Alongside defence and border security, maintaining law and order is one of the first duties of any state - but in the UK today, many laws are just not being enforced.
A short 🧵 on the UK's law enforcement crisis - and the signs that private security is emerging to fill the gap:
When we talk about law and order in the UK, we often talk about a few distinct but related issues:
- softening of the law around some crimes
- soft sentences
- inaccurate data reporting
- generalised disorder
- non-enforcement of the law
Today, I want to focus on the latter.
In May 2024, London's Met Police announced that it would no longer be policing fare evasion on London buses.
"Since this incident happened, we have stopped our involvement in supporting Transport for London fare evasion operations."
December 2023 research revealed that the Met Police attended just 44% of shoplifting reports between April 2022 and April 2023 - the rate has not been above 50% since 2018.
In 2022-23, Home Office statistics show that the Met Police failed to solve 82 percent of burglaries in London.
Just 8 percent of London burglaries during this period resulted in a suspect being charged or summoned - we can assume that the conviction rate is even lower.
In 2022, 89.2% of bike theft cases across England went unsolved, rising to 93% of thefts in London.
In Surrey, just 0.81% of bike theft cases resulted in a suspect being charged.
According to March 2024 research, police failed to solve a single burglary over the past three years in half of neighbourhoods in England and Wales.
This comes despite an October 2022 promise from all 43 police chiefs across England and Wales to "attend every break-in".
In 2023, police failed to attend 72 percent of car thefts - an increase of 32 percent since 2021.
In Cambridgeshire, a full 90 percent of car thefts reports were not attended by an officer - in Bedfordshire that figure was 88 percent.
The police's own data shows that, as of 2023, around 90 percent of all crime goes unsolved, rising from around 75 percent in 2015.
This figure includes more than 30,000 sex offences, 330,000 violent crimes, 320,000 cases of criminal damage, and 1.5 million thefts.
According to February 2024 research, police failed to attend 40 percent of violent shoplifting incidents in 2023.
This comes as the Co-op has reported that assaults on staff have increased by almost 30 percent, with 20 percent more anti-social behaviour and verbal abuse.
And finally, across London, 250 phones a day are stolen - one every six minutes.
In theory, the Met Police's 'Operation Venice' is designed to crack down on phone snatching - but there's no public information about the current state of that operation.
Pulling together these individual data points, what do we see?
The police are no longer consistently enforcing the law - particularly in cases of property crime, but increasingly in terms of low-level violent crime too.
This isn't just a London problem, either.
This is especially audacious given the efforts made by police in recent weeks to crack down on 'hate speech' and improper political activism.
They don't have the resources to protect businesses from theft, but they do have the resources to put people in jail for sharing memes.
This leaves ordinary people subject to the tyranny of criminality - criminal disorder is just as tyrannical as any overbearing state.
One of the results of this is a rise in private security use, particularly from businesses who know that they can no longer rely on the police.
My Local Bobby, a security firm established by two former Met Police officers, served 12 residential areas and four "public realm beats" as of May 2023, with a focus on property crime.
Households pay around £100 to £200 a month for this additional protection.
According to the British Security Industry Association (BSIA), the UK will need 62,000 new security officers over the next 12 months to keep up with growing demand.
BSIA estimates that a total of 450,000 licensed security professionals could be in operation by the end of 2024.
According to a January 2024 poll, 6 in 10 UK adults trust private security professionals, while 7 in 10 say that private security professionals are necessary to maintain public order.
An April 2024 poll, on the other hand, showed that just 4 in 10 Britons trust the police.
In the absence of a capable state police force, many businesses - and some individuals - are turning to private provision.
Let me be clear - this is not a good thing! The expanding role of private security is a sign of withering state capacity.
In countries where disorder is common - like South Africa, Nigeria, or Brazil -, private security is a fact of life.
Nevertheless, these private security firms often operate under strict regulatory conditions, even while the state's policing capacity continues to decline.
While Britain's situation is not nearly as severe as Brazil or South Africa, we are experiencing a decline in law and order.
The early warning signs are there - including the growth in private security and the rise of gated and quasi-gated communities.
We must resource our police force properly, enabling them to enforce the law consistently.
Even John Cowperthwaite, Hong Kong's famously laissez-faire Financial Secretary, understood the importance of a police force able to enforce order and protect property.
"The hard realities of keeping the peace between man and man and between authority and the individual can be more accurately described if the phrase were inverted to “order and law”, for without order the operation of law is impossible."
- Lee Kuan Yew, 1963 🇸🇬
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
52% of British adults are now reliant on the state for their livelihood - and YOU could be paying for it.
That's according to @ASI's inaugural State Reliance Index, which tracks the number of Britons who rely, directly or indirectly, on the state.
A 🧵 on our findings
So what does the State Reliance Index consider?
We looked at adults (1) receiving benefits or state pension, (2) employed by the public sector, (3) in higher education, or (4) who work in the private sector, but in fields which only exist because of public sector regulation.
This was a conservative estimate.
We didn't even look at every area of the private sector which receives state subsidy - and nor did we include the charitable sector, which relies heavily on state support.
In other words, the true figure could be even more than 52%.
The Church of England is our national church, a c. 500-year old institution which is also responsible for the upkeep of many historic buildings 🏴
But increasingly, it is beholden to dangerous ideas about race, culture, and immigration.
A 🧵 on the rot at the heart of the CofE
For centuries, the Church of England has been at the centre of our national life.
The CofE is our national church, and plays a central role in many national celebrations. It stewards thousands of historic buildings, and maintains thousands of Anglican schools.
But increasingly, the priorities of Church leadership are at odds with ordinary Anglicans.
In 2022, the Church commissioned a report into its own historic links to the trans-Atlantic slave trade. The Archbishop of Canterbury issued a formal apology for past wrongdoing.
We often hear about absurd asylum decisions, with criminals spared from deportation by faceless tribunals.
But never forget, these decisions don't happen by accident. They're made by activist judges. Let me introduce you to some of them.
A 🧵 on the judges in our asylum system
First, some context.
In the UK, the Home Office is responsible for making decisions on immigration and asylum.
But these decisions can be reviewed by 'specialist' tribunals. These tribunals can block Home Office decisions, if they feel that these decisions contravene UK law.
The UK has only had specialist immigration tribunals since 1969. This system was expanded in 1971 - with the current iteration emerging in 2007.
These tribunals are full of activist lawyers and judges, with no incentive to consider political broader arguments around migration.
Who should we celebrate as our national heroes? 🇬🇧
There's a lot to be said for figures like Churchill, Wellington, and Nelson - but a 9th-century Saxon king could be the ideal hero for 21st-century Britain.
A 🧵 on why we should rediscover our love for Alfred the Great
Alfred was born in Wantage, Berkshire, in 849. He was the youngest son of Aethelwulf, King of Wessex.
At that time, England was divided between a number of Anglo-Saxon kingdoms, which jostled for supremacy. The largest of these kingdoms were Wessex and Mercia.
During the same period, England was suffering an increasing number of Viking raids, which mostly originated from Norway and Denmark.
Alfred's father, and his older brothers, spent much of the 840s and 850s fighting off these escalating raids, which often targeted monasteries.
Did you know that about 1.8 BILLION people are eligible to vote in UK elections, including millions from India, Pakistan, and Nigeria?
That's because, believe it or not, Commonwealth citizens can vote in UK elections.
A 🧵 on this loophole, and how it devalues UK citizenship
So why can Commonwealth citizens vote in UK elections? The story starts at the end of Britain's Empire, in the wake of World War 2.
Traditionally, those living in Britain's overseas dominions were considered British subjects, with the same rights as those in Great Britain.
But as global realities shifted, it became necessary to distinguish between British subjects, and those living in 'dominions' like South Africa, Australia, or India.
In 1948, the British Nationality Act created a distinction between British subjects and 'Commonwealth citizens'.
The Government is planning to introduce an official definition of Islamophobia - which could criminalise criticism of Muslim migration and even grooming gangs.
A 🧵 on the 'APPG definition of Islamophobia' and why it's so dangerous for free speech