We can expect to see police statistics shortly that confirm public confidence in their forces’ activities. There is no reason to expect otherwise, in which the country believes in vast majority that official statistics are bent. ‘Statistics’ has Greek origin, meaning ‘numbers of the State’. There is little connection, though clearly a pretence of one, with the scientific, largely arithmetic methodology of statistical mechanics, or even in the debatable use of the term in survey research. The history of ‘lies, damned lies and statistics’ is as old as the practice, even if attributed to Mark Twain. I have great sympathy with and admiration for the vast majority of British police officers, even their wholly over-paid senior managers. Many of the problems laid at their door are really to do with the collapse of political honesty and the society of hope into which I was regularly told I was born into as I grew up. We can brand the problem as ‘Nulabour’ these days. Without giving that any escape from responsibility, I would track the issues back much further. Nulabour is a running sore in our daily lives and needs to be disposed off. What we don’t want is simply to see new faces in the business-as-usual our votes are likely to bring.
There is already at least one example on public confidence indicating we will only get cover-up. This can be seen on the website of the IPCC (Incompetent Poodles of Constabulary Corruption – they do not deserve the tag ‘independent’) and in the public pronouncements of it chief officer and transcripts of his public interviews, all of which stand in defiance of proper scrutiny. This is the line we can expect the target-related pay of police senior managers to follow. It has no academic or scientific validity, though will be used in a manner pretending such credibility. There will be three main steps:
1. Pick on a few ‘success stories’ and claim they are the general case.
2. Poll the general population broadly unaffected by your organisation’s activities or those it is supposed to stop.
3. Create a ‘suppression culture’ to prevent whistle-blowing.
More later – any comments welcome at this stage.
Allcoppedout's Blog 
Hello A.C.O.
Public confidence in the police? Yet another brainchild of the alleged experts at the NPIA I understand? Posted this on kkpops blog a few days ago so apologies if you’ve already seen it.
The criminal waste and profligacy at this level deserves to be repeated as often as is necessary until someone gets off their arse and does something.
Talking of which, David Cameron is answering questions local to us in the Midlands tomorrow, so we have someone armed with questions about Policing, including this confidence nonsense and the role and doubtful value of ACPO and the NPIA.
Lets hope he (a) has the nerve to answer them and (b) will live up to any promises of reform he might make.
With the “NPIA Confidence Experts” there is certainly enough subject matter.
Click to access public_confidence_in_the_police.pdf
42 pages about “Bivariate analysis” “Multivariate analysis” and reams of stuff about “logistic regression analysis”.
What a complete and utter load of hogwash from CC Peter Neyroud and his army of 2032 staff of empire builders. After 42 pages, I wasn’t at all convinced they had discovered the elixir or formula that will deliver an accurate measurement of public confidence.
It amazes me that departments larger than some forces have been created solely for the purpose of creating hairbrained schemes and procedures that can only take the front line copper off the street for even longer periods filling in endless reams of meaningless bullshit. And the only ones who benefit from all of this are the Chief Officers who can claim confidence is up, along with detections??? and crime being down??
In business, confidence is expressed by customers returning to buy more of what they want from who sells it. Simple.
Public confidence in the police will be expressed by REAL reductions in crime, more recidivist scrotes locked up for longer, resulting in safer neighbourhoods. Simple. Front liners have little control over sentencing and less informed sectors of the public will lose confidence in the police as a result.
Something the NPIA seem to have overlooked is how many of the less informed make assessments of the police based on the whole system of criminal justice, CPS decisions, Court ineffectiveness, Prison early releases or non custodials?
So, performance targeting has been replaced by one single measure, that of public confidence? The Jury is out on that one. How can comething as nebulous as confidence be measured accurately? I have yet to be convinced.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, bet your life its a friggin duck! I agree with you A.C.O. this whole confidence nonsense is so open to manipulation it must have NuLabours influence stamped all over it. With thepublic rapidly waking up to the “Cooking of Crime Figure Books”, they’re looking for the next best nebulous yardstick with which they can conjure up their illusion of success.
How can the NPIA preach increasing and measuring public confidence when the the public would be so shocked to hear the truth behind the organisation that created the confidence model?
I wonder if the public confidence will soar when they discover that on top of his £195,000 salary to improve public confidence, Neyroud’s employment package includes a Westminster apartment — in a block that has a gym, pool, sauna and valet parking — within walking distance of the agency offices costing the taxpayer £23,200 in 2008-09.
As a perk of the job, the flat has an income tax demand of £9,000 a year, which the NPIA pays!
This quango is spending taxpayers’ money like mits going out of fashion on swanky accommodation for their top brass while frontline policing struggles to get the job done on limited resources and then have to waste valuable operational police time helping senior ranks manipulate the confidence returns so the SMT bonus isn’t threatened.
The NPIA spends £19 million a year on consultants and recently employed an external contractor as its director of resources, paying him £296,000 — including accommodation costs — not a bad little number for seven months work.
The Agency senior managers have faced criticism before. They shared £82,000 in bonuses in 2008-09 and earlier this year Peter Holland, its chairman, claimed £46,000 expenses in two years — including £2,800 on meals at the RAC Club in Pall Mall.
An NPIA spokesman (probably Mr Neyroud!) defended the provision of a second home for Mr Neyroud and his deputy, stating that his family home is more than 120 miles from London. In fact, Mr Neyroud’s permanent home is actually 50 miles from London and in an area where many London commuters live.
One Oxford resident commented in the Times : “Neyroud lives in Oxford and was our chief constable. That’s 45 miles from London, not the 120 listed. Oxford is within easy commuting distance. I and tens of thousands of others do it every day without the need for public subsidy or our tax bills paid. I do not think I have seen a worse case of public sector greed”.
Closer examination of the most recent NPIA accounts make interesting reading too.
• 2008-09 accounts show Mr Neyroud was paid £190-195,000 p.a. with benefits in kind of £14,331.
• His lump sum pension at age 60 £600-605,000
• The role of Director of Resources was filled by Donald Muir, a contractor, from 1 July 2008 until 15 February 2009. Fees for this service, including accommodation costs met by the NPIA, amounted to £296,000.
• The Director of Resources, John Beckerleg, left on 30 June 2008 and received a severence payment, including lieu of notice, of £64,000.
• The Chief Executive Officer (Neyroud) and Deputy Chief Executive Officer (Barker-McCardle ) are provided with accommodation as part of their role. The cost of this, in 2008/09, was £23,200 and £22,900 respectively.
• The NPIA is currently reviewing the tax treatment and will bear any tax that may fall due.
• Jim Barker-McCardle (Deputy) was paid £160-165,000
• His lump sum pension at age 60 £505-510,000
• Peter Holland, Chairman was paid £95-100,000
• 4 other senior management are collectively paid £535-555,000
• 2032 staff (Why??) 1258 permanent, 64 Home Office staff, 266 seconded officers, 444 temp contractors with staff costs of £101,211,000 (£91million 07/08)
• They own land and buildings worth £70,762,000 {Inc Bramshill}(conveniently similar to the £70million Alan Johnson wants to knock off the overtime bill). Private sector businesses often sell property and have it rented back to them to realise cash (called sale & leaseback).
• They own dwellings worth £3,062,000 & vehicles worth £1,549,000
• Plant & machinery £3,580,000
• Communications equipment £138,142,000
• IT Hardware £28,710,000
• Web Development £1,020,000
• Fixtures & fittings £6,797,000
• ANTIQUES £2,113,000
• Assets Under Contruction (?) £21,445,000
Total Tangible Assets £278,361,000
• They are owed £34,850,000
• They owe £71,729,000
• Cash in bank and at hand £5,245,000
• Cash in bank/at hand same time 2008 £42,254,000
• Fixed and current assets total £345million
• Deducting liabilities, the balance sheet is positive to the tune of £257million
THIS BIT IS INTERESTING …..
The following are services that the NPIA should be charging out more than they cost to deliver, but look at this :-
Fees and Charges
COSTS TO NPIA
• Fingerprint identification (IDENT1) 32,973,000
• Police National Computer (PNC) 29,526,000
• National DNA Database (NDNAD) 9,517,000
• Project support charges 42,709,000
• Other information services 70,918,000
• Information services 185,643,000
• Exams and Assessment 5,427,000
• Learning and Development Services 16,840,000
• Leadership Development Services 6,646,000
• Other people and development services 12,290,000
• People and development services 41,203,000
• Property recharges 22,432,000,000
Total Costs £285,870,000
INCOME FROM CHARGING FOR THESE SERVICES :-
Total Income £49,784,000
Deficit -£236,086,000
In short, from the accounts, it appears that they are spending hundreds of millions more than they receive in fees and grants from forces and the Home Office.
If this were a private sector company, some serious questions would need to be asked. They do not appear to be generating surplus (profit) at all, and as such the £236million deficit on services would appear to be a direct taxpayer drain.
There is possibly good work done by ACPO, the APA and the NPIA. However, for public confidence to be fully restored, accountability must start at the top, with full transparency and independent scrutiny of each agency to assess its viability and value to the service and tax paying public.
As for this latest load of Labour infested bunk, it should be dumped in its rightful place in that round receptacle under the office table, alongside the other waste of public money and resource – “The Pledge”.
Let the front line coppers do the job they way they are screaming to do it, back to basics with loads of common sense and discretion. That’s all that’s needed to restore public confidence and support from the majority.
Rant over
Best regards – Steve
Hi, Very interesting article. I am quite impressed and just wanted to let you know that you did a fine job on this article. However, I do have some unanswered questions that I would like to ask you. I will contact you via email so that you can clear some of these things up for me. Again, very well written article. Keep up the good work.