23rd July 2019
Established 1872. Online since 1996.

Brexit could force isles police to send help south

15 comments, , by , in News

Chief inspector Lindsay Tulloch could not rule out isles officers being sent south in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

Chief inspector Lindsay Tulloch has not ruled out isles police officers being sent to other parts of the UK in the event of disruption emerging from a no-deal Brexit.

Mr Tulloch was speaking at the community safety and resilience board meeting in Lerwick Town Hall this morning.

He was asked by Shetland South councillor Allison Duncan whether officers might be moved from Shetland to places such as Dover to provide extra support if there is public disorder flowing from a no-deal departure from the EU.

Mr Tulloch said: “It’s really difficult for me to say at the moment if we will be affected by that here in Shetland.”

But he added: “Following the 29th March there is definitely planning from Police Scotland to support colleagues.”

Mr Tulloch said that if isles officers did have to be relocated, it would only be those who were officially on rest who would be chosen.

The police chief also fielded questions on a variety of different subjects throughout the two-hour meeting.

Mr Duncan quizzed Mr Tulloch about party buses, for instance, asking whether underage drinking was a problem.

Mr Tulloch said there had been a number of occasions where children had been found on the buses.

“Generally party buses are quite controlled but there are incidents where we have to give it proper attention to ensure no crimes are being committed,” said Mr Tulloch, who added, in response to another query from Mr Duncan, that drugs had not been encountered on the buses.

The crime detection rate later came under fire from Shetland North councillor Alastair Cooper, who said the 70 per cent figure was “not good” and suggested it had been higher in the past.

“As a community we should be aspiring to keep these figures up,” Mr Cooper said, adding: “The detection rate has to be high before we can say we have a safe community.”

Mr Tulloch said: “The reporting crime rate has gone down but some of the crimes that have been reported are difficult in the nature of them to detect, especially when they’re historical.”

He added that vandalism in the town centre was another difficult crime to detect.

Among the others present at the meeting were representatives from the fire service, coastguard service and road safety panel.

15 comments

  1. Ian Tinkler

    “If there is public disorder flowing from a no-deal departure from the EU.!!!!” Better alert the Army, Air Force and Navy” expect a full-scale invasion by the Franco, Eirian, Germanic Alliance. Not to mention hoards of Picts having a Sh@? fit. Really will these scaremongering nits ever stop, this is not WW3 or Armageddon?

    Reply
  2. Robert Szocs

    “Party buses quite controlled”- shows an exact effort in every way for the safety of the community by SIC.

    Reply
  3. Shuard Manson

    So if you voted remain we will shortly be hunting each other wi clubs and spears. If you voted leave da streets will be paved with gold and money Will faa fae da sky!

    Reply
  4. Peter Hamilton

    Once again a public official’s factual reply to a public representative’s question irks.

    The police are duty bound to contingency plan where there are identifiable potential threats to public order. Ian and Shaun ridicule the threat in the event of a Hard Brexit, but it is not long since a far-right public order threat was being used to dragoon wavering MPs behind May’s deal: https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1071205/brexit-news-chris-grayling-extremist-politics-leave-european-union

    This was echoed locally by Shetland’s own Ali inkster, writing at the end of January that: “politicians should take note, they only need look to France for a taste of what will come”.

    Perhaps we should be more fearful of the threat posed by the far-right should Parliament block Brexit. Those interested can look to the Home Office Report: Hate crime, England and Wales 2016/17. Figure A1 shows a marked spike in racially or religiously aggravated offences recorded by the police over and just after the referendum campaign. There were thousands more hate crimes against fellow Brits and EU citizens.

    Ian and Shaun can ridicule “scaremongering” all they please. Scottish coppers now train for peace-keeping service in Northern Ireland: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-violence-fears-as-uk-police-to-be-deployed-in-northern-ireland-a4030166.html Lets put this evil genie back in its bottle with a second referendum instead.

    Reply
  5. Shuard Manson

    That’s not my name. You claim to be a teacher. History, Politics,Economics, English and reality seem to be your weakpoints. You must be a music teacher? I can see dee in Hayfield Hoose. Dats Whaur da teachers with the most ability end up…….

    Reply
  6. Peter Hamilton

    My apologies to Shuard. I hope he can accept it was an honest mistake and that I meant no offence by accidentally getting his name wrong.

    Neither did I intend to distract Shuard from the point in hand: whether hard Brexit security warnings are scaremongering.

    I wonder if Shuard has any thoughts on what the justice secretary, David Gauke, said on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme on the 16th of February: “Leaving without a deal would have a very adverse effect, to put it mildly, on our economy, on our security and on the integrity of the union”?

    If Shuard thinks this is inaccurate, exaggerated or untrue, how does Shuard determine what is nonsense and what is reality?

    We are living in an era in which truth has been persistently and purposefully devalued. The alt-right are actively convincing people that everything they hear is unreliable. When it is proven that what the alt-right are saying is false, the indoctrinated could not care less. They now already “know” they are being lied to by the establishment.

    Reactionary arguments aren’t hard to spot. There is an absence of fact, clear exaggeration and personal abuse. They represent a project to fear.

    Reply
    • Shuard Manson

      Only the Dutch and the Germans get my name correct. (Perhaps a lesson to us all) I sometimes agree with you. Believe it or not!

      Reply
      • Shuard Manson

        As for the difference between nonsense and reality…….we live in interesting times! (I nivvir thought it would be this interesting…! 🙂

  7. John Tulloch

    The EU runs a £94 billion p.a. trade surplus with the UK.

    This will be severely hit by the application of tariffs which “could” yield a tariff profit to the exchequer of up to £23 billion p.a.. It won’t because EU exports to us will fall, drastically, as we source cheaper alternatives, either home produced or from non-EU countries.

    Our exports need not be hit as, freed from EU state aid rules, we will be free to use our tariff receipts to compensate suppliers for any tariffs imposed by the EU and still have money left over for public services.

    We would also get to keep our £39 billion settlement that the pro-Remain House of Lords investigation determined we have no need to pay.

    And of course, we keep our £8-10 billion p.a. net annual contribution to the EU’s budget.

    This doesn’t sound like “economic catastrophe” to me.

    And it explains why EU gloating was replaced by palpable fury when Parliament raised two fingers to their “surrender terms”.

    Too bad our opposition parties and Tory remainers have undermined and continue to undermine, our negotiators, even at this most critical time for the future of our country. Shameful.

    Reply
  8. Peter Hamilton

    I wonder if Shuard would agree that belittling public servants in Hayfield House adds little to a discussion about the possible impact of a hard Brexit on public security?

    Looking at how Trump belittles others, attacks the media and erodes the truth, I fear we’re going to have to work pretty hard to regain the ability to civilly agree to disagree and identify fact from fiction.

    John Tulloch’s ideologically driven, pro-hard Brexit position conveniently neglects the economic harm that has already been done and the government’s own dire forecasts.

    There is no good Brexit. What is shameful, to use John’s word, is how people who were angry about austerity have been conned by greedy, hardline, Tory toffs into turning against our neighbours and an institution which, despite its flaws, was created to secure peaceful cooperation and prosperity.

    There was never a thumping great majority for this deluded act of self-harm, just a slim majority achieved by thumping great lies that were reinforced by social media manipulation that was often racist and illegal. I took some pains to demonstrate this last point with reputable references to allow for fact checking on a previous thread… but there’s no learning some folk.

    Reply
  9. Sean Gilfillan

    Peter makes a good point, it’d be quite easy to fact check, but people are always more eager to argue and be declared the winner of said argument through shear stubbornness. Why, just recently I noticed someone who was more willing to argue and insult just because someone mistakenly got his name wrong.

    Going to sound very typical when I say so but social media manipulation is easy and common place now. Almost everyone is online and context isn’t so easy to pick up with text. (Difficult to spell without text though.) Hard to tell if someone is mocking you, bored with you, angry with you or indeed indifferent entirely. Of course there’s always someone there going to say your happy emoticons are passive aggressive. Social media manipulation is very easy.

    That said, not everyone is on Social Media, and if Peter wants to reach out and say hello to old friends, it’d be greatly appreciated. (How’s that for a Segue?)

    Reply
  10. Mr ian Tinkler

    “the possible impact of a hard Brexit on public security?”. Peter! Heavens forbid, Just what impact are you expecting? Enlighten us as to precisely what your exhaustive and lengthy texts are trying to tell us. Try and be factual and not too much fantasy. (Riots, No medicine, mass starvation, a plague of locusts, no junker et el, hell on earth.)

    Reply
  11. Peter Hamilton

    Ian is welcome to contradict defence minister, Tobias Ellwood, who was quoted in The Independent on 24th December last year as saying: “Leaving without a deal would mean access to around 40 international security programmes would be significantly reduced.

    “Exchanges of critical intelligence data would halt until new arrangements are in place. We would immediately reduce our ability to tackle threats from terrorism to cybercrime, modern slavery to fraud.”

    I’ve already referenced above that Scottish police being trained for peace keeping in Northern Ireland. If Ian can take a moment to consider this he will see it reduces their capacity to address crime in Scotland.

    No one should underestimate the consequences of exacerbating troubles in Northern Ireland. I’m sure Tobias Ellwood MP, a former captain in the Royal Green Jackets, with three years of parliamentary responsibility for counter-terrorism, doesn’t. Maybe Ian knows better.

    As regards Sean’s comment, I don’t do social media but I have been known to reply to kindly postcards 🙂

    Reply
  12. Ian Tinkler

    Sure all the usual scaremongering rubbish from all the usual Brexit fearful people. If you believe that intelligence sharing will stop once out of the EU, you are delusional, Peter. Incidentally closing down the fluidity of EU borders would certainly not help Isis et al. infiltrate the UK but greatly strengthen the UK’s security. That is self-evident. Now the most significant threat of a hard border in the Ireland of Ireland does not come from the UK. It is the EU trade protectionism nothing more.
    Regarding Mr. Tobias Ellwood MP, (Remoner supreme) he is now-ex-Army and only reached the giddy rank of Captain, hardly an illustrious rank (I well outranked Toby!) I also severed with my Irish friends, North and South, but there we go!!. Anyone with a grain of intellect knows a hard border is not helpful. however, it is the EU that is insisting on a hard border, after Brexit, not the UK!!! (They so have to protect their closed trade cabal)

    Reply
  13. Peter Hamilton

    Ian might want to contradict the following from the Home Office committee’s report: “More recent evidence has reaffirmed the importance of agreeing a deal which facilitates ongoing cooperation on policing and security. In October 2018, the Director General of the National Crime Agency, Lynne Owens, told us that, without access to EU tools or a planning period that allows for “sensible negotiation” with bilateral partners, there is “a risk that this country will be less safe as a result.” This view was endorsed by DAC Richard Martin of the Metropolitan Police Service and National Police Chiefs’ Council, who said that “entrepreneurs of crime” will “exploit any gap that they can find in the market”, and will “certainly exploit it across borders”. He warned that “if we were not to get a deal, then we will not be as safe as we currently are.”
    Lynne Owens also described the significant loss of capability were tools like SIS II and the European Arrest Warrant to be lost.”

    May’s deal caused Met chief Cressida Dick to speak out too, but maybe Ian knows better.

    These aren’t “the usual Brexit fearful people” and Ireland remains entitled to Europe’s ample support.

    Reply

Your Comment

Please note, it is the policy of The Shetland Times to publish comments and letters from named individuals only. Both forename and surname are required.

Comments are moderated. Contributors must observe normal standards of decency and tolerance for the opinions of others.

The views expressed are those of contributors and not of The Shetland Times.

The Shetland Times reserves the right to decline or remove any contribution without notice or stating reason.

Comments are limited to 200 words but please email longer articles or letters to editorial@shetlandtimes.co.uk for consideration and include a daytime telephone number and your address. If emailing information in confidence please put "Not for publication" in both the subject line and at the top of the main message.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.