Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System - 2005 - Statewatch

Section 95
Probation
The Probation Service was the second criminal justice agency to introduce
systematic monitoring, doing so in October 1992. Probation committee members,
probation service staff and persons subject to the supervision of the service were all
included. Offenders were required to tick a box (Black, White, ‘Other’ (please specify)
or Refused) and answer the question, “Where would you say your ethnic group
comes from?’’ selecting from the list of countries provided. The results were mapped
to the 1991 Census ethnic groupings or the 4-point Home Office system of ethnic
classification.
However, after an initially good start, the proportion of ethnic data missing rose
substantially from the mid-1990s. Figures were consequently omitted from the 1999
and subsequent statistical publications on race and the criminal justice system. The
transition to the use of the 2001 Census categories led to more technical problems,
with many probation areas unable to supply ethnic data because of changes required
to IT systems. These problems have been resolved, but the proportion of ethnic data
missing in a number of areas is still too high for national figures to be included in
national statistical publications. Probation Circular 60/2004, issued on 30 December
2004, asks all Probation Boards to examine their ethnicity monitoring data and have
an action plan in place to improve their performance in this respect. Information has
been published for those areas with sufficiently complete data.
National Offenders Management Service (NOMS)
On 1 June 2004, the Prison and Probation Services and most of the work carried out
by the central units in correctional services were brought together under the new
National Offenders Management Service (NOMS).
Police
Section 95 of the Criminal Justice Act 1991 led to new measures to establish
consistent ethnic monitoring within the police service.
Following discussions with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and Her
Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC) the Home Office wrote to all Chief
Constables in England & Wales in March 1995 confirming April 1996 as the start date
for mandatory ethnic monitoring in all police force areas. During 1995/96 thirty-nine
forces were able to fully or partially begin the data collection. The areas of police
activity monitored initially were: stop and searches, arrests, cautions and homicides.
The classification was based upon the police officer’s visual perception of the ethnic
appearance of the suspect/victim, using four categories (White, Black, Asian and
‘Other’). This was compatible with the fuller classification used in the 1991 Census
and elsewhere. Asian in this context covers those of Indian, Pakistani or Bangladeshi
origin. The Home Office’s consultations revealed it would not be practical at that time
to use a wider classification system or for the police officers to ask suspects or
victims to classify themselves. It was also agreed that police forces should undertake
ethnic monitoring of all deaths in police custody from 1 April 1996 (Cotton and Povey,
1997).
From 1 April 1999 all police forces were asked to provide information on notifiable
arrests by ethnic appearance, gender, age and offence group. From 1 April 2003, in
addition to the visual assessment using the 4-point classification, it has been
4