Who do you think you’re kidding Mr Winsor?
So we’ve done the strongly worded letters. We’ve tried to speak to our MP’s. Some with limited success but many have just received draft replies or been ignored. We’ve started & signed petitions. We’ve Emailed,tweeted and posted messages on Facebook. Many things done have received limited attention but the government seem determined to continue with their policy of silencing us, smearing our reputation and pretending it’s not happening. Why?
Well it’s the commonly held opinion of many people affected that the driver for these changes is the PM Mr Cameron. His history and involvement with Sheehy being partial motivation but I suppose there must be more to it than that. I wont speculate. The 2006 speech he made, which has been well circulated, shows that he had an agenda of changing the Police service many years before being elected.
This is part of the problem that the government face. The, so called, consultation carried out by Mr Winsor does not stand up to independent scrutiny. There is so much evidence that it was not independent. That it was a smokescreen. Political window dressing.
To demonstrate. Begin with the above mentioned speech made by Cameron in 2006. http://http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/jan/16/conservatives.ukcrime The content of this speech was Winsor. Almost in its entirety. It’s been said before but it is worth repeating. Winsor had his conclusion handed to him and had to invent the evidence in support of it. Winsor was put in place by Cameron to give the ‘appearance’ of fairness. To give him deniability. The emergence of this speech undermined that facade.
Regarding this process of fabricating his evidence. Or, as Winsor calls it, his ‘consultation’. Whilst interviewing Winsor for the House of Commons select committee Keith Vaz described Winsor as a reluctant witness. Winsor admitted that he had been made aware that Officers he had quoted in his consultation were on leave when he claims to have spoken to them. Others did not exist and some categorically denied having made the comments he attributed to them. He replied by saying he must have made ‘honest mistakes’ but ‘had not kept minutes’. He ‘had not kept minutes’! Why on earth would somebody conducting such serious research with the resources he had not keep minutes? Oh yes. He didn’t want his deceit to be discovered. For the record he also admitted that he used recording equipment that wasn’t actually very good at picking up what was said!
It is also worth commenting that the Police Arbitration Tribunal (PAT) described the quality of the data in the Winsor 1 report as “pretty variable”. They actually went as far as to say that in the areas they failed to arrive at conclusions it was because of the poor quality of the data supplied by Winsor. Would you change the Policing system of the country on the basis of a report With variable and flawed data which also had many “honest mistakes” in it? Not if you were independent. But we know of course that Cameron is not.So, let’s dig deeper. In reaching his conclusions in part 1 Winsor consulted with the huge number of 176 officers. 176. There ‘were then’ 140’000 officers and he consulted with just over 0.1%. Pretty comprehensive! It should be pointed out that the176 included the above mentioned officers who denied speaking to him or claimed they were misquoted. So, he hardly spoke to any of us and when he did he changed what we said or made people up.
Then we have the so called Blobby Bobbies episode. Winsor stated that 75% of officers surveyed were overweight. Then it was disclosed that his sample group were part of a self help group for overweight officers and staff. Why on earth would you choose this as your sample group? Unless of course you were on a deliberate search for evidence to support a pre-held conclusion. There was never likely to be any other result from a sample group like this. Utterly disgusting. I would suggest that to present data from a source like this and misrepresent it as he did is barely, if at all, short of outright lying.
Now I realise that many of you already know all of this. But what would be the reaction if the average person on the street realised that the whole of their Police service was being remodelled on the say so of a man who made errors, based his report on poor data and manipulated his statistics careful pre-selection of sample groups. I don’t imagine they would be happy.
We need to let them know. Pass it on. Stick it on Facebook. Tell people when you speak to them in the street tell your MP. Tell journalists. When people ask why it took you two hours to get to the job they reported tell them about how resources are falling and how we are being torn apart on the say so of Mr Cameron in the name of his personal agenda.
If we get the public on board and spread the word it can make a difference.
Please sign the Epetition to reject Winsor 2 completely. play your part: