We have requested CCTV at our end of town, but apparently the crime figures do not justify this
As you may know, our CCTV control room is being moved elsewhere. There are approx 100 cameras in our area. The new control room does not has the capability to run them all so approx 75 of our cameras are being turned off permanently. This is something that W.B.C. have been keeping very quiet about, a/ because of public outrage, and b/ because some companies paid section 106 money to install many of them to start with.
It is perhaps not surprising therefore that they are reluctant to fit extra.
As you may know, our CCTV control room is being moved elsewhere. There are approx 100 cameras in our area. The new control room does not has the capability to run them all so approx 75 of our cameras are being turned off permanently. This is something that W.B.C. have been keeping very quiet about, a/ because of public outrage, and b/ because some companies paid section 106 money to install many of them to start with.
It is perhaps not surprising therefore that they are reluctant to fit extra.
Threep.
There is so much that needs exposing on this topic.
If you have any inside information on this Threep, it is time to spill the beans.
There are approx 100 cameras in our area. The new control room does not has the capability to run them all so approx 75 of our cameras are being turned off permanently.
If that is true then it is an absolute scandal. Indeed, as BrianB says, please do spill the beans if you have more info. It's one thing for the operation of CCTV to be handed over someone else as long as the service level remains the same. Quite another when the service level is being cut, and it's being kept quiet because of that reason.
There is so much that needs exposing on this topic. If you have any inside information on this Threep, it is time to spill the beans.
My informants (both members of Thames Valleys Finest) told me last Friday and Saturday respectively, and both still maintain the info is still correct today. ('cos I just checked). Hungerford and Thatcham are also having their cameras reduced. Those may well be included in the figure I was given of 75. I have no knowledge of those in Pangbourne or Theale.
ITV and other major TV companies are getting very concerned about the move nationally for the scaling down of CCTV coverage. They may have to start putting on dramas and other worthwhile TV projects rather than just regurgitate cheap and boring CCTV 'real-life-crime' clips....
I've no idea whether this is true or not, however it's luxuries like this we can do without if it keeps a few more bobbies on the beat in a post-October 20th world.
I wouldn't say they were luxuries. In the past, CCTV was justified as being used in crime hotspots. I just don't understand why West Berks can't tell us which cameras are going and which are staying. Have West Berks published a breakdown of how they have calculated potential savings???
I wouldn't say they were luxuries. In the past, CCTV was justified as being used in crime hotspots. I just don't understand why West Berks can't tell us which cameras are going and which are staying. Have West Berks published a breakdown of how they have calculated potential savings???
Given no one knows exactly how deep the cuts will be until tomorrow afternoon it's probably very hard to know how much is needed to be saved.
This applies to all public spending, bar the stuff that "accidentally" seems to have ended up in the papers.
The trouble is the change of base to Windsor was announced before the election.Threep.
That's hardly "trouble", I call it good forward planning. Whoever was elected was going to have to make cuts, the only difference between the parties was the depth and speed of the cuts.
Well, I for one, would be happier if my staff were locking up after dark and walking home under CCTV cameras.
Don't think you can put a price on peoples safety these days . . . isn't there another thread .... apparently some guy has just had his throat cut..... if that was on CCTV it would save an awful lot of police time.
Well, I for one, would be happier if my staff were locking up after dark and walking home under CCTV cameras.
Don't think you can put a price on peoples safety these days . . . isn't there another thread .... apparently some guy has just had his throat cut..... if that was on CCTV it would save an awful lot of police time.
And there's another thread that says "perception is actually worse than it is".
We'd need cameras everywhere to make it effective, would you be willing to have one outside your house?
I'm sure Mary Bale is cursing the person that did.
And there's another thread that says "perception is actually worse than it is".
We'd need cameras everywhere to make it effective, would you be willing to have one outside your house?
I'm sure Mary Bale is cursing the person that did.
Actually I think mobile cameras might be more effective ? Currently experiencing problems my end of town, but it hasn't always been like that, and I doubt it will stay like it either - it's just here and now.
Cameras, no thanks but ..... (now this will make you laugh).... roadworks are about to commence outside my house !
That's hardly "trouble", I call it good forward planning. Whoever was elected was going to have to make cuts, the only difference between the parties was the depth and speed of the cuts.
They were supposed to be paid for, plus costs, by 106 money. If they're now not needed, will W.B.C offer to return the money, or do you think it might be 'lost' along with the other 106 monies? http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=10113
They were supposed to be paid for, plus costs, by 106 money. If they're now not needed, will W.B.C offer to return the money, or do you think it might be 'lost' along with the other 106 monies? http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/News/Article.aspx?articleID=10113
I don't know about you Threep, but I'm hoping we all see some cash back in our pay packets for the Ark Royal being de-commissioned four years earlier than planned.
I don't know about you Threep, but I'm hoping we all see some cash back in our pay packets for the Ark Royal being de-commissioned four years earlier than planned.
These are not just cameras in Newbury Town Centre, but those in Hungerford and Thatcham, as well as those proposed for Theale and Pangbourne.
I think that Lambourn is to be included in the new setup with a couple of cameras.
There is no doubt that the picture quality will improve for those cameras that remain operational. The big question mark hangs over the coverage that will be achieved by reducing the camera numbers. The cameras in Park Way became redundant when Costain started work and the boy racers had to relocate. Also the new shopping precinct will be installing their own security system.
However there was no logical reason for removing the camera in the Broadway last Autumn, on the basis of the proposed relocation and reduction in numbers.
The camera outside Macdonalds is now supposed to cover the Broadway, Oxford Street and London Road. How is it expected to see round corners?
I don't know about you Threep, but I'm hoping we all see some cash back in our pay packets for the Ark Royal being de-commissioned four years earlier than planned.
And YOU had the nerve to call ME greedy ! Perhaps you could give some of your pay packet to Lieutenant Commander Kris Ward ?? .........
The Prime Minister is set to announce that the Royal Navy's flagship HMS Ark Royal and her fleet of Harrier jets are to be scrapped immediately when he unveils the defence review later today.
One Harrier jet pilot, Royal Navy Lieutenant Commander Kris Ward, 37, said: "I am a Harrier pilot and I have flown 140 odd missions in Afghanistan, and I am now potentially facing unemployment. How am I supposed to feel about that, please, sir?"
Thought it might be fairly obvious I was using it as a comparison when someone asked "will W.B.C offer to return the money".
Comparison my backside ! You would like a payrise (or indeed some pay) just like the rest of us. We all have a certain amount of community spirit in us - but there is a line where you HAVE to look after yourself .... and you just crossed it !
Comparison my backside ! You would like a payrise (or indeed some pay) just like the rest of us. We all have a certain amount of community spirit in us - but there is a line where you HAVE to look after yourself .... and you just crossed it !
User23, any tip offs about the central government grant yet? I know some MP's have given the detail to their local authority (Islington cut by 18% I think)... I spoke to the Council and Benyon's office today and nobody has heard anything. I'm surprised Richard hasn't sought out that information really.
*Officially* the detail comes tomorrow according to the person I talked to at West Berks.
User23, any tip offs about the central government grant yet? I know some MP's have given the detail to their local authority (Islington cut by 18% I think)... I spoke to the Council and Benyon's office today and nobody has heard anything. I'm surprised Richard hasn't sought out that information really.
*Officially* the detail comes tomorrow according to the person I talked to at West Berks.
No idea why you think I'd know this, all I can offer is the same level of speculation as you.
Reading the NWN it looks like some sort of consultation will be held on what to cut so you'll be able to have your two penneth.
I think that is a very good point. A lot of people attack User23 because he is in the public sector, but surely we should only be curtting wastage. To cut too fast, too soon we are risking the economy. Sacking 500,000 people means we have 500,000 less taxpayers, or am I being naive???
I think that is a very good point. A lot of people attack User23 because he is in the public sector, but surely we should only be curtting wastage. To cut too fast, too soon we are risking the economy. Sacking 500,000 people means we have 500,000 less taxpayers, or am I being naive???
As far as I can tell there's very little "wastage" to cut in some areas of the public sector. Certainly in West Berkshire that was Amey's plan a few years back and we all know what happened there.
These cuts mean the withdrawal of some services or handing them over to business or the third sector to run.
I've identified a few "services" that could change hands and save us money. I'd like to try and identify more, but still I've yet to have the information that is available to other parties.
I genuinely hope there aren't too many people losing their jobs. I know a few at West Berks now, and all seem like pleasant people, just truly disillusioned with their role and uncertainty about their future.
I've identified a few "services" that could change hands and save us money. I'd like to try and identify more, but still I've yet to have the information that is available to other parties.
I think that is a very good point. A lot of people attack User23 because he is in the public sector, but surely we should only be curtting wastage. To cut too fast, too soon we are risking the economy. Sacking 500,000 people means we have 500,000 less taxpayers, or am I being naive???
It also means that potentially we have 500,000 persons joining the dole queue.
User, I'd happily tell you if you weren't going to pre-empt what is in our manifesto. All will be clear soon enough, but until West Berks provide the information we have requested my hand are tied as to completing the manifesto.
User, I'd happily tell you if you weren't going to pre-empt what is in our manifesto. All will be clear soon enough, but until West Berks provide the information we have requested my hand are tied as to completing the manifesto.
Why not sound them out on here?
I have a feeling Labour's campaign in West Berkshire might backfire on them with exactly the opposite effect they might want.
Not at all, but I feel it deserves a proper launch. I've already offered to invite you to a policy focus group, but that would involve shedding your alias. My email address is richard.garvie@googlemail.com - anybody is welcome to email me if they want to come along.
As I've said before User, I value your opinion on some aspects and I don't believe you are "all bad" as some people would say. I just don't understand why you dislike or try to rubbish me all of the time. What ward do you live in User?
But nobody really knows what the Labour plan is, because I've not published it. I've only commented on what is happening now. I hope that when you see our manifesto you will agree that it's positive. But if not, I'd love to hear what you don't agree with.
Yes - 500,000 fewer salaries to pay. 500,000 fewer bodies to provide office space for, 500,000 fewer to make pension payments for.
Point taken, but job seekers, housing benefits, loss of tax revenue, loss of spending (which means loss of VAT) etc. as has been mentioned elsewhere, surely that revenue would be more positive at this time, then cut as we improve our situation?
Point taken, but job seekers, housing benefits, loss of tax revenue, loss of spending (which means loss of VAT) etc. as has been mentioned elsewhere, surely that revenue would be more positive at this time, then cut as we improve our situation?
I wasn't making a point in favour of the job cuts - just pointing out that your reading of it was incredibly one-sided. If the lost revenue generated by these jobs plus the benefits paid out to those that remain unemployed is higher than the cost of employing them then there is a good argument for continuting to employ them (look at it as a new, cheaper, form of benefit - a public sector job). If the sum works out the other way then getting rid of the jobs is a benefit to the economy.
Osborne seems to have convinced himself that all 500,000 will find work pretty quickly and the outgoings in benefits will be low - in some areas (such as Newbury) he might be right but in parts of the country where the public sector dominates local employment he is, I'm convinced, kidding himself. If he's right then the transfer of 500,000 jobs from the public to the private sector could be a real boost to the economy.
It's a big if. I just can't see where these 500,000 jobs are in the private sector, and Price Waterhouse Cooper seem to think another 500,000 from the priivate sector will lose their jobs too. I'm looking at the evidence to build my arguments. I really do hope that I am wrong, but some parts of the UK will be left devastated by this. The problem in my view (not my party) is that it's all been rushed on how they have made these decisions. Labour are right that they seem to want to cut to fast too soon. I'm all for cutting if it is responsible and fair, but whilst arriving at these figures, there is a lot of anomalies and decisions where no thought has been given to the knock on effects. The school building cuts for instance has seen hundreds of buildig firms go bust already. These jobs are not included in the headline figures. That's just one example, let's see what detail comes out. The Central Government Grant for West Berks will be out today hopefully so we will see first hand what effect it will have here.
and 500,000 not buying goods and putting another 500,000 on the dole. But as long as it's not you or yours eh?
If those in the public sector worked harder and wasted less money then perhaps 500,000 might not be losing their jobs. Let's face it, when the decision to rebuild St Barts was taken, who stopped to think that just because the money wasn't coming out of West Berks coffers, there wasn't somewhere a price to be paid?
For Jay's information, I have been hit hard by this recession, but rather than coming on here moaning I started a new business.
If those in the public sector worked harder and wasted less money then perhaps 500,000 might not be losing their jobs. Let's face it, when the decision to rebuild St Barts was taken, who stopped to think that just because the money wasn't coming out of West Berks coffers, there wasn't somewhere a price to be paid?
For Jay's information, I have been hit hard by this recession, but rather than coming on here moaning I started a new business.
Hope it goes well for you and well done for trying something new. But I have to say if you think you have been hit hard by the recession, it hasn't even started yet. Wait until the VAT increase and the increased duty on fuel when most commodities will have to rise by 10-20%. When crime on our street increases because of less prison places and less police to catch the perpertrators. When your children's class number is at 40+ because of the restriction in teachers. When your parents cant get carers to help them wash or dress. When you get cancer but have to be back at work within 12 months. Then come back and tell me the recession has hit you hard.
Hope it goes well for you and well done for trying something new. But I have to say if you think you have been hit hard by the recession, it hasn't even started yet. Wait until the VAT increase and the increased duty on fuel when most commodities will have to rise by 10-20%. When crime on our street increases because of less prison places and less police to catch the perpertrators. When your children's class number is at 40+ because of the restriction in teachers. When your parents cant get carers to help them wash or dress. When you get cancer but have to be back at work within 12 months. Then come back and tell me the recession has hit you hard.
Or we could cut responsibly over a slightly longer period...
hmmm.... would you prefer to suffer with a head shattering toothache for years, or get it over and done with as soon possible by a visit to the dentist to pull the thing out?
Since this thread has gone just a tad off topic, perhaps we could consider the proposal from the Glasgow Media Group for reducing the national debt AT A STROKE. Indeed, not just reducing it, but actually getting rid of it completely. Thus saving us from having to pay any more interest on it.
They've been all over the TV and radio etc explaining it, so I'm sorry if some of you have already heard it.
The total personal wealth in the UK is £9,000bn. It is mostly concentrated at the top, so the richest 10% own £4,000bn, with an average per household of £4m. The bottom half of our society own just 9%.
A 'one off' once only graduated tax of 20% on the top 10% of households would produce £800bn. (And they don't even have to pay it all now).
Here's the best bit.......if the debt was cleared, interest rates and shares would begin to rise again and after a few years the 'super rich' would get their money back from their investments.
Since this thread has gone just a tad off topic, perhaps we could consider the proposal from the Glasgow Media Group for reducing the national debt AT A STROKE. Indeed, not just reducing it, but actually getting rid of it completely. Thus saving us from having to pay any more interest on it.
They've been all over the TV and radio etc explaining it, so I'm sorry if some of you have already heard it.
The total personal wealth in the UK is £9,000bn. It is mostly concentrated at the top, so the richest 10% own £4,000bn, with an average per household of £4m. The bottom half of our society own just 9%.
A 'one off' once only graduated tax of 20% on the top 10% of households would produce £800bn. (And they don't even have to pay it all now).
Here's the best bit.......if the debt was cleared, interest rates and shares would begin to rise again and after a few years the 'super rich' would get their money back from their investments.
Job done.
Threep.
What a brilliant idea and win/win solution. Shoots Cameron/Cleggs 'hard decision' 'no other way' down doesn't it and proves there are alternatives to most things if you want them enough.
But nobody really knows what the Labour plan is, because I've not published it. I've only commented on what is happening now. I hope that when you see our manifesto you will agree that it's positive. But if not, I'd love to hear what you don't agree with.
Labour plan to stand in Thatcham West, I know that.
What is your prediction a to what might happen in that ward?
The total personal wealth in the UK is £9,000bn. It is mostly concentrated at the top, so the richest 10% own £4,000bn, with an average per household of £4m. The bottom half of our society own just 9%.
....and I would bet that there is double that amount sitting in offshore bank accounts.
Labour plan to stand in Thatcham West, I know that.
What is your prediction a to what might happen in that ward?
I think there will be an independent candidate and a Labour candidate standing, but it won't be me. And for what it is worth, I think they will both be elected.
I think there will be an independent candidate and a Labour candidate standing, but it won't be me. And for what it is worth, I think they will both be elected.
Here's what I think will happen. The Labour and independent candidates will take a few votes off the Lib Dems, the Tory vote will stay largely the same and the ward will move from Liberal to Tory control. Is that the sort of outcome you were looking for?
By the way, it would take a swing so swinging that it would make the swinging sixties look like the static sixties for Labour to win in this ward.
Logged
Male
