Ware Online Community Forum

“AN off-road vehicle has been donated to East Herts police by a resident who wished to remain anonymous....”

"This off road vehicle, generously paid for by a local businessman..."

http://www.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk/N ... 162447.htm

There is something about this affair that makes me deeply uneasy.

I am uncomfortable with police accepting expensive donations that must influence the policing priorities of the district.
Unless the expensive machine is to stand idle, then police officers, whose time and training is not covered by the donation, must be redeployed from other duties to use it.

A more concerning issue is the refusal to reveal the identity of the donor.

Without knowing the identity how can the public judge whether the gift was intended to influence police activities to the particular benefit of the donor. Note that the gift was not of a sniffer dog, or a patrol car or rape interview suite. The machine can only be used to chase down poachers or farm machinery thieves. Has a wealthy landowner bought himself a private security team on the cheap?

Alternatively, how can we tell if the donor is not a director of G4S or SERCO. Both companies are courting the PCC to secure lucrative outsourcing contracts.

How possibly can we expect police to operate without fear or favour if we allow them to accept anonymous gifts?

Enoughofthat wrote:“AN off-road vehicle has been donated to East Herts police by a resident who wished to remain anonymous....”

"This off road vehicle, generously paid for by a local businessman..."

A more concerning issue is the refusal to reveal the identity of the donor.

Proof that no good deed goes unpunished!

The police shouldn't accept gifts. They have to be seen to be open, transparent and beyond anything that could be perceived as 'dodgy'. It's wrong on many different levels imo.

I too thought it to be an offence to bribe a police officer and this is tantamount to that. As Enoughofthat says, is this possibly someone attempting to buy a security service which would inevitably be at the expense of losing resource elsewhere. Transparency is needed.

Some of the comments on here, you can see why the donor wanted to remain anonymous!

Bribes, buying a security service, really? It could just be a kind hearted individual. I'm sure if it was seen as 'dodgy' the police would not have gone to the press?

Enoughofthat wrote:A more concerning issue is the refusal to reveal the identity of the donor.

A more concerning issue is the wish of the donor to remain anonymous.

Devils round every corner.

Steve wrote:

Enoughofthat wrote:A more concerning issue is the refusal to reveal the identity of the donor.

A more concerning issue is the wish of the donor to remain anonymous.

Why? People make anonymous donations all the time!

JCB wrote:I too thought it to be an offence to bribe a police officer and this is tantamount to that. As Enoughofthat says, is this possibly someone attempting to buy a security service which would inevitably be at the expense of losing resource elsewhere. Transparency is needed.

It is an offence to bribe a Police Officer. However, if you think this falls under that category you might need to review the law!

If this was a bribe...I doubt the Chief Constable would be having his picture taken riding around in it.

I think a few people on here need to "chill out"

There's no such thing as a free lunch

Isn't it just a gift from a member of the public to the wider public? Although giving a nice gift to an organisation with vast reserves and an unlimited income stream is nothing short of mental - I can't see how this is remotely sinister.