As NZ has gradually sunk deeper into the socialist mire over the last few decades, the frequency of bizarre and irrational decisions from its government institutions have accordingly increased. The twisting of reason into some kind of distorted shape that suits the many derangements of the socialist mental condition becomes commonplace. People get used to it and sigh and shrug and go about their business as best they can, seeking relief from their shame in the old maxim “you can’t fight city hall”.
One of the strangest perversions of reason to arise in recent time has been the perception that Police are to blame for deaths or injuries that result from pursuit. If a suspected criminal fails to stop for Police, and instead drives off at high speed, and is involved in an accident, then really, what should have happened is that the Police should have let the offender escape and we’d all have been better off. I find this line of argument so staggeringly beyond reason, I am left bewildered stunned and perplexed at how it could actually gain currency in our Police Department. What has happened to the management of the Police that such a bizarre idea could gain momentum? One would think that any rational managers would reject the idea in an instant.
North Shore Police are being severely criticised by the Independent Police Conduct Authority for breaching policy multiple times during a pursuit in March last year. The Authority found Police twice ignored instructions to give up the chase and also failed to lay road spikes correctly. The pursued offender was driving a stolen car that eventually crashed.
The Police Association appears somewhat saner than the management and are at least prepared to take a stand against this depravity of reason. According to a NewstalkZB report, its spokesman Greg O’Conner said criminals are getting wise to the rules Police operate under, “the most significant thing about this report is what the offender said…. he knew if he drove fast enough, the police would stop.”
Of course, but why would such a reasonable point of view need to be in conflict with Police Management? The only possible reason IMHO must be that Police Management’s ability to arrive at logical decisions is seriously constrained by socialist ideology. I believe this starts in the first place with Affirmative Action, that misguided but extremely destructive concept, pushed by the socially engineering left, and designed to allow promotion not upon ability as it should be, but according to race and gender.
Consequently we have Police Management staffed by one or two intelligent and reasonable people but outnumbered by “minority” idiots. A further problem with such minority idiots is that they frequently buy into the perversion of reality that got them their positions, and apply them to their own staff selections. So we end up with a Police Management structure that is from the top down controlled by morons.
Then we have a secondary cause, and this is the style of thinking that allows people to come to such absurd conclusions as offenders should not be pursued. That style is the socialist style, and its characterised by the belief that no individual is fully responsible for their own actions. If a driver fails to stop, its society’s fault. Your fault. My fault. The Polices’ fault. The actual absconder plays only a minor role in the whole scenario, given that his actions are in the end down to all of us. To the collective.
I’m not going to search out the Police Management involved in this, but the members of the Independent Police Conduct Authority are easily identified. Justice Minister Simon Powell made new appointments in August. They are profiled as such-
- Angela Hauk-Willis is a former Deputy Secretary of the Treasury who was responsible for all corporate and central operations, and the technology strategy. She was a member of the senior leadership team with special responsibility for corporate governance, Māori responsiveness, ethics, and integrity.
- Dianne Macaskill is an independent contractor. She was Chief Executive and Chief Archivist at Archives New Zealand from 2001 to 2009, and a former Deputy Government Statistician at Statistics New Zealand from 1996 to 2001.
- Richard Woods has been chairperson of the Environmental Risk Management Authority since April 2008. From 1999-2006 he was Director of the Security Intelligence Service. In his previous diplomatic career he served in Rome, Tehran, Bahrain and Washington,and as ambassador in Tehran, Athens, Moscow, and Paris.
These people sound to me as if they would not have a damn clue about police groundwork. At least the first two also sound to me as if they would be deeply submerged in Progressive thinking. I would trust them to come up with a reasonable conclusion about this episode as I would trust Chris Carter with my credit card.
We have to get to a bottom line here, and it must be that the government and especially the Police Management must be completely beyond perseverance. It needs a complete clean out. It must start right at the top. If Simon Power is prepared to go along with these idiotic conventions on police chases then he is as guilty as anyone, even more so, of complete dereliction of his public duty. Judith Collins and Simon Power need to go.
Somebody needs to be appointed with the guts to grasp the nettle of political correctness and restore the priorities of the Police Force, government’s premium service to the public. It is a department that exists to keep law abiding members of the community safe, not to pander to the idiocies of left wing social policy.