I retired in 2008 and looking back with the benefit of hindsight Sir Ian Blair's tenure as commissioner was the time when the job of Commissioner became essentially impossible to perform. Social media was ramping up its influence and the clamour of 24/7 rolling news was really getting going. No Commissioner is ever going to be universally popular. Lord Blair was dealing with a senior command team at NSY who were more than dysfunctional. It was a recipe for disaster and as you said he would have been a good choice for deputy under Sir Hugh Orde.
Lest we forget the role of Commissioner is a true poison chalice and I believe no Commissioner now will see out their tenure.
He brought the odious Hayman in as Acso along with a person who apparently vanished from Norfolk Constabulary overnight to mysteriously appear alongside Hayman in some form of personal assistant capacity. Together they brought havoc,chaos and anarchy, grovelling subserviently to Thames House ( deceived is probably nearer the truth); destroying everything in their path. Hayman at best failed to understand what he did or at worse knew, didn't care and deliberately det out to do it. Blair once came into 1829. Bumbled on waving a clipboard about for few mins before departing followed by his entourage. He came across as a aesthetic minor academic best suited to administration and bureaucracy. As a leader he was as about as inspirational as a dose of dysentery. He projected jo warmth, no humour and no empathy. Im sure he was a decent enough man. But he swan with hammerhead and great white sharks, and they toyed with him until he had served his use, then spat him out. I read his book recently, and Haymans too. Blair seemed utterly unable to perceive and comprehend exactly what Hayman was. I suspect he failed in that regard constantly as Commissioner.
For many ex and some still serving Met officers, Sir Ian Blair’s term as Commissioner may not be looked back upon favourably.
He oversaw the 2005 summer bombings in London and the disastrous shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes but in my opinion, like several commissioners over the years, especially Cressida Dick, he was dealt a poisonous hand from the outset.
Painted as a Tony Blair appointed, university educated liberal by both his predecessor, Sir John Stephens and the mainstream media, he had an uphill battle even before his very first day in office.
He was certainly a very different animal to Stephens who ran the Met like General Patton ran the US third army. My experience of Sir Ian was very different.
I met him several times during my career and always found him personable and professional.
On one specific occasion I witnessed him make a split second decision to authorise a tactical capability that his predecessor had pontificated over for three years.
I also had the privilege in 2016, when we were both long retired, of interviewing him for several hours whilst filming the documentary ‘Secrets of a Police marksman’ and found him more quietly professional than his predecessor, not remotely liberal in his outlook and way more decisive than he was painted by his detractors.
Fair enough Tony, as I said in the piece, recollections will vary. We take as we find. I will say, though, I am inclined to assess senior officers by what they do rather than they say - especially after they retire. I tried to be as fair as possible to the man. I also stand by my words. The cultural direction of travel he set for British policing was an absolute disaster. The dumpster fire that is British policing today is down, in no small part, to the managerialism and social justice-tinted nonsense Blair introduced into the service.
Fascinating insights. I agree with another comment’s sentiment that commanding the Met is a poisoned chalice. I recall an observation that “all senior police officers are politicians”, yet progressing through a police career rarely equips individuals with a full set of political skills. And nor should it. That’s the conundrum. One observation here in Hong Kong, both during the colonial era and more recently, is that Commissioners have been ‘moved on’ after proving wanting during a crisis. As the saying goes, “Only when the tide goes out do you see who is swimming naked.” Some catch a lucky break to serve their term without experiencing a major calamity.
I view Stockwell through the prism of Officers following a man they ‘knew’ to have a bomb. They were prepared to sacrifice their own lives to save the innocent.
From what I recall of the de Menezez affair, the senior personnel of the Met were too busy with meetings at which they pondered whether to arrest the terrorist suspect or not, thus ignoring the pleas of the frontline officers worried he was heading toward the underground.
The bureaucratic mind may appear civilised and reasoned, but, particularly for emergency situations, it’s inept, self-protecting and cruel.
The remark supposedly made by a Chief Stoker when he surfaced alongside Lord Mountbatten after Kelly was sunk off Crete in May 1941 springs to mind. The difficult part, as always, is being able to distinguish between the two. I know where my money is in this case.
I only met him once when he as Deputy Commissioner swept into HMIC at Queen Anne’s Gate for a meeting, later than all the other attendees. He had a commanding presence and spoke intelligently. Commanding the Met is a bit of a poisoned chalice that broke most postholders during my 70s to 2000s service. I had gone by 7/7, not the Met’s finest hour.
Tough job, booted unceremoniously by Boreass Johnson, and now he’s gone with not too many good words, although some. RIP Lord Blair.
I retired in 2008 and looking back with the benefit of hindsight Sir Ian Blair's tenure as commissioner was the time when the job of Commissioner became essentially impossible to perform. Social media was ramping up its influence and the clamour of 24/7 rolling news was really getting going. No Commissioner is ever going to be universally popular. Lord Blair was dealing with a senior command team at NSY who were more than dysfunctional. It was a recipe for disaster and as you said he would have been a good choice for deputy under Sir Hugh Orde.
Lest we forget the role of Commissioner is a true poison chalice and I believe no Commissioner now will see out their tenure.
He brought the odious Hayman in as Acso along with a person who apparently vanished from Norfolk Constabulary overnight to mysteriously appear alongside Hayman in some form of personal assistant capacity. Together they brought havoc,chaos and anarchy, grovelling subserviently to Thames House ( deceived is probably nearer the truth); destroying everything in their path. Hayman at best failed to understand what he did or at worse knew, didn't care and deliberately det out to do it. Blair once came into 1829. Bumbled on waving a clipboard about for few mins before departing followed by his entourage. He came across as a aesthetic minor academic best suited to administration and bureaucracy. As a leader he was as about as inspirational as a dose of dysentery. He projected jo warmth, no humour and no empathy. Im sure he was a decent enough man. But he swan with hammerhead and great white sharks, and they toyed with him until he had served his use, then spat him out. I read his book recently, and Haymans too. Blair seemed utterly unable to perceive and comprehend exactly what Hayman was. I suspect he failed in that regard constantly as Commissioner.
For many ex and some still serving Met officers, Sir Ian Blair’s term as Commissioner may not be looked back upon favourably.
He oversaw the 2005 summer bombings in London and the disastrous shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes but in my opinion, like several commissioners over the years, especially Cressida Dick, he was dealt a poisonous hand from the outset.
Painted as a Tony Blair appointed, university educated liberal by both his predecessor, Sir John Stephens and the mainstream media, he had an uphill battle even before his very first day in office.
He was certainly a very different animal to Stephens who ran the Met like General Patton ran the US third army. My experience of Sir Ian was very different.
I met him several times during my career and always found him personable and professional.
On one specific occasion I witnessed him make a split second decision to authorise a tactical capability that his predecessor had pontificated over for three years.
I also had the privilege in 2016, when we were both long retired, of interviewing him for several hours whilst filming the documentary ‘Secrets of a Police marksman’ and found him more quietly professional than his predecessor, not remotely liberal in his outlook and way more decisive than he was painted by his detractors.
RIP sir 💙
Fair enough Tony, as I said in the piece, recollections will vary. We take as we find. I will say, though, I am inclined to assess senior officers by what they do rather than they say - especially after they retire. I tried to be as fair as possible to the man. I also stand by my words. The cultural direction of travel he set for British policing was an absolute disaster. The dumpster fire that is British policing today is down, in no small part, to the managerialism and social justice-tinted nonsense Blair introduced into the service.
Fascinating insights. I agree with another comment’s sentiment that commanding the Met is a poisoned chalice. I recall an observation that “all senior police officers are politicians”, yet progressing through a police career rarely equips individuals with a full set of political skills. And nor should it. That’s the conundrum. One observation here in Hong Kong, both during the colonial era and more recently, is that Commissioners have been ‘moved on’ after proving wanting during a crisis. As the saying goes, “Only when the tide goes out do you see who is swimming naked.” Some catch a lucky break to serve their term without experiencing a major calamity.
I met him once. Seemed like a nice man but never a policeman in 100 years.
I view Stockwell through the prism of Officers following a man they ‘knew’ to have a bomb. They were prepared to sacrifice their own lives to save the innocent.
Indeed. Some of them were friends and colleagues. Sadly, Stockwell (for many) was also about how management dealt with the aftermath.
I hate to think what DHCs (Decent Hardworking Coppers) were put through. The aftermath certainly separated leaders from managers.
From what I recall of the de Menezez affair, the senior personnel of the Met were too busy with meetings at which they pondered whether to arrest the terrorist suspect or not, thus ignoring the pleas of the frontline officers worried he was heading toward the underground.
The bureaucratic mind may appear civilised and reasoned, but, particularly for emergency situations, it’s inept, self-protecting and cruel.
The remark supposedly made by a Chief Stoker when he surfaced alongside Lord Mountbatten after Kelly was sunk off Crete in May 1941 springs to mind. The difficult part, as always, is being able to distinguish between the two. I know where my money is in this case.
I only met him once when he as Deputy Commissioner swept into HMIC at Queen Anne’s Gate for a meeting, later than all the other attendees. He had a commanding presence and spoke intelligently. Commanding the Met is a bit of a poisoned chalice that broke most postholders during my 70s to 2000s service. I had gone by 7/7, not the Met’s finest hour.
Tough job, booted unceremoniously by Boreass Johnson, and now he’s gone with not too many good words, although some. RIP Lord Blair.
I never liked Blair and was glad when he went. John Stevens, for me was a coppers copper. He always had time to stop and chat with the ranks.