Britain's top policeman resigns

 

Sir Ian Blair says leading the Met Police was 'the proudest time' of his life

 

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair has announced his resignation, blaming a lack of support from London mayor Boris Johnson.

 

Sir Ian has faced controversies in the job but said he was not stepping down on 1 December because of any failures.

 

Mr Johnson said the Met needed "new leadership", but the home secretary said there was "a process in place that the mayor chose not to respect".

 

Gordon Brown said Sir Ian had made a "huge" contribution to the UK's safety.

 

The prime minister went on to commend Sir Ian's leadership at the time of the July 2005 suicide bomb attacks on London's transport system. HOME SECRETARY'S LETTERS

 

 

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said: "I pay tribute to Sir Ian for the massive reductions in crime that his leadership of the Met has overseen and his continuing efforts to tackle gun, gang and knife crime.

 

"His part in leading neighbourhood policing across London has led to Londoners being safer and more confident."

 

But she accused Mr Johnson of ignoring protocol regarding the mayor's relationship with the police, adding: "Frankly you should put a bit of time and effort into that before you jump to judgement."

 

Mr Johnson, who took over as chairman of the police authority on Wednesday, has avoided publicly backing Sir Ian since being elected Conservative Party mayor in May.

 

Speaking after Sir Ian's resignation, the mayor said: "There comes a time in any organisation when it becomes clear it would benefit from new leadership and clarity of purpose. I believe that time is now."

 

'No secrets'

 

Sir Ian's tenure as head of Britain's biggest police force started confidently with reforms including community support officers, neighbourhood police, and a more diverse workforce.

 

The new mayor made clear, in a very pleasant and determined way, that he wished there to be a change of leadership

 

Sir Ian Blair

 

 

Resignation statement in full

Reaction to decision

 

But some senior officers disliked his close relationship with Downing Street when Tony Blair was prime minister, and his leadership style.

 

There were questions about his handling of events surrounding the 2005 death of Jean Charles de Menezes, who was shot dead at Stockwell Underground station in south London after being mistaken for a suicide bomber.

 

The Met Police was later convicted of a health and safety offence over the incident.

 

Sir Ian was also criticised after publicly questioning why the murders of two girls, Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, in Soham, Cambridgeshire in 2002, had been such a big story in the media.

 

It later emerged he had recorded a telephone conversation with the attorney general without asking his permission.

 

In 2006, in the course of arresting two brothers who were later cleared of any involvement in terrorism, armed Met officers shot and injured one of them.

 

Recently, Sir Ian has faced criticism over the racism row involving the Met's most senior Asian officer Tarique Ghaffur.

 

And Metropolitan Police Authority auditors are in the process of examining Scotland Yard contracts given to consultancy firm Impact Plus, run by a friend.

 

 

 

Boris Johnson says a new start for policing in London is needed

Sir Ian has said he had been "open and straightforward" in informing both the police service and the police authority about the friendship.

 

Sir Ian, whose contract was due to run until 2010, defended his record as he announced his resignation at Scotland Yard.

 

"I am resigning not because of any failures of my service and not because the pressures of the office and the many stories that surround it are too much.

 

"I am resigning in the best interests of the people of London and of the Metropolitan Police Service."

 

Shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve said Sir Ian had taken the "right decision" in standing down.

 

 

HAVE YOUR SAY It's a very difficult job, and I don't believe that he did badly, but he needs to go

Nic Brough, London

Send us your commentsLib Dem home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said the resignation was "long overdue".

 

But the former London mayor Ken Livingstone said the resignation appeared to make the role of the commissioner more political.

 

"Whoever is now appointed to replace Sir Ian Blair will know that there's a precedent that an incoming mayor feels they've got the right to change the commissioner of police," he said.

 

Erionaldo da Silva, speaking for the de Menezes family, said Sir Ian should have resigned three years ago and the decision to do so now should not deflect attention from Jean Charles' ongoing inquest.

 

The Home Office and the Metropolitan Police Authority will draw up a shortlist for Sir Ian's successor.

 

Met Deputy commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson will take over as acting head should no candidate be appointed by the time Sir Ian leaves.

 

The Metropolitan Police Federation, which represents rank and file police officers, said it was looking forward to building a "positive and constructive relationship" with the new chief.

 

Sir Edward Henry was the last commissioner of the Metropolitan Police to quit in 1918, following a damaging police strike, the last time officers were allowed to walk out

 

Source. BBC London News

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Now, I absolutely detest Sir Ian B-Liar and the institutionally racist London Metropolitan Police force and was, at first, delighted to hear that he was finally going... BUT (and it's a huge BUT....), the more I read about this, the more unease I feel.... I dont feel that he is going for the correct reasons... The reasons he SHOULD be going are for his handling of the Jean Charles De Menezes affair, the Tarrique Ghaffur (at top Asian officer suing the Met for racism, not exactly without foundation it has to be said....) affair and the fact that on more than one occasion he has attempted to do Tony Blair's political dirty work, particularly with regards to the 90 Days detention plans that Nu Labor drew up... The reasons he APPEARS to be going seem to be more to do with Boris Johnson's own dodgy political machinations, and the fact that he has a problem with Sir Ian because he was in tight with the Nu Labor establishment.... The ridiculous whims of an incompetent tw@t like Johnson should NOT be the reasons for London's Chief Constable to resign/be sacked....

 

It also opens up serious constitutional questions also, only the Home Secretary can dismiss or force a Chief Constable to resign, NOT some petty local bureaucrat with a political axe to grind. This opens up serious dangers of the Police Force, which is supposed to be accountable to the PUBLIC and only the Public, coming under increasing political control.. We saw examples of "Political Policing" in the 80s during the Miners Strike, things are gonna get worse if you ask me, the Police State is becoming an increasing reality in this country.. The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire has already ruled himself out as being the Met's new Chief Constable, citing the reason that the dislodgement of Sir Ian was "a demonstration of political will", he goes on to say - "I am not prepared to set aside my professional judgement and integrity, forged over 36 years, in order to meet short-term political expediency," . Ahem, quite.....

 

And what's Boris' brilliant answer to fill the void....? Parachuting in some bloody Yank who himself was sacked from the NYPD...... <_< Great...... -_- Nice to see that Boris has the interests of Londoners at heart..... Yes, I dont like Sir Ian Blair, but I don't believe that this is the way he should go out, no way...... That may seem curious to some of you who know of my own Leftist positions, but at the end of the day, I dislike Boris Johnson and his ridiculous game-playing and the way he's running the great city of London more than I dislike whatever Sir Ian may be guilty of....

 

 

He was right to resign as he'd lost the confidence of the elected Mayor of London. Jacqui Smith said as much on Question Time and that's why she accepted his resignation without persuading him to re-consider. Boris only told the Met. Police Commission what the rest of us were thinking. Oh and Michael Heselitine said on QT too that it was nothing political.

Edited October 4, 200816 yr by Crazy Chris

Oh well if Heseltine said it wasn't political it must be true :rolleyes:

 

I'm no great fan of Ian Blair but Johnson has no right to do what he did. He also showed a total lack of courtesy and a disregard of protocol in not informing the Home Secretary before talking to Blair. And all this in a week when the Shadow Home Secretary told the Tory conference that politicians should not interfere in policing matters.

Sir Ian Blair: I did NOT resign - Boris Johnson fired me

By David Rose

Daily Mail.co.uk

Last updated at 1:31 AM on 05th October 2008

 

Sir Ian Blair has furiously denied London mayor Boris Johnson’s account of his departure as Metropolitan Police Commissioner, senior officers said last night, insisting he did not resign voluntarily but was fired.

 

Mr Johnson issued a statement saying that when the two men met in his office last Thursday morning ‘the decision that Sir Ian took was his decision alone’.

 

But this, Sir Ian told friends, is ‘absolute s***. He made it absolutely clear that he was determined to bring about a change of leadership, and in the circumstances I had no choice but to comply.’

Sir Ian’s rebuttal will deepen the constitutional row over his departure. As Scotland Yard has responsibility for key national policing jobs, including counter-terrorism and Royal protection, there is deep concern in Whitehall at what some see as Mr Johnson’s ‘unilateral’ action, taken without discussion with Home Secretary Jacqui Smith.

 

According to Sir Ian’s Scotland Yard colleagues, Mr Johnson said that as chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority, he would have moved a vote of no confidence in Sir Ian if he did not agree to go.

‘In theory I could have fought and clung on,’ Sir Ian told one friend, ‘but I could not have allowed the organisation I love to take that level of damage. The Mayor made it plain he could not work with me as Commissioner. For him then to say my departure was my choice is frankly ridiculous.’

 

Senior officers said that Mr Johnson’s sacking of Sir Ian came ‘as a bolt from the blue’, adding that the Commissioner had imagined that the fateful meeting’s only purpose was a routine discussion of the agenda for a police authority session this week.

Yesterday, reports claimed that before seeing Mr Johnson, Sir Ian had a heated argument with Mr Johnson’s deputy for policing, Kit Malthouse.

The officers denied this too, saying that when he arrived at City Hall, Sir Ian went straight to see the Mayor. ‘He was slightly late because he had just been visiting a PC in hospital who had smashed his legs up falling through a roof while chasing a burglar,’ one source said. ‘He had no inkling he was about to be fired.’

There were just four people in the room for the 20-minute meeting, the sources said – Mr Johnson, Mr Malthouse, Sir Ian and Catherine Crawford, chief executive of the Metropolitan Police Authority, who was no more aware of what was about to happen than Sir Ian.

 

‘Boris came straight to the point,’ a Yard source said. ‘He told Ian, “There’s no easy way to put this, but I’m afraid it’s time for new leadership.” It wasn’t the fact that Boris felt this way that stunned him, but the timing. Boris said he wanted a change at the Met in his election campaign. But since taking over, their working relationship had seemed reasonable.’

Last month, the source added, Sir Ian had been pleased when Mr Johnson endorsed his decision to suspend Assistant Commissioner Tarique Ghaffur, who is suing the Met for alleged racial discrimination. The source claimed Sir Ian was more worried about surviving the inquest into the Met’s 2005 killing of unarmed Brazilian Jean Charles de Menezes in the mistaken belief he was a terrorist.

It is due to end next month and the source said: ‘Sir Ian had told us he was resigned to the fact that he might have to go after the inquest. He didn’t expect this.’

 

Sir Ian’s friends said that after fending off attacks for many months, part of him seemed relieved that what one called ‘the most difficult commissionership of modern times’ was finally over. ‘But this isn’t how he would have wanted it – a sacking with ominous political implications for his successor.’

 

He is to take a short break next week and will return to his post before stepping down at the end of November.

 

I'm no great fan of Ian Blair but Johnson has no right to do what he did. He also showed a total lack of courtesy and a disregard of protocol in not informing the Home Secretary before talking to Blair. And all this in a week when the Shadow Home Secretary told the Tory conference that politicians should not interfere in policing matters.

 

That's pretty much how I feel... Like I said, if he was going for the right reasons, then I have no issues, but some petty local bureaucrat (or any other politician come to that) being allowed to interfere in the independence of policing and the Judiciary is something I feel should concern us all... It's just an example of the growing Police State culture in this country where the Police and the courts are coming under ever tighter control and subject to the whims of whatever Govt, whether national or local is in power.. As far as I'm concerned any oversight of either the police or courts should be public and only public, and totally independent of any party political interests... The courts and the Police are there to serve WE THE PEOPLE, not the Govt and certainly not Boris fukkin' Johnson, who as far as i'm concerned is a clown, a bumbling, incompetent buffoon, an idiot voted in by idiots who thought it would be funny for the bloke on "Have I Got News For You" to be mayor.... If Sir Ian Blair goes it should be because of the three main points that I outlined in my original post....

 

‘But this isn’t how he would have wanted it – a sacking with ominous political implications for his successor.’

 

And therein lies the problem.... So, basically now, anyone who takes on the job is going to be subject to the whims of Boris Johnson as opposed to serving the interests of the actual PEOPLE of London.... <_< Sorry, call me old fashioned, but aren't Police officers supposed to be PUBLIC servants, and not Political patsies....? Ken Livingstone certainly had his problems and disputes with Sir Ian Blair, but even he wasn't so stupid as to do something like Boris has done... Boris has set an incredibly dangerous precedent here, the man is unfit to govern London as far as I'm concerned.....

 

No wonder the CC of West Yorkshire doesn't want to touch this job with a barge-pole... -_-

That's pretty much how I feel... Like I said, if he was going for the right reasons, then I have no issues, but some petty local bureaucrat (or any other politician come to that) being allowed to interfere in the independence of policing and the Judiciary is something I feel should concern us all... It's just an example of the growing Police State culture in this country where the Police and the courts are coming under ever tighter control and subject to the whims of whatever Govt, whether national or local is in power.. As far as I'm concerned any oversight of either the police or courts should be public and only public, and totally independent of any party political interests... The courts and the Police are there to serve WE THE PEOPLE, not the Govt and certainly not Boris fukkin' Johnson, who as far as i'm concerned is a clown, a bumbling, incompetent buffoon, an idiot voted in by idiots who thought it would be funny for the bloke on "Have I Got News For You" to be mayor.... If Sir Ian Blair goes it should be because of the three main points that I outlined in my original post....

 

 

I voted for Boris. :angry:

I voted for Boris. :angry:

 

:lol: ... now why doesnt that surprise me?

I voted for Boris. :angry:

 

And you dont think now that this was actually a mistake on your part...?