Plebgate and police relationships

By Jeremy Swan

Twitter: @Jez_Swan

 

Quote

‘When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property.’ Thomas Jefferson

 

News

Recent developments in the ‘Plebgate’ scandal in the UK have brought police relationships with politicians and the public into focus. In October last year Andrew Mitchell, then Conservative Chief Whip, was forced to resign over allegations that he called a police officer a ‘pleb’. Mr Mitchell repeatedly denied using the word, although he admitted to swearing in front of a police officer.

 

On Wednesday the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) accused police of lying about a meeting they had with Mr Mitchell in an attempt to force his resignation and put pressure on the government to backtrack over police cuts. According to the IPCC, the police investigation into the incident had initially concluded there should be a misconduct inquiry, yet the final report was changed and said no action would be taken.

 

Our society expects high moral standards of those in public roles; trust is damaged when these standards are not met. Public trust requires that the law will be applied without partiality, and that there will be an unwavering commitment to truth and justice. In Mr Mitchell’s case it perhaps seems that some individuals were prepared to sacrifice justice in pursuit of their own interests.

 

If these allegations against the police are proved to be true, we must ask whether the police can be trusted to regulate themselves, as they have been allowed to do in this case. How also might they repair the broken relationships with the public and the politicians?

 

An apology to Mr Mitchell would be a good start.

 

Read on…

A recent IPCC statement about the police investigation can be listened to online by clicking here.

 

Walk the talk

Acting with integrity allows trust to be built in our relationships, leading to stronger, more resilient bonds. Even if it comes at short term personal cost, investing in integrity will pay dividends in the long run.

 

The last word

From the Bible, Proverbs chapter 20, verse 7: ‘The righteous who walks in his integrity – blessed are his children after him!’

 

Big Brother and the whistle-blower

Quote

“People who live in the post-totalitarian system know only too well that the question of whether one or several political parties are in power, and how these parties define and label themselves, is of far less importance than the question of whether or not it is possible to live like a human being.” Václav Havel.

News

The face of fugitive Edward Snowden adorns the front page of several papers in Britain today. The former CIA employee who leaked vast amounts British and American intelligence data was pictured together with four prominent American whistle-blowers at a secret location in Russia.

The battle over the ethics of his actions rages in the press.  The Guardian has been publishing the leaks to expose the extent of eavesdropping by the intelligence services and force greater accountability on them.  On the other hand, the Daily Mail accuses the Guardian of being ‘The paper that helps Britain’s enemies’, and The Times headline states that Snowden’s leaks are the ‘worst blow to British intelligence ever’.

Both sides in the wider debate claim to act out of a sense of responsibility, but more important is the question of proportionality.  What is a proportional level of surveillance of the US or UK population in order to intercept potential security risks?  And when responsibility requires blowing the whistle on corrupt or illegal actions, how much is it appropriate to divulge?

From a relational perspective, perhaps the crucial issue is to consider what poses the greater threat to our lives and relationships in the long run.  Is it the threat of a sudden attack from malevolent individuals, or is it the creeping tyranny from a centralised state?

Each threat is real, and many people in diverse countries have painful experiences of both realities.    The challenge for whistle-blowers and governments alike is knowing how to mount an effective defence against the one threat, without increasing the likelihood of the other.

Read on

Sales of Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell’s book about ‘Big Brother’ dominating a totalitarian state, have surged since Edward Snowden’s leaks; you can read an overview of the events and context which shaped Orwell’s thinking here.

Walk the talk

Do you need to consider the proportionality of your response to some particular threat?  Be careful to avoid the substitution of one danger for another. 

The last word

From the Bible, Matthew chapter 24, verse 43: “But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what time of night the thief was coming, he would have kept watch and would not have let his house be broken into.”

Stand and fight or sit and talk?

By Jeremy Swan

Twitter: @Jez_Swan

 

Quote

“I really do inhabit a system in which words are capable of shaking the entire structure of government, where words can prove mightier than ten military divisions.” Václav Havel, former President of the Czech Republic.

 

News

At midnight on 1^st October the US government went into partial shutdown as the political stalemate over the federal budget rumbled on. Around 800,000 government employees were furloughed, National Parks were closed and the Department of Health’s annual flu programme was halted. There are fears that the US could default on its debts if an agreement cannot be reached before 17^th October. At the heart of this crisis is a failure of relationships.

 

The main sticking point has been ‘Obamacare’ – for Democrats it is about providing affordable healthcare for the 15% of the population who cannot afford health insurance; for the Republicans it is an unwelcome intrusion into people’s lives which can only be financed through increased borrowing – and both sides are sticking to their guns. They are playing party politics at a time when they should be trying to build consensus.

 

The US political establishment, like other bicameral systems, was built on the assumption that relational solutions would be found whenever such standoffs are reached. It was expected that leaders would work together for the common good, accepting the need for compromise and responsible leadership.

 

This time, however, the implicit understanding between the parties has broken down as the centre ground in American politics disappears. One major implication is the effect on relationships between the US and other nations: the US has been forced to postpone trade talks with the EU; President Obama has cancelled his trip to Asia; sanctions against Iran become harder to enforce; and China watches on as the 17^th October deadline looms.

 

There is also the potential impact on relationships at a household level as the families of federal workers may come under financial strain, despite the promise of retroactive pay once the crisis has been resolved.

 

Read on…

In the wake of the US government shutdown a number of businesses have started offering freebies for the furloughed – a great relational (and PR) response. Special offers include free burgers, free theatre shows and free knitting lessons!

 

Walk the talk

Where you have a sharp difference in view from someone else can you consider the ‘knock on’ effect on other people and think about a consensual way forward?

 

The last word

From the Bible, Mark chapter 3 verses 24-5: ‘If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand.’