Skip to main content

The police were right

It is important that no chances are taken with people's lives. I have not tried to find out exactly what the intelligence was that led the police to evacuate the City Centre last night. I do, however, support their decision to do what they did.

It meant that I missed the Steve Ajao Blues Jam session in Centenary Square - a slight inconvenience that does not matter. At least I have managed to have a session with Digby Fairweather this week. With a bit of luck we will reunite for the same number (Funny Valentine) on Tuesday week.

Three years ago was the last attempt (by the Real IRA) to bomb Birmingham. My wife passed through the area next to the bomb during the day.

We need to take any threat seriously. That does not mean, however, that it needs to undermine life in any other way.


A C Baker said…
I entirely agree that missing a concert is minor compared to being on a bus that explodes. However, I am concerned that a threat which required the evacuation of the entire centre of a city - a move with few precedents - is sufficiently distributed that the rest of Birmingham may well have been in danger also. For example, nuclear, chemical or biological agents will tend distribute along weather patterns.

Also, a mass evacuation carries its own risks. On Saturday morning, I spoke with a psychiatric specialist who reported a significant upswing in medical crises amongst his existing patients. We have no way of knowing what physical and mental health problems have been caused to those evacuated, as luckily, no one seems to have died of a heart attack. But it is plausible at least that someone may have been driven to suicide.

There does need to be scrutiny of the balance of probabilities, and the risks associated with action as well as with in-action.
john said…
I accept entirely the points that you made. I do intend to check on much of this today when I am in B1.

There is, however, an important message to terrorists in the evacuation. That message is that we are not just going to sit there and take it.

One of the points about 9/11 is that noone should expect air passengers to be passive in future highjackings. Previously people were passive, because they expected to survive that way.

Similarly the London bombings will make people far more vigilant about unidentified packages.
PoliticalHack said…
I'd take issue with A C Baker's comment about any potential CBR threat. It is highly unlikely that any of these would be used - short of a fully-fledged nuclear device, they are not tremendously effective or easy to assemble and deploy. Even if it were to be used, it would be far easier to handle the problem with people in their own homes, as the concentration of people is that much lower in residential suburbs than it is in the centre of our city at the weekend.

I accept that there may be additional risks caused by news of this sort, but I would suspect that the upswing was at least as much due to the bombings in London on Thursday and you could trace a similar swing after 9/11. The police, rightly, have to worry about the 20,000 people whom they believe to be in imminent danger.

I've been a little worried at how much time the police have had to spend justifying their decision. For a variety of reasons, this wouldn't have been an easy choice to make, but the risk of attack was clearly felt to be exceptionally high. This is an occasion where we have to place our trust in the police and the intelligence services and rely on their judgement.
A C Baker said…
Politicalhack, I'm not suggesting that unconventional attacks are likely - instead, I'm trying to build plausible scenarios in which the evacuation of Birmingham city centre is reasonable. I take your point about remaining indoors in a wider contamination area - but in hot weather, many windows will be open unless we're warned to do otherwise!

I've put my concerns to my MP, rather than haranguing the police. (I _could_ say that I trust the _police_ more than the politicians :-) But I try to base my trust upon careful thought. It _is_ reasonable to ask in the _medium_ term for the rationale behind such an _unusual_ decision - this is proper democratic scrutiny.

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.

I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…