Why Britain's police hardly solve any crimes
W HEN STAN GILMOUR started out as a 'regular street bobby' in 1993, he remembers picking up 'multiple burglaries a day'. It was nearly all 'traditional crime' back then: 'you know, the whodunnit, broken window, property gone, search for the suspect'. There were no mobile phones or CCTV cameras, which meant lots of knocking on doors and learning to 'manage the crime scene' to yield clues.
Our survey finds that Britons are pessimistic about the country's cohesion
The police are better; the politicians are worse
The LIBOR saga reflects badly on the courts
Compromise rarely leads to contentment. But it nearly always leads to costs
Matthew Holehouse, our British political correspondent, asks what might happen if Britain made voting compulsory
Their main union has become a platform for activists' causes
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Statesman
an hour ago
- New Statesman
Why I am sticking with Labour
In a packed fringe meeting at the Labour Party conference in 1980, cigarette smoke hung thickly beneath dim, flickering lights. Amid the hum of tense whispers and shifting chairs, Shirley Williams stood, resolute and defiant, her voice slicing through the haze: 'We are going to fight to save the party, and by God we think we can. We are going to start fighting for a Labour Party worthy of the name. Yet barely a year later, Williams and her allies – soon to be known infamously as the Gang of Four – left Labour altogether, founding the new Social Democratic Party. Why begin an article about my decision to remain within Labour with a quote that, in hindsight, didn't even survive the year? Three reasons. First, because today I – and many others inside the Labour Party – feel exactly as Shirley Williams did when she uttered those words. This is not a Labour government worthy of the name. From its morally hollow alignment with a far-right US president amidst war crimes and probable genocide in Gaza, to its embrace of a discredited economic orthodoxy reliant on trickle-down myths, deregulation, and corporate extraction, this is not the principled, people-first politics we were promised. Add to this the normalisation of racist rhetoric about migrants and asylum seekers, punitive policies targeting disabled people – from threatened cuts to Personal Independence Payments to real-terms reductions in Universal Credit – and the introduction of some of the most draconian laws this country has seen outside wartime, including proscribing protest groups as terrorists, and it becomes painfully clear: something has gone profoundly wrong. Like Shirley Williams then – and countless others from both the left and right throughout Labour's history – I believe remaining in the party (as long as that option is open) and fighting for its soul is the right choice. For all its faults, Labour remains the political vehicle that has done more than any other to improve the lives of working-class people in Britain. That legacy isn't just worth defending; it demands our defence. Secondly, given the increasing fragmentation of British politics – and the very real possibility that the Labour-Conservative duopoly, which has defined our political landscape for over eighty years, might finally unravel – the events of 1981 now look less like a historical footnote and more like an urgent warning. The SDP failed on its own terms, but the two-party system that it aimed to break open never really recovered from its intervention. So, what, if anything, has today's Labour leadership learnt from the emergence of the new left party? What deeper forces – economic, social, and environmental – are shaping this moment? And how might we navigate the storm of intersecting crises we now face? Judging by their reaction thus far: very little. Within Labour circles, responses have been defined more by dismissive sneers than serious reflection. But the hundreds of thousands expressing interest in the new party should serve as a profound wake-up call. This isn't a fringe rebellion, it's an indication that the foundations of our electoral system are cracking. Discontent of this magnitude doesn't emerge from nowhere, nor will it vanish if ignored. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Even if you share the leadership's apparent wish that the left be locked away and forgotten, history demonstrates that suppressing dissent doesn't neutralise it – it energises it. Those turning toward this new party are not extremists or radicals, but ordinary people repeatedly told that their entirely reasonable demands (a fair economy, genuine democracy, and meaningful climate action) are dangerous delusions. That lie has a limited shelf life, and we may well be reaching its expiry date. Third, Shirley Williams' instinct in 1980 to remain in the party, was fundamentally right, an instinct shared by myself and many others today. The fight ahead against authoritarian and anti-democratic forces will only intensify. How and where we engage in this struggle must be strategic. Effective strategy against a capable and adaptive opponent demands keeping as many paths open as possible, resisting premature narrowing unless the landscape unmistakably demands it. This strategic calculation lies at the heart of current tensions. Many see this as the decisive moment to commit fully to the new left project. They might well be correct. And those of us still holding the line within Labour, even cautiously, may yet be proven wrong. But we must also acknowledge the unknowns surrounding the new project. Its political culture remains largely untested. There is a genuine risk of fragmentation and recrimination. Prudence advises us to maintain fallback positions and avoid burning bridges prematurely. We must recognise there are many fronts in this fight. I understand deeply the anger towards this Labour government – anger shared by many still within the party. Yet dismissing those who choose to engage within Labour, the Greens, or elsewhere neither advances our cause nor aligns with the pluralist politics this moment demands. We all have roles to play. Thousands choose to fight from within Labour; others do so externally, whether in a political party or campaign groups and broader civil society. What matters is mutual support and solidarity among all committed to democracy, social and climate justice, pluralism, and human rights – across parties and factions. Ultimately, my choice is guided by strategic judgement, not certainty. In these turbulent political times, certainty is a luxury none of us possess. Yet, I sincerely hope the path I've chosen contributes meaningfully and that, regardless of the routes we each take, we find ways to converge again when it truly matters. [See more: Revenge of the left] Related
South Wales Guardian
2 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Adult social care vacancies down but domestic recruitment still ‘challenging'
Posts filled by people with a British nationality since 2020/2021 fell by 7%. The Government has previously pledged to 'end the reliance on overseas recruitment' but Skills for Care's latest report has said there must be a focus on 'how we attract and keep more people domestically'. In the most recent year alone, the twelve months to March, the number of posts filled by British nationals fell by 30,000, the organisation, which is the strategic workforce development and planning body for adult social care in England, said. The organisation measures posts filled rather than the number of people, because a person might hold more than one post and roles might also be shared. In rules which came into effect last week, new applications for care workers and senior care workers under the skilled worker visa were closed, as part of Government efforts in 'restoring control over the immigration system'. In April the Government implemented new rules saying that care providers would have to prove they had attempted to recruit a worker from within England, before looking overseas. The latest Skills for Care report said domestic recruitment 'remains challenging for the sector' and that the new immigration rules from July 'will make it more challenging for the sector to continue to grow in line with demand'. The organisation re-stated its previous projection that an extra 470,000 people will need to be employed in the sector by 2040 to meet the needs of a growing older population. The report said: 'A substantial increase in recruitment and retention of staff with a British nationality would likely be required to achieve this level of growth.' Under the previous Conservative government, a ban on international care workers bringing dependants to the UK led to a sharp drop in health and care visas in the months after the measure came in. The latest Skills for Care report said an estimated 50,000 people arrived in the UK in 2024/25 to start direct care-providing roles in the independent sector, down from 105,000 the previous year. Of the 50,000 recruited internationally, an estimated 10,000 came on a health and care worker visa, while the rest came on other routes, potentially including student visas and family members of people arriving in the UK on other visa types. Overall, the number of adult social care posts filled between 2023/24 and 2024/25 rose by 52,000 to 1.6 million. The vacancy rate has also fallen to 7.0%, with 111,000 vacant posts on any given day in the year to March. This is down from an 8.3% vacancy rate in the year to March 2024, when there were 126,000 vacant posts on any given day. The vacancy rate hit a high of 152,000 vacant posts a day in the 12 months to March 2022. Oonagh Smyth, Skills for Care's chief executive, said while the falling vacancy rate is 'encouraging', the sector 'can't afford to be complacent'. She said: 'We need to protect ourselves from the wild swings in vacancy rates driven by the wider economic picture. 'It's important to recognise that, while the vacancy rate in social care has reduced, it's still three times that of the wider economy.' She urged investment in 'stable recruitment and retention' and efforts to make roles 'more attractive to the domestic workforce over the long term' including through development opportunities, improving the quality of roles and supporting positive cultures within organisations. She added: 'We know there's lots more to do, though. Everyone, from Government to care providers, from regulators to frontline staff, has a role to play in building the workforce we need to deliver the best possible care and support for the people in our communities who draw on local services.' The Government has been contacted for comment. The Social Care Institute for Excellence said the drop in the vacancy rate was a 'cause for optimism' but the system remained 'precariously dependent' on overseas workers. Chief executive Kathryn Marsden said: 'This overreliance is not a sustainable strategy and it leaves the entire care system vulnerable to policy changes and political headwinds beyond its control.'
The Herald Scotland
2 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
Colbert cancellation: Jay Leno blasts politics in late-night TV
"I like to think that people come to a comedy show to kind of get away from the things, the pressures of life, wherever it might be," Leno said. "And I love political humor, don't get me wrong, but what happens (is) people wind up cozying too much to one side or the other. "Why shoot for just half an audience, why not try to get the whole (audience)?" he posed. Colbert's cancellation: A ratings crisis or a political bribe? We investigate While the interview, published July 22, appears to have taken place prior to the cancellation of CBS' "Late Show" with Stephen Colbert, his comments venture into an ongoing debate about the salience of a late-night lineup amid the Trump administration. Colbert, a frequent critic of President Donald Trump, announced the cancellation of not just his hosting gig, but also the network's late-night show, earlier this month. A successor to David Letterman, Colbert belongs to a class of comedians, including Jon Stewart and John Oliver, who've leaned heavily on political satire to draw laughs from their audience. Notably, though, even less politically-minded comics like Jimmy Fallon, who replaced Leno, and Jimmy Kimmel have opted for sharper critiques of the current president. Leno was off the air before Trump's first successful run for president in 2016, and served as host during the Obama, Clinton and both Bush presidencies from 1992 to 2009 and then again from 2010 to 2014. "I like to bring people into the big picture," Leno added in the interview. "I don't understand why you would alienate one particular group." "I'm not saying you have to throw your support or whatever, but just do what's funny," he said. "I don't think anybody wants to hear a lecture." Colbert's cancellation sent shock waves through the late-night comedy circuit and beyond, even drawing calls from some legislators for an investigation into CBS parent company Paramount's decision to axe the program. Paramount has maintained that the reason for Colbert's cancellation was financial. In a statement sent to USA TODAY previously, executives lauded the comedy host for his tenure and insisted that he was irreplaceable. Citing "a challenging backdrop in late night," the company said the cancellation was "not related in any way to the show's performance, content, or other matters happening at Paramount." Piers Morgan blasts Colbert, politicization of late-night Elsewhere, conservative commentator and British television host Piers Morgan in a post to X called Colbert's seeming left-wing tilt "damning." "Most of America's biggest late-night hosts have become nothing more than hyper-partisan activist hacks for the Democrats - a party that's rarely been more unpopular," Morgan wrote alongside a photo of the New York Post front page announcing the show's cancellation. "No wonder Colbert got canned," he added. Ahead of Colbert's cancellation, Paramount settled a defamation lawsuit with the president, a move viewed by some as a peace offering meant to improve the chances of a merger with Skydance Media before the FCC. The merger has since been approved.
