Police(ing) Dogging

First of all, let me assure you that this post is a matter of Political point and not personal persuasion. I don't want any nasty rumours starting in the Macclesfield Express.

I got a call from a constituent last week, who'd had an interesting experience whilst on the way home. He'd been driving down Congleton Road when his phone rang, and being a good boy and not wanting to get a ticket for driving on the blower, he pulled into one the lay-bys to answer his phone.

Shortly after this he was approached by a couple of the Cheshire East community wardens. These are not the police, they are not PCSO's, they are council employees with the power to issue tickets for dog fouling, littering and other similar offences.

They informed him that there had been reports of lewd activity in the lay-by, and in light of this they were patrolling the area. They wanted to know what his reason was for being there and said that if they didn't think his reasons were genuine his number plate would be logged on a database and the registered keeper would be informed by post. You see....they thought he was after a blower of a different type.

Now....I must add at this point that I've been talking to the council officer responsible for this area, and they have reassured me that there is no database and no letters will be sent. I'm not sure where this part of the story arises from, but it still raises some interesting questions.

The council, including community wardens, have no business policing lay-bys. The police have an interest in matters of indecency, but if no criminal offence has taken place, or about to take place, then it really is no-ones business but the individuals involved. We are all aware of the kind of activities that do occur in such places, but however odd and strange we may find it, it really is none of our business unless someone has broken the law.

It is certainly not where the wardens, who are paid for by the tax-payers, should be diverting their efforts.

I am also very uncomfortable at the idea of a warden, who has no formal legal qualification, thinking they have the power to decide if an individual has right to be in a location. If I was asked similar questions by a warden I'm afraid to say that I would dispatch them in no uncertain terms to go an mind their own business.

Quite clearly, it would be completely unacceptable for us to log a database of such occurrences, or to send letters. Someone may have a perfectly good reason for being in the lay-by (as in this case), and yet they may refuse to tell the warden why (as I've suggested I would personally do). In this case, a letter could be sent which then could cause the owner significant problems back at home when their wife/daughter/mother read the letter.

So whilst I've been promised that there is no log of number plates, I've written to the cabinet member who is responsible for wardens to ensure that this will always be the case. Hopefully then the wardens can get back to making sure that everyone clears up after their dogs, which is what I want them to do.