Scared MP's replace police, bring in private grunts

[cronus]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27400342

Police security role at Parliament to be reduced

Police officers are to be replaced by private guards to cover some aspects of security at the Houses of Parliament.

The Metropolitan Police force currently provides all security services for the Commons and the Lords.

From next April, security screening at public entrances will be run by a private contractor - although the Met will continue to provide armed police.

The move has been made in a bid to make substantial savings to the £24m parliamentary security budget.

(continued, not a good sign really - gotta feeling come the day of need, the police might be supporting the mob outside?)

[mistermack]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27400342

Police security role at Parliament to be reduced

Police officers are to be replaced by private guards to cover some aspects of security at the Houses of Parliament.

The Metropolitan Police force currently provides all security services for the Commons and the Lords.

From next April, security screening at public entrances will be run by a private contractor - although the Met will continue to provide armed police.

The move has been made in a bid to make substantial savings to the £24m parliamentary security budget.

(continued, not a good sign really - gotta feeling come the day of need, the police might be supporting the mob outside?)

It's a false economy anyway. They just want everything run privately, so that they can get their mates the contract, and take a cut.
They could just have had the screening done by community support officers, who get paid less than cops. That would have saved a similar amount on wages.

[Tero]

Do they get at least minimum wage? Is that at least 10 £?

[mistermack]

Do they get at least minimum wage? Is that at least 10 £?

Well,,,, yes and no....

[JimC]

Remember, remember!
The fifth of November,
The Gunpowder treason and plot;
I know of no reason
Why the Gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot!
Guy Fawkes and his companions
Did the scheme contrive,
To blow the King and Parliament
All up alive.
Threescore barrels, laid below,
To prove old England's overthrow.
But, by God's providence, him they catch,
With a dark lantern, lighting a match!
A stick and a stake
For King James's sake!
If you won't give me one,
I'll take two,
The better for me,
And the worse for you.
A rope, a rope, to hang the Pope,
A penn'orth of cheese to choke him,
A pint of beer to wash it down,
And a jolly good fire to burn him.
Holloa, boys! holloa, boys! make the bells ring!
Holloa, boys! holloa boys! God save the King!
Hip, hip, hooor-r-r-ray!

[Seth]

Bringing in private security means not having to pay pensions and not having to deal with police unions in firing someone. Wise move of Parliament because no public employee should ever be permitted to unionize.

[MrJonno]

The British police had a 'Federation', which are their representatives but legally aren't allowed to strike, so not really a union

Private security firms presumably will have unions which can strike, so in affect they have taken non-union security and unionised it

Not exactly a libertarian dream that (then again neither normal police or private security are armed)

[Strontium Dog]

But, of course, the House of Commons has plenty of armed police dotted around the place.

[MrJonno]

Main concerns are about security vetting of these guards, presumably the checks on police are going to be a lot higher than private security guards.

It wouldn't matter to much if we were talking about an art gallery or even a football stadium but this is our heart of government.

What does the White House do?, do they have non-public sector security there, whether its police, army, CIA whatever?