Third Report - The Macpherson Report: Twenty-two years on

The government details improved stop and search data collection and a commitment to use data to challenge disparities. It also highlights the importance of internal and external body-worn video reviews to build confidence, but does not commit to police forces setting out local plans to improve BME community confidence or to HMICFRS monitoring these efforts.

The government extensively discusses the use of Body Worn Video (BWV) to improve accountability and transparency, outlining efforts to improve guidance, facilitate footage sharing with scrutiny panels, and enhance officer communication training. However, the response does not address the recommendation for the Home Office and National Policing Board to monitor the confidence gap or set out annual national actions for BME communities.

The government discusses the College of Policing's role in developing quality training for officers on community engagement, diversity, and the appropriate use of powers. It then outlines the responsibilities of a proposed independent Commissioner, but neither aspect addresses the specific recommendation to disaggregate race hate crime data by ethnicity for publication.

The government acknowledges the need for representative police forces and details existing initiatives under the Police Uplift Programme, but does not commit to agreeing specific minimum targets for BME recruitment or a new national strategy with timelines and remedial measures.

The government response reiterates its general commitment to police diversity through the Police Uplift Programme, which includes sharing best practice among forces, but it does not specifically address the recommendation for the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners to facilitate force-level comparison and shared learning among PCCs.

The government reiterates its commitment to increasing diversity through the Police Uplift Programme, which involves attraction strategies, national campaigns for diverse audiences, and sharing best practice. However, it does not specifically address the recommendation to examine proposals for broadening positive action provisions or to explicitly affirm to forces that Chief Constables will be held accountable for recruitment progress.

The government defends the use of stop and search, stating that powers should be used fairly and properly. However, it offers no specific commitments or actions to improve the respectful manner or de-escalation of stop and search encounters.

The government defends the use of stop and search and the need for fair use and monitoring, but does not address the recommendation for focused and targeted use or the specific criticism of the Metropolitan Police's past unfocused operations.

The government's response discusses progress in handling complaints and conduct, and the importance of granular data on disproportionality, but it does not address the committee's specific concern about the failure to gather local force-level confidence data by ethnicity.

The government provides statistics on ethnic minority representation in Professional Standards Departments and states the NPCC is working to improve this, but the response does not address the committee's central point about the failure to treat increasing trust and confidence as a Ministerial priority or the lack of local confidence data collection.

The government's response focuses on the benefits and monitoring of stop and search powers, detailing piloted data collection for s.163 Road Traffic Act powers and a commitment to consider various stop and search metrics. It does not address the recommendation to gather and regularly publish public confidence data for all forces.

The government acknowledges concerns about disproportionality in COVID-19 Fixed Penalty Notices (FPNs) and notes ongoing data publication and an independent analysis commissioned by the NPCC. It commits to improving diversity and community relations but does not address the specific recommendation for clear action to properly support victims of racist crimes.

The government outlines its support for police technology and the role of the Chief Scientific Advisor, emphasizing training programs that involve local communities and address racial disparities within institutions. However, it does not commit to commissioning research on confidence among hate crime victims or improving the recording and breakdown of hate crime data by ethnicity as recommended.

The government's response did not directly address the committee's call for social media companies to do more to tackle online racist crime, focusing instead on existing government and police initiatives against hate crime.

The government did not commit to drawing up a new strategy for policing online hate crime. Instead, the response detailed existing measures such as the Hate Crime Action Plan, the True Vision reporting portal, and Operation Modify for digital skills training among police.

The government highlights the ongoing Police Uplift Programme as its approach to increasing diversity and improving understanding of retention, but does not commit to the Home Secretary setting clear, measurable race equality objectives for individual police forces with annual reporting.

The government defends the use of stop and search for tackling serious violence and highlights the importance of fair use and monitoring. However, it does not address the committee's specific finding that knife crime does not explain widespread racial disparities in stop and search.

The government's response largely discusses general support for stop and search and considering metrics for disproportionality as part of the Inclusive Britain report, but does not specifically address the recommendation for all forces to put systems in place for internal reviews of body worn video or to explicitly comply with HMICFRS recommendations on racial disparities.

The government's response outlines past progress in policing reforms and diversity recruitment, and refers to the "Inclusive Britain" response for future actions to improve accountability, but does not directly address the committee's specific observations on the concept of institutional racism.