Is this yet another sensitive issue?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15704549

There are concerns regarding the increase of metal theft which is costing the UK £770m per year, so much so that the MPs are to debate the introduction of new scrap metal dealing laws.

But strangely enough no mention has been made regarding the main culprits, except of course by the Daily Mail.

http://www.dailymail....r-hits-770m-year.html

[jackthehat]

Many years ago, 'fences' used to receive harsher sentences because by their very existence, they encouraged thieves to steal.

If scrap metal dealers/smelters are more stringently regulated/punished then hopefully *no-one* will want to steal for fear of having their collar felt when they attempt to off-load their haul.

[DrFilth]

the problem with scrap metal is they stash the bent gear inside the load of scrap
so mr bloggs at the yard can't sort through 15 or 20 tons of metal once on the deck,
the overhead electric crane will come along and shift it to the main pile

[Zeuhl]

Why would it be sensitive? Romania is just another country isn't it?

The BBC has reported on the main issue - increased metal theft and the proposal to fix it with new scrap dealing laws - clearly and objectively without recourse to any as yet unsubstantiated hypotheses or nuances to the story.

This is what the BBC usually do and they are of course obligated like all Broadcast companies to be accurate and objective and are thus monitored and regulated.

The Dail Wail - like all newspapers - has no such regulation or monitoring so is free to highlight any rumour, minor aspect, hypothesis or invention of their own in order to 'sex up' a story.

They are regularly found to be doing this and are regularly caned in the courts for it when they lie about someone who has the where-with-all to take legal action.

The Wail story claiming all the metal theft is down to Romanians includes the classic weasel-words <<police believe>> without any substantiation or quantification.

Even if it later turns out to have some truth to it (which seems unlikely) it is still gutter journalism and an insult to most people's intelligence.

[New Judge]

Whoever is doing the stealing there would probably me less of this type of crime if the existing legislation (The Scrap Metal Dealers Act, 1964) was properly enforced.

From the report:

“The LGA proposals also include...the requirement that dealers keep a log of sellers' details.”

From the Act:

“...every scrap metal dealer shall, at each place occupied by him as a scrap metal store, keep a book for the purposes of this section, and shall enter in the book the particulars required by this section with respect to...” [and it goes on to describe the details to be recorded which include the identity of the seller, the registration mark of any vehicle used, etc]

From the report:

“They also want scrapyards to renew their licences every year”

From the Act:

"..any such entry [in the register of scrap dealers] shall be cancelled by the authority at the end of the period of three years beginning with the said day, unless before the end of that period the dealer applies to the authority for the registration to be continued for a further period of three years..."

The first reaction of the authorities when faced with a problem is either "new taxes" or "new laws". In this case new laws are proposed with little regard for considering whether those existing are suitable and are being enforced. Yes, the Act (which is almost fifty years old) needs a bit of fine tuning to adapt it to today’s circumstances. Among the things needed are perhaps more frequent re-registration and some identity checks on sellers. But there is no need for a wholesale re-write of the existing law unless it can be shown that, despite its enforcement, it is unfit for purpose.

I think Dr Filth has identified the main problem in that scrapyards simply do not have the resources to screen every load of scrap they receive for illicit goods. They are not in the same position as someone buying a TV for twenty quid from “a bloke in the pub”.

The LGA report suggests that “Tougher regulations on the scrap metal trade are needed to combat "soaring" theft...” Unless and until it can be shown that the 1964 Act is inadequate I would suggest that what is really needed is tougher policing to prevent and detect metal theft and tougher sentencing to keep those doing it locked up for a while. Let’s remember, the real culprits here are the people that do the stealing.