
Woke police chiefs whinge about underfunding when the real problem is their warped priorities
Readers of this newspaper will, throughout its long history, have been among the most ardent supporters of the police. We are traditionally pro law and order and take a dim view of rotters. It feels like that time is well and truly over.
Monday's main Telegraph story, in advance of Wednesday's spending review by Rachel Reeves, which reported the concerns of senior officers that the police service is 'broken' and that underpaid and overworked personnel are leaving in droves because of funding cuts, attracted well over two thousand comments. They ranged from 'Diddums' to 'It's all your own stupid fault' with a good deal of colourful hostility in between. Honestly, you would struggle to find more derogatory remarks among the police's long-running foes at The Guardian.
I noticed a similarly unsympathetic reaction a week ago when Met chief Sir Mark Rowley protested that police would have to choose which crimes to investigate if they didn't get more cash. As if the public, until now, had enjoyed a superb and rapid response to its burglaries, muggings, car, bike and phone thefts and our town centres positively thrummed with the purposeful presence of bobbies on the beat.
'Yes, Sir Mark, times must really be hard if you can only send six officers to arrest a retired police volunteer over a single tweet,' sneered one disgruntled taxpayer, perfectly capturing the mood of seething resentment.
This collapse in trust is as precipitous as it is shocking. A widespread feeling has clearly taken hold that police are no longer doing the job we expect them to do, while interfering in things that are none of their damn business.
The story of the London couple who were obliged last week to 'steal back' their own car after being told by police they did not know when they would be able to investigate thieves who took the Jaguar away on a flat-bed truck (but do call 101 if you find it, they were told) presents a snapshot of a frustrated public having to take the law into their own hands like a group of extremely polite, Emma Bridgewater-owning vigilantes.
While many physical crimes go largely ignored, activist constabularies are doing a roaring trade in online offences. The preposterous yet sinister non-crime hate incidents (NCHIs), an Orwellian development of the College of Policing back in 2014, are frequently cited by police critics, as is the clampdown on free speech which is increasingly used to suppress popular discontent about things like the annual £4.7 billion bill to keep migrants in hotels and look after them.
Those of us who, for some strange reason, think it's outrageous to spend the equivalent of every single penny in tax paid by the population of Manchester on accommodating tens of thousands of young males who broke into our country, used to be called 'racists'. But I see we have got a promotion, ladies and gentlemen. According to Prevent [a counter-terrorism programme], we are no longer racists, we are 'terrorists'! If we dare to express doubts about uncontrolled immigration and lack of integration, that is.
That's the same Prevent which failed to prevent Axel Rudakubana slaughtering a dance class of little girls. And which, according to a 2023 report by Sir William Shawcross, concentrates too much on the largely mythical 'far Right' and not enough on Islamist terror.
The College of Policing, I am reliably informed, encourages the same delusional appeasement of the group which poses by far the biggest threat to our national security. The criminalising of the white indigenous population, running in parallel to the woke appeasement of actual criminals, goes some way to explaining this new cordial loathing of the police, I think. Unbelievably, over 60 of our fellow citizens are slapped with an NCHI every single day for 'hateful' thoughts or conduct, many of them Monty Pythonesque in their absurdity.
While senior police moan about Home Secretary Yvette Cooper not winning them a big enough payout in the spending review, there seem to be adequate funds to arrest and stigmatise law-abiding people. Only this week, I got a very worried email from a reader, Carolyn, who had complained to the police about a man who has been camping for several weeks in the park where her children play. The surrounding area stinks of urine and faeces and there are scattered remnants of drug use. When Carolyn and other mums walk past they have seen the man put his hand down his trousers to play with himself. The camper's appearance suggested to her that he was an African migrant. 'Using the term 'migrant' therefore did not strike me as anything other than a fair assumption,' says Carolyn.
Uh-oh. Obviously, in the bonkers world of PC policing it will now be the anxious lady who complained about a threat to her community who is warned about causing trouble. 'It would seem that any offence caused to me is secondary to the offence of Hate Crime,' Carolyn says. Correct.
An officer emailed Carolyn to say that police did not have the powers to remove the tent from the park. 'With regard to the hand down the trousers,' he said, 'Many people from all different backgrounds do this as a cultural/social trend and have done for a while, we often see members of the public doing this all around the city. We will speak with him about this though and advise him of the perception this could cause. I also suggest you reframe (sic) from referring to him as a 'migrant' and making comments about 'Are we paying him to take the proverbial out of us all?'… These can be seen as derogative (sic) terms and possibly a hate crime, especially when you probably know nothing about him.'
If you seek a perfect illustration of why the police service is 'broken' and officers are deserting in droves, look no further than this jaw-dropping inversion of good and bad guys. Intimidating man from alien culture seemingly exposing himself in public and peeing, crapping and doing drugs where your kids play? Completely fine, culturally appropriate, nothing to be done about it. Englishwoman suggests the man is a 'migrant' who is taking advantage of our absurdly generous system? Oh dear, oh dear – your hurty words will be taken down, Madam, and used in evidence against you.
Now, it's a fair bet that many of the public-spirited young people who aspire to become police officers still think it is Carolyn's side they should be on. A rookie error, I'm afraid. 'Recruits who join the force don't realise the police are so captured,' a senior source tells me.
Officers now lack maturity and experience
Police retention has been a problem for a long time. It's got much worse since the higher echelons subscribed to the anti-white Critical Race Theory and adopted a witless, Leftist ideology that would have been abhorrent to their predecessors. The number of resignations in the police started to exceed the number of retirements nationally around 2023.
What this means in practice, as I was told after Essex Police came to my own door on Remembrance Sunday, is that many officers now lack the experience and maturity to make common-sense decisions and bin spurious allegations of racial hatred that flatter the identity-politics obsessions of their superiors.
'It's not uncommon for uniform shifts to be about 50 per cent probationers, and they might be running with an acting sergeant barely out of his probationary period (two years) in some cases,' warns my source. The Conservatives' decision, in 2020, to lower the application age to 17 (to join at 18) as part of their training means that a lot of young people without much life experience, who don't know what they're letting themselves in for, find policing a nasty shock to the system. Once they're in, probationers have to cope with complicated, badly-designed computer systems that add hours to already heavy workloads. They have very little time to conduct inquiries and pick up more and more stressful cases, meanwhile having to deal with the aggressive, ever-more-volubly-entitled, human-rights-aware dregs of our society.
After all that, if you can still muster the courage to be a first-class constable who fiercely defends the public against wrong 'uns but swears a bit and leaves violent offenders feeling they weren't treated with enough dignity then expect your Pontius Pilate of a chief constable to throw you under the Hurty Feelings bus. That is exactly what happened to Lorne Castle, a Dorset officer who has twice won a national bravery award, including one for rescuing an elderly woman from a swollen river in 2023.
A shameful betrayal
The 46-year-old father of three was dismissed without notice for gross misconduct after bodycam footage captured him trying to arrest a teenager who was believed to have assaulted an elderly man (the boy, who later turned out to be carrying a knife). If you watch the footage, you can experience the frightening, febrile atmosphere in which Lorne Castle was trying to carry out his thankless task. He shouted and swore, telling the lad: 'Stop resisting or I'm going to smash you.'
A veteran officer tells me that 'it looked like a good arrest'. But a panel found PC Castle did not treat the teenager with 'courtesy' or 'respect', and Dorset Police said 'his shouting, swearing, finger pointing, taking hold of the boy's face and throat and suggested use of leg restraints was not necessary, reasonable or proportionate'. The force said no further action was taken against the teenager – of course it wasn't! – but he was issued with an out of court disposal for possessing the knife.
I ask you, why would anybody risk phone seizures, suspensions and months of stress over complaints that usually turn out to be baseless but which see them treated like criminals? While clueless top brass in their woke ivory towers put saving their career before protecting their officers. In my book, a man of the calibre of Lorne Castle is worth more to the people of this country than every chief constable put together.
So let us hear no more whingeing about underfunding leading to reduced services and driving officers away. Blame a warped sense of priorities promoted by activist police chiefs, a shameful betrayal of the British bobby and the demonisation of ordinary people for expressing legitimate fears. If the police have lost the support of Telegraph readers, then they are lost indeed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Telegraph
36 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Live Economy shrinks in blow for Reeves
Britain's economy shrank at the start of the second quarter, official figures show, in a blow for the Chancellor after her spending review. UK gross domestic product (GDP) contracted by 0.3pc during the month, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS). This was worse than analysts' fears that the economy would shrink by 0.1pc and follows a 0.7pc expansion during the first three months of the year. The data covers the month when Donald Trump launched his so-called 'liberation day' tariff onslaught which threatened to upend global trade. ONS director of economic statistics Liz McKeown said: 'After increasing for each of the four preceding months, April saw the largest monthly fall on record in goods exports to the United States with decreases seen across most types of goods, following the recent introduction of tariffs.' The figures come a day after economists warned that Britain faces tax rises in the autumn after Rachel Reeves unveiled her spending review. The Chancellor has made growing the economy one of her key missions as she battles to shore up the public finances. An expanding economy would mean that she is better able to pay off the nation's debt and would improve living standards. Ms Reeves said: 'Our number one mission is delivering growth to put more money in people's pockets through our Plan for Change, and while these numbers are clearly disappointing, I'm determined to deliver on that mission.'


Reuters
39 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump's energy dominance agenda could be ravaged by Section 899
LONDON, June 12 - A proposed U.S. tax targeting foreign investors could hurt European energy giants that operate in America's booming oil and gas sector, undermining what President Donald Trump describes as his energy dominance agenda. Trump's sweeping tax and spending bill under review by the Senate includes an additional tax of up to 20% on foreign investors' income, such as dividends and royalties. The tax, known as Section 899, was devised as a pushback against countries that impose what the bill describes as "unfair foreign taxes" on U.S. companies, such as digital services taxes. Section 899 is believed to be targeting companies headquartered in the European Union and Britain, which both have tax systems considered discriminatory by the Trump administration. The provision is a significant threat to London-listed Shell (SHEL.L), opens new tab and BP (BP.L), opens new tab as well as France's TotalEnergies ( opens new tab and Spain's Repsol ( opens new tab, which all have sprawling operations in the United States. Trump, who often used the slogan "drill, baby, drill" in his election campaign, has portrayed himself as pro-fossil fuel, vowing on his first day in office to maximise oil and gas production. But if approved, Section 899 could have the opposite effect. BP last year invested more than $6 billion, about 40% of its capital expenditure, in the United States, where its interests include onshore and offshore oil and gas operations, two refineries, thousands of retail fuel stations and a power trading business. The country is also home to more than a third of BP's global workforce of about 90,000 and accounted for roughly 30% of its 2024 revenue of $189 billion and more than a quarter of its $21 billion net profit. Shell, the biggest European oil major, is also a huge investor in the United States, which accounted for 23% of its 2024 revenue of $284 billion. It invests about 30% of its capital expenditure in the country, where it has oil and gas production facilities, a petrochemicals plant, a vast retail network, liquefied natural gas (LNG) purchasing agreements and major trading operations. The United States became increasingly important to Big Oil companies in recent decades thanks to its stable fiscal and regulatory environment while other regions presented a variety of challenges. Take Russia, for example. Its vast oil and gas resources started attracting investments from many companies in the 1990s after the collapse of the Soviet Union, but the country is now uninvestible owing to western sanctions that followed Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Similarly, western companies have limited opportunities to invest in the Middle East, where national oil companies dominate. Europe, meanwhile, has limited natural resources and strict environmental regulation. The multinational nature of oil and gas companies means they have plenty of experience dealing with tax uncertainty, but shifting tax policies tend to delay investments. Company boards require long-term confidence to proceed with large, multi-decade capital projects such as oil and gas fields or LNG plants. The industry's confidence in the United States was already shaken under Trump's predecessor, Joe Biden, who in 2020 revoked a construction permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. The Biden administration also paused approvals for new LNG projects in 2024 because of climate concerns. Trump lifted the pause when he entered the White House. According to Section 899, multinational companies could face a new tax on dividends sent overseas and inter-company loans, potentially reducing profit. The Gulf of Mexico accounted for about 10% of Shell's 2024 free cash flow of $40 billion, it said in a presentation. That means that Section 899 could shave $800 million from its free cash flow per year from Gulf of Mexico operations alone. BP made about $1.5 billion in free cash flow in the United States last year, Reuters calculations show. A 20% dividend tax could translate into a $300 million loss in free cash flow. Faced with the worsening fiscal terms, companies could opt to direct funds away from the United States. Though options for deploying capital elsewhere on a similar scale are limited, companies could choose to spread their investments more widely. Such a scenario could be a boon for countries such as Canada, Brazil, Mozambique and Namibia, which have large untapped natural resources. Another option would be for companies to transfer their headquarters and listings to the United States - a costly and politically complicated option. Shell previously contemplated such a move to boost its share value, though it appears to have abandoned the idea. Ultimately, it is very likely that the Senate would push to modify Section 899 or limit its scope, given the potential far-reaching impact on many sectors. But barring a radical change, Section 899 poses a huge risk for European oil and gas giants that are heavily dependent on the United States. Achieving the Trump administration's energy dominance agenda will almost certainly require more foreign investment, not less, so if the CEOs of European energy companies complain loudly enough, the president may well listen to them. The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), opens new tab, your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI, opens new tab can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X., opens new tab


The Independent
40 minutes ago
- The Independent
Britain morphing into ‘National Health State', says think tank
Britain is turning into a 'National Health State', a think tank has said after the Chancellor gave the NHS a major funding boost in her spending review. The health service was the big winner of Wednesday's spending review, receiving an extra £29 billion per year for day-to-day spending and more cash for capital investment. Overnight, the Resolution Foundation said Rachel Reeves's announcements had followed a recent trend that saw increases for the NHS come at the expense of other public services. Ruth Curtice, chief executive of the Resolution Foundation, said: 'Health accounted for 90% of the extra public service spending, continuing a trend that is seeing the British state morph into a National Health State, with half of public service spending set to be on health by the end of the decade.' Defence was another of Wednesday's winners, Ms Curtice said, receiving a significant increase in capital spending while other departments saw an overall £3.6 billion real-terms cut in investment. The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) made similar arguments about 'substantial' investment in the NHS and defence coming at the expense of other departments, although the think tank's director Paul Johnson warned the money may not be enough. He said: 'Aiming to get back to meeting the NHS 18-week target for hospital waiting times within this Parliament is enormously ambitious – an NHS funding settlement below the long-run average might not measure up. 'And on defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6% of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' Ms Curtice added that low and middle-income families had also done well out of the spending review 'after two rounds of painful tax rises and welfare cuts', with the poorest fifth of families benefiting from an average of £1,700 in extra spending on schools, hospitals and the police. She warned that, without economic growth, another round of tax rises was likely to come in the autumn as the Chancellor seeks to balance the books. She said: 'The extra money in this spending review has already been accounted for in the last forecast. 'But a weaker economic outlook and the unfunded changes to winter fuel payments mean the Chancellor will likely need to look again at tax rises in the autumn.' Speaking after delivering her spending review, Ms Reeves insisted she would not have to raise taxes to cover her spending review. She told GB News: 'Every penny of this is funded through the tax increases and the changes to the fiscal rules that we set out last autumn.'