Simon Shaw delighted as Police Commissioner Kennedy agrees to redraft “misleading” police response stats

Merseyside’s Labour Police Commissioner Jane Kennedy has now agreed to redraft her annual report after Birkdale Lib Dem councillor and long-serving Police Panel member Simon Shaw pointed out misleading statistics over police response times.

A week ago the Merseyside Police & Crime Panel had the opportunity to consider her draft report for 2017/18. In it, Commissioner Kennedy claimed that “Merseyside Police control room receives more than 2,500 calls a day…Approximately 200 will be graded as emergency calls, these are the priority incidents which the police aim to respond to within 10 minutes … For those calls that do not require an emergency response, approximately half are responded to within an hour and more than 83% will result in the attendance of a police officer within four hours.”

As reported here earlier this week Councillor Shaw had expressed his disbelief at the claim that 83% (or 5 out of 6) non-emergency calls have a police officer attending with four hours, saying “this claim just doesn’t tie in with people’s own experiences.” He called on Police Commissioner Kennedy to fully review the source of these statistics, and correct the statement as appropriate.

“I’m delighted that Jane Kennedy has done this and now acknowledges that ‘the text in the draft annual report is not sufficiently clear’. She also says she ‘will re-draft it to assist the public’ which is exactly what I asked for” says Cllr Shaw.

Councillor Shaw wrote to the Police Commissioner’s Office on Monday concerning the section on police response times, and said this:
‘I am concerned that gives the clear impression that, of all the calls that involve a crime (however minor e.g. garden shed break in), within the total daily average of 2,500+, then 200 or so get a very prompt emergency response, and an amazing 83% of all the others get a visit within 4 hours.

My suspicion is that it is more likely that 83% of (non-emergency) crime calls which the Control Centre categorise as being "worthy" of a visit get an attendance within 4 hours - but that is not what the two paragraphs in the draft Annual Report says.’

“From what we have been told so far that seems to be broadly how the mistake has arisen. I did ask for the original Police statistics on which Jane Kennedy’s statement is based and I look forward to seeing them in full in due course.”


The original disputed section of the Police Commissioner’s draft Annual Report is to be found on page 16 of http://councillors.knowsley.gov.uk/d...StyleSize=none

A week ago the Merseyside Police & Crime Panel had the opportunity to consider her draftreport for 2017/18.

Does Cllr Shaw realise how pathetic he sounds as in reality in his role he was asked in his role to review a draft report and he needs to create two stories one on on both sites (this one probably a defensive response to another one) to basically say he raised a couple of comments and they got actions, can’t wait for next weeks story to here his delight that two typos and three misplaced commas were corrected.

To me, this underlines how awful some of our councillors are at cross party working that they need to regurgitate contents of every meeting to try and undermine the opposition, which may be in their own interests but it’s definitely not in ours

Originally Posted by Username2016

Does Cllr Shaw realise how pathetic he sounds as in reality in his role he was asked in his role to review a draft report and he needs to create two stories one on on both sites (this one probably a defensive response to another one) to basically say he raised a couple of comments and they got actions, can’t wait for next weeks story to here his delight that two typos and three misplaced commas were corrected.

To me, this underlines how awful some of our councillors are at cross party working that they need to regurgitate contents of every meeting to try and undermine the opposition, which may be in their own interests but it’s definitely not in ours

Not quite as bad as your contribution!
Repeated words, missing apostrophe, missing full stop, a 78 word sentence and goodness knows how many missing commas and instances of improper grammar.

Originally Posted by MargeSimpson

Not quite as bad as your contribution!
Repeated words, missing apostrophe, missing full stop, a 78 word sentence and goodness knows how many missing commas and instances of improper grammar.

Thanks for that valuable review, if I change it do you think prasnee or cllr shaw will post a story “welcoming it with delight”?

Think you’ve missed the point though, we have a lot of councillors who play devisive politics here, for example why does he think he has to post his review comments on both sites as they weren’t refuted so other than trying to make himself seem effective at the cost of a rival politician feels a bit like a race to the bottom to me which is not for our benefit as how does any one expect an effective council if we have councillors looking for any opportunity to big themselves up through posting negative stories of their colleagues with sometimes heavy doses of spin.