View Full Version : Michael Howard and Brixton
2 Hardcore
08-10-2004, 08:35
Interesting Polly Toynnbee article in today's Guardian.
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=7
My friend and I have been travelling up to Brixton (clubbing nights out) quite a bit of late, and I have to say we were pleasantly surprised by how safe we felt by comparison, say, to walking around certain areas of Bristol. We park up in Vauxhall (near the after-party club - far better to do the long walk before than after a weekend on the razzle! :D ) and walk up to the Fridge; on the first occasion, when we got a little lost, people were friendly and helpful. At no time have we felt we needed some visible police presence.
Toynbee's right - Howard's probably one of the scariest things to have recently roamed around Brixton!! :D
miss minnie
08-10-2004, 08:38
wrong link in that post there, btw...
dogmatique
08-10-2004, 09:09
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives2004/comment/0,15018,1322592,00.html
Actually, I think this warrants being posted in full...
A Scary Night In Brixton
When Michael Howard went on the prowl for a quick-hit crime story he didn't let the facts get in his way
Polly Toynbee
Friday October 8, 2004
The Guardian
The police in Brixton are outraged. The community in Brixton is outraged and the Community Consultative Group, which links police and people together, has written a furious letter to Michael Howard.
It was this section in Howard's conference speech that caused the trouble: "Three weeks ago on a Saturday night, I went out on the streets of Brixton. I saw the problem their community is up against. In two hours we didn't meet a single policeman, not one. This was inner-city London just before midnight, on a Saturday night. No wonder people feel the police have become distant and remote."
Leave aside the unpleasant "black mugger" racist overtones in choosing Brixton in the first place, just look at his failure - yet again - to do the most rudimentary research. A cursory phone call would have revealed the excellent state of genuine community policing here. (Did he even forget that Lambeth is now run by his own Tories, together with the Lib Dems?) There were plenty of police out and it was a very low crime night: one robbery, one burglary and one serious incident all that Saturday night. Michael Howard must have been one of the scarier midnight things roaming around Electric Avenue.
Here is why they are so angry with him. Crime in Brixton has been dropping like a stone. In the last year alone robbery is down by 21.5% - 330 fewer street robberies. Burglary is down by 16.8% and car crime by 21.9%. There were 2,000 fewer crimes this year and that comes on top of three years of falling figures: robbery dropped by 36% the previous year, remarkable results year after year.
This is what Detective Chief Inspector Glynn Jones of Brixton said to me with angry relish - firmly on the record: "Basically, Mr Howard, go and shove it. If you want a lesson in leadership and delivery you could get it from no one better than Lambeth borough Commander Richard Quinn, awarded the Queen's Police Medal and one of the masterminds behind the London-wide Operation Safer Streets".
At the last community consultative meeting, an elderly Brixton resident got up to say he had never in 50 years known the place feel safer - and he was outraged by Howard's ignorant hit-and-run attack.
Lee Jasper, black activist and spokesman for the Community Consultative Group, describes how well things work. When the police go out to arrest a big drug dealer, he goes too, together with others, to reassure local people. They hand out leaflets to explain what's going on. "As the police frog-march the guy away there is not a murmur. When people see us with the police, they start to say it's a good thing, to get rid of the trouble they've had in the area."
Now the community has taken over a private house impounded from a convicted drug dealer and turned it into a mini-police station and community centre. "This is the best partnership and Quinn is the third of three excellent commanders we've had here," Jasper says. Where the police knew of 85 crack houses a year ago, now they think there are only five left.
So into all this success stalks Michael Howard one dark night, on the prowl for a quick-hit cheap crime story, clueless about any of this. If that is Howard's idea of a new era of political honesty to engender new trust from the people, forget it.
Crime is the best reason why politicians often well deserve the deepest distrust. They use it shamelessly to frighten the living daylights out of voters. They do it worst in opposition - Labour was shameless too - but they are scarcely better in office. The Tories this week were at their most unscrupulous: "Crime is out of control!" Howard said, lying through his teeth and knowing it. (But note how this barrister weaselled the truth: he didn't actually say "crime is rising").
It wouldn't matter much if this were just ordinary ya-boo political mendacity, part of the game. But in stirring up crime panics, politicians are reckless of the real unhappiness they spread. It's not just fear, but that wretched, life-sapping sense that society is beyond saving, all is decay and sadness. It makes people depressed and pessimistic; it is the wicked thing that politicians do quite routinely. And then they wonder where "trust" went. If they want trust, they should agree the base line on crime figures and call a truce on scaring the public witless.
And witless the public is, through no fault of its own. Two-thirds of people think crime increased in the last two years, half of them think it increased "a lot", according to the British Crime Survey.
As attentive Guardian readers should know by now, nationally the risk of being a victim of a crime has fallen by 40% since 1995 - the longest continuous fall in crime since 1898. Burglary has fallen by 39% and car crime by 31%. Violence has dropped too, by 24%.
The media and opposition parties get away with pretending it is not so, by quoting the police recorded figures, which have been rising due to improvements requiring the police to record more, not less, crime. All reputable, non-partisan crime experts think that the British Crime Survey findings are the ones that more accurately measure the way things are moving, even if no figures ever catch the whole truth. (The BCS asks a sample more than 30 times the size of an ordinary opinion poll if they suffered from crime in the last year: that picks up a far larger total number of crimes than a reliance on the vagaries that determine which crimes get reported to the police.)
Of course the arch villain is the media. Newspaper sales and television ratings thrive on fear of crime: the wilful misleading of the public knows no bounds. As a prank the Sun has just sent a removal van to the high court to remove Lord Woolf, in protest at new punishments set out by the Sentencing Guidelines Council. How are Sun readers to know that this council - on which sits Victim Support and other lay members - is bringing not leniency but consistency and transparency to sentencing? Yet again the public is encouraged to think nothing works, the law is mad, and criminals go unpunished in this most punitive of nations.
But there is no need to feel sorry for the government if its good crime figures are unknown. Whenever they are likely to be reported, Blair and Blunkett love to rail against yobs and louts and anti-social behaviour, as if the country really was going to the dogs. Blunkett joined the tabloid pack the other day by attacking a judge's decision to let a suspected terrorist out on bail. This playing to the press means people never learn the true facts about crime and punishment. The way crime is used and abused for political gain is one of the worst excrescences of democracy. Let's have no more crocodile tears from politicians about loss of trust - until they start to talk honestly about law and order.
polly.toynbee@guardian.co.uk
2 Hardcore
08-10-2004, 11:08
wrong link in that post there, btw...
ooops, apologies, hazard of trying to work and post simultaneously!!
happyshopper
08-10-2004, 16:11
When I read in the papers about how unpleasant our city centres are becoming at night because of "binge drinking", casual violence, etc. I can't help comparing this with what it's like in Brixton, which as a resident always seems pretty relaxed and peaceful to me. Of course I am careful about where I go but it is certainly a lot less threatening than the West End or the centre of towns like Colchester or Basingstoke.
Trouble is, I'm not usually out after 11.00 pm. Does it get any worse later on?
Dubversion
08-10-2004, 18:53
yeh, i don't have a lot of time for Toynbee as a rule, but she certainly did her research on that one.
Let us welcome happyshopper to the boards! :)
Trouble is, I'm not usually out after 11.00 pm. Does it get any worse later on?Compared to what I've seen on most city streets, lagered up fighting beer boys are a much rarer sight on Brixton streets.
Crime in Brixton has been dropping like a stone. In the last year alone robbery is down by 21.5% - 330 fewer street robberies. Burglary is down by 16.8% and car crime by 21.9%. There were 2,000 fewer crimes this year and that comes on top of three years of falling figures: robbery dropped by 36% the previous year, remarkable results year after year.
I'm surprised she is not more cautious about using unattributed crime statistics and I am astonished that she says "one robbery, one burglary and one serious incident all that Saturday night". Surely that can't be right?
I'm surprised she is not more cautious about using unattributed crime statistics and I am astonished that she says "one robbery, one burglary and one serious incident all that Saturday night". Surely that can't be right?
The crime statistics are public domain here (http://www.met.police.uk/crimefigures/) (choose 'Rooling 12 Months', 'Select Crime [type]' and move mouse curser over Lambeth)
As for the figures on that Saturday night, perhaps that was just for Brixton?
More to the point, given the Mail's history of hanging on the policy utterences coming out of Brixton nick, what will they make of 'Go shove it' ?
It's an indication that even Brixton police reckon Howard is unelectable!
That or they hold a grudge dating back from when he was Home Secretary.
It's amazing that Toynbee elicited that comment about a politician from a senior police officer.
In the olden day's he'd have got into some serious problems etc etc, contd on p97.
It's an indication that even Brixton police reckon Howard is unelectable!
That or they hold a grudge dating back from when he was Home Secretary.
It's amazing that Toynbee elicited that comment about a politician from a senior police officer.
In the olden day's he'd have got into some serious problems etc etc, contd on p97.
The idea that violent crime is falling is laughable. Anyone ever tried to report a crime in Brixton or anywhere else? They make it almost impossible.
Michael Howard was invited to Brixton by the group he toured with. Surely it's a good thing that a senior politician takes the trouble to see things for himself? It seems though, in the Polly (Labour Party member) Toynbee world it's impossible for a tory to go to Brixton for anything other than cynical reasons. And since Howard had the nerve to criticise the Brixton police (that august body of men) she found a policeman (bravely off the record) to criticise Howard.
Polly Toynbee, by the way, is so confident that we live in crime free streets, she lives in one of those gated communities so loved on this forum. A hypocrite? - surely not.
The idea that violent crime is falling is laughable. Anyone ever tried to report a crime in Brixton or anywhere else? They make it almost impossible.
Michael Howard was invited to Brixton by the group he toured with. Surely it's a good thing that a senior politician takes the trouble to see things for himself? It seems though, in the Polly (Labour Party member) Toynbee world it's impossible for a tory to go to Brixton for anything other than cynical reasons. And since Howard had the nerve to criticise the Brixton police (that august body of men) she found a policeman (bravely off the record) to criticise Howard.
Polly Toynbee, by the way, is so confident that we live in crime free streets, she lives in one of those gated communities so loved on this forum. A hypocrite? - surely not.
If you're a politician and you want to visit somewhere you always get invited - by asking to be invited - national politicians do this the whole time. The question is why Howard wanted to tour Brixton rather than anywhere else that might be a bit more typical of urban Britain. Polly Toynbee (who I usually disagree with BTW) rightly picks up that Howard is using Brixton as a metaphor for 'scary black Britain'. Brixton is not by any means typical of Britain (in many ways I wish it were) - Howard is using it as a trigger for fear.
Strangely Labour & Lib Dem politicians also use Brixton but for the opposite reasons - as a good place for getting friendly reactions at the market & to show positive policing initiatives. For instance the first thing you get if you google Charles Kennedy & Brixton is the following:
Charles Kennedy & Simon Hughes visiting Brixton to see success in fighting crime:
http://www.vauxhall.libdems.org.uk/news/11.html?PHPSESSID=4b58b4fbcd4fe77c63565c80da35ecc3
Send 'em to Stockwell! :D
more (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives/comment/0,9236,1323473,00.html) This is what Detective Chief Inspector Glynn Jones of Brixton said to me with angry relish - firmly on the record:
she found a policeman (bravely off the record) to criticise Howard.
:confused:
I think the policeman probably went over the limit by suggesting that Mr Howard 'shove it', but he was absolutely right to state the figures.
Howard's trip was a gimmick for the cameras - he should take some lessons from McIntyre, at least he managed to get mugged, albeit after three days!
Edited to add - there's more (http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives/comment/0,9236,1323473,00.html). A sympathetic leader in the Guardian - the Met will give Quinn another medal!
And since Howard had the nerve to criticise the Brixton police (that august body of men) she found a policeman (bravely off the record) to criticise Howard.
Did a blue mist descend when you read the article BC? Glynn Jones was ON the record. And without wishing to be pedantic, some police officers are women, too, these days.
I don't know where Polly Toynbee lives, but does an address disqualify a journalist from some subjects? Where should you live exactly in order to be able to write credibly about politicians and their utterances on crime?
She makes a valid point, no? It plays well for the Conservatives to claim that crime is up, in spite of figures showing some reductions.
[QUOTE=Mr BC]
Michael Howard was invited to Brixton by the group he toured with. Surely it's a good thing that a senior politician takes the trouble to see things for himself? It seems though, in the Polly (Labour Party member) Toynbee world it's impossible for a tory to go to Brixton for anything other than cynical reasons. And since Howard had the nerve to criticise the Brixton police (that august body of men) she found a policeman (bravely off the record) to criticise Howard.
QUOTE]
As I dont support Tories/Libs or Labour maybe I cant see much difference between say Blunkett or Howard.I believe Mr BC is correct that he came to Brixton with the support of a local "Faith group".I think Mr BC is correct that Pollys article has a lot to do with the fact she loathes Howard and the Tories.At the end of the article she does indicate that all mainstream politicians big up the fear of crime.Blunketts made comments like the NHS being "swamped" by supposedly "illegal immigrants"-so hes no more or less racist than Howard.
As for the Lib/Dems they just drift around the middle ground.In Lambeth they appear to be fully behind the New Labours Red Card Zones/ASBOs.In fact they try and outdo the Labour party on this.
Playing on peoples fears (Crime,Immigration) is the form mainstream politics takes in the present time.This IMO is due to the general impotence of politicians to make serious changes in society.
So unlike Polly who sees herself as a critical supporter of the "Third Way"(she is ex SDP) I dont agree with any of them.
The question is why Howard wanted to tour Brixton rather than anywhere else that might be a bit more typical of urban Britain. Polly Toynbee (who I usually disagree with BTW) rightly picks up that Howard is using Brixton as a metaphor for 'scary black Britain'. Brixton is not by any means typical of Britain (in many ways I wish it were) - Howard is using it as a trigger for fear.
It really is pretty offensive to say that, just because he's a tory, his visit was inspired by racism!
It says more about your own prejudices than his. But, of course, we ALL know that only nice, left-liberals like Polly Toynbee, really care about black people. :rolleyes:
And also the "Faith Group" he was accompanying him around Brixton are a Black church.I now as I saw him that night.
I agree with Mr BC Polly is the most irritating of Left/Liberals.Some of her pieces on social policy are good(especially on childcare and lowpay)But any time the Unions etc try and do anything about these issues she berates.
I think the policeman probably went over the limit by suggesting that Mr Howard 'shove it'
Much as it's hard to disagree with someone telling Howard to sod off, I don't want cops giving political endorsements either.
The mistake Howard made was that his criticism of lack of police was aimed at the Government but came across as criticising the Cops themselves.One thing Cops dont like is being criticised.
How things have changed.Back in Thatchers period the Cops were falling over themselves to be the para military wing of the Tory party.
Know with Blunkett out Torying the Tories they tell Howard to shove it :rolleyes:
Gerry1time
10-10-2004, 17:32
And also the "Faith Group" he was accompanying him around Brixton are a Black church.I now as I saw him that night.
And, according to the evening standard (http://ccfwebsite.com/news_display.php?ID=157&type=news&printer=true), Les Isaac, the minister leading Mr Howard round, is a member of the Conservative Christian Fellowship.
The only thing googling can't seem to tell me is Mr Isaac's relation to pastor Chris Andre Watson, who was the 'impartial community figure' so eagerly critising the cannabis (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2118590.stm) reclassification along with IDS before it had even had time to settle down a bit.
Perhaps he isn't a member of the CCF like Mr Isaac, but if he is it explains why he was so rabid in attacking the government at the time. Interesting stuff, had always wondered about that one...
It really is pretty offensive to say that, just because he's a tory, his visit was inspired by racism!
It says more about your own prejudices than his. But, of course, we ALL know that only nice, left-liberals like Polly Toynbee, really care about black people. :rolleyes:
I'm not saying that at all - what I'm saying is that it was lazy shorthand to use Brixton as a metaphor for everything that is bad about crime in Britain. Howard could have come to Brixton to talk about the collaboration betweeen the Lambeth police and the Lib Dem - Tory coaltion who run Lambeth...
IntoStella
12-10-2004, 09:39
Howard is bloody at it again (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1324935,00.html) -- in the Grauniad comment section, attacking Polly Toynbee. It's flagged up in a basement story on page one as 'The Battle of Brixton'.
Apparently his party's policies are not racist because they were black pastors he went round Brixton with.
So it wasn't a cynical, racist bid to manipulate the bible bashers into appearing to back the tories' cynical, racist scaremongering on crime, then? :rolleyes:
How fucking naive does he think people are? :mad: :mad: :mad:
So it wasn't a one-off -- clearly Brixton is to be made the national focus of a political slanging match on crime. Interesting.
Howard is bloody at it again (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1324935,00.html) -- in the Grauniad comment section, attacking Polly Toynbee. It's flagged up in a basement story on page one as 'The Battle of Brixton'.
Apparently his party's policies are not racist because they were black pastors he went round Brixton with.
So it wasn't a cynical, racist bid to manipulate the bible bashers into appearing to back the tories' cynical, racist scaremongering on crime, then? :rolleyes:
How fucking naive does he think people are? :mad: :mad: :mad:
So it wasn't a one-off -- clearly Brixton is to be made the national focus of a political slanging match on crime. Interesting.
Exactly correct!
Howard excells at this sort of unpleasant manipulation for his political ends.
Turd.
Streathamite
12-10-2004, 10:33
It really is pretty offensive to say that, just because he's a tory, his visit was inspired by racism!
It says more about your own prejudices than his. But, of course, we ALL know that only nice, left-liberals like Polly Toynbee, really care about black people. :rolleyes:
Ok - but baring in mind certain community groups and the police are rather annoyed - and bearing in mind people like Howard have 'previous' in terms of cynically playing to the gallery, is it all THAT unreasonable for people in turn to be cynical about what he's up to here?
Isambard
12-10-2004, 10:56
Don't like Toynbee much but sometimes she produces some good stuff. I read the article on the tram yesterday. Spot On.
Tonight's Standard
Howard stands firm over 'missing police'
By Richard Edwards, Evening Standard
12 October 2004 Tory leader Michael Howard today stood by his claim that there are not enough police patrolling the streets of Brixton.
The Conservative leader had faced community criticism after he used his conference speech to urge that more officers be put on patrol, sparked by a visit to the neighbourhood during which, he said, he did not see a single policeman.
However, today Mr Howard stood by his comments, saying there were widespread fears over the absence of bobbies on the beat and called for a debate on crime and the causes of crime. He said he was happy to congratulate the police on their successes in reducing overall crime but added: "Nobody mentioned that violent crime in Lambeth has risen by almost 10 per cent in the past five years. Violent crime really frightens people - and a police presence on the streets helps to reassure the public."
His comments come after the Evening Standard took to the streets of Brixton to retrace Mr Howard's steps. In two hours we saw 11 officers, four police cars and two patrolling police vans. The area did not feel threatening and there were no overt signs of crime.
Before the tour on Saturday had begun we found six police officers standing outside Brixton station. Then, from 10pm until midnight, we traced the Tory leader's steps around the Angell Town estate, towards the notorious Coldharbour Lane and up Brixton Road.
For the first 50 minutes, Mr Howard's claims stood up. On the recently refurbished Angell Town estate, we saw no officers. The area was deserted. On Coldharbour Lane, a police car flashed past. Then a Met van. But there were no officers on the street.
One 41-year-old man, who said he was a reformed drug dealer, said: "I'm surprised. We normally see them coming up and down in twos but they haven't been for the past few weeks.
"Coldharbour Lane is no longer a major dealing area. I don't feel Brixton is dangerous - Howard should have tried going to Harlesden or Stonebridge Park." At 10.50pm, we saw a group of six policemen dealing with a minor incident outside the Ritzy Club. Two more walked past within minutes.
Further up Brixton Road, we found another two officers outside the Academy and a further one with a woman in a wheelchair as crowds dispersed from the venue. Two police cars drove past, followed by a van.
By 11.30pm, once pubs had emptied, police sirens rang out around the area.
Back outside the Dog Star pub on Coldharbour Lane, where Mr Howard had been recognised by passers by, we were offered "pills and marijuana" by a swaying, dreadlocked man. It was the only sign of crime we encountered.
"We base all our patrolling on intelligence," one policeman said. "You cannot be everywhere at one time, and we concentrate on the centre of Brixton unless we have specific information about problems in a certain street."
In his speech, the Tory leader said police had become "distant and remote". A shopkeeper on Coldharbour Lane disagreed, saying: "For the past two years this area has been a lot better and the police have hit the right balance. Brixton is now safer, but it remains its loud and vibrant self."
It was a feeling backed by the policemen on duty. One of the officers we met said: "I cannot understand how Michael Howard didn't see any police. Tonight there are 25 of us on patrol between 4pm and midnight.
"Maybe there was a major incident elsewhere that night. But I can say for certain that we were not all sitting behind desks, as he claimed."
Alan Piper, secretary of the Brixton Society, said: "I think Mr Howard is out of touch. It's wrong to paint such a gloomy picture of Brixton. Maybe 10 or 20 years ago his comments would have been more accurate but there are now more police in Brixton. There are no more no-go areas and things have improved tremendously."
IntoStella
12-10-2004, 15:33
Thanks Pooka.
Apart from the references to 'the notorious Coldharbour Lane', 'Ritzy Club' :rolleyes: etc, that is a pretty unusual piece for the substandard. Glad they aren't swallowing Howard's shit.
What next in the 'Battle of Brixton", I wonder?
Isambard
12-10-2004, 15:38
'kin hell; a fairly decent article in the substandard! :eek:
Howard must be well out on a limb on this one. Prick! :mad:
So we'll hope to keep Blair as Prime Minister I suppose............... :(
Thanks Pooka.
Apart from the references to 'the notorious Coldharbour Lane', 'Ritzy Club' :rolleyes: etc, that is a pretty unusual piece for the substandard. Glad they aren't swallowing Howard's shit.
What next in the 'Battle of Brixton", I wonder?
How about this? Oliver Letwin a while back praising the police in Brixton! He says:
' We need to give them the ability to recapture our streets through the real and sustained neighbourhood policing that we have had in Brixton - actively pursued by Borough Commander Richard Quinn and Inspector Sean Wilson...Over the past year, crime figures for Lambeth have radically improved. Since August 2002, robbery is down 36% and burglary down 50%. Over 140 abandoned cars have been removed, over 900 graffiti sites cleansed and 30,000 needles collected.'
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=64998&speeches=1
interesting if you google it the socially liberal tories are positive about Brixton (e.g. Letwin & Norris), socially illiberal Tories are negative (e.g. Howard & IDS)
Streathamite
12-10-2004, 17:03
oh dear, we seem to have the first split in Tory ranks for quite a while! :D
edit; ed'ed out for stealth value
From today's Guardian:
Howard's crime claims marred by Letwin
Michael White and Alan Travis
Wednesday October 13, 2004
The Guardian
The deadliest affliction known to British politics, the Curse of Letwin, struck again yesterday, inadvertently demolishing Michael Howard's claim that crime is out of control in Brixton because there are no police to be found on its streets at night.
Twenty-four hours after the Conservative leader used a Guardian article to attack the police record in the south London area - and columnist Polly Toynbee - for challenging his party conference thesis, internet researchers unearthed laudatory praise of the "Brixton miracle."
It came from the lips of Oliver Letwin. But he could not be accused of stabbing Mr Howard in the back. He stabbed him in the front - in two public speeches.
Admittedly, the shadow chancellor was shadow home secretary at the time and the past year in Tory politics has been a very long one. But at last year's Conservative conference in Blackpool Mr Letwin said he had visited Brixton, but found it to be an outstanding example of neighbourhood policing.
"I saw Inspector Sean Wilson and his team reclaiming the streets for local people. Burglary is down, robbery is down, graffiti is wiped away, abandoned cars towed away. Central Brixton is a safer, happier place than it was a couple of years ago," he reported, having made similar claims in a speech in June.
To compound future embarrassment to his party leader, Mr Letwin went on to say that it was "bobbies on the beat" - the ones Mr Howard told this year's conference he hadn't seen - that had made the difference in Brixton.
When the Guardian pointed out to Mr Howard that his claims had infuriated the borough police commander and local residents because crime had fallen, not risen, the Tory leader retaliated.
"They've howled in protest at my comments and demanded an apology. But no-one has contradicted what I said. I spoke the truth," he wrote in yesterday's paper.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1325934,00.html
Are you the "internet researchers" referred to in the article Bob?
:D
Sounds as if the Guardian might be lurking in these parts.
Fascinated by Howard's comment to the effect that "nobody" has contradicted him since he made his allegations.
I suppose he needs to inhabit that kind of mental tunnel when the polls are showing what they do.
IntoStella
13-10-2004, 09:21
He stabbed him in the frontLOL :D :DMr Letwin said he had visited Brixton That must have been when that impudent wretch Anna key went up to him outside the library and asked him if he'd seen Oliver Letwin about anywhere. :D
And without wishing to be pedantic, some police officers are women, too, these days.
Oh really? I did not know that. What would I do without such enlightenment?
No doubt you commonly refer to 'personkind' etc. :rolleyes:
IntoStella
13-10-2004, 09:26
Seeing as they have suffered a number of serious shooting incidents of late, why isn't Howard walking around Nottingham, Harlesden or Hackney?
Because he's too fucking scared, that's why.
He knows Brixton is a lot safer, even if the average Daily Maul reader doesn't. Cynical c*nt. :mad:
Streathamite
13-10-2004, 09:28
From today's Guardian:
Howard's crime claims marred by Letwin
Michael White and Alan Travis
Wednesday October 13, 2004
The Guardian
The deadliest affliction known to British politics, the Curse of Letwin, struck again yesterday, inadvertently demolishing Michael Howard's claim that crime is out of control in Brixton because there are no police to be found on its streets at night.
Twenty-four hours after the Conservative leader used a Guardian article to attack the police record in the south London area - and columnist Polly Toynbee - for challenging his party conference thesis, internet researchers unearthed laudatory praise of the "Brixton miracle."
It came from the lips of Oliver Letwin. But he could not be accused of stabbing Mr Howard in the back. He stabbed him in the front - in two public speeches.
Admittedly, the shadow chancellor was shadow home secretary at the time and the past year in Tory politics has been a very long one. But at last year's Conservative conference in Blackpool Mr Letwin said he had visited Brixton, but found it to be an outstanding example of neighbourhood policing.
"I saw Inspector Sean Wilson and his team reclaiming the streets for local people. Burglary is down, robbery is down, graffiti is wiped away, abandoned cars towed away. Central Brixton is a safer, happier place than it was a couple of years ago," he reported, having made similar claims in a speech in June.
To compound future embarrassment to his party leader, Mr Letwin went on to say that it was "bobbies on the beat" - the ones Mr Howard told this year's conference he hadn't seen - that had made the difference in Brixton.
When the Guardian pointed out to Mr Howard that his claims had infuriated the borough police commander and local residents because crime had fallen, not risen, the Tory leader retaliated.
"They've howled in protest at my comments and demanded an apology. But no-one has contradicted what I said. I spoke the truth," he wrote in yesterday's paper.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1325934,00.html
ooh dear, what rotter spilled those beans... :D
<looks endearingly modest>
IntoStella
13-10-2004, 09:31
<looks endearingly modest>
Oh yes??? Come on, elaborate, do. :)
Streathamite
13-10-2004, 09:47
Oh yes??? Come on, elaborate, do. :)
who do you think emailed Ms Toynbee?
and it went like this;
Dear Ms Toynbee,
Thank you for your recent article in which you (rightly) pointed out community and police anger over Michael Howard's crass comments about policing in Brixton.
The following link from the Conservatives' own website may be of interest (I also include it as an attachment, for your convenience);
http://www.conservatives.com/tile.do?def=news.story.page&obj_id=64998&speeches=1
(I am afraid you will have to Cut & Paste into your browser).
I recommend you skip straight to para eight.
It appears that the Leader of the Oppposition and the Shadow Chancellor don't see entirely eye to eye...
Should the link mysteriously disappear - I have saved the speech to MS Word, dated and location included (attached)
I Thought this may be of use!
Yours Faithfully
couldn't resist. :D :D :D
Mind, they may have got there first, but I sent it at 18.28, well before deadline....
Unbelievably inept!
Will Blair be able to resist it in today's PMQ's? He's already had a poke:
When Michael Howard told his story about visiting Brixton and finding no police, it took the Borough Commander and outraged residents to point out that numbers of police were at record levels and crime had fallen not risen in Brixton.
Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3733380.stm)
IntoStella
13-10-2004, 09:50
A very large beer for you next time you're in Brixton, young man. :cool: :cool: who do you think emailed Ms Toynbee?.
Streathamite
13-10-2004, 09:56
Unbelievably inept!
Will Blair be able to resist it in today's PMQ's? He's already had a poke:
Souce (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3733380.stm)
this is the first time in a long while I've wanted Blair to shoot and score.... :D
<tries hard to wipe smug grin off face>
2 Hardcore
13-10-2004, 10:01
I'm getting really worried now about our next visit to Brixton ......... all these marauding Tories..... :D
Swear to God! Imagining taking a short cut through a dark alley and being faced with Michael Howards bloodsucking mug! Shudder! I don't know which is more scary, his evil grin or Tony Blairs Stepford Politican Smile!
Streathamite
13-10-2004, 13:09
I really cannot believe how badly Howard has shot himself in the foot over this one. I mean, the least you expect is basic competence. didn't ANYONE think to check? jesus, how have the mighty fallen...
miss minnie
13-10-2004, 13:14
basic competence? from the party that brought us a treasurer who forgot to pay his visa bill? :D
Brixton Hatter
13-10-2004, 13:34
Apart from the references to 'the notorious Coldharbour Lane', 'Ritzy Club' :rolleyes: etc, that is a pretty unusual piece for the substandard. Glad they aren't swallowing Howard's shit.
Yes, very unusual for the Sub Standard! Dont think they've turned over a new leaf though - they probably just couldn't resist giving Howard a bit of a kick! Still, nice to see some balance.
Back outside the Dog Star pub on Coldharbour Lane... we were offered "pills and marijuana" by a swaying, dreadlocked man. Ed, you must stop hanging around the Dog Star! :D ;)
Finally..... well done Jezza!
Streathamite
13-10-2004, 14:24
basic competence? from the party that brought us a treasurer who forgot to pay his visa bill? :D
I know. :D
it's because I remember the awesome, evil machine that dominated the 80s, that their uselessness STILL stuns me.
when a certain Brixton forum poster was an arch-thatcherite... ;) :p
Oh really? I did not know that. What would I do without such enlightenment?
If you knew that, why did you refer to the Brixton police as a 'fine body of men?'. It gives the impression that you haven't been out since 1953.
And it rumbles on. Hopefully this will discourage people from continually using Brixton as an example of inner city failure... :)
Crimes against statistics
As a former home secretary, Michael Howard can't really believe what he is saying about violence in Brixton
Mike Hough
Thursday October 14, 2004
The Guardian
Earlier this week, Michael Howard called Polly Toynbee to task for drawing on British Crime Survey figures about falling crime. "The most reliable crime statistics - those recorded by the police - show that crime in England and Wales has risen by 850,000 in the past five years," he claimed. He referred to an increase in recorded violent crime of 83% over the past five years nationally, and, in defence of his remarks about Brixton, a rise in violent crime statistics in Lambeth of 10% over the past year.
As a former home secretary, he must be aware that this is a gross misrepresentation of crime trends. Police statistics bear little relation to the reality. The British Crime Survey (BCS) shows unequivocally that major types of crime have fallen dramatically since 1995: vehicle crime down by half, house burglary down by 47%, assault down by 43%, wounding down by 28%, vandalism down 27%. Mugging shows a small fall that is statistically not significant.
Recorded crime has gone up over the past five years because the police have changed the way that they count crime. In particular, they altered their "counting rules" in 1998, and introduced a national crime recording standard from 2002. They previously rejected victims' reports of crime if they doubted them; now, under the NCRS, these are taken at face value. Both sets of changes have inflated the police count of crime, and this inflation has been greatest for crimes of violence. That is the reason for the 83% rise in violence that Mr Howard cites.
What are we to make of Lambeth's rise of 10% in recorded crimes of violence last year? Nationally, police figures for violence rose by 14%, while the BCS figure shows a fall of 3%. If Lambeth follows the pattern elsewhere, the 10% rise is simply a consequence of the "bedding in" of the NCRS.
Statisticians have always known that only a proportion of crimes committed get reported to the police, and only a proportion of those reported find their way into police records. The BCS, which has now been in existence for 23 years, can put estimates to the "dark figure" of unrecorded crime; it interviews very large samples of the population about their experience of crime. Thus in 1981, 36% of such crimes were reported to the police, a figure which has risen to 44% today. The proportion of reported crime that is recorded has risen over this period from 62% to 77%. So the proportion of unrecorded crimes has shrunk since 1981, from almost four-fifths to around two-thirds - a very large change.
The BCS trend is simple: crime rose from 1981 until 1995, and then fell back again to near 1981 levels. The trend in recorded crime is more complicated: it rose at a faster rate than the BCS trend-line in the 1980s because as a nation we began to report more of the crimes committed against us. In the early to mid-1990s the recorded statistics showed a fall while the underlying trend was still upward - possibly a disciplined police response to targets set for them by Michael Howard. Are we to believe the BCS? It is done to high technical standards by survey companies independent of the Home Office. I trust it - but as a member of the original research team, I would say that, wouldn't I?
However, there are no persuasive technical grounds for doubting the validity of the trend information it has yielded. True, response rates have dipped by five or so percentage points since 1981. True, the estimates are subject to sampling error. But measurement error is not a plausible explanation of falls approaching 50%.
This brings me to Mr Howard's second claim about the BCS, that it has significant flaws in undercounting crime. The BCS is flawed in much the same way that my car is flawed in its failure to run on railway tracks. An index of people's personal experience of crime will not measure other sorts of crime. However, the Home Office is due to publish its survey of commercial victimisation and its "self-report" survey of offending later this year. These will plug some of the gaps left by the BCS.
The safest thing to conclude is that crimes that bear some similarity to BCS crimes will follow similar trends. I would expect commercial burglary to follow a similar pattern to house burglary, and vandalism against public property to track vandalism against personal property. There is no evidence to my knowledge that crime against the under-16s is rising. One crime type that could buck the downward trend is shoplifting - the main crime committed by dependent drug users. Violent crime involving firearms is rare but rising. E-crime is surging. But the headline trend for crimes that affect everyone's daily lives is downward.
We can hardly be surprised that opposition politicians play a spoiling game when crime goes down or when the government claims all the credit for the falls. But that is no reason to discount the very real improvements in knowledge that the BCS has brought about.
· Professor Mike Hough is director of the institute for criminal policy research, King's College London
mike.hough@kcl.ac.uk
JoshNeicho
14-10-2004, 09:14
Letters editor of the sub-Standard here - very good to read your discussion - please send in your views on the saga and our Tuesday article to me at letters@standard.co.uk. I've got a copper arguing against the BCS and the Toynbee/Mike Hough line that crime is falling...a personal perspective on Brixton and how it's changed, or political comment about Howard, Letwin and local councillors would be especially interesting.
Streathamite
14-10-2004, 09:53
sounds like a fair offer to me peeps, but I'm too feckin' busy right now.
Streathamite
14-10-2004, 12:11
can I also point out some thing out, JoshNeicho?
although I will gladly comply with your request, it is just a little bit rude to come barging in on a not-for-profit BB without so much as a by-your-leave, soliciting letters.
a 'hello, nice to meet you' or 'what a nice website, my congrats to editor' would have been rather more charming.
we do manners round here. do you?
If you knew that, why did you refer to the Brixton police as a 'fine body of men?'. It gives the impression that you haven't been out since 1953.
I've already answered why. sorry if the explanantion was too sophisticated. Persistent reading of the Guardian clearly numbs the brain.
[QUOTE=Bob]
The BCS trend is simple: crime rose from 1981 until 1995, and then fell back again to near 1981 levels. The trend in recorded crime is more complicated: it rose at a faster rate than the BCS trend-line in the 1980s because as a nation we began to report more of the crimes committed against us. In the early to mid-1990s the recorded statistics showed a fall while the underlying trend was still upward - possibly a disciplined police response to targets set for them by Michael Howard. Are we to believe the BCS? It is done to high technical standards by survey companies independent of the Home Office. I trust it - but as a member of the original research team, I would say that, wouldn't I?
QUOTE]
Whilst reading this thread on policing/Tories its been in the back of my mind how much Policing levels/"bobbies on the beat" effect crime.Thw BCS implies that crime(that is the kind of crime that BCS were studying) rose during the Thatcher period and than when the worst of that Witches goverment was over gradually went down.
Seems to me to indicate that crime is levels are associated with the economy.
And, according to the evening standard (http://ccfwebsite.com/news_display.php?ID=157&type=news&printer=true), Les Isaac, the minister leading Mr Howard round, is a member of the Conservative Christian Fellowship.
The only thing googling can't seem to tell me is Mr Isaac's relation to pastor Chris Andre Watson, who was the 'impartial community figure' so eagerly critising the cannabis (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/2118590.stm) reclassification along with IDS before it had even had time to settle down a bit.
Perhaps he isn't a member of the CCF like Mr Isaac, but if he is it explains why he was so rabid in attacking the government at the time. Interesting stuff, had always wondered about that one...
Good googling.I dont however think the Tories manipulated this Black church.Just because someones Black doesnt stop them from holding right wing opinions.
I'm not saying that at all - what I'm saying is that it was lazy shorthand to use Brixton as a metaphor for everything that is bad about crime in Britain. Howard could have come to Brixton to talk about the collaboration betweeen the Lambeth police and the Lib Dem - Tory coaltion who run Lambeth...
Quite then the Lib/Dems could have pointed out how right wing they are on Law and Order whilst hiding behind a veneer of reasonableness :rolleyes:
I've already answered why. sorry if the explanantion was too sophisticated. Persistent reading of the Guardian clearly numbs the brain.
I'd keep going but I think I've just heard my copy of 'Conservative Way Forward' come through the letter box.
And the other thing i think is being forgotten here is that Pollys original article also at the end castigated all mainstream politicos for bigging up crime."Crime" is now becomeing merged into ASB.I think this is a particularly dangerous path to go down.Whilst "crimes" against the person/burglary etc are going down ASB is replacing it to give the Cops something to do and placate the so called "general public".
IntoStella
14-10-2004, 13:23
Whilst "crimes" against the person/burglary etc are going down ASB is replacing it to give the Cops something to do and placate the so called "general public". At which point nonconformism becomes criminalised.
So we need more 'proper' crime to keep plod busy and prevent them from transforming into thought police?? ;) :p :eek:
I dont think theTories have got any chance of getting back into power.I cant really get that worked up about Howard when a bastard like Blunkett is pursuing a Tory Law and Order policy anyway.
http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/other/blunkett.php
I'd keep going but I think I've just heard my copy of 'Conservative Way Forward' come through the letter box.
Sorry, just had to rush to hospital for emergency surgery on my splitting sides. :rolleyes:
IntoStella
14-10-2004, 14:10
Sorry, just had to rush to hospital for emergency surgery on my splitting sides. :rolleyes:
I will bang your heads together in a minute. :p
I'm sorry Mr BC but if I were in your position I would be putting plenty of distance between myself and Michael Howard's frantic attempts to dig himself into a bigger and bigger hole.
http://tidyboy.sdf-eu.org/Gravestone.jpg
I will bang your heads together in a minute. :p
'm sotrry Mr BC but if I were in your position i would be putting plenty distance between myself and Michael Howards; frantic attempts to dig himself into a bigger and bigger hole.
http://mozart.chat.net/~jeske/newimages/dave-gravestone.jpg
I've not defended Howard and seldom, if ever, do so on any subject.
My criticism was the suggestion of racism by Toynbee, which in my opinion, was intellectually lazy, dishonest and polemical.
Hendo's 'you're a tory therefore what do you know' quips are merely an irritant that I've grown well used to over the years.
IntoStella
14-10-2004, 14:48
I've not defended Howard and seldom, if ever, do so on any subject.
My criticism was the suggestion of racism by Toynbee, which in my opinion, was intellectually lazy, dishonest and polemical.
Hendo's 'you're a tory therefore what do you know' quips are merely an irritant that I've grown well used to over the years. I have to say I do think there is an element of racism involved in any attempt to scaremonger about violent street crime in the highest-profile black area of Britain. Why not, say, Newcastle?
And Howard's claim that he couldn't be racist because the street pastors were black came across as ludicrously disingenuous, not to mention patronising. We have already established that the Street Pastors are a conservative group.
It's the same as black Republicans saying "Hey, the Republicans aren't racist -- look at me!" Some people will sell out their roots (whether in terms of race, class, gender or whatever) if they think they think it is going to get them the keys to the farm. The fact that the street pastors are evangelical Christians tells me more about them than the fact that they are black. And I don't like what I see.
However Mr BC the main parties are making the immigration/asylum seeker issue an election issue.Theirs been a short Radio series by an ex (right wing)Labour MP whose name I forget.He pointed out back in the late 60s/70s when Powell was trying to wipe up the issue of Race Heath refused to do so.The end result being that at the next election,on the doorstep it was not a major issue.
Ahem! I think this is looking dangerously like a thread that should be relegated to P&P. Can we keep on the subject of Brixton in some form and not just descend to slagging each other off?
I think BC's got a point though -it's not really racism it's simply lazy stereotyping of an area.
IntoStella
14-10-2004, 15:12
Ahem! I think this is looking dangerously like a thread that should be relegated to P&P. Can we keep on the subject of Brixton in some form and not just descend to slagging each other off?
I think BC's got a point though -it's not really racism it's simply lazy stereotyping of an area. FFS! We ARE talking about Brixton and nobody is slagging anybody off. (Apart from BC and hendo but they love each other really;) ).
What do you want?
I bought some really nice shoes in Shoefayre the other day. They were only 35 quid and they're leather uppers and everything.... :rolleyes:
However Mr BC the main parties are making the immigration/asylum seeker issue an election issue.Theirs been a short Radio series by an ex (right wing)Labour MP whose name I forget.He pointed out back in the late 60s/70s when Powell was trying to wipe up the issue of Race Heath refused to do so.The end result being that at the next election,on the doorstep it was not a major issue.
You have a point with immigration and asylum where both parties are pandering to an unpleasant instinct in some parts of the electorate. Toynbee suggested that a tory merely going to Brixton was somehow playing the race card, which shows how very twisted the woman's own bigotry is.
Powell is an interesting point though (and, I confess, nothing to do wth Brixton). Heath sacked Powell and disowned him pretty violently (he hated his guts), but many commentators say Powell's racist intervention played heavily in the tories favour in the 1970 election. That was certainly an odd election, in which everyone expected Wilson to walk it - polls showed Labour leads of 8% the day before polling day. But the tories won pretty comfortably.
Ahem! I think this is looking dangerously like a thread that should be relegated to P&P. Can we keep on the subject of Brixton in some form and not just descend to slagging each other off?
I think BC's got a point though -it's not really racism it's simply lazy stereotyping of an area.
Cant see why this thread should be binned-seems OK to me.
Whilst Mr BC may be correct that Howard is not a racist that does not stop Howard pandering to the more right wing elements in his party and more importantly those fascists in blazers that form UKIP.
Cant see why this thread should be binned-seems OK to me.
Whilst Mr BC may be correct that Howard is not a racist that does not stop Howard pandering to the more right wing elements in his party and more importantly those fascists in blazers that form UKIP.
I agree. UKIP are mad and bad. Their actvities and activists would warrant some much closer inspection. It's also true that some lunatics in the tory party think we should pander to them. Madness.
Don't bin this thread! Mr BC and I snipe at each other as a way of expressing our long-standing affection.
(((Mr BC)))
:cool:
IntoStella
14-10-2004, 15:44
I agree. UKIP are mad and bad. Their actvities and activists would warrant some much closer inspection. Madness. Getting rid of that lot must have been like lancing a particularly ugly and painful boil.
Streathamite
14-10-2004, 15:45
I've already answered why. sorry if the explanantion was too sophisticated. Persistent reading of the Guardian clearly numbs the brain.
that is really bitchy, unkind, and quite uncalled for! :mad:
IntoStella
14-10-2004, 15:46
Don't bin this thread! Mr BC and I snipe at each other as a way of expressing our long-standing affection. (((Mr BC))) :cool: :D ((((mr BC)))) ((((hendo)))) ((((Lang rabbie))))) ((((The whole world)))) except )))))Bob((((. :p
Aww, not really. ((((((((((Bob))))))))))).
Powell is an interesting point though (and, I confess, nothing to do wth Brixton). Heath sacked Powell and disowned him pretty violently (he hated his guts), but many commentators say Powell's racist intervention played heavily in the tories favour in the 1970 election. That was certainly an odd election, in which everyone expected Wilson to walk it - polls showed Labour leads of 8% the day before polling day. But the tories won pretty comfortably.
Not directly to do with Brixton but as Howard is using Brixton partly to raise his profile I think its OK to see how other Tory leaders dealt with some of these issues.The Radio programme was Walden remininsces(Brian Walden who was a right wing Labour MP before going into TV).I dont now enough about that period to agree whether Powell did make a difference.If he did then depressingly those in the Tory party want to go to the right may be correct.
:D ((((mr BC)))) ((((hendo)))) ((((Lang rabbie))))) ((((The whole world)))) except )))))Bob((((. :p
Aww, not really. ((((((((((Bob))))))))))).
((((((((((IS)))))))))))
:)
IntoStella
14-10-2004, 15:50
You have a point with immigration and asylum where both parties are pandering to an unpleasant instinct in some parts of the electorate. Toynbee suggested that a tory merely going to Brixton was somehow playing the race card, which shows how very twisted the woman's own bigotry is. Did she? :confused: I thought she objected to not any old tory but the Leader of the Opposition going to Brixton to deliberately set off a huge, grotesque media circus about crime and law and order in the UK's most high-profile black area.
But then maybe over-exposure to Rubbisher's rag has numbed my brain too. ;)
Getting rid of that lot must have been like lancing a particularly ugly and painful boil.
Quite. I'd be more than happy to pay for the leaving parties of a few other should they wish to go the same way.
that is really bitchy, unkind, and quite uncalled for! :mad:
Bitchy? Yep. Unkind? Not really. Uncalled for? Just in the spirit of the exchange. Hendo knows my views on 'Conservative Way Forward', so his quip was just as offensive to me.
lang rabbie
14-10-2004, 15:55
Thanks for the ((((((LR)))))), IS, even though I haven't posted on this thread :)
Bitchy? Yep. Unkind? Not really. Uncalled for? Just in the spirit of the exchange. Hendo knows my views on 'Conservative Way Forward', so his quip was just as offensive to me.
Sorry Mr BC, didn't mean to be offensive, thought we were having little jokes.
(((MR BC)))
IntoStella
14-10-2004, 16:21
Sorry Mr BC, didn't mean to be offensive, thought we were having little jokes.
(((MR BC)))
Fuck all this huggling, I'm off to P+P
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
Streathamite
14-10-2004, 17:43
for my part, I thik Howard really does play the race card, and in a pretty shitty way. He's far too intellligent to not know that, in the eyes of the Tory core vote, and quite a few floating voters, Brixton = a)black and b)crime/trouble. To me he stereotyped the area, and played on the fears of gullible people. I think the cops etc got it right; progress has been made in Brixton, and he simply chose to ignore that for a cheap, quick headline. racist? dunno. cynical and opportunistic? yup, with knobs on.
JoshNeicho
14-10-2004, 18:22
I'm sorry Red Jezza, and all of you - very rude of me, deadline manners. Lovely to join the board - I think the website is fantastic and have enjoyed reading lots of the stuff on here :) . I hope you don't mind me soliciting letters but am very interested in your views.
Streathamite
14-10-2004, 20:04
fair play to you sir, will do letter tomorrow am. sorry for delay. :)
for my part, I thik Howard really does play the race card, and in a pretty shitty way. He's far too intellligent to not know that, in the eyes of the Tory core vote, and quite a few floating voters, Brixton = a)black and b)crime/trouble. To me he stereotyped the area, and played on the fears of gullible people. I think the cops etc got it right; progress has been made in Brixton, and he simply chose to ignore that for a cheap, quick headline. racist? dunno. cynical and opportunistic? yup, with knobs on.
How was Howard playing the race card? In your terms, Brixton is an area synonymous in the public mind with its black community. If there is a high crime rate in Brixton who are the victims of that, if not the people who live there?
In fact, in his conference speech, all he said was that he spent 2 hours in Brixton on a Saturday night and didn't see a single police officer. He went on to say, this is inner city London on a Saturday night and he saw no police officers.
It certainly is true that crime has fallen in Brixton in recent years, but we fall into the trap of accepting the subsisting level of crime as acceptable. 2 or 3 years ago the crime levels in Brixton (and everywhere else in Lambeth) were incerdible. The robbery rate had risen to levels never before imagined. There has been some improvement of that situation, but it is still unacceptable.
And, God, it hurts to defend Michael Howard (believe me it really does) but I think this particular charge on these particular grounds, is unfair and suggests more about the prejudices of those who make it than it does about his prejudices.
This one has legs...from today's Standard, quite a good article.
Simon Jenkins
WHEN MUGGERS RULE THE ROOST.
A friend was recently mugged by three men as he left work in the West End. He unwisely reacted to the first attacker by hitting him hard to the ground. The other two drew knives and told him he was 'dead'. A chase ensued. My friend ran fast and luckily escaped. The police later asked if he would give evidence against the one he had hit. He said no. The others knew where he worked. Pressing charges would be suicide.
The son of another friend was last week beaten up outside a Tube station by a group of youths, for no apparent reason other than that he was alone. He recognised one of his attackers as local. The police, summoned by a witness, duly asked him if he would give evidence against the youth. The boy said no. They knew where he lived. It would be madness.
What should the responsible citizen advise? Should my friends co-operate with the police, or should they look after their own skins?
The answer is buried in the strange disagreement this week between the Tory leader, Michael Howard, and his colleague Oliver Letwin over the safety of Brixton. To Mr Howard its streets were a lawless wilderness where he had walked for two hours and found not one policeman. To Mr Letwin they have been miraculously 'reclaimed for local people'. South London was a safer place, he declared, where burglary, robbery and graffiti were all down. On all sides, so he implied, beaming policemen were being kissed by happy passers-by.
A simple principle explains the dichotomy. Crime is not a statistic. It is as bad as anyoneŐs last victimisation. If a friend is mugged or a house burgled, crime is out of control. If we are set on by hooded youths marauding the high street, civilisation is collapsing faster than in Baghdad.
When I hear of such scenes in London I am with Mr Howard. When I see a policeman chatting to tourists in Piccadilly I am with Mr Letwin. It all depends on personal experience.
I am currently on Mr Howard's side. Street crime is a serious and growing menace in central London. There are now gangs, many from eastern Europe, targeting residents in well-heeled parts of town and preying on tourists. They act with virtual impunity for the simple reason that few are ever caught. More to the point, the police cannot offer serious protection to those who might help catch them.
This is not because of police shortage. It is because, on the latest figures, London's 30,000 police spend roughly half their time on office paperwork. Most of the rest is spent in courtrooms, cars and on motorbikes. More police are now on street patrol but they dare not walk alone, thus halving their effective deployment. Any stroll round the West End will reveal their absence from key corners and Tube exits.
If I have no expectation of finding a police officer in the vicinity, neither will the mugger. I am all for Ňintelligence-led' policing and the new movement to localise London's police into ward teams. This may well improve clear-up rates. But the best deterrent to a street attack - as New York shows - is a Ňcop on every blockÓ. By definition, a mugging implies the failure of such deterrence.
When the police arrive, their screaming car gives any attacker advance warning. They then expect witnesses, who may well know the culprits, to put their lives at risk to solve the crime their absence has precipitated. If the police will not deter criminals by patrolling LondonŐs streets, it is hard to expect ordinary citizens to cope with the consequences, with the threat of revenge on their heads and no local constable to offer protection.
I take most of London's rough and tumble for granted. Over the years things get better and things get worse. We mostly survive. But one thing is for sure. The withdrawal of police from street patrols into bureaucracy, mostly under Mr Howard and his Tory colleagues, destroyed public confidence in the safety of city centres - as did the drop of almost 1,500 officers in the MetŐs numbers in the mid-Nineties. These places were delivered over to drunks, vandals and gangs.
Yesterday, I happened to visit the scene of both muggings. There were no police anywhere in sight. The under-policing of the central West End, a national street-crime hotspot, was shocking. Yet I counted more than 100 police within 200 yards of Parliament Square, standing about and chatting while 100 crimes were probably being committed a mile to the north. This part of Westminster has, since Tony Blair came to power, looked like a banana republic in the aftermath of a coup. It is a display of warped priorities.
No, I will not tell my friends to risk a knife in the ribs to help the police meet a David Blunkett clear-up target. If police in armoured jackets will not take the same risks the rest of us take in walking about alone, they can hardly expect us to hazard all in their support.
Londoners are now hiring vigilantes, community support officers and private security guards to protect themselves and their property. This is not because there are not enough police. It is because the police are somewhere else, safe. As every police chief attests, it is notoriously difficult to get a modern constable out of his or her car. But cars do not deter.
In the past two years, more police have been allocated to street patrols, albeit still in pairs. They have decades of neglect to rectify and confidence to restore. Suburban town centres are still ruled by street gangs at night. Every neighbourhood echoes to the gossip of another street attack. As long as fear of the local villain outstrips love of the local police, witnesses will feel insecure. Until police get back on the streets they once controlled, people will be reluctant to join them in the battle against crime.
IntoStella
15-10-2004, 10:24
How was Howard playing the race card? If he wasn't playing the race card, why did he come to Brixton rather than one of any number of other parts of the UK where crime is an issue?
It's not at all subjective to say that Brixton has a very high profile as a long standing black community. It's a fact. Say 'Brixton' to anyone in Britain -- in fact say it almost anywhere in the world -- and those who have heard of it will immediately think "black area".
I'm sorry, you can't wriggle out of it by suggesting that Brixton's black profile is a figment of Jezza's or my imagination, or by making out that Howard might as well have pulled the name Brixton out of a hat and that there is no racial subtext. Of COURSE there is subtext and it is clearly racial in nature.
If he wasn't playing the race card, why did he come to Brixton rather than one of any number of other parts of the UK where crime is an issue?
It's not at all subjective to say that Brixton has a very high profile as a long standing black community. It's a fact. Say 'Brixton' to anyone in Britain -- in fact say it almost anywhere in the world -- and those who have heard of it will immediately think "black area".
I'm sorry, you can't wriggle out of it by suggesting that Brixton's black profile is a figment of Jezza's or my imagination, or by making out that Howard might as well have pulled the name Brixton out of a hat and that there is no racial subtext. Of COURSE there is subtext and it is clearly racial in nature.
I agree Brixton is thought of as a 'black area'. I wasn't trying to deny that, just making sure I put the argument in the terms it was being put to me.
He came to Brixton because he was invited by a black community group which, regrettably, is not something that often happens to leaders of the tory party.
Your argument is, effectively, that any politician who comes to Brixton does so because they want to play the race card one way or the other. Any way, you'd be hard pressed to find an area of deprived inner city Britain that does not have a significant minority community.
He didn't mention race, he mentioned the lack of police. It is paranoia to think that a politician must be stirring up a racism just by talking about crime in an area with a large black community. As I say, leaping to that conclusion says more about your own prejudices about tories than it does about Howard.
Mrs Magpie
15-10-2004, 12:01
I think there are three main reasons that politicians come to Brixton....
1) Wherever you live in the UK, you will have heard of Brixton and to those who don't live here it's shorthand for 'The Mean Streets'.
2) It's also the place that stands for 'Multicultural'.
3) It's very easily reached from Westminster.
So basically it's very useful for lazy politicians.
Howard would have been better off talking to local Councillors ;)
Isambard
15-10-2004, 12:14
There are now gangs, many from eastern Europe
I'm gonna shout "bingo! " in a minute! :rolleyes:
Top posts from IS and Jezza - I'd hardly done more than read the headline on the article and you could see "something of the night" Howard was playing the Race Card. :mad:
Isn't it nice and cosy here in the Brixton forum, can I hang a round a bit if I offer you Hobnobs? :)
IntoStella
15-10-2004, 12:22
He came to Brixton because he was invited by a black community group Ahem. You mean a right-wing evangelical christian group that just happens to be black. Which is handy for Michael Howard.
IntoStella
15-10-2004, 12:27
Isn't it nice and cosy here in the Brixton forum, can I hang a round a bit if I offer you Hobnobs? :)Milk or plain? They are chocolate, aren't they? You wouldn't offer us non chocolate Hob Nobs, would you? (Looks menacing ;) ).
You are always welcome, but if you're going to be a Zummerzet boyee, won't the Bristol Bumpkin forum get jealous if you hang around with uzz zitty zlickerzz? ;)
Isambard
15-10-2004, 12:29
Plain choc natch Into Stella! :)
IntoStella
15-10-2004, 12:32
Plain choc natch Into Stella! :)
YESSSSS! :cool: :cool:
Streathamite
15-10-2004, 14:08
Milk or plain? They are chocolate, aren't they? You wouldn't offer us non chocolate Hob Nobs, would you? (Looks menacing ;) ).
You are always welcome, but if you're going to be a Zummerzet boyee, won't the Bristol Bumpkin forum get jealous if you hang around with uzz zitty zlickerzz? ;)
arrr, they'll chase 'ee with um pitchforrrk and tractorrr, and thar'll be no zoiderr for that there grtho, marrk moi worrdzz.... :D
Streathamite
15-10-2004, 14:10
umm, it is ever-so-slightly possible that there may be a good reason to purchase todays Evening Standard, and turn forthwith to the letters page, but I can't be sure as yet... :o
make that monday's!
Ahem. You mean a right-wing evangelical christian group that just happens to be black. Which is handy for Michael Howard.
I don't think they 'just happen to be black'. Judging by the meeting I was invited to recently hosted by a local black evangelical group, they represent a very powerful force in the black community. One whose views on most social issues I find abhorrent, but there we are.
I think there are three main reasons that politicians come to Brixton....
1) Wherever you live in the UK, you will have heard of Brixton and to those who don't live here it's shorthand for 'The Mean Streets'.
2) It's also the place that stands for 'Multicultural'.
3) It's very easily reached from Westminster.
So basically it's very useful for lazy politicians.
Howard would have been better off talking to local Councillors ;)
All very true, particularly (3), which should never be underestimated.
Why not go the whole hog and replace him with a local councillor?? I know one who could have his arm twisted. ;)
Streathamite
15-10-2004, 14:50
you crafty blighter! so all along this was your machiavellian scam to nick the leadership of the Tory Party! :eek:
:D
you crafty blighter! so all along this was your machiavellian scam to nick the leadership of the Tory Party! :eek:
:D
Believe me, there's more chance of you becoming tory leader than there is me. Mind you, a very cold winter should cut a scythe through the blue rinse brigade and then you never know...
Mrs Magpie
15-10-2004, 18:03
This subject has just been covered by the News Quiz on Radio 4.....worth listening to for more laffs at Howard's expense...You can listen here after the Saturday repeat...
www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/comedy/newsquiz.shtml
dogmatique
15-10-2004, 20:13
All very true, particularly (3), which should never be underestimated.
Why not go the whole hog and replace him with a local councillor?? I know one who could have his arm twisted. ;)
Reminds me...
When the Mayoral elections were on, Steve Norris started to pop up at my bus stop in the morning with alarming regularity (Opp Streatham Hill bus station).
Having lived here for several years, I was surprised at first glance, especially as he was with a photographer.
I couldn't resist asking him "Bit early in the morning for a photo-op isn't it Steve?"
He replied, "It's never too early for a photo op, dear boy...", smiled and got on the 159.
I was watching a mayoral debate the next day and he started saying things like "Where I live in Lambeth..." etc etc I started to wonder...
Turns out he has "one" of his residences somewhere on Tierney Road.
Next time I saw him, a couple of days later I asked "So, Steve. How often do you get the 159 into town?"
He replied "As often as is necessary, dear boy."
Needless to say, as soon as the election was finished... we never saw him again. Back to the limo.
Politicians, eh?
Well, the Streatham Guardian is on the ball...only 10 days after the event!
Brixton hits back at Howard attack
By Saxon East
Tory leader Michael Howard has been accused of using Brixton as a "political football" for his party conference after he attacked the level of policing in the town.
Community leaders and residents have rallied behind Brixton police after Mr Howard, during his speech at the Conservative Party conference in Bournemouth last Tuesday, claimed Brixton shows why police have lost touch with people.
Describing his Brixton visit three weeks earlier, Mr Howard told the conference: "In two hours we didn't meet a single policeman. Not one.
"This was inner city London, just before midnight on a Saturday night. No wonder people feel the police have become distant and remote."
But Mr Howard's comments come at a time when latest figures revealed crime in most areas was dropping in Brixton.
At a police community liaison meeting on the same day, people heard how offences had dropped in robbery, burglary, car vehicle crime and gun crime in the past year.
Chairman Lee Jasper said: "It is clearly an attempt to use Brixton as a political football for the Tory party conference.
"Given that he made these visits without informing the borough commander and made public statements on the back of his visits, I shall put a letter to him saying we are enjoying the best of times, not the worst of times."
People at the meeting which is open to all members of the public offered to put their names to the letter in support.
Lloyd Leon, 66, from Morat Street, South Lambeth, said: "He would not have been able to spend that amount of time in Brixton a couple of years ago without being molested by some undesirable sort. That is how much it has changed."
A Conservative spokesman said: "The point he was making was that the police spend only half their time on the streets because of the mountain of paperwork created for them by the Government.
"If Britain's problems with crime and the fear of crime are to be resolved, a suitable police presence is essential."
12:47pm today
OldSlapper
17-10-2004, 14:57
a very cold winter should cut a scythe through the blue rinse brigade...
One amusing thing about this debate is what it says about the state of the Tory party.
Howard, Leftwin and, it seems, Mr BC, may as well be in different political parties, with 'decent' Tories reduced to waiting for half the party to croak so they can ditch Howard's right-wing social agenda!
And with the rise of UKIP there's simply no need for the Tories to be the 'nasty' party any more on social issues (crime, drugs, sexuality, etc): the BNP-in-Blazers brigade now have Tangerine Man, aka Robert Killroy-Silk, to do their dirty work.
In fact, with the revolting Killroy-Silk running about what's the point of Howard? What function does he serve, apart from prolonging Tory Party agony and keeping Blair in Downing Street?
My take on what will happen:
- Howard's in a similar position to Michael Foot in 1982, with UKIP occupying a wrecking role analogous to the SDP.
- Howard will lose next year's general election, spectacularly, just as Footy lost in '83, with UKIP stripping 10-15% off the Tory vote.
- All hell will then break loose in the Tory party, with people like Leftwin and BC making their move.
So the presence of UKIP is vital to drive the Tories to the left.
The big question: do the Tories need a Neil Kinnock-type period before they can get themselves elected again, or can they do it in one jump under a post-Howard leadership?
Blair's defining moment was ditching clause IV. What's the Tory Party equivalent?
A commitment to European, as opposed to US, taxation levels? Getting a conference to vote to stick such a commitment in the Party constitution, along with some guff about 'social fairness'?
So a stake does indeed need to be driven through Howard's heart. I hope Mr BC and his friends are up to the job, not least because it will be fun to watch.
Mrs Magpie
17-10-2004, 18:40
A gem from The Spectator....
http://www.spectator.co.uk/cartoons/2004-10-16-4.gif
‘I did see Mr Howard, but I hid.’
Streathamite
18-10-2004, 14:44
I errr do hope everyone saw the Standard letters page today... :o
IntoStella
18-10-2004, 14:52
I errr do hope everyone saw the Standard letters page today... :o
I think AK bought one. Look forward to seeing it.
Isambard
18-10-2004, 15:10
Could someone scan it in or post a link for those of us who find the sub-standard a tad........errrm "foreign and provincial" :o
They'll be a plain chocolate Hobnob in it for you or something. Cheers.
Streathamite
18-10-2004, 15:16
How was Howard playing the race card? In your terms, Brixton is an area synonymous in the public mind with its black community. If there is a high crime rate in Brixton who are the victims of that, if not the people who live there?
In fact, in his conference speech, all he said was that he spent 2 hours in Brixton on a Saturday night and didn't see a single police officer. He went on to say, this is inner city London on a Saturday night and he saw no police officers.
It certainly is true that crime has fallen in Brixton in recent years, but we fall into the trap of accepting the subsisting level of crime as acceptable. 2 or 3 years ago the crime levels in Brixton (and everywhere else in Lambeth) were incerdible. The robbery rate had risen to levels never before imagined. There has been some improvement of that situation, but it is still unacceptable.
And, God, it hurts to defend Michael Howard (believe me it really does) but I think this particular charge on these particular grounds, is unfair and suggests more about the prejudices of those who make it than it does about his prejudices.
I will now say why I think Michael Howard played the race card.
As I see it, faced with no impact in the polls, Howard has done/is doing what Hague did before him - shoring up his core vote. he's given up on the marginals, and a sunstantial number of the seats the tories lost in '97 and are yet to win back. all his recent efforts indicate to me a man who knows he's lost the battle for the centre ground and is banking on still being around in 4 years' time for a bigger tilt.
so - faced with a threat to the right from UKIP, and a Labour Govt which is brilliant at occupying the centre ground, he lurches sharp right to address that dwindling band of people who've stayed loyal in the pastb 2 election.
He KNOWS that in this (99% white, and midddleaged/elderly) group, crime is ever spiralling out of control, and he also knows that if you say the word 'Brixton' to them, the first emntal picture in their heads is a violent black ne'er-do-well.
This article/speech/etc was NOT pitched at Brixtonians, but at this core vote. Howard's far too bright to not be fully acquainted with this audience's prejudices and gut reactions - he knew, and he played up to it. misrepresenting Brixton and its' police in the process.
Streathamite
18-10-2004, 15:17
This is the letter as ran;
Although I no longer live in Brixton, I did for many years, and still spend enough of my leisure time there to know that Michael Howard is quite wrong in his recent disagreement with Polly Toynbee. There have been amazing changes in Brixton in the past few years, mainly due to the excellent work of Police Commanders Paddick and Quinn, and to a whole host of committed hard-working community activists who have worked with them to tackle the area's problems.
You can practically breathe in the new relaxed, positive 'vibe'
I have never been assaulted or even threatened there - in fact, the only 'hassle' I have had was from an over-enthusiastic evangelical Christian pamphleteer who would not accept my protestations that I neither wanted nor needed my soul to be saved!
Yours sincerely
OldSlapper
18-10-2004, 15:30
I will now say why I think Michael Howard p[layed the race card...
As I see it, faced with no impact in the polls, Howard has done/is doing what Hague did before him - shoring up his core vote. he's given up on the marginals, and a sunstantial number of the seats the tories lost in '97 and are yet to win back. all his recent efforts indicate to me a man who knows he's lost the battle for the centre ground and is banking on still being around in 4 years' time for a bigger tilt.
so - faced with a threat to the right from UKIP, and a Labour Govt which is brilliant at occupying the centre ground, he lurches sharp right to address that dwindling band of people who've stayed loyal in the pastb 2 election.
He KNOWS that in this (99% white, and midddleaged/elderly) group, crime is ever spiralling out of control, and he also knows that if you say the word 'Brixton' to them, the first emntal picture in their heads is a violent black ne'er-do-well.
This article/speech/etc was NOT pitched at Brixtonians, but at this core vote. Howard's far too bright to not be fully acquainted with this audience's prejudices and gut reactions - he knew, and he played up to it. misrepresenting Brixton and its' police in the process.
I think your analysis is correct, which is why the Tory party is tearing itself to pieces.
There's a semi-hidden libertarian left in the Tory Party which is at war with the blue rinsers (and their UKIP-voting BNP-in-Blazers sons). Mr BC dislikes these people so much he wishes death upon them!
That's the delightful battle-to-the-death occuring in the Tory Party. It's amusing to see it acted out on the streets of Brixton.
Stobart Stopper
18-10-2004, 16:03
I errr do hope everyone saw the Standard letters page today... :o
Bloody show off, I just KNEW that was you! :D
Streathamite
18-10-2004, 16:46
so let's see, inthe space of the past week, i've stitched up Michael Howard been on the Radio, and now in the SubStsandard
Just call me 'meejahdarling' :o
lang rabbie
18-10-2004, 16:48
so let's see, inthe space of the past week, i've stitched up Michael Howard been on the Radio, and now in the SubStsandard
Just call me 'meejahdarling' :o
Beware - just recall the sudden disappearance of Justin after he let us know that he was the same Justin as the author of the South London Press "letter of the week" :eek:
Mrs Magpie
18-10-2004, 16:53
You can practically breathe in the new relaxed, positive 'vibe'
mmm, not sure about that line....I'm sure the Daily Mail will translate that as clouds of marijuana smoke.......
Streathamite
18-10-2004, 17:09
Beware - just recall the sudden disappearance of Justin after he let us know that he was the same Justin as the author of the South London Press "letter of the week" :eek:
errkl!!!
you reckon hatboy's gonna 'off' me? :eek:
:D
so let's see, inthe space of the past week, i've stitched up Michael Howard been on the Radio, and now in the SubStsandard
Just call me 'meejahdarling' :o
If the Standard offers you a column don't accept anything under 60K.
Just got an email saying that this Sunday's Dimbleby programme will have Michael Howard on. They're looking for Brixton people for the audience. Contact details are:
Jonathan Dimbleby Programme
London Weekend Television
T: +44 (0) 20 7737 8759
F: +44 (0) 20 7928 5548
M: +44 (0)7932 964269
IntoStella
05-11-2004, 14:43
Just got an email saying that this Sunday's Dimbleby programme will have Michael Howard on. They're looking for Brixton people for the audience. Contact details are:
Jonathan Dimbleby Programme
London Weekend Television
T: +44 (0) 20 7737 8759
F: +44 (0) 20 7928 5548
M: +44 (0)7932 964269
Ironically, dickie birds tell me a certain erstwhile poster beginning with J might well be on that programme.
Streathamite
05-11-2004, 15:45
...and a certain current poster who adds an R to that other poster's initial, also is in with a shout.
Meejahdahling. :o
IntoStella
05-11-2004, 16:31
...and a certain current poster who adds an R to that other poster's initial, also is in with a shout.
Meejahdahling. :o
Oh it'll be fantastic if you're both on. :cool: :cool: :cool:
Streathamite
05-11-2004, 16:53
sorry to disappoint yer folks - the charming young lady on the tel numbers above just said 'full up'. still I know JUST THE QUESTION to prime Justin with
IntoStella
05-11-2004, 18:26
sorry to disappoint yer folks - the charming young lady on the tel numbers above just said 'full up'. still I know JUST THE QUESTION to prime Justin with
You'd better PM me with it then.
You'd better PM me with it then.
Oh, go on, do share. ;)
Donna Ferentes
07-11-2004, 12:54
Well, I didn't get on, I'm afraid - I was in the audience but didn't get the chance to speak. I think they had a whole row of Brixton residents queueing up to rubbish Howard but unfortunately somebody called Rachel Heywood, from the Brixton Area Forum, wittered on at great length in a contribution whose duration was inversely proportionate to its content, and that left sod all time for everybody else.
Personally I shall give watching it a miss. Besides, the rugby league highlights are on the other side.
Streathamite
07-11-2004, 17:16
The question I woulda PMed Justin - had events not conspired to stand betwixt me and a PC on Sat would have been either "why do you think the Area Commander of Police told you to 'shove it'?" or, alternatively "who's got it wrong over Brixton policing, you or your shadow chancellor?"
Saw you on TV Justin :) Rachel managed to talk at great length about how good Oliver Letwin was in Brixton :eek:
Howard is a right bastard.It showed when he started going on about immigration and "asylum seekers".You would have though the son of asylum seekers wouldnt come out with this crap.
Still watching these question time programmes makes me realise how out of touch Im with the great Brixtish public :rolleyes: .Thats why I dont normally watch them.
Also Howard came out with the one about being only interested in policies that help the "British people".It doesnt matter whether they are left,right or in the centre in his opinion.
And then he spouts a load of right wing policies.
On Brixton he said that "people" want more "bobbies on the beat" regardless of whether crime is going up or down as this makes them feel safer.Really.Obviously Im not one of the "people".Still hes not that different from Blunkett.
Their is a whole subtext behind Howards reasonable tone.You cant go saying No Blacks No Irish these days.You can say that "Asylum seekers" are healthy young men who pay people trafficers to come here.Ergo you arent a proper Asylum seeker.Basically thes policies appeal to the small minded UKIP/Sun reader type.Whats been called "Soft Fascism"-correctly IMO.
Still with my views Im not part of the mainstream :(
Donna Ferentes
07-11-2004, 22:36
Still watching these question time programmes makes me realise how out of touch I am with the great Brixtish public.Thats why I don't normally watch them.In fact the debate was by no means relentessly bad, though it might have been better had I had the chance to point out that poverty as well as crime was an issue in Brixton. (I was even going to mention the secondary school, but Rachel's peroration ruled that out.) But in fact there were, and usually are, plenty of people who will disagree with law 'n' order posturing if somebody else says so bluntly and firmly first. (And doesn't say "locus", Rachel.)
Mr Retro
07-11-2004, 22:43
Justin!!!!
Hope you are back? Not been as good without you (like Anna Key unfortunately).
Donna Ferentes
08-11-2004, 09:17
I can be found here (http://justinhorton.blogspot.com)
IntoStella
08-11-2004, 13:21
Well, I didn't get on, I'm afraid - I was in the audience but didn't get the chance to speak. I think they had a whole row of Brixton residents queueing up to rubbish Howard but unfortunately somebody called Rachel Heywood, from the Brixton Area Forum, wittered on at great length in a contribution whose duration was inversely proportionate to its content, and that left sod all time for everybody else. No change there then. And I'd rather stick red hot pokers up my own jacksy than watch the appalling Haywood on TV.
Typical of the arrogant, stuck up dimwit who has probably done more to stifle consultation in Brixton than any other to hijack a programme on which real Brixton residents might otherwise have had a chance to speak. But no, she had to go on and gag them there too by wanking on until the time ran out. Hyacinth Bucket representing Brixton. I am all but choking on my chicken korma.
IS - I see how she appears, but if you get to know her, she actually does care about some of the stuff that matters. And she does take on alot of work.
Yeah, there are other people I might have preferred to see on that programme.
But Rachell was a main player I think in getting Pullross Road Playground up, active and revamped after its decay and the shooting incident there.
PS - I don't do cliques, whether u75 or Brixton Area Forum. But nowadays criticisms of Rachell Heywood, or anybody really, I'd take to their face.
[QUOTE=IntoStella]No change there then. And I'd rather stick red hot pokers up my own jacksy than watch the appalling Haywood on TV. QUOTE]
i have no idea who this woman is - can you fill me in on why shes so reviled?
i missed the programme... but michael howard (and his party) are so irrelevant im not sure why he even scored a primetime slot on the beeb..?
IntoStella
08-11-2004, 14:26
But Rachell was a main player I think in getting Pullross Road Playground up, active and revamped after its decay and the shooting incident there.
Actually no, apparently she did fuck all and has tried to take all the credit for it from the volunteers who did do all the work.
This is a woman who got local kids to make designs for the B OUR GUEST thing. And then what did she do? Did she throw an event to which the kids who did the work could go and enjoy themselves? No, she had a champagne reception for all the big noises. Kids and staff/volunteers from the contributing playgroups etc were not invited.
IntoStella
08-11-2004, 14:28
Zubaier -- she is chair of the Brixton Area Forum, which specialises in totally ignoring the wishes of Brixton residents.
OK. I do beleive she helped with Pullross. She may be good at doing the admin/funding app things perhaps. Several face to face meetings with her suggest to me so far that she has a good heart.
Zubaier -- she is chair of the Brixton Area Forum, which specialises in totally ignoring the wishes of Brixton residents.
The Coldharbour/Angell Group doesn't. :)
Look L***. I am suspicious of whether people higher up in the council are really listening to these meetings and groups, but that doesn't mean that some of the residents who attend these meetings, and therefore are part of "Brixton Area Forum" are not absolutely genuine and as concerned about stuff as you or anyone else.
Some are, some aren't.
And don't blow your top, but there's many people in Rushcroft and Clifton Mansions, where your group APT is, who do not feel that APT is fair or representative atall.
The point is that both APT and BAF are flawed, but that doesn't mean good can't come out of them.
:)
IntoStella
08-11-2004, 15:08
OK. I do beleive she helped with Pullross. She may be good at doing the admin/funding app things perhaps. I don't find it difficult to make a choice between believing either a politician with a track record of bullshitting and self-aggrandiesment or the actual volunteers who run the playground.
As for local residents' groups, apt is open to all who share its aims, ie defending public housing. I haven't seen you at any of its meetings. You have one personal friend who has an entirely personal problem with one member of the committee. And you have only heard one side of the story. That's not the same as what you have made out, is it? Be honest.
Mrs Magpie
08-11-2004, 15:24
This is a woman who got local kids to make designs for the B OUR GUEST thing.er, no, I know the bloke who did that with the local kids so she's taken the credit there too.....
IntoStella
08-11-2004, 15:35
er, no, I know the bloke who did that with the local kids so she's taken the credit there too.....
I wonder if he was invited to the champagne reception.
er, no, I know the bloke who did that with the local kids so she's taken the credit there too.....
"A playground has many parents, but a rubbish dump is a lonely orphan" :D
Donna Ferentes
08-11-2004, 16:12
Actually the spooky thing was that she knew who I was. According to her Jim Something had told her that I was going to be on. And what's spookier is that I didn't know him either.
(I think it went like this. The ITV people had asked if I knew anybody else who'd got something to say and I suggested that they conbtact comminuity organisations through the Town Hall. This was because I was specifically thinking of black organisations and I don't know who they'd be. Presumably the researchers then contacted the Town Hall, who then put them onto the Area Forum people, who in the course of conversation wondered who'd suggested them - or who else was on - and were told it was me. Hmm. But who is Jim Thingy?)
lang rabbie
08-11-2004, 16:52
Actually the spooky thing was that she knew who I was. According to her Jim Something had told her that I was going to be on. And what's spookier is that I didn't know him either.
But who is Jim Thingy?)
Googling Jim and "Brixton Area Forum" only gives
Cllr Jim Dickson
Jim Carrol (chair of Camberwell Community Forum)
I wouldn't rule out Jim Blunt of the SLP (who I suspect might lurk around this forum)
IntoStella
08-11-2004, 16:53
But who is Jim Thingy?)
I think I know. ;) ;)
IntoStella
08-11-2004, 16:56
Googling Jim and "Brixton Area Forum" only gives
Cllr Jim Dickson
Jim Carrol (chair of Camberwell Community Forum)
I wouldn't rule out Jim Blunt of the SLP (who I suspect might lurk around this forum)
Miles out. :p
I don't find it difficult to make a choice between believing either a politician with a track record of bullshitting and self-aggrandiesment or the actual volunteers who run the playground.
As for local residents' groups, apt is open to all who share its aims, ie defending public housing. I haven't seen you at any of its meetings. You have one personal friend who has an entirely personal problem with one member of the committee. And you have only heard one side of the story. That's not the same as what you have made out, is it? Be honest.
About APT. There's more to it than that IS. APT sometimes comes across as afew people trying to call the shots. Like BAF does. Like alot of these things. Doesn't mean there isn't good in it also. That is being honest. I wasn't thinking of any particular friend (and in fact what you said could apply to several people I know).
I don't think Rachell Heywood is a politician btw, just a volunteer. But she's not my favourite person or something and you may well have a point so I'm not going to defend her more than I have already.
I'm not interested in getting into yet another temper ping-pong on here. Take care - Paul x
Mrs Magpie
08-11-2004, 19:45
I think I know. ;) ;)
Me too, and he's a very, very nice man.
The thing is Hatboy their is a big difference between an organisation like APT and the BAF.APT is purely voluntary run.The BAF is set up and funded(well I know the funding has been cut) by the Council.
To take personalites out of it the problem with the BAF is that the Council(then New Labour) set it up giving the impression it was "our forum" as I remember the then leader Dickson saying.
In fact its an unhappy amalgamation of management(Town Centre Mge) and doing things from the "bottom up".I agree with you that some of the people in it are OK.Also as the Council "consult" through it its necessary to attend meetings when something big comes up like this new plan for Brixton.
APT like any community group run on a showstring is easy to criticise.I know in my Coop Im accused of being part of a "Central Committee"-and this gossip gets around.The best thing to do with people who make complaints is to elect them to a post.And then sit back and watch them to bugger all.
I can be found here (http://justinhorton.blogspot.com)
I agree with you that the debate on immigration is fundamentally dishonest as its really about race.But the thing is a lot of people agree with Howard,Blunkett etc on this.Making a stand on it would lose votes.The Howards and Blunketts of this world would argue if they went "soft" on immigration the far right would gain.I think they are making it worse by pandering to it.Race/Immigration is one of those issues IMO were you have to take a stand-whether that loses you votes or not.
Going back to the programme I thought Howard could have been pulled up on his assertion that people want "bobbies on the beat" regardless of how much crime their is in the area.My view is that the police are a necessary evil at best.If they keep a low profile I prefer that.
The trouble with these Question time type programmes is that they work within a framework of what Ordinary Decent People(ODCs) :p or "Hard Working Families" :p -one of New Labours favourites- think
Another thing that infuriated me was Howard assertion he didnt care whether policies were left,right or centre as long as they "worked" for the British people.This is straight out of New Labours books.
I cant stand it.It means you cant argue with them.If you do your being "ideological".
Apart from seeing Justin on TV :) Im glad I watched the programme.Whilst watching it I was reminded of an article I read by the American Sociologist Richard Sennet on "Soft Fascism".(And the recent doc series on TV "The Power of Nightmares").As Justin says on his blog irrationality is presented as rational in present day politics(on race).Society is controlled through tapping into peoples primal fears-Race,Difference,"Crime"--
See here
http://books.guardian.co.uk/review/story/0,12084,1332840,00.html
Hes talking about the States but its the same here.Part of the reason I avoid these programmes is that Id rather not think a lot of people are like this.Though it makes me realise that dispite all the arguments that go on in Brixton Im glad Im here(well until the Council kick us all out).
Donna Ferentes
09-11-2004, 09:23
Another thing that infuriated me was Howard assertion he didnt care whether policies were left,right or centre as long as they "worked" for the British people.This is straight out of New Labours books.
I cant stand it.It means you cant argue with them.If you do your being "ideological".Then there was the way he started out talking about the rail crash, which nobody asked him to and which was honestly a bit baffling. He then proceeded