Gargi Bhattacharyya speaking on behalf of West Midlands against Policing for Profit speaking at the Public meeting ‘No Private Profits from Policing’ held on 27th September 2012 in Birmingham.
Dave Stamp from ASIRT speaking at the ‘No Private Profits from Policing’ Public meeting on 27th September 2012 on the the treatment of asylum seekers by private companies contracted by the state.
Organised by Moseley Forum
Date: 7pm on Wednesday 17th October
Venue: St Columbas Church B13 9DD (corner of Alcester Road and Chantry Road)
For more details: http://www.moseleyforum.org.uk/?q=node/293
Organised by BRAP
Date: Thursday 18 October
Venue: Handsworth Community Fire Safety Centre, 41 Rookery Road Handsworth, Birmingham B21 9QU
For more details:
Women’s Question Time
Organised by Coventry Women’s Voices
Date Wednesday 31st October 2012
Time 7 to 9pm
Venue Coventry Council House
For more details:
Organised by Birmingham Trades Union Council
Date: Thursday 1st November
Venue: Birmingham Council House
Event: West Midlands Hustings
Organised The Drum
Date: 6.30pm Wednesday 7th November
Venue: The Drum, Potters Lane, Aston
Please let us know of any further meetings taking place.
Bob Jones was asked his position on the Business Partnering for Policing programme should he be elected Police and Crime Commissioner on the 15th November.
Take the pledge!
Anti-privatisation campaigners have called on the candidates standing for election for the post of Police and Crime Commissioner to pledge not to privatise any policing service if elected. West Midlands against Policing for Profit will launch the pledge at a public meeting to be held on Thursday at Birmingham Council House.
All the current candidates including Bob Jones for Labour and Matt Bennett for the Conservatives have declared themselves opposed to the current Business Partnering for Profit programme. The Business Partnering for Profit contract offered a lucrative potential contract of £1.5bn to private companies to provide policing services including Custody and Forensic services.
The Campaign wants a clear commitment from the PCC candidates that they will oppose all future privatisation of policing services and will be asking them to sign a pledge. The two part pledge reads:
‘1. If elected all Policing services will remain publically provided and retained ‘in-house’ within West Midlands Police Force.
2.West Midlands Police Force will not contract with companies proven to have committed human rights abuses.’
The public meeting has been called by Birmingham Trades Union Council and will include speakers from the UNISON and UNITE representing the Police staff affected and human rights campaigners including those concerned about the treatment of asylum seekers by private security companies.
A spokesperson for West Midlands against Policing for Profit stated:
We welcome the commitment of the candidates to stop the BPP programme. Some of the shortlisted Private companies have a poor track record in their treatment of vulnerable people in their care and custody. The loss of accountability through the privatisation of policing services has major implications for civil and human rights.
We want the PCC candidates to declare their position in regards to any privatisation not just the Business Partnering Programme and will accordingly ask them to sign the ‘No Privatisation’ pledge. Policing isn’t for profit , it’s a core function of the State and there is no room for the shareholder in that equation.
Details of the Public Meeting
The public meeting will take place on Thursday 27th September at 7pm at Birmingham Council House in Committee Rooms 3 and 4. The speakers include Jill Harrison on behalf of UNISON West Midlands Police Staff Branch, a speaker from UNITE, Dave Stamp from Asirt and Gargi Bhattacharyya for West Midlands against Policing for Profit.
In minutes of Thursday’s meeting, Surrey Police Authority members noted that potential police and crime commissioner candidates, due for election in November, were “actively campaigning” to put a stop to the business partnering plan. “It did not seem prudent to continue to invest Surrey tax payers’ money in a programme that may not reach a fruitful conclusion,” the document read.’