How can there still be an opinion that G4S are capable of out sourcing anything after the Olympic failure.....its worse that they waited so long to tell us they couldn't provide their staff as promised.....it should have been a police and military jobfrom day one!

@Anonymous. I agree that this work should have been the sole preserve of Police and armed services from day one. However, to condemn G4S in totality for the failure to provide is far too simplistic. G4S as a company have an excellent reputation world-wide and should not be seen to be solely responsible for the Olympics fiasco. Expecting unemployed people, who were trained months before the event, to remain unemployed until the Olympics kicked off, refusing any other employment opportunities in the meantime, was a ridiculous expectation. Locog were also culpable in that many trained staff were unable to undertake any work as they were awaiting security clearance from Locog.

@Anonymous Thus spake a G4S manager!! (or an interested party)

You get what you pay for and if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Hand everything over to the private sector, I don't think so. Dave and Theresa have continued to outsource patrol functions to PCSOs and where has that left us the public, thankful for small mercies, glad to see a uniform even if they have got few powers. Until a proper sensible debate takes place about the future of policing far away from Whitehall and Tom, we will spiral downwards. But don't worry, " crime is going down "

@george No George, actually a full time Trade Union official who understands that companies like G4S and Securitas are trying to take security work to a new level. In this world, as things stand at the moment, there is a need for private security to allow the Police to get on with real Police work. I recognise G4S as a company trying to take private security officers to a new level rather than let them be seen as "monkeys" by unenlightened people such as David (see below).

The problem with private security is they are a viable deterrent that can do nothing. Security at most locations exist just to call police to do something.

The simple truth is that a private company screwed up big time, it does not matter where the blame lay, it was proof that you can not rely on private companies except to look after the share holder and keep an eye on profits. It should of been left to the professionals i.e the Army and Police, and I'm sure truth be known the Mad Hatters in HMG (who have links with G4S) were hoping that the Olympics were going to proove that G4S were capable of a major security operation, and the answer to Policing on the cheap, when in fact they fell on their arses big time.

@Anonymous You may have missed the fact that I'm agreeing that the Police and armed forces should have dealt with the Olympics in entirety. There is however a need in our current society for private security. Are you saying that security at airports is pointless for instance? Look around you; shops, job centres, factories etc all have security by necessity. Who transports our money round the country? Do you think the Police could cover all of this? The point I was making is that some security companies are striving to raise the bar for security workers and G4S are one of those companies who realise that security workers are not "monkeys".

@GGTTH Despite my previous posting I believe you have some very valid points and I agree there is a need for private security companies in the areas you pinpointed and I have no doubt some of these companies do a professional job. It is a pity that G4S had a lot of adverse publicity (deservedly so) and unfortunately that is now the yardstick by which the security industry is judged .I can also understand why the biggest percentage of postings are negative and against the private security business. The police service has been decimated by Winsor and May with the support of HMG and are very suspicious about any move to involve private security firms especially when leading figures in this government have personal interests in certain companies.Police numbers and salaries have been reduced, cost of pensions increased ,terms and conditions altered with the minimum (if any) consultation or consideration how these changes will effect the standard of living of most officers and on top of this it is mooted that private security firms will be taking over some roles being performed by the police. The majority of rank and file officers see this as the thin end of the wedge which will result in more and more changes taking place thus further reducing the value of the job of police officer.With all this going on you probably appreciate why the security business is viewed with more than a little paranoia .I'm afraid it will be an uphill battle to convince police officers otherwise as trust in HMG has been completely erased and the security industry is caught in the middle. George (115)

It was not only G4S at fault over the Olympics, Ms May knew sometime before the games that G4S were in trouble, but she did nothing but 'sit back' and hope it all turned out alright, she and her dept should have be more forceful with G4S and made more thorough enquiries into whether the required people could have been recruited in time. G4S are good at some things in the security business, but they were very poor at the Olympics.

@Maverick22 You're absolutely right Maverick. You will note that there was very little criticism of G4S from the ConDems, because they knew that G4S were not solely to blame. Retention of trained staff was a big problem, as was Locog with their painfully slow clearance issues. Throw in a high level of G4S incompetence, for which a number of high ranking staff "walked", and you have chaos. I personally am still dealing with a number of temporary G4S staff who have not been paid properly and I've no doubt the Employment Tribunal offices will be dealing with some of those cases fairly soon.