Who do you think you’re kidding Mr Winsor?

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:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/32177


CynicalBobby
#AntiWinsorNetwork.

Advertisements

20 thoughts on “Who do you think you’re kidding Mr Winsor?

  1. Pingback: Who do you think you’re kidding Mr Winsor? | Policing news | Scoop.it

  2. Well said! The nature of the attack on policing , with discretion, and by consent of the LAW ABIDING public is an affront to the Civil Liberties of all fair – minded citizens in this country.
    Sadly, Labour as the party who destroyed the real independence of ACPO by controlling the courses necessary for senior command, AND the composition of the short lists for such positions, and the introduction of PCSO’s, plus the Interference with pay awards,and the nonsensical ‘Performance Culture’ are equally complicit.

    I have yet to hear any politician of note apologise for their part in the destruction of British Policing. Similarly, I have yet to hear any ACPO ‘ colleague’advise ‘Partners’ or public, what we can no longer afford to do.

    The policy of closing police stations and denigrating the role of warranted police officers in non confrontational contact with the public, and replacing them with ‘Local Beat Officers’ hitherto PCSO’s is outrageous, and self defeating.

    In my view, the protection of police officers with their INDIVIDUAL discretion to enforce the law, and maintain order is under the severest threat.

    The spectre of Privatised Companies, feeding off the carcass of British Policing is appalling and shameful, and economically questionable.

    Cultural change to empower officers with RIGHTS than can be defended in law is now necessary.

    http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/31250

  3. I had the good fortune, or some may say misfortune, to hear Mr Tom Winsor being interviewed on BBC Radio4, and he was asked a question about the Blobby Bobbies and where he got his figures from. As stated above, he said he got hem from a self-help, which consisted of a very small number of Police Officers who had responded to an advert and 75% of them had stated that they were concerned about their weight. Winsor then said that he used that percentage and applied it across the Police Service as a whole because there was no other comparator to refer to. Any student with an O Level in statistics would have laughed these results straight out of school, they do not form a large enough sample to draw any reliable conclusion from whatsoever. However, Winsor knows best and he completely ignored this fact and carried on regardless, leading to much publicity and smokescreen in the press diverting attention away from the really important issues. Well done Mr Winsor, I trust you are proud of your work, but a statistician you will never be.

      • I’ve been wracking my brains to remember the programme but I have been able to establish that it was April 20th, Radio 4 and I think the afternoon, which means it was probably World At One, hope that helps.

  4. Surely there must be some sort of complaint/Court of human rights etc etc each and every one of us can take out individually against Winsor, how much of his important time would that take up? lack of earning whilst answering to each and every one of us, that would make him talk about the truth..

  5. I retired 12 years ago and we had to put up with this crap throughout my 30 years service. The weight thing is all a smokescreen. I was overweight for most of my service during which time I was commended 18 times. My yearly assessments consistently described me as an outstanding officer. I always believed that local knowledge was more important than the statistic driven police service of today. The lads and lasses havent changed they are just as brave and driven as we were. It is the leadership that has changed, the police are now run by a bunch of lily livered politically correct arse lickers. Many years ago when I was stationed at BK we had a problem with a tyranical governor – eventually we had enough and the whole of the uniformed reliefs went sick for one day – resulting in the quick transfer to C.O. for said governer. Not that I would ever suggest that should happen again!!

  6. Unless you are refering to the title of a particular force, the word ‘police’ is written with a small, not a capital p.

  7. Reposted.

    The sheer arrogance of the political corruption in this is astounding. But look a little further.
    Former ACPO officer in control of G4S, certain Chief Constables insisting they’re going ahead with these ‘reforms’, sales of shares in G4S increasing along with share price and investor interest.
    Can’t help but feel this whole charade goes somewhat further than just a government hell-bent on selling off everything from forests and parks to Policing and the NHS.

  8. Reblogged this on fishandrobot and commented:
    I know there’s a lot of anti-police sentiment in the country, most of it received and not decontructed conciously by people. But even so, surely a law enforcement force is necessary? well, these people get royally fucked constantly. Atleast keep track of this.

  9. I love the comment on how he came by his “75%” figure for overweight officers – by attending a self-help group for overweight officers!

    That is like going to one of the officer support groups, and saying a certain percentage of officers are gay, Asian, Christian, etc.

    In effect, it is in no way a true reflection of how the force really is!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s