Legal, Policing, Scotland, Society

Nine police officers are attacked on duty each day

POLICE SCOTLAND

NEW figures published show that police officers were subjected to more than 800 assaults over the course of just three months.

An average of more than nine assaults were inflicted every day on serving officers during the first quarter of this year.

During this period, 860 attacks were committed, with an average of five working days lost for every assault.

This was slightly down from the 1,031 over the same time period in 2020-21, which was a significant rise from 764 assaults in 2019-20.

Injuries such as stabbings with needles doubled in 2020-21, and injuries during an arrest rose by 12.5 per cent.

In 1919 Magazine, the policing magazine, which focuses on Scotland’s justice and social affairs, an experienced Police Scotland officer said: “The main underlying cause of violence against police is lack of police officers. You’re lucky if you’re sending two cops to go to a call where historically there might have been four, five, six in two or three cars.”

In the first quarter of the year there were five cases of officers being injured by needles.

The most common injuries were bruising and inflammation with 233 cases, followed by 222 cases of exposure to a hazardous substance, and 133 reports of a cut or laceration.

Last year, a thug was jailed after choking an officer and rendering him unconscious. Colleagues feared the officer had been killed after the assailant attacked him at a disturbance in Coatbridge, Lanarkshire. A total of 225 working days were lost over the three-month period. This is in comparison to 910 days lost due to potential or confirmed exposure to Covid.

The statistics come from a health and safety report, sent to the Scottish Police Authority’s People’s Committee last month. This report highlights a series of incidents.

It includes a case of an officer attending a violent domestic incident in Glasgow where a man was brandishing a knife close to paramedics. He swung the knife at officers when they tried to engage with him and struck one on the chest.

The report raised the “continued increase in police officer and police staff assaults” as an area of “concern”.

A senior police officer said: “Officers and staff work with dedication and a commitment to helping people, and violence against them is deplorable and unacceptable.

“It is simply not part of the job, and it will not be tolerated.

“It causes physical and psychological harm to dedicated public servants and there is also a cost to the public purse through days lost to ill-health or personal injury claims.”

Those who carry out serious attacks on police officers can face up to life imprisonment under common law offences.

There are also specific offences relating to police assaults in the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act and Emergency Workers (Scotland) Act.

The Scottish Government said: “No one should be the victim of abuse or violence at work, and assaults on police officers are completely unacceptable.

“The health and safety of police officers is a matter for the chief constable, who has made a commitment for 2021/22 that he will continue to take action to reduce the impact on officers and staff of violence in all its forms.”

Standard
Competition and Markets, Government, Legal, NHS, Society

Price-hiking pharmaceutical firms fined £260m

CMA RULING

PHARMACEUTICAL companies have been fined £260million after overcharging the NHS for life-saving drugs for almost a decade.

UK firms increased the price of hydrocortisone by more than 12,000 per cent and paid would-be rivals to stay out of the market, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) found.

The watchdog said Auden Mckenzie and Actavis UK, now known as Accord-UK, charged “excessively high prices” for the pills, used to treat adrenal insufficiency. The cost of a pack rose from 70p in 2008 to £88 by 2016 – a 12,471 per cent increase.

Meanwhile, NHS spending on the drug, which is taken by tens of thousands – including for the life-threatening condition Addison’s disease – rose from £500,000 a year to £80million.

Andrea Coscelli, chief executive of the CMA, said: “These are without doubt some of the most serious abuses we have uncovered in recent years. The actions of these firms cost the NHS – and therefore taxpayers – hundreds of millions of pounds.” The firms exploited the fact that de-branded drugs are not subject to NHS price regulation, enabling them to increase their prices without constraint.

Auden Mckenzie bought the licences for hydrocortisone and launched generic versions in 2008. It paid off rivals AMCo, now Advanz Pharma, and Waymade. Actavis UK took over the business in 2015 and continued paying off AMCo to stay out of the market.

The CMA said: “Auden Mckenzie’s decision to raise prices for de-branded drugs meant that the NHS had no choice but to pay huge sums of taxpayers’ money for life-saving medicines. These were egregious breaches of the law that artificially inflated the costs faced by the NHS, reducing the money available for patient care.

“Our fine serves as a warning to any other drug firm planning to exploit the NHS.”

The regulator said that Accord-UK will be liable for £65.6million of the fine, while former parent company Allergan is solely liable for £109.1million. The pair are also jointly liable for £2million.

Accord-UK, Accord Healthcare and the current parent company Intas are jointly and severally liable for £44.4million, the CMA said. There is a total fine of £42.8million for AMCo, while Waymade will be required to pay £2.5million.

The CMA’s decision also means the NHS will be able to seek damages for the firms’ behaviour. Accord said it is “disappointed” by the ruling and intends to appeal.

Standard
Britain, Government, Internet, Legal, Society, Technology

New enforceable code for web giants

INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

FACEBOOK, Google and other social media platforms will be forced to introduce strict age checks on their websites or assume all their users are children.

Web firms that hoover up people’s personal information will have to guarantee they know the age of their users before allowing them to set up an account.

Companies that refuse will face fines of up to 4 per cent of their global turnover – £1.67billion in the case of Facebook.

The age checks are part of a tough new code being drawn up by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which is backed by existing laws and will come into force as early as the autumn.

. See also Internet safety: The era of tech self-regulation is ending

Experts claim it will have a “transformative” effect on social media sites, which have been accused of exposing young people to dangerous and illicit material, bullying and predators. It includes rules to help protect children from paedophiles online.

The code also aims to stop web firms bombarding children with harmful content, a problem highlighted by the case of Molly Russell, 14, who killed herself after Instagram allowed her to view self-harm images. Under the new code:

. Tech firms will be banned from building up a “profile” of children based on their search history, and then using it to send them suggestions for material such as pornography, hate speech and self-harm.

. Children’s privacy settings must automatically be set to the highest level.

. Geolocation services must be switched off by default, making it harder for trolls and paedophiles to target children based on their whereabouts.

. Tech firms will not be allowed to include features on children’s accounts designed to fuel addictive behaviour, including online videos that automatically start one after the other, notifications that arrive through the night, and prompts nudging children to lower their privacy settings.

Once the new rules are implemented, children should be asked to prove their age by uploading their passports or birth certificate to an independent verification firm. This would then give them a digital “fingerprint” which they could use to demonstrate their age on other websites.

Alternatively, the tech firms could ask children to get their parents’ consent, and have the parents prove their identity with a credit card.

If the web giants cannot guarantee the age of their users, they will have to assume they are all children – and dramatically limit the amount of information they collect on them, as set out in the code.

At present, a third of British children aged 11 and nearly half of those aged 12 have an account on Facebook, Twitter or another social network, OFCOM figures show.

Many youngsters are exposed to material or conversations they are too young to cope with as a result.

The Deputy Commissioner at the ICO, said: “We are going to be making it quite clear that there is a reasonable expectation that companies stick to their own published terms and policies, including what they say about age restrictions.”

A House of Lords amendment tabled by Baroness Beeban Kidron that ensures the new code will be drawn up and put into law, said: “I expect the code to say: ‘You may not, as a company, help children find things that are detrimental to their health and well-being.’ That is transformative. This is so radical because it goes into the engine room, into the mechanics of how businesses work and says you cannot exploit children.”

The rules will come into force by the end of the year, and will be policed by the ICO, which has the powers to hand out huge fines.

It will also use its powers to crack down on any web firm that does not have controls in place to enforce its own terms and conditions. Companies that say they ban pornography and hate speech online will have to show the watchdog they have reporting mechanisms in place, and that they quickly remove problem material.

Firms that demand children are aged 13 or above – as most web giants do – will also have to demonstrate that they strictly enforce this policy.

At the moment, web giants such as Facebook, simply ask children to confirm their age by entering their date of birth without demanding proof.

 

FOR far too long, social media giants have arrogantly refused to take responsibility for the filth swilling across their sites.

Many of these firms, cloistered in Silicon Valley ivory towers, are owned by tax-avoiding billionaires who are indifferent to the trauma inflicted on children using websites such as Facebook and Instagram.

At the click of a mouse, young children are at risk of exposure to paedophiles, self-harm images, online pornography and extremist propaganda.

Finally, however, these behemoths are being brought to heel by the Information Commissioner (ICO). They must ensure strict age checks and stop bombarding children with damaging content – or face multi-million-pound fines.

Such enforced regulation is very welcome and well overdue.

Standard