But it's not just numbers that are being cut. Its the support staff, the call centre handlers - everything!

They say community policing is a key weapon in the fight against terrorism, yet where are the community officers? I'm sure technology and techniques mean you can do more with fewer officers, but now we have the army on our streets.

Same as now I know if my house gets burgled, I contact the police only for a crime number for my insurance. The police don't have time to actually track down these scumbags any more.

There is plenty of money sloshing about, but vast quantities of it end up in the hands of private shareholders, a lot of whom don't pay tax in the UK or contribute in any meaningful way to our society

3 absolute car crashes this morning from Rudd, Fallon and Abbott

Rudd and Fallon are both bumbling morons; and Rudd is who May is sending to the TV debate in her place - it beggars belief!

And I know that Corbyn has history with Abbott - but I wish they'd sideline her; she's terrible in front of a camera - she goes to pieces and sounds decidedly unconvincing, even on relatively safe ground.

Yes. Yes, that is exactly what I'd say.

A realtive, now deceased, a couple of years back had a group of men smashing down her door, wanting to beat up her son, at 3 a.m. The PC who arrived at 8.30 am said it was his first job on shift, and was sorry, but there had been nobody available any earlier.

I'm not sure what evolution of policing methods would reduce the number of officers needed to respond to a group of men breaking down doors in the wee small hours, but perhaps you could explain it to me. Drones fitted with AMRAAMs maybe?

This is not a case of bad luck. Most people would be truly shocked to know how few police are actually on duty in their area at night.

TM went well last night on the May Jezza Sky/4 programme.

Thought Paxman was poor. Audience questions all very predictable

Do you really think so ?

She looked and sounded a long way short of "strong and stable" ?
Labour's spending plans are scary and there isn't a business in the UK that wont change their style to help them avoid some of their new "tax on business".
However, May appeared very unsure and quite nervous and it was easy to see why she wouldn't go head to head in a "proper" leaders debate.

I dont want either of them as our country's leader and we will inevitably end up with May.
However, it's comforting to know that despite her hot air, it wont actually be her doing the Brexit negotiations.

She is full of hot air and appears to lack any conviction whatsoever in her politics, mind you when you are trying to "steal" votes from everyone from the SNP, to UKIP and Labour, it's hardly surprising.

Really? I thought Corbyn came out best out of the 2 of them, May didn't have any decent answers for explaining her countless U-turns and memorably got called a blowhard.

Paxman is done though, he couldn't get much to stick on her even with an open goal.

If there can be a winner when they don't actually debate head to head, it was clearly Corbyn; as many commentators noted, he had the audience laughing with him, whilst May had them laughing at her.

I have to agree about Paxman though - his sole focus with Corbyn was things that *weren't* in the manifesto; and his constant interruptions and sneering just came across as boorish.

It makes me wonder if Jezza is missing a trick by avoiding the impending Brexit or if he is being cute and not going down the line of a strong economy which failed for the Remainers on Brexit.

The 30% rise (7% real terms) on CT (and removing Zero hours contracts and raising minimum wage) wont help Labour given how many people are employed by SME.

From the Labour manifesto:

"We will protect small businesses by reintroducing the lower small profits rate of corporation tax. We will also exclude small businesses from costly plans to introduce quarterly reporting."

Corbyn's comments on "access to the free market" post Brexit weren't really picked up on (unless I misheard him.
He certainly passed some comment along those lines.

Having seen how flakey Mrs May was, I'd love to see her in a proper debate with some of the other party leaders, sadly that isn't going to happen.

Shes cleverly avoided them. Don't shoot yourself in the foot.



But when pressed last night by the small business owner in the crowd Jezza didn't say that he said do you want to see XYZ and if not we all need to pay more. That business owner was on Sky news this morning reiterating his concerns about CT, abolishing Zero Hours contracts which he uses for Undergraduates and also the £10 min wage. He is voting for TM this time based solely on that.

Well boohoo for him, under labour plans, he'd still be paying less than 7 years ago. He'd also be paying less than vast majority of Europe or any other advanced economy.

The 0hrs thing is easily avoided by awarding a contract guaranteeing minimum amounts of work and overtime available.

As for the £10 minimum wage, it's only £1 an hour more than what the Tories were originally promising (yet another U-Turn) We need to move away from this economy that is propped up by private debt. That's the reason interest rates are so low and have been for so long, because any increase would push many, many people over the edge. Higher wages protects us from that and stimulates economy.

Yes, of course he was on Sky news...

Did they also feature the midwife who trashed Mrs May's stuff and nonsense about the NHS, or the man who turned to his friend on camera during one of her droning non-answers and said, "that's bollox?"

Do you think that she looked "strong and stable". really ?

As I've said before, I'm no fan of Corbyn but, of the two of them, he looked far more assured than Mrs May, who was flapping like a fish out of water when pressed on the social care "cap".

She has made more U turns in her short time in power than any leader in the last 40 years and has no political beliefs.

She called an election at short notice, despite saying several times that there would be no snap election on the basis for needing a "strong and stable" government to aid the Brexit negotiations, which will be done and dusted well before the next election was due.

Devoid of morals and with zero political conviction, Mrs May is not fit to lead her own party, never mind the country and she says that Labour and the SNP would be the coalition of chaos.


Btw, please explain where I shot myself in the foot

Lets hope for Labours sake he is a one off!!

The breaking down of doors would only have stopped if there was a Police officer stationed outside the actual door - having policemen on the streets isn't going to stop a targeted attack of that nature - as well you know

Do you think more officers would enable a quicker response to an incident such as this or, would increased numbers of officers slow down the response ?

They (the police) dont even come out to break in's anymore, unless someone has been injured/assaulted.
This may be why reported crime is falling in some areas, as there is little point in reporting it !

10 days after a break in at my place I'm still waiting for the police to come and take a statement. The night CID came round and SOCO came to examine the next morning, but nothing since. I've been given the name of the officer, but haven't had any contact, not even "sorry, we're all on duty in the city centre because of the terror alert". Just silence.

I'd happily pay a bit more tax to get numbers back up to deal with stuff like this properly. The scrotes know they'll never get caught and will just carry on doing what they're doing. Whatever happened to the party of law and order?

Not wishing to defend the lack of police numbers but, in the circumstances, you would expect priority to be given to the terrorist incident.
Getting broken into is not pleasant but, the reality is that they dont often catch the thieves, unless they are particularly stupid and I think even you would want them to deal with the terror threat first ?

Absolutely, and I wasn't meaning I should take priority. However, if there were more police around I could give my statement, let the insurance deal with it all and move on. The lack of contact is the thing that's bugging me most, even though I understand why.

We had two cars taken as well as other stuff, but haven't been updated on whether they've been seen on the ANPR cameras so we're completely in the dark.

Generally the lack of contact isn't acceptable but I fully accept priorities are elsewhere. If thousands of coppers hadn't been made redundant, maybe I wouldn't be "complaining"

Of course not - the police are scaremongering and just need to modernise their methods. Maybe they could send a drone round when you've been burgled - take a few pictures, record your statement, spit out a crime number - bingo, your insurance claim is underway, and the few coppers who remain in a job can focus on the real criminals.

Of course you could employ a lot me police officers so everyone can get their insurance claims settled earlier!!

Perhaps if we spent the money tackling the root cause of so many robberies then we wouldn't actually need so many note taking form filling guys/girls in blue uniforms. Perhaps if the elephant in the room i.e. drugs were tackled using an enlightened approach then domestic crime might actually drop?

Of course its so much better to take the Labour approach throw loads of money at it - that will sort it. Pity they struggle with how much it will cost

The bigger problem for Labour will be realising the actual amount of cash that they may have calculated.
ALL Businesses will find ways to become more "tax efficient", it's part of running a business.
They may reduce their profits by investing in capital, amending their pay structures, paying higher contributions into pension funds etc, etc.
What they wont do is, just roll over and accept a higher tax burden and in the case of small businesses, why should they, when the big boys are paying rock all.

I agree they will get some of the money year 1 but after that not a chance. The idea about reducing taxation % levels was to increase the overall tax take which does appear to be happening. Perhaps if more focus was put on the take itself rather than the headline numbers then that would give a more balanced approach.

It is like judging the NHS on the performance of A&E it gives a distorted view of the service.