put it.
It isnt really the fact that civil servants and government workers have views on Bills I have a problem with, it is the government trying to use them as a lobby, or silence their objections.
There's a difference. Nurses, doctors, teachers etc are regarded by most people as seperate from the 'State'; even if the State ultimately pays their wages. There allowed free political association and their jobs put no limit on their freedom of speech.
The army, police and civil service (and I believe probabtion service is civil service) all are regarded by people as part of the 'state'. Both the police and military are not even allowed to belong to unions and as individuals are severely proscribed in which political activities they can do. Civil servants are allowed to belong to a union, but we're still limited in what we can do politically, even if it has no direct impact on our day to day jobs. This is because whilst the 'government or administration' may go, we do not serve it, but the wider 'state' (which is why I used the term crown servants) and so we have to be party politically neutral*.
* I probably better add we're obviously not fully politically neutral as even by serving the state we're part of the current political system of mixed economy under a Westminister Parliamentary system.
The frontline workers have every right to complain at every opportunity.
The boit about "not misrepresenting" the privatisation of the Probation Service made me laugh; that's exactly what it is doing.
We would have our say as the legislation is drawn up. It would be discussed with Ministers, who would then take a final decision. Once its drawn up and is being voted on by Parliament the individual civil servants shouldn't be saying anything (though our unions might). In the same way I have no problem with ACPO making comments (as the senior police equivalent of union or trade body), but individual police officers should not be trying to influence MPs.
In reality if the civil service strongly advises that something would damage our ability to do our job it would have to be a very brave Minister who was willing to go through with it - an effective civil service is one of the best servants all Ministers have.
Eh? What is ACPO but individual police officers? What difference does it make?
Sorry, but an ineffective and incompetent Probation Service is something that a Government intent on locking everybody up needs.
Only the senior Civil Servants are asked for their opinion- the smucks on the floor might as well mail their opinion up their arse for all the difference is makes.
The senior Ministers and CS are on the make anyway; the vast sums of money they take in back-handers more than compensates for the small amount of flak they receive for privatising everything.
Yes, but who do you think provides the information to the SCS?
And junior officials can write as private citizens, the same as a PC could. I have no problem with junior staff voicing their concerns, I do have a problem with senior people voicing them, as rightly or wrongly if PC Bloggs writes to his MP that is seen as his opinion, if Chief Constable Smith writes to his MP its seen as writing on behalf of the entire force.
ah but the police are the enforcers of parliaments will, thus if asked they can provide a professional opinion however lobbying mps as a bloc is a completly different situation