
DUP Statement on the Tories/DUP coalition (10.06.2017)



The BBC has now said it is official, that the Conservative Party (Tories) and Prime Minister Theresa May has gone into a partnership with Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), this is in-spite the possible breeches of ‘the Good Friday Agreement’. This is clearly a game of thrones and control in London. Not thinking into consideration the implications of Northern Irish politics or the situation there. This is all saving the grace and the Lady, who brash went into a snap election. Theresa May isn’t considering the implications, neither the consequences, other than she get to stay in power and have the throne for this time being. Even as the squabble and aftermath of this decisions are far from over. Her own party, MP’s and others are already reacting with all sort of reasons. As the DUP are a unique party with a certain history and policies that could be toxic in London. Therefore the statement from both No. 10 and from Sinn Fein’s Michelle O’Neill say it all. Take a look!
“Full statement from No 10
Posted at 20:36
A Downing Street spokesman said: “We can confirm that the Democratic Unionist Party have agreed to the principles of an outline agreement to support the Conservative government on a confidence and supply basis when Parliament returns next week. “We welcome this commitment, which can provide the stability and certainty the whole country requires as we embark on Brexit and beyond. “The details will be put forward for discussion and agreement at a cabinet meeting on Monday.“(BBC.com – link: http://www.bbc.com/news/live/election-2017-40231623)
DUP ‘betraying people of the north’
“An arrangement between the Conservatives and DUP will “end in tears” says Sinn Fein leader in the North Michelle O’Neill” (…) “She said: “It is no surprise that the DUP has agreed to prop up the pro-Brexit and pro-austerity Tory government of Theresa May” (…)“The Irish government needs to seize the initiative to secure designated special status for the North within the EU as part of the Brexit negotiations.” (…) “They have once again betrayed the interests of the people of the north by supporting a Tory party which has cut funding to our public services year on year to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds.” (…) “Experience shows us that unionists have minimal influence on any British government. They have achieved little propping up Tory governments in the past and put their own interests before those of the people“(…) “This new arrangement between the DUP and the Tories will be transitory and will end in tears.“But it will be the people of the north who will have to pay the price for the DUP’s support for Brexit and for cuts.” (McStravick, 2017).
This is far from over. This is just beginning and the ‘Impartial Clause’ of the ‘Good Friday Agreement’ will hunt this coalition, as much as the DUP own stances and policies. This not a friendly fire, but the truth hitting the shelves. The London based Parliament should consider what this does to Stormont and Belfast. As much as if the Conservative went into bed with SNP would have done. They are now involved in the midst of conflict and giving ways to a special kind of party. This will not be shrugged under the rug, as the deal and arrangement will come forward on Monday. But it will be 24 hours of mess, that will not be jolly for Theresa May. No matter what happen Arlene Foster has made a name and became the reason why May is the Prime Minister. While Sinn Fein and others are left in the sticks.
The Tories claim stability, but this will bring chaos and weakness, as the Tories has to walk carefully not to disembark DUP in the future, also how they are acting towards all the other parties in Northern Ireland. As they have gone into bed with. The indefinite question now, how long will this be merry and who fall on their sword first?
Reference:
McStravick, Sheena – ‘ Arrangement between DUP Tories “will end in tears” says Michelle O’Neill’ (10.06.2017) link: http://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/arrangement-between-dup-tories-will-13168628

In the Good Friday agreement that was written in 1998 might create issues for the newly admitted deal between the Conservative Party (Tories) and the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) yesterday, after the Tories lost their majority and their powers in the House. The lacking need of MPs, which made this agreement happen in the first place.
If you read the Good Friday Agreement or “The Agreement” of 1998 between the Her Majesty Government or the United Kingdom Government and the Northern Irish Government. Where the peace-agreement are clearly evident on the Constitutional Aspect of the agreement, that implicates certain values between the London and Belfast. That certainly Prime Minister Theresa May and DUP leader Arlene Foster, who both doesn’t want to think about the implications.
Therefore, let me take an important paragraph from the Agreement:
“(v) affirm that whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, the power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos, and aspirations of both communities” (Good Friday Agreement – Constitutional Isssues, 1998).
So with this in mind, the sovereign government in Northern Ireland should be exercised with rigorous impartiality. Merriam-Webster explains impartiality as “lack of favoritism toward one side or another”. If understood rightfully means that the Tories are now favoring the DUP in Northern Ireland, which would be natural as they are going into partnership as they are giving enough votes for them to continue to form a new cabinet. Since the Northern Irish questions will be concerning the policies and angles of DUP, not the rest. As the Sinn Fein and other parties will not be a part of the coalition. Therefore, while the Tories will walk close and with honor of their accord. They will clearly be careful making troubles with their partner, that is clearly in violation of the one paragraph signed in the Good Friday Agreement. Because the Tories has to be impartial to make sure their fellow comrade are taken care off and are happy.
If this break the inner-works of Stormont and the other political structures in Northern Ireland, it wouldn’t be surprising as the DUP are risking the agreement that laid peace for some more power in the whole Union. Without considering the implications of their impartial place by close working with No. 10. That Sinn Fein is reacting isn’t shocking, if Ulster Unionist Party (UUP), People Before Profits (PBP), Alliance Party of Northern Ireland, Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) and Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV). Still, the biggest voice in the NI other than DUP is Sinn Fein. Where Gerry Adams and others will clearly say this is a breach of the agreement.
I can understand this, even if the other parties in Northern Ireland isn’t questioning it. As Arlene Foster and Company are using their tricks to get a bargain. This will benefit her party and her constituency, but if it will really benefit the Northern Ireland politics, I doubt it. It will clearly bring massive questions and also a possible overhaul of the agreement. Which, Theresa May doesn’t need as she has enough problems with handling possible negotiations with Brussels and her weaken government into discussions of terms of the Brexit. Peace.

Today is a unique day, the General Election in the United Kingdom. That Theresa May herself ushered in and grinned while doing. She was confident because of the Conservative Party lead and support, that it would be walk-in-the-park to regain and strengthen her party before Brexit negotiations. Instead, she has fallen and bad. So bad she do not have majority in Parliament as she thought she was entitled to have. The public was not agreeing with her methods, neither was her campaign anything to run around the mill about and no one will say: “Well done lads”.
The winner is the opposition candidate and his party. That is Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and his campaign. A manifesto of progressive social welfare state ideas. That would support youth, health-care and build the state. He was moderate in tone, but progressive in stances and promises. It was something rare and neat. Corbyn deserves praise for his attitude amongst all the hatred, sceptics and pundits who expected him and his party to fall. The dominant problem was not the grass-root mobilization, but the Members of Parliament who has revolted against the man.
While Theresa May has been able to screw-up all on her own. Corbyn has built a party from scratch in some sense and used his connections in Unions to spark interest. To the amazement of the left, which May has sounded more and more alike. Part of me feels that she has more similar opinions of Nigel Farage, than of her old mate David Cameron and George Osborne. That is just me, I guess.
With this amazing defaulted campaign that has shattered the dreams of strong Conservative Party united to negotiate with European counterparts. Instead, she has belittle herself and has to ask for help. Not by just anyone, but the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP). She needs help from the DUP and their support to gain majority. Before the election, the mandate of the Conservative was strong enough on their own.
Now the help come from the London friendly Northern Irish. Just think about the shit-storm it would have been, if the Labour Party went into alliance with Sinn Fein (SF) or Scottish National Party (SNP). It would have created havoc and the world would have hassled the leadership of Labour. The world clocks would have stopped and the Tube in London would have gotten massive delays. However, since it is the Conservative and their needs, we all should just be merry.
Well, the handout of loyalists to London in Northern Ireland is all fine, but at what cost is it for the May government. Since, an arrangement of these sorts has to leeway for the alliance partner and not just for the show. That she says she will deliver a government for the ‘National Interest’ is bit weird, as the whole election was about her ego and her drive for total control. Something the voters has taken away. She will not get full majority, Theresa May needs support… the Tories cannot run alone.
If the Tories and May government hadn’t run this snap and quick elections, she would still been able to have majority and also have more power in the Brexit negotiations. Now she is weak, the tea isn’t strong. Corbyn and Labour has surged, because the Tories run on weak manifesto and worse campaign. May might be good to write legislation and be a Parliamentarian, but as a campaign leader she was unstable. The public saw this and the strength she didn’t show the public, as she even abstained from open and national televised debates. That was distasteful and showed arrogance to the public.
That also Liberal-Democratic Party (Lib-Dems) gotten more seats in Parliament. That Tories and SNP lost seats, shows how their workings has gone against them. That the Tories will defend their minority government in honor of the willing party DUP. The DUP as of now will decide what they deserve for being the king-makers.
May has really lost, not only her strength, but her credibility. She has been all-out swinging, but not delivering. Shredded with her ego and therefore when Corbyn and his team been modest in their approach they have gotten more sympathy and while May created apathy. This is the reason why so many turned Labour and lost faith in her. While Corbyn have showed character. Theresa May haven’t showed this. The Tories are bleeding now, therefore they need the support of DUP to be able to create a new cabinet.
The ones who voted the Tories because they feared the ‘Coalition of Chaos’, she will now run her own if she get an agreement and gives way to DUP. That the DUP Arlene Foster will use her leverage to eat of the plate and create hardships for May. The cost will come to the forefront the coming days. Even if the Tories have the senior Cabinet Ministers and the Tories have the formal minority government alone. They will still need to kiss the ring of Foster. She is not even trusted in Northern Ireland, so it is interesting that a bleeding Prime Minister begs from someone who is not trustworthy in NI.
This here will be saga of chaos and chaotic affairs, this is not a stronger United Kingdom government before negotiations with Brussels. Because the Tories have to keep their own shop at bay and also their new partnership with the NI DUP. This will be a fragile company… and how it goes will escalate the coming days. What we do know is that the Tories lost, May lost and the Corbyn’s of the world had a massive victory. Peace.
“I’m clear: if human rights laws get in the way of tackling extremism and terrorism, we will change those laws to keep British people safe. After the London Bridge attack, I said “enough is enough”, and that things need to change to tackle the threat we face. And tonight I set out what that means: longer prison sentences for people convicted of terrorist offences; deporting foreign terror suspects back to their own countries; restricting the freedom and movements of terrorist suspects when we have evidence to know they present a threat, but not enough to prosecute them in court” – Theresa May (06.06.2017 – at a rally at Slough, United Kingdom).
That Prime Minister Theresa May are obliged to amend her laws and ask for provisions to change them through Parliament. She is fine to do so and follow the procedures of the state, to make the most draconian laws able. As the Tories already before the grand-elections started to unleash laws of old, that we’re in the fashion of King Henry IV. These laws was amend and gives more powers to the government over the Parliament. So the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom has already shown force and will of taking the powers in their hands.
Theresa May isn’t the first to use terrorism to control and to suspend laws to gain more power. That is usually a sign of oppressive behavior and of the Orwellian society. Clearly, a human being like May should consider her words. If not she really wants to show that she can act so much, that she wants to take away freedom and liberties from her own citizens. Instead of believing in the set freedoms and provisions done by the United Nations Charter and ratified legal framework that the United Kingdom must have.
Still, there are enough signs that she doesn’t need to do so, as the provisions that are in place has not and will not overpower a sovereign, neither will it create interference of state control in troubling time. That is if she really cares about the liberties and the just societies the United Nations legal framework put in place.
OHCHR own Fact Sheet on Human Rights and Terrorism:
“International and regional human rights law makes clear that States have both a right and a duty to protect individuals under their jurisdiction from terrorist attacks. This stems from the general duty of States to protect individuals under their jurisdiction against interference in the enjoyment of human rights. More specifically, this duty is recognized as part of States’ obligations to ensure respect for the right to life and the right to security” OHCHR, P: 8, 2008).
“These challenges are not insurmountable. States can effectively meet their obligations under international law by using the flexibilities built into the international human rights law framework. Human rights law allows for limitations on certain rights and, in a very limited set of exceptional circumstances, for derogations from certain human rights provisions. These two types of restrictions are specifically conceived to provide States with the necessary flexibility to deal with exceptional circumstances, while at the same time—provided a number of conditions are fulfilled—complying with their obligations under international human rights law” (OHCHR, P: 23, 2008).
Than it is the United Nation Security Council own definition:
“Security Council Resolution 1963 (2010) reiterates that effective counter-terrorism measures and respect for human rights are complementary and mutually reinforcing, and are an essential part of a successful counter-terrorism effort, and it notes the importance of respect for the rule of law so as to effectively combat terrorism. Resolution 1963 (2010) “thus encourages CTED to further develop its activities in this area, to ensure that all human rights issues relevant to the implementation of resolutions 1373 (2001) and 1624 (2005) are addressed consistently and even-handedly including, as appropriate, on country visits that are organized with the consent of the visited member State”.
(UNSC, 2015)
It is really serious when the United Nations and the OHCHR are saying there no issues between respecting the Human Rights Law legal framework and countering terrorism. Even if the resolutions and legal framework are critical and makes the state more bound to respect the terrorists. This still, doesn’t stop them from having provisions and having strict security in the Member States. The Member State themselves are putting forward rule of law and also has to incriminate inside their territory. However, the security is for the reason of the liberty and freedom of all citizens and all rights to all human beings. It is strange that Prime Minister Theresa May wants to suspend it, while the UNSC and OHCHR are saying it is possible.
That she has to go this far to gain support. Seems more like she could join Nigel Farage and Paul Nuttal, than following the Conservative leadership of the past. These words would not have come from David Cameron or anyone of his kind. This shows how fragile and how hell-bent is on winning this election by any means. That she has to promise on the final leap to suspend rule of law and take away basic human rigths. As the Police Service and Security Organization in our time cannot be able fight terrorism by the means and the values, that most of Europe see as natural. That the Police and Army get stronger laws and more draconian ones to make sure the United Kingdom can oppress and silence freedoms. Instead of fighting it through the means of strengthening the Police and the Intelligence, as the UK has one of the most sophisticated Security Organization in the world. It should have the capacity and if the Conservative had been serious about it, they would have fixed the issue during the last 8 years. Peace.
Reference:
Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) – ‘Human Rights, Terrorism and Counter-terrorism – Fact Sheet No. 32’ (July 2008)
link: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Factsheet32EN.pdf
United Nation Security Council – ‘PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS WHILE COUNTERING TERRORISM’ (10.09.2015) link: http://www.un.org/en/sc/ctc/rights.html
“If I was to really get at the burr in my saddle, it’s not politics — and this is, I think, probably a horrible analogy — but I look at politicians as, they are doing what inherently they need to do to retain power. Their job is to consolidate power. When you go to the zoo and you see a monkey throwing poop, you go, ‘That’s what monkeys do, what are you gonna do?’ But what I wish the media would do more frequently is say, ‘Bad monkey’.” – Jon Stewart
This week’s interview with the Plymouth Herald as she was campaigning in the South West of England. As the General Election of the United Kingdom runs closer. I feel it is important to show grace and tact to the local constituencies. Plymouth is a marginal seat and with the dwindling polls of the Conservative and less of a percentage between the Conservative Party and the Labour Party.
Therefore the coalition of chaos is getting closer, than the strengthening the Tories for the Brexit negotiations. Instead of showing class and policy as the Tories could have had a better campaign, as their manifesto was a sensation of tax-breaks for the rich and cuts on welfare. In the margin’s of error is that the Labour Party has a social-caring manifesto and where they are putting forward meaningful policies. Even if Jeremy Corbyn are seen as Marxist, but he is more consistent, than what the Prime Minister Theresa May. We can see how she lacks campaigning and being honest with the pledges. Prime Minster May are again nonsensical in her interview.
In Plymouth, Theresa May botched an interview, it is horrific how little she answered and how little she answered. As the Plymouth problems didn’t matter or if she even had been briefed about the situation. This is as if she didn’t want to mind it and thought it would be easy to answer the local press. Because with just looking into two of the four questions asked by the Plymouth Herald to Prime Minister May, she didn’t really answer with anything. It is not like the Conservative Party head honcho had any answers or thought true the implications of Brexit to the constituency of Plymouth. Take a look!
Q: “Prime Minister, welcome to Plymouth. We’re in one of the most marginal seats in the country here. Are you getting nervous, and do you see Plymouth as a ‘must win’ next week?” (…) A: “No, I’m very clear that this is a crucial election for this country” (…) “We stand at an important moment, we need to make sure we get the Brexit negotiations right, but also have a plan to take this country forward, to build a stronger, more prosperous future for Plymouth, for families here and across the whole of the United Kingdom” (…) “So I’m going out and about around the whole country, talking to people with that very clear message that they face a choice on June 8.” (Blackledge, 2017).
Q: “A lot of people in Plymouth voted for Brexit because they saw a better future ahead. How will your Brexit plan make Plymouth people better off?” (…) A: “I think there is a better future ahead for Plymouth and for the whole of the UK” (…) “There are opportunities when we leave the European Union. But we need to have the right government in place, the right plan to grasp those opportunities” (…) “We need to get Brexit right, just 11 days after the GE we will start those Brexit negotiations. I’m the Prime Minister, I’m the party leader with the plan for those negotiations” (…) “But it’s about more than this. it’s about building that prosperous future for families in Plymouth and around the whole of the country” (…) “I’m confident we can do that, I’ve got a plan for a stronger Britain, I’m confident we can build that stronger economy with better opportunities for young people, better opportunities for families, and I’m optimistic about that because I believe in Britain and I believe in the British people.” (Blackledge, 2017).
This here is a proof of the lacking policies and guidelines for the future with the Tories. If you believe the Brexiteers and the Tories after this one, than your blind. The blindness will be eating you and you would be walking in total uncertainty. Since PM May isn’t answer the questions. She is just bringing a word-salad instead of actually coming with wisdom of how she will deliver the promises. Like Plymouth doesn’t get any consideration or concern.
The constituency of Plymouth and the problems there are not worth her time. Instead more important to say the whole United Kingdom will be prosperous without the European Union. Even if there isn’t anything in the near future proving that the Brexit will be positive. If it will be so, it isn’t because the Tories have been prepared or had a well-figured out polices to become independent from the European Union. The Tories here is on the limb. Tories isn’t proving that they care about Plymouth and doubt that is the only constituency that May has no current plan to help. Peace.
Reference:
Blackledge, Sam – ‘The four key questions put to Theresa May that Plymouth wanted answered’ (31.05.2017) link: http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/here-is-what-the-prime-minister-had-to-say-to-the-herald-this-morning/story-30363776-detail/story.html#QxRrRf1Fj11MiaRm.99








Her Majesty Treasury and Her Majesty Government, the Tories and their White paper on legislation concerning sanctions are interesting read, as you can see how combined the laws and the execution of the framework have been with the European Union, as well as the legality connected with the United Nations Security Council. This proves how laws and combined efforts have been the norm in Europe of late. That the United Kingdom government have complied and worked directly with Brussels and New York, to establish the information and the legal assistance to sanction state, businesses and individuals crossing into the United Kingdom.
Therefore, this White Paper from the HM Treasury says certain aspects the government have to work upon and how the kingdom have to make new laws to fix the issues. These issues has to be handled as the Brexit will certainly impact the legislation on sanctions and how the UK going to handle it. The words of the report is telling and expel the facts in a deep way, secondly the report also colorfully extend the needed for different sort of laws; that is both open-government and also making sure data get kept secret. This shows how much work the UK government have with rewriting and reforging their own legislation with the leaving of the EU. That cannot be worked out with a few phrases, but has to be build on a which paradigm and what precedence the Tories government seem fit. Just take a look!
“This consultation is about the legal powers we need to maintain sanctions as a viable instrument of foreign policy. It is not about the policy goals themselves or how we will align UK sanctions in future with those imposed by the EU or other international partners. However we recognise that sanctions require broad application to be effective and we will continue to work closely with allies and partners to this end” (HM Government, P: 5, 2017).
“The legislation will need to be in place before we leave the EU to ensure that we can preserve current UK sanctions policy, although entry into force will be timed to coincide with the date of our actual withdrawal. While the UK is a member of the EU we will continue to exercise all the rights and obligations of membership including with respect to the Common Foreign and Security Policy” (HM Government, P: 8, 2017).
“Those subject to UK sanctions will be able to challenge their listing by requesting an internal review, where this is consistent with our obligations under UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs). The sanctions will remain in place while the challenge or request is being considered” (HM Government, P: 21, 2017).
“The Government will always seek to sanction an individual or entity on the basis of open-source evidence which can be disclosed to the listed person in the event of a legal challenge. However, in certain cases the Government may wish to rely on sensitive material, the disclosure of which would be damaging to national security, international relations or another public interest. In order to protect the sensitive material from disclosure but make it available to the presiding judge, a closed material procedure should be available” (HM Government, P: 22, 2017).
“Asset-freezing regimes will contain grounds for permitting otherwise prohibited activity to authorise the release or making available of certain frozen funds or economic resources to pay for:
a) the essential needs of natural or legal persons, entities or bodies b) reasonable and necessary professional fees and reimbursement of incurred expenses associated with the provision of legal services c) the fees or service charges for routine holding or maintenance of frozen funds or economic resources and d) extraordinary situations or expenses. This will continue the licensing practice that the Government currently operates. Exemptions for country sanctions regimes will be further defined within either secondary legislation or by reference to statutory” (HM Government, P: 26, 2017).
“Any new sanctions legislation would provide the Government power to obtain and share information relating to sanctions. The Government’s ability to share information will extend to Government bodies, agencies, regulators, businesses, operational partners, other public bodies and international partners. It will be similar to the ability to obtain, use, and share information under current EU legislation and will be consistent with, and subject to the safeguards in, the existing UK and international provisions regarding the sharing of information” (HM Government, P: 36, 2017).
These laws that they have to fix and make are substantial if the United Kingdom still wants to comply with the United Nations Security Council, as well as if they wish to have good functioning body with the rest of the European Union. Even though the legality and the dominion will be all United Kingdom and their sovereign powers as a state, they still need to be in coherent with the rest of the world.
This shows that the powers of the Tories and the questions left behind and the unknown hurdles of the current leadership. As this is just one sort of legislation that has to be fixed in due time and with the process of both houses. That the importance of the sovereign state make sure that their laws are complied, that their statutes can be used and that the sanctions can be put on actors that breaches the codes of the United Kingdom. Certainly, the Tories Government and Brexiteers didn’t think of the issues complied with the legality of sanctions. Peace.
Reference:
HM Government – ‘Public consultation on the United Kingdom’s future legal framework for imposing and implementing sanctions’ (20.04.2017) link: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/609986/Public_consultation_on_the_UK_s_future_legal_framework_for_imposing_and_implementing_sanctions__Print_pdf_version_.pdf

Yesterday (19.04.2017), the internal memo was sent out the leadership of the Uganda Police Force, to the district leaders to get back the Police Uniforms and Uniform parts from the Crime Preventers. The Crime Preventers even got motorcycles in 2015. The Inspector General of Police Kale Kayihura have defended the program since 2015, as the political opposition inside Uganda has questioned the use of it.
That is natural, as the National Resistance Movement (NRM) and President Yoweri Museveni has used the Crime Preventers, they we’re important part of the campaigns and the use of fear during the campaigns between 2015-2016. They we’re usually at the rallies and also in the villages drumming up people for the President. By 2016 the numbers of Crime Preventers we’re about 65,000.
So after getting the amount of the unemployed youth, getting them trained and paying them for the loyalty to the state, they are now trying to disembark the giant project of Crime Preventers, since it cost to much and has to many people to take care off. The NRM cannot sustain the brigades of Crime Preventers, the youth who learned the Movement mantra and use of propaganda for two years. As the use of them was valuable in 2015 and 2016, in 2017 less, as the rallies and the opposition is easier to control.
The Police Force can easily monitor the Opposition in the non-election time, but during campaigns the strength of manpower is hurt, as the UPF cannot hire enough proper officers and train them, than it is healthy to use of the unemployed. The Unemployed can very easy just become Crime Preventers and then loyal to the NRM. That was the sufficient need and they could also intimidate the public and make sure they where loyal to the Movement.
So that today the start of dismantling the Crime Preventers and the stage of need is gone. They are not seen as so vital, as the NRM feels safe about their state of affairs. Since they don’t need the youth group who are trained by the Police to be Community Policing, the NRM needed them only to do so when the Opposition parties where campaigning, now they need to clear the unnecessary bills. That bill now is the Crime Preventers and they are approximately 65,000 civilized police.
The civilian trained police force that was the Crime Preventers and they we’re needed in the 2015 and 2016, but not now in the 2017, as the republic are cash-strapped and the economy isn’t booming. Therefore, the Police doesn’t need a big budget post, which is unnecessary. The unemployed youth we’re needed while campaigning and promising pledges, but in office again, they are just big bill. Peace.