www.DorsetSpeed.org.uk   please contribute: info@dorsetspeed.org.uk

Exposing incompetence, greed, waste, danger and corruption in the speed enforcement industry
Skip Navigation Links
Update 2017
Coverup, protection
Original articles
Name and shame

Dorset Speed facebook group was shut down!!
Here is the link to the new group

My questions for new PCC David Sidwick

Dear Mr Sidwick,

Congratulations on winning the vote for Dorset PCC, I have read your comments and you certainly seem to understand the principles, accountability to the public, not being "cosy" with the chief constable, etc.

I have been studying Dorset Police for nearly 2 decades and I don't think you have any idea of the mess you are getting into. You talk, like the others, of reducing crime, protecting the vulnerable, etc, but do you understand that the greatest benefit of all across all responsibilities will come from having a highly efficient force run by senior police with the highest levels of integrity, competence, honesty and desire to serve the public?

I have consistently found the exact opposite. I therefore present to you a small sample of questions which self-evidently need answering. Please will you demonstrate that you will fulfil the primary purpose of the PCC by obtaining answers. Unfortunately I am not optimistic, as when you properly expose corruption and incompetence in Dorset Police, you will expose protection and disinterest in it from Boris Johnson, Pretti Patel, MP Michael Tomlinson, Kit Malthouse, the IOPC, the Inspectorate of Constabulary, the Information Commissioner, Judges, neighbouring forces Hampshire, Devon and Cornwall,etc etc. That is too much for someone with a political career.

Whatever you may think about the subject I have found to demonstrate the appalling state of policing, please bear in mind that it is the nature and scale of the behaviour we should be worrying about the most - I have been contacted over the years by many with equally bad (or worse) experiences in other areas such as, astonishingly, child protection. Note that your predecessor Mr Underhill has fiercely protected all of this appalling misconduct. I know for sure, you will be put under pressure to protect him, and others, please do not be tempted.

1. Please could you ask James Vaughan why he feels it is ok to lie to the public about police performance, and when the "mistake" is explained to him, just ignore it and leave the lies in place, and assist in the coverup when complaints are made? Example 1  , Example 2

2. Please could you explain how it is reasonable for Dorset Police / Council to make a 1/2 £million lost income claim when it could not run courses for just 4 months, when the Dorset OPCC Chief exec wrote to me that "no police force makes money from its driver awareness scheme", and then dodge the perfectly reasonable questions about this by abusing freedom of information rules?  Details ,   abuse of FOI rules

3. The previous PCC and CC James Vaughan have obviously protected "awareness courses", and have also (rather cosily) authorised payments including from course money, which the PCC himself receives, to "charity" Safewise of about 1/3 £million in the last few years, when both of them are on the board of trustees of that "charity". The only proper, independent study has shown that these courses do nothing to reduce road casualty. Do you agree that this blatant conflict of interest is therefore clouding the judgement of the previous PCC and current CC about what is best for road safety and therefore likely to be costing lives? Do you agree that the police selling products and services to the public that do not work as described is a breach of trading standards? Will you insist that courses are immediately halted until there is some clarity, honesty and transparency about them? Will you immediately stop receiving course money directly to demonstrate that at least you understand and object to this astonishing conflict of interest?

As I have explained, I feel I am more likely to see cows flying than proper answers to these questions from anyone, so I will leave it at just 3 for the moment. Please prove me wrong.


Regards, Ian Belchamber