by Sean O'Neill
The Times
May 02, 2012
from
MyFoxDFW Website
LONDON
Giant US military-industrial company Kellogg
Brown & Root (KBR)
is in the running to win a slice of a controversial £1.5 billion (US$2.43
billion) contract to transform the West Midlands and Surrey police forces in
Britain, The (London) Times reported.
Hailed as the largest police privatization scheme in the UK, it has been
suggested the private companies who win the contract will be tasked to
perform several police functions - including patrols, detention and
criminal investigation.
KBR, a former subsidiary of the Halliburton group, has attracted its
share of criticism over the large contracts it won with the US government
during the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The corporation also helped
to build the Guantanamo Bay detention facility.
The Times reported that it was among four groups shortlisted to win the
British police contract, a number whittled down from more than 200.
A KBR spokesman said its bid was the first time the corporation had
attempted to get involved in regular policing.
"KBR is not involved in policing; instead,
our objective in the privatization of the police force is to get more
police doing actual police work while KBR brings operational
efficiencies to the back office with the objective of achieving an
overall lower cost of service while improving service levels," the
spokesman said.
With police planning to hold a protest march
next week against the push to privative the force, KBR's involvement in the
bidding process will possibly add fuel to the fire.
"This is the latest move that seems to be
designed to make the police more and more remote from the public we
serve," said Julie Nesbit, of the Police Federation.
"We believe simply that if you call a cop, you should get a cop, not a
security guard, not a uniformed civilian nor an employee of a major
international conglomerate. We believe it's what the public expect and
believe that there should be a public debate before parts of the police
service are sold off to the highest bidder."
Police Superintendents' Association President
Derek Barnett said the public should be more involved in the push
towards privatization.
"The legitimacy of policing stems from the
fact that it takes place with the consent of the public; it is only
right, therefore, that the public should have a say in who they want to
deliver operational policing services," he said.
Comment
"Fascism should more properly be called
corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power."
Benito Mussolini.
U.S. Company that Built Guantánamo Wants to...
Run Police Services in UK
by Andy Worthington
9 May 2012
from
OpenDemocracy Website
Last week
the Guardian reported the extraordinary
story that KBR
(Kellogg, Brown & Root), the Texas-based former subsidiary of the
Halliburton corporation (of which former US Vice President
Dick Cheney was the CEO), is part of a
consortium that has made it through to the final shortlist for a £1.5bn
contract to “run key policing services in the West Midlands and Surrey.”
KBR, which was sold by Halliburton in 2007, was involved in building the
Bush administration’s reviled,
“war on terror” prison at Guantánamo Bay,
and “was still part of Halliburton when it won a large share of Pentagon
contracts to build and manage US military bases in Iraq after the 2003
invasion.”
When the “police privatization” plan was first
touted two months ago,
the Guardian explained that,
“private companies could take responsibility
for investigating crimes, patrolling neighborhoods and even detaining
suspects” under the radical privatization plan being put forward by West
Midlands and Surrey, “two of the largest police forces in the country,”
who had “invited bids from
G4S and other major security companies
on behalf of all forces across England and Wales to take over the
delivery of a wide range of services previously carried out by the
police.”
The Guardian added that the contract was “the
largest on police privatization so far,” dwarfing
a recently agreed £200m contract between
Lincolnshire police and G4S, under which, as the Guardian explained, in a
matter-of-fact manner that failed to disguise the chilling reality of what
was going on,
“half the force’s civilian staff are to join
the private security company, which will also build and run a police
station for the first time.”
I fail to see how this can be anything but a PR
disaster for the Tories, primarily because it demonstrates that they are not
just driven by an urge to privatize everything (as their
assault on Britain’s universities and
the NHS have demonstrated), but are
absolutely obsessive about their mission, and are unflinchingly proud to be
destroying the state’s control of almost every aspect of British life, even
going so far as to mess with the police, an area of core right-wing support.
To me - and, I’m sure, to many, many other people - the government’s plans
for the police also lay bare the extent of the damage that ministerial
inflexibility brings, including - in particular, I think - the results of an
inability to recognize when change is economically counter-productive, and a
loss of accountability that ought to trouble anyone who wants those who
purport to serve the public to be answerable to the public and not just to
their shareholders.
The Guardian explained that it had,
“learned that 15 groups of companies and
individual firms have made it on to the most recent shortlist,” after
more than 200 “initially expressed an interest at a ‘bidders’
conference’ held in March,” and that the list “includes several private
security companies that are already involved in running private prisons,
escorting and deporting prisoners or providing other criminal justice
services”,
...like G4S, the disturbingly huge global
security services company that also has a dubious reputation (see
the scandal over its dealings with
deportations from the UK, for example).
This is new territory for KBR, however, although last month Chris Sims,
the West Midlands chief constable, said that his force was,
“a good testing ground for fundamental
change as he battles to find £126m of budget savings”, and pointed out
that there was already significant private investment in the armed
forces, and that KBR was one example, “as the Texas company employs the
large contingent of civilian staff managing the British Camp Bastion in
Afghanistan.”
That is, of course, disturbing in its own right,
as only the mention of the word “Blackwater”
ought to alert intelligent people to the problems with outsourcing - and
making unaccountable - military activities, and there is, of course, no
reason to think that outsourcing and the removal of accountability would be
any wiser when applied to the police.
The Guardian also noted that a KBR spokesman had admitted to the Times that
the company was interested in the West Midlands/Surrey contract, but had
claimed,
“KBR is not involved in policing, our
objective in the privatization of the police force is to get more police
doing actual police work while KBR brings operational efficiencies to
the back office with the objective of achieving an overall lower cost of
service while improving service levels.
We are an operational support company whose
capabilities are transferable to critical, uniformed, command-led
environments such as the police.”
On its website, the company also
weighed in, attempting to defend its position,
but ended up muddying the waters still further.
“KBR already provides support services to
the police in the UK,” the company announced, adding, “We are, for
example, supporting the police during the Olympic Games” - an aspect of
their involvement in the British state that I had not previously noted.
KBR added,
“Like many other companies facing the public
sector, KBR is interested in helping West Midlands and Surrey Police
improve their efficiency, but we have no interest in ‘privatising’ the
roles of front-line police officers.”
However, in March, the Guardian reported that
these “back office” support claims drastically underplayed the role that KBR
and other private companies anticipated playing, stating:
“The breathtaking list of policing
activities up for grabs includes investigating crimes, detaining
suspects, developing cases, responding to and investigating incidents,
supporting victims and witnesses, managing high-risk individuals,
patrolling neighborhoods, managing intelligence, managing engagement
with the public, as well as more traditional back-office functions, such
as managing forensics, providing legal services, managing the vehicle
fleet, finance and human resources.”
Despite a statement by the West Midlands and
Surrey forces, in which they insisted that they were,
“still in the early stages of the
procurement process,” the Guardian noted that the disclosure about KBR
“raised fears among critics that the contract is close to privatizing
core elements of policing.”
This is undoubtedly true, of course, and for a
clear example of how this obsessed government is out of control - using, as
ever, a false mantra of austerity to justify what is at heart an ideological
mission to destroy public ownership of everything - Julie Nesbit of
the Police Federation - that’s the Police Federation, not a traditional
bastion of left-wing dissent - said,
“This is the latest move that seems to be
designed to make the police more and more remote from the public we
serve.”
She added, crucially:
“We believe simply that if you call a cop,
you should get a cop, not a security guard, not a uniformed civilian nor
an employee of a major international conglomerate.
We believe it’s what the public expect and
believe that there should be a public debate before parts of the police
service are sold off to the highest bidder.”
Derek Barnett, the president of the
Police Superintendents’ Association, also criticized the plans, calling for,
“greater public consultation over moves
towards privatization,” as the Guardian described it.
“The legitimacy of policing stems from the
fact that it takes place with the consent of the public,” he said. “It
is only right, therefore, that the public should have a say in who they
want to deliver operational policing services.”
The Guardian also spoke to Peter Allenson,
a national officer for local government with
Unite, who lamented that there was,
“a lack of awareness among the public”
regarding the proposals.
“The police are fundamental to the society
we live in,” he said. “This is an issue of major importance, yet the
government are pushing through privatisation at breakneck speed without
proper public consultation.”
I’m not sure how “fundamental” I think the
police are.
They’re rarely around when needed (honestly!),
and, in my neighborhood, they spend far too much time harassing young black
men in a random manner, and eating fast food, but they are at least part of
a structure that involves the public, the government, and some sort of
accountability - whereas this accountability, of course, conveniently
disappears the moment that police services are in private hands, whether
they are the hands of G4S employees, bloodied from disposing of unwanted
asylum seekers, or those of KBR employees, with their experience of dealing
with arbitrarily detained Muslim prisoners at Guantánamo, or their
counterparts in Iraq.
Personally, I’d rather have police whose competence - or not - is at least
the responsibility of a Chief Constable who can, to some extent, be called
to account for his officers’ actions, and not an unassailable CEO, who, in
KBR’s case, would also be leeching British taxpayers’ money out of the
country to KBR’s HQ in Texas.