FOI Officer Training (0401-2024/25)
Request
Q1. In November 2011, how many officers have did your force have with either Level 1 or 2 Public Order Training? Please provide a breakdown at each level.
Q2. As of 01.08.24, how many officers have did your force have with either Level 1 or 2 Public Order Training? Please provide a breakdown at each level.
Extent and Result of Searches to Locate Information
To locate the information relevant to your request searches were conducted within North Yorkshire Police. I can confirm that some of the information you have requested is held by North Yorkshire Police.
Decision
Q1. Please note that data in relation to 2011 is no longer held.
Q2. I am exempting disclosure of this information pursuant to Section 31 (Law Enforcement) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act).
Section 31 is a prejudice-based qualified exemption and there is a requirement to articulate the harm as well as carrying out a public interest test.
Evidence of Harm
It is imperative that each police force maintains the ability to effectively police protests and disorder and thus keep the public safe. This means being cautious about releasing any information under FOI which could be used advantageously by criminals or those with intent to commit crime or cause disruption. It is reasonable to suggest that criminals and gangs intent on instigating violence, could use information about specific operational capability and levels of Public Order Officer training to determine which forces may and may not have greater vulnerability when it comes to policing protests and disorder.
Public Interest Test
Factors favouring disclosure under Section 31
Information would ensure transparency and accountability and enable the public to see what tactics are deployed by the Police Service to tackle/assist in fighting crime.
Factors against disclosure under Section 31
It can be argued that there are significant risks associated with providing information in relation to any aspects that can assist criminal planning and that any nation’s security arrangements, by releasing the information, may reveal the relative vulnerability of what we may be trying to protect.
The Police Service would not wish to reveal resource information that would undermine the law enforcement operations and would impact on police resources, as more crime would be committed because criminals/terrorists would know which forces had less/more capability. This in turn would place the public at a greater risk and a fear of crime would be realised, especially for more vulnerable areas.
Balance Test
The security of the public and the country is of paramount importance and the Police service will not divulge the resources, if to do so would place the safety of individuals at risk, due to providing freely available (single point) information under such requests and which in turn would undermine National Security or compromise law enforcement.
Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing resources and providing assurance that the police service is appropriately prepared and effectively engaging with the threat posed by various groups or individuals, there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding the integrity of police resources and operations in the highly sensitive areas such as extremism, crime prevention, public disorder and terrorism prevention.
As much as there is public interest in knowing that policing activity is appropriate and balanced this will only be overridden in exceptional circumstances. It is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for exempting your request for planning information is not made out.
Pursuant to Section 17(1) of the Act this letter acts as a Refusal Notice in response to part of your request.
Please note that systems used for recording information are not generic, nor are the procedures used locally in capturing the data. It should be noted therefore that this force’s response to your questions should not be used for comparison purposes with any other responses you may receive.