The preferred image of the Met Police after ‘break-up’ 

 

Phew: after such a long wait the Westminster swamp dwellers are finally getting their revenge! The political theatre that is the HoC, together with their preferred mouthpieces, amply helped by ‘sources’, are now producing the final act in the ‘Partygate’ theatre: “Teh BJ Hearing”. This is what the papers scream about on their front pages this morning, beautifully collected by ‘staff’ at the BBC under “Newspaper headlines: ‘D-day’ for Johnson as he gets ‘ready for battle’.” (link).

The broadsheets also mention Starmer, the DT giving their ‘report’ pride of place at the top of their online front page: “‘Hypocrite’ Starmer to avoid tax on pension – Labour leader has a unique pension deal despite attempts to abolish lifetime allowance” (paywalled link). The Times meanwhile has shuffled their report down the front page, in between some other news: “Starmer has big pension pot even if Labour scraps tax break” (link, paywalled).

I dunno why effort and pixels were wasted on this ‘information’ now and not when the budget was debated.  After all, Starmer isn’t the only person with different pension pots and why should we plebs worry about a politician being a hypocrite? That is practically a job description for any politician wanting to get to the top. 

Moreover, some of us are very well acquainted with the ‘guidance’ given to all Lefty politicians according to which their mantra must be “do as we say, not as we do”. Perhaps this breathtaking revelation of Starmer’s pension pot hypocrisy is meant to document the non-partisanship of said broadsheets? Perhaps they just needed something ‘on paper’, should readers dare to accuse them of bias once Starmer is in No 10? 

Perhaps they simply needed some space filler, to deflect attention from the Casey Report, conspicuously absent in today’s MSM. That has sunk really fast! Let’s give The Times their due, there’s one ‘reaction’ report in their edition today where we find a quote by the Mayor of London (my emphasis):

“Sadiq Khan, the mayor of London, said the Met had to “embrace the recommendations” of Casey’s report. He , will head a new board to oversee the Met’s progress on reform. Khan has already been in overall charge of accountability of the Met, however, in his years in charge of London, through Sophie Linden, his deputy mayor for policing.” (link, paywalled)

So let me get this straight: for six years there was a female Chief of the Met Police on whose watch all this happened, and there was a female deputy mayor (Labour) for policing, allegedly ‘supervising’ the Met – and they noticed nothing?

Are we meant to believe that all those male police officers were able to pull the wool over these gentle laydees’ eyes? Did they bully them into looking away and not doing anything? Perhaps it’s all a huge conspiracy by the white patriarchy, using such females as helpless puppets behind which to hide their nefarious, misogynistic deeds?

Perish the thought that yon laydees might have been incompetent and got their jobs because of ‘equality’! Rejoice because female ‘reporters’ are finally ‘on the case, providing the nation, or rather the part reading The Times, with proof how tough they are on the current PM:

“Rishi Sunak refused to say whether his two daughters Krishna, 11, and Anoushka, nine, could trust the police. Speaking to BBC Breakfast, the prime minister said: “We need the answer to that question to be yes.” (link, paywalled)

Thank you, BBC, thank you, Times ‘reporters’, for asking such important question and for bringing the two little daughters of Sunak into the public debate! We also learn that the current Met Chief, Sir Mark Rowley, ‘admitted he didn’t see the level of toxicity’ described in the Casey report (link, paywalled). Clearly, he must be replaced with a top female police officer! Oh wait …

Never mind that he only got the job six months ago, and surely, as any reader of thrillers knows: the gap between his predecessor suddenly leaving in April 2022 and his appointment must have been quite sufficient for the white patriarchist, misogynist police bullies  to hide their tracks. 

As for ‘breaking up the rotten Met police’: well, that’s for the future. At the moment, the aim of ‘campaigners’ is that the Met police, from the top down, acknowledges their ‘institutional racism’ before a reorganisation is of any use.  The concluding paragraphs from the Times’ report demonstrate this beautifully:

“It [institutional racism] is an acknowledgement that black and minority ethnic officers, as well as the public, are not treated fairly. That is down to processes within the institution as well as outdated attitudes and prejudices. Many campaigners have argued that acknowledging this will finally show Londoners that the Met is serious about tackling its problems. With disproportionate arrest rates, disparity in stop and search and black officers 80 per cent more likely to be put through the misconduct system, it is a powerful argument.” (link, paywalled)

‘Confess and all will be well’: what does this cry remind me of … And didn’t the Met Chiefs ‘before C Dick’ already confess to ‘institutional racism’? Hm … Meanwhile, we better not mention that London’s population is now about 50% ‘coloured’. We better not ask why so few PoC apply to become police officers despite decades of recruitment campaigns.

Above all, let’s not think about what a break-up of the Met would look like, nor if certain string-pullers would love to make London similar to certain big cities in the USA, with the difference that here in the UK normal people don’t have guns. 

That’s all I have for today. There’s the political theatre provided by BJ’s Partygate  and there’s ‘politics of gestures’,’confession’ being the latest political shibboleth. Have a good day.



Print Friendly, PDF & Email