One of the cardinal and much-cherised principles of the British democratic system dating back to 1829 has been policing by consent. This is the idea that the police earn the right to exercise their powers by society’s approval, based on transparency, accountability and integrity.
Another valued tradition, which sets us apart from the US and other countries, is that British police are not usually armed. Seeing officers on the street with handguns or automatic weapons tends to makes us feel uncomfortable, rather than secure.
Unfortunately, these principles seem to have been ignored on the Rosneath peninsula, where the UK’s nuclear weapons are housed. As we report today, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) police who guard the Coulport and Faslane nuclear bases are planning to increase their activities across the area.
MoD police are routinely armed, and in the past have focussed on preventing crime and terrorism on nuclear sites. They also regularly apprehend protestors who try and block the nuclear bomb convoys that travel by road the length of the UK.
Now concerns have been raised locally about their expansion plans on the Clyde. MoD police are stepping up spot checks on cars, and increasingly quizzing people who take an interest in nuclear submarines to ascertain, in the words of one MoD officer, “whether you are a friend or foe of Argyll”.
The motives and behaviour of the MoD police may be admirable, but there are real questions to answer about their ambitions. Will they respect civil rights? Do they really understand how to police communities? Are they compensating for cuts in Police Scotland local cover?
It is also odd that Police Scotland hasn’t commented, and that the local SNP MP and defence spokesman, Brendan O’Hara, doesn’t seem that bothered. They should be pressed to say more.
This is not an argument about some little local policing problem. It goes to the heart of the precious tradition of policing by consent, and should be taken seriously by our police and our politicians.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here