One positive sign is the big citizen led clean ups in Clapham and Ealing, and the way the kinds of people the Chavs idolise - the sports stars, the singers and actors and media personalities have unanimously condemned the rioting and supported citizen efforts.
More than curfew, the delay in the decision to bring in those extra reinforcements from outside London, and fully stand up the Met was the real failure. With sufficient numbers they could have taken back the streets with or without curfew, with or without non-lethal ammunition, and prevented the destruction in Croydon and Clapham Junction in particular.JE Menon wrote:Johann,
By the second night, it was clear things were getting out of hand. Cannot a curfew (the announcement alone would have made most people stay at home) be enforced by the police, who apparently have been given the authority now to use plastic bullets? No need to bring the army in. I mean, so much of property damage and destruction of small business operations could have been avoided. I can understand the reluctance to set a precedent... but the situation so far already seems unprecedented.
The question is whether it was a failure of assessment, or a failure of leadership. I don't know yet whether the problem was that the Met failed to anticipate the seriousness of the second night, or if the political leadership and Met Command waffled when presented with the options. My suspicion was that it was probably a bit of both
A lot of people seem to feel in their gut that this was a failure of leadership - people at the top waiting to see how things turned out for fear of being seen as over-reacting. If thats the case they will pay a political price for their misjudgments. Of course that will only be a marginal compensation for those who lost their homes and businesses.