The government gave the IPCC an EXTRA £30 million in their budget so that they could do more good works.
Policing minister Mike Penning said there would be a cash reduction of £299m in the overall 2015-16 police funding budget, compared with 2014-15.
But the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) will get a £30m funding boost to take on more work.
Today they publish their report Police Use of Force: evidence from complaints, investigations and public perception.
Two of the “highlights” that were quick to publish were these;
83% of people trust the police to use reasonable force but this is lower among younger people and BME communities
— Independent Office for Police Conduct (@policeconduct) March 8, 2016
At first glance you may think that is something to be concerned about, but as I delve deeper I begin to have concerns about the report and its methodology.
It is true, the %age of BEM respondents having confidence in the use of force by Police does indeed drop to 61%.
Then I noticed the sample sizes at the bottom of the diagram, 61% of 179 BEM respondents had confidence.
The TOTAL sample size was a mere 1,302 persons across the board.
1,302 represents 0.002% of the total population of England and Wales.
This does NOT mean that the results have no validity but it is well known that the larger the sample size the more confidence can be enjoyed in the findings.
My mood did not improve when I read the page on methodology;
What on earth is an “ethnic boost”? I truly don’t know but it doesn’t sound very good. I have yet to find an explanation in the report or supporting documents. I also noted that this sample was taken in August to September 2014, with such a small sample size why has it taken 18 months to publish the findings?
Somebody on Twitter has explained an ethnic boost to me thus;
@Alanw47 ethnic boost is extra surveys of minority groups so sample is large enough to be representative of population @NathanConstable 1/2
— Matt Ashby (@LessCrime) March 8, 2016
@Alanw47 boost sample necessary if you want to be able to apply your results to ethnic minority population as a whole @NathanConstable 2/2
— Matt Ashby (@LessCrime) March 8, 2016
I’m not a Statistician, I do not have a degree in anything (except bollocks maybe) but as a Member of the Public I am offended and incensed by the manner in which the findings of this survey have been put over. I, along with others, have put a few questions to IPCC about the report and its findings but no response as yet.
.@IPCCNews If 83% was the average some sectors must have been much higher, not at all bad IMHO. You don't quote the higher figures I notice
— Alan Wright (@Alanw47) March 8, 2016
So what is the %age figure for elderly Middle England? https://t.co/lXsk0wdit1
— Alan Wright (@Alanw47) March 8, 2016
.@IPCCNews Have I got this right, the total sample size was 1,300 out of 60 million?
— Alan Wright (@Alanw47) March 8, 2016
Finally I have also been informed that the company that carries out this fine piece of work for the IPCC also carry out the Crime Survey of England and Wales for the ONS.
@Alanw47 @IPCCNews thanks I also see this company works for home office too. https://t.co/qOSskYfiWP
— ian bishop (@bish1964) March 8, 2016
I just know I’m going to get flak for this post but I just don’t see the same issues as IPCC obviously do.
