Manchester Arena Explosion

[blandy]

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

... Which they shouldn't be doing.

soldiers aren't police

True. They're replacing the missing Armed police. Who else do you get who's firearms trained, when you've "lost" 1300 odd firearms officers?

[Villanun]

36 minutes ago, blandy said:

 Who else do you get who's firearms trained, when you've "lost" 1300 odd firearms officers?

I hate this use of the word "lost". Where are they Theresa, down the back of the **** sofa?

[NurembergVillan]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

True. They're replacing the missing Armed police. Who else do you get who's firearms trained, when you've "lost" 1300 odd firearms officers?

[peterms]

22 hours ago, TheAuthority said:

Off topic but Major brought the Irish to the table and should get the majority of the credit. But he doesn't because Blair was PM when the papers were signed and is a smug, PR-savvy bar-steward.

John Major has his faults, like all of us, but he seems to be a fairly modest man. 

I suspect if you spoke to him, he wouldn't try to claim too much credit for being in the revolving chair when the efforts of many thousands of people, over decades, finally bore fruit.

[Chindie]

Threat level had been reduced, for all that really means.

[Awol]

24 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Threat level had been reduced, for all that really means.

It means, hopefully, that they have the people in custody who were posing a continuing and immediate threat so no one else gets blown up this weekend. 

[Chindie]

2 minutes ago, Awol said:

It means, hopefully, that they have the people in custody who were posing a continuing and immediate threat so no one else gets blown up this weekend. 

My point was rather more that the difference between severe and critical is neither here nor there for the public.

[brommy]

38 minutes ago, Chindie said:

My point was rather more that the difference between severe and critical is neither here nor there for the public.

It certainly makes a difference to the security procedures across my company's UK sites.

[Chindie]

10 minutes ago, brommy said:

It certainly makes a difference to the security procedures across my company's UK sites.

Would you say your company is representative of the public at large?

Precisely what difference does 'critical' do to your security that 'severe' doesn't? Surely if there is a threat, which there is, most threatened areas should maintain security to a level that counters that threat, regardless of the notch it's set at?

To the man on the omnibus, critical or severe threat is the same thing. One just sounds worse.

Edited May 27, 2017 by Chindie

[brommy]

4 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Would you say your company is representative of the public at large?

In that it employs thousands of U.K. citizens and will be similar to many other large companies who together employ several million of the U.K. public, yes.

Edited May 27, 2017 by brommy

[Chindie]

Just now, brommy said:

In that it employs thousands of U.K. citizens and will be similar to many other large companies who together employ several million of the U.K. Public, yes.

Right. You're misreading me.

The general public aren't represented by your company. No company represents the public.

I'd be very interested in what difference 'critical' makes over 'severe' to your company though. If the threat exists that is important enough to protect, you should protect it to that extent regardless of a level set by the government. After all, the level only went up after being caught on the hop. 

[brommy]

Just now, Chindie said:

Right. You're misreading me.

The general public aren't represented by your company. No company represents the public.

I'd be very interested in what difference 'critical' makes over 'severe' to your company though. If the threat exists that is important enough to protect, you should protect it to that extent regardless of a level set by the government. After all, the level only went up after being caught on the hop. 

I have just googled the definition of 'public' in regards to the general population - "ordinary people in society, rather than people who are considered to be important or who belong to a particular group." As millions of ordinary people in society work for large companies whose security measures are directly affected by the government's decreed security level, I'd still say it has an affect on many of the public.

In regard to the change in security measures and whether they should be held at the highest level whatever the government's advice, extremely high security can be very restrictive to business (as well as being an big inconvenience to the day to day work life of employees). If extremely high security is deemed necessary it should be used. If the risk has been deemed to have reduced slightly, then large companies usually move slightly less restrictive practices. High security instead of extremely high security, if you will.

[chrisp65]

I'd say there is a large part of the public that is impacted by this, even if it isn't 'the public at large'. 

My job has definitely been impacted by it this week, visiting several different clients in several towns, the ability to arrange meetings and get in and out of buildings has been markedly different. 

This week, that's included businesses on Threadneedle Street and sort of semi secure buildings in Devon and Cardiff. I work in a company of around 40 or 50 people, we've had to redraw a lot of our itinerary because of the time needed to get in and out of places and the ability of others to attend meetings. Being a small private business, if we don't do the work, we don't raise the invoices and it doesn't take long for people to not get paid.

We're not exactly working with MI5 or the army here, just pretty vanilla institutions that have protocols for when this stuff happens. When the incident happened on Westminster bridge, I couldn't get out of the building I was in for several hours and several meetings over the next few days were automatically cancelled. That meant my company couldn't meet programme dates and our sub contractors were stood down. That meant people that have their own white van businesses had work cancelled and lost money.

It has a real impact. Not on everyone, but on a significant number.

Critical versus severe because of an incident in Manchester means a plumber from Gloucester gets a week's work in London cancelled when he was using that money to pay for his week's holiday in July. I'd say he's a pretty typical member of the public.

 

[Risso]

The IOM airport closed its drop off lane in the wake of the security level being increased, and made people use the car park 5 feet away instead. A measure that I have no doubt will make the average Islamic terrorist reconsider their plans.

[Chindie]

Fair enough. Obviously I've underestimated the difference it makes.

Happy to humbly admit to being wrong.

[limpid]

12 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

This week, that's included businesses on Threadneedle Street and sort of semi secure buildings in Devon and Cardiff. I work in a company of around 40 or 50 people, we've had to redraw a lot of our itinerary because of the time needed to get in and out of places and the ability of others to attend meetings. Being a small private business, if we don't do the work, we don't raise the invoices and it doesn't take long for people to not get paid.

If it's just for meetings, is there a reason they can't use video conferencing and collaborative working tools? It means you wouldn't have to reschedule because of third party factors (and save significantly on travelling time and avoidable carbon emissions).

[Xela]

25 minutes ago, Risso said:

The IOM airport closed its drop off lane in the wake of the security level being increased, and made people use the car park 5 feet away instead. A measure that I have no doubt will make the average Islamic terrorist reconsider their plans.

While also increasing the revenue for the airport by making people pay for the car park. 

[snowychap]

14 minutes ago, Xela said:

While also increasing the revenue for the airport by making people pay for the car park. 

What - both passengers?

[HanoiVillan]

20 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Fair enough. Obviously I've underestimated the difference it makes.

Happy to humbly admit to being wrong.

Me too. It's been an educational page!

[brommy]

45 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Fair enough. Obviously I've underestimated the difference it makes.

Happy to humbly admit to being wrong.

 

25 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Me too. It's been an educational page!

I think there's lots of people who don't know what goes on behind what is immediately visible. Most companies have set security procedures according to the 'threat level'. Within minutes of the recent increase to 'critical', all our staff (several thousand) had emails detailing the additional security measures. These included a ban on visitors to all UK sites unless security staff had advance notice in writing, the visitor presented photo ID (passport or driving licence) and the visitor was escorted at all times. In reality most visits were cancelled. It's clear to see why strict security measures are eased back to more sensible levels when possible.