Click the link below to view the newsletter.
Newsletter June 2011
June 17, 2011 | 2 Comments
Westminster Park Residents Association
Bringing our community alive
June 17, 2011 | 2 Comments
Click the link below to view the newsletter.
June 22, 2011 at 3:10 pm
I’m writing to voice my concerns over the resolution, already passed, that the annual subscription to the WPRA is to be raised by 50%, from £2 to £3, to partly fund the salary of a PCSO.
I’m surprised that the decision has been taken with so little consultation with the police and Westminster Park residents – although if I have missed a consultation meeting and information sheets, I apologise.
My concerns are:
If WPRA pays a third of the PCSO’s salary, what are our responsibilities?
What if the PCSO requests a pay rise? Do we pay an increased amount?
Are we partially responsible for any claims that may arise either from or against the PCSO?
What are our rights?
Can we demand the PCSO works in Westminster Park the exact proportion that we pay?
Can we demand targets and proof these targets have been met?
What if there’s an emergency in, for example, Newton. Can we complain if the PCSO attends because it would mean neglecting the area that pays his salary?
What about the ethics of paying a PCSO’s salary?
Is the WPRA comfortable about paying for better protection than other, more needy, areas of Chester?
Is the WPRA comfortable about helping what is a de facto privatisation of the police force – surely something that should have been discussed in Parliament before being rolled out in Chester?
There is also the matter of having a PCSO rather than a qualified policeman. Although you state the salary payment would be a means of maintaining Police cover in Westminster Park, PCSOs are not police. Should we be encouraging a cheaper version of the police which, according to many PCSOs and PCs, is what the PCSO system is. As a recently retired policeman said to me recently: “while they provide a visible presence on the ground they aren’t trained or sworn as constables and as such are only a cheap substitute for the real thing. If you pay peanuts well you know what you get.”
He also made the point “At least you could truthfully say you owner a third of a PCSO. But could you pick, or even get, the useful third?” What rights would we have if we were dissatisfied with the PCSO’s conduct or achievements? Could we withdraw funding? Ask for a replacement or our money back?
I therefore think that until my concerns have been addressed, I will be unable to renew my subscription.
M A Cameron
Westminster Park Resident
June 28, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Mr. Cameron,
Many thanks for taking the time to submit your views to us.
Since publication of our June newsletter, the part payment of the PCSO’s salary has been dropped by the police because for the time being the danger of losing our local PCSO has not materialised.
We feel that we must explain the situation that we found ourselves in as a Residents’ Association.
We were approached by the Police to see whether WPRA would contribute to our local PCSO’s salary. He only covers Westminster Park, Hough Green and the Curzon Park areas of Chester. The idea that was put to us was that the three Residents’ Associations should consider funding up to £1000.00 with the remainder being raised from local shop keepers. The aim was to raise one third of his salary by this method.
It would have given the three Residents’ Associations a say in where and what his duties would be.
The idea was put forward for discussion at the WPRA AGM in March and, although some people raised queries along the line of yours, a resolution was proposed and seconded from the floor that we should raise approx. £350.00 by a nominal increase of £1.00 in the annual subs to pay our contribution.
Just to re-iterate, the idea of part-funding has now been dropped by the police.
We hope that the above answers some of your points and that you will feel able to renew your subscription, which will remain unchanged at £2.00 per annum.
Westminster Park Residents’ Association