A Reform council has hired private security guards in three town centres to ward off “gatherings of male migrants” after reports they were intimidating locals and “wolf-whistling at schoolgirls”, making the town centre a ‘no-go’ zone for women. The Mail has the story.
Essex County Council said six “operatives” will patrol Braintree, Colchester and Chelmsford town centres from today for an initial three-month trial period.
The decision follows Government plans to expand the number of asylum seekers housed at nearby RAF Wethersfield – a former airfield – from 800 to 1,245. The Home Office has also said it will now be operational beyond 2027.
Men housed at the migrant accommodation centre – the largest of its kind in Britain – are often bussed into local towns to shop and access services.
Reform said the patrols – named Operation Vanguard – came as a “direct response to concerns raised amongst local residents, particularly women and girls, over gatherings of male migrants in town centres”.
One Braintree resident, Mike Readon, 66, last month said he saw the effect of migrants in his town centre first-hand as they are dropped off by the busload in the morning – smartphones in hand and often masked.
He said: “They hang around the bus station and they whistle at the schoolgirls coming off the buses.
“It’s horrendous. Lots of women just avoid the town entirely on a Thursday because it’s a totally different environment.
“You see them hanging around the cash machines and then going into charity shops, haggling for a shirt that only costs a pound, trying to get it for 50p.
“My wife and her friends, they wouldn’t come in on a Thursday, certainly not alone anyhow.”
Reform’s Peter Harris, the leader of Essex County Council, said: “Today, Operation Vanguard moves from words to action.
“Six trained security guards, two each in Braintree, Chelmsford and Colchester, will provide a visible and reassuring presence on our streets, particularly for women and children. Our message is simple: the safety of Essex residents comes first.”
New Essex Police Chief Constable Rachel Nolan has said crime linked to the large asylum accommodation in the county was “very low”.
“Certainly, as far as I’ve seen, there is absolutely no reason for anyone to be concerned about criminality associated with migrants from the Wethersfield camp in Essex,” she told BBC Look East.
The new patrols will cost around £118,000 plus VAT and will be funded by using up to £150,000 from a community improvement fund, the party said.
The guards will work from 10am to 6pm seven days a week to “deter anti-social behaviour”, the council said, and provide “reassurance” to residents and “gather evidence” on whether additional support is needed.
Worth reading in full.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Security funded by the council because the police won’t bother to get involved.
Sums up the state of this country
Has this Chief Constable not heard of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997?
Has the Essex Police Chief Constable Rachel Nolan noticed what happened in Epping. And she still says “crime linked to the large asylum accommodation in the county was “very low”?”
“New Essex Police Chief Constable Rachel Nolan has said crime linked to the large asylum accommodation in the county was “very low”.
“Certainly, as far as I’ve seen, there is absolutely no reason for anyone to be concerned about criminality associated with migrants from the Wethersfield camp in Essex,” she told BBC Look East. ”
Enemy of the people. Servant of the satanic cabal that is working flat out to destroy white civilisation. A woman cynically and deliberately betraying her own sisters and children.
Roger Hirst, Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner for Essex, said: “Rachel Nolan showed she was the outstanding candidate at every stage of the rigorous and highly competitive appointment process to become the Chief Constable of Essex Police.”
https://essex.pfcc.police.uk/news/rachel-nolan-confirmed-as-chief-constable-of-essex-police
“… no reason for anyone to be concerned about criminality associated with migrants…”
Except their victims.
There is such a thing as risk. Is the risk of being a victim of immigrant crime higher or lower with an immigrant holiday camp in your village/town? Should people wait for crime rate to go up before becoming concerned?
”“Rachel Nolan showed she was the outstanding candidate at every stage of the rigorous and highly competitive appointment process to become the Chief Constable of Essex Police.””
Translation: she didn’t have a penis.
In addition to the clear risks from these men there is the fear it engenders and the limits on the free activities of the local population, especially but not wholly women and girls.
Chief Constable Rachel Nolan is not interested in the concerns of local people. She doesn’t see what she doesn’t want to see.
CC Nolan is lying by omission. The security guards are not there to tackle crime except perhaps to be witnesses in the event. They’re there to deter anti-social behaviour which might escalate into crime. If they were to become physically involved at any stage I reckon they’d face arrest and prosecution by Nolan’s police.
Tsk. If only we had a police force.
On a brighter note. This does demonstrate that public services don’t have to/shouldn’t be State-run. They never used to be until they were de facto nationalised.
Direct hire – either by individuals or community groups – of services like policing, fire, health means they are accountable to their paymasters and serve their interests, not the ideological and political interests of the muppets in charge.
Fire brigades (remember when they were called that?) were invented by insurance companies who reasoned they cost less to maintain than insurance payouts on burnt out property.
It could be returned to that today, with insurers covering the cost with building insurance policies. Similarly policing, crime detection could be provided by insurers collecting cost through policies, to reduce payout for theft, burglary, property damage, personal injury.
The markets could easily find better solutions to Government (mis)handling the so-called public services, and certainly at less cost.
But then we would need the muppets, and since they are unemployable in the private, wealth producing sector what would they do?
They’d be on jobseeker’s allowance. But at least that would cost us less than the make-work they ‘do’.