Non-crime hate incidents 993/2025
FOI Reference: 993/2025
Request
1. Please provide information on the total number of Non-Crime Hate Incidents(NCHIs) currently (as at the date of this request) recorded by the Dyfed-Powys Police.
2. Please provide information on the total number of NCHI recorded by the Dyfed-Powys Police since the introduction of the 2014 Hate Crime Operational Guidance published by the College of Policing (the “HCOG”).
3. Please provide a description of the database(s) on which NCHIs are first recorded and any database(s) to which they are (or may be) transferred. (Please provide further information if these databases have changed at any point since 2014.)
4. Please provide details (including copies where possible) of any policies and procedures relating to the steps the Dyfed-Powys Police takes to remove NCHI data upon the expiration of any relevant data retention periods (for example, upon the expiration of a six-year limitation period).
5. Please provide copies of any internal guidance or policy documents relating to the application of:
(a) The National Standard for Incident Recording published by the Home Office in 2011;
(b) The HCOG; and/or
(c) The Non-Crime Hate Incidents: Code of Practice on the Recording and Retention of Personal Data published by the College of Policing in 2023 (the “2023 Guidance”).
6. Please also provide any other guidance or internal policy documents used by police officers in relation to the NCHI recording or review process.
Period 1: from implementation of the 2014 HCOG until the Court of Appeal decision in R (Miller) v College of Policing [2021] EWCA Civ 1926, handed down on 20 December 2021
7. Please state the total number of NCHIs recorded between the introduction of the HCOG and 20 December 2021.
8. Please state the total number of persons who have had NCHIs recorded against them between the introduction of the HCOG and 20 December 2021.
9. Please state the total number of NCHIs recorded before 20 December 2021:
(a) Where the NCHI data has not been recorded as having been reviewed or been otherwise removed.
(b) Where the NCHI data was deleted, without substantive review, because a relevant data retention period elapsed.
(c) Where the NCHI data has been recorded as having been reviewed and then deleted.
(d) Where the NCHI data has been recorded as having been reviewed, and then retained but under a different categorisation (i.e. no longer as an NCHI).
(e) Where the NCHI data has been both recorded as having been reviewed and then retained.
10. Please state the total number of different persons against whom an NCHI was recorded in each of categories (a) to (e) of question 9 above. If no individual has more than one NCHI recorded against them in any of the above categories, please say so.
Period 2: from the day after the Court of Appeal decision in Miller (i.e. 21 December 2021) until the publication of the 2023 Guidance on 3 June 2023
11. Please state the total number of NCHIs recorded between 21 December 2021 and 3 June 2023.
12. Please state the total number of persons who have had NCHIs recorded against them between 21 December 2021 and 3 June 2023.
13. Please state the total number of NCHIs recorded between 21 December 2021 and 3 June 2023:
(a) Where the NCHI data has not been recorded as having been reviewed or been otherwise removed.
(b) Where the NCHI data was deleted, without substantive review, because a relevant data retention period elapsed.
(c) Where the NCHI data has been recorded as having been reviewed and then deleted.
(d) Where the NCHI data has been recorded as having been reviewed, and then retained but under a different categorisation (i.e. no longer as an NCHI).
(e) Where the NCHI data has been both recorded as having been reviewed and then retained.
14. Please state the total number of different persons against whom an NCHI was recorded in each of categories (a) to (e) of question 13 above. If no individual has more than one NCHI recorded against them in any of the above categories, please say so.
Period 3: since the publication of the 2023 Guidance on 3 June 2023
15. Please state the total number of NCHIs recorded during this period.
16. Please state the date when the Dyfed-Powys Police implemented the Non-Crime Hate Incidents: Code of Practice on the Recording and Retention of Personal Data (the “2023 Guidance”).
17. Please state the total number of persons who have had NCHIs recorded against them between 4 June 2023 and the date of implementation of the 2023 Guidance by the Dyfed-Powys Police.
18. Please state the total number of NCHIs recorded between 4 June 2023 and the date of implementation of the 2023 Guidance by the Dyfed-Powys Police:
(a) Where the NCHI data has not been recorded as having been reviewed or been otherwise removed.
(b) Where the NCHI data was deleted, without substantive review, because a relevant data retention period elapsed.
(c) Where the NCHI data has been recorded as having been reviewed and then deleted.
(d) Where the NCHI data has been recorded as having been reviewed, and then retained but under a different categorisation (i.e. no longer as an NCHI).
(e) Where the NCHI data has been both recorded as having been reviewed and then retained.
19. Please state the total number of different persons against whom an NCHI was recorded in each of categories (a) to (e) of question 18 above. If no individual has more than one NCHI recorded against them in any of the above categories, please say so
20. Please state the total number of different persons against whom an NCHI has been recorded after the implementation of the 2023 Guidance by the Dyfed-Powys Police.
Response
Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1)(a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Section 1(1)(b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.
I can confirm that the cost of determining whether any information relative to this request is or isn’t held is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond therefore we are withholding the whole of the requested information since we consider that the Section 12 (2) exemption the Cost of Compliance exceeds the Appropriate Limit applies to it.
Where exemptions are relied upon Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Dyfed Powys Police, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which: (a) states that fact, (b) specifies the exemption in question and (c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies. The following exemption has been applied to the whole of the information you have requested:
Section 12(2) – The cost of compliance exceeds the Appropriate Limit
Section 12(2) states: “…Subsection (1) does not exempt the public authority from its obligation to comply with paragraph (a) of section 1(1) unless the estimated cost of complying with that paragraph alone would exceed the appropriate limit.”
The cost of determining what information is held, if any, relevant to your request is above the amount to which we are legally required to respond i.e. the cost of locating and retrieving the information exceeds the “appropriate level” as stated in the Freedom of Information (Fees and Appropriate Limit) Regulations 2004. It is estimated that it would exceed 18 hours (i.e. between 19 - 37 hours) to comply with your request. The regulations can be located @ https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/3244
The Freedom of Information department has been advised that the information in respect of your request is not held in an easily retrievable format. The relevant department have reviewed the request and established that the required data is not currently retrievable through existing data reporting products and an existing script does not exist.
Consequently, the steps required to initially understand if the data is available and subsequently complete the required extraction, verification, and analysis, through the writing of a new bespoke script, would exceed 18 hours. A breakdown of the steps required and the estimated time it would take per step is detailed below:
|
Stage |
Description |
Time estimate |
|
1 |
Review which server and database might contain the data required for the FOI request |
2 hours |
|
2 |
Identify and scope the necessary tables and columns that might hold the relevant data |
4 hours |
|
3 |
Consult with SMEs or system owners to confirm the selected tables and columns are appropriate |
4 hours |
|
4 |
Develop new script to extract the requested data |
4 hours |
|
5 |
Send the data extract to SMEs / system owners, to confirm accuracy |
4 hours |
|
6 |
(Steps 1-5 repeated should data be inaccurate) |
18 hours |
|
7 |
Data sent to the Performance Team to analyse and respond to FOI |
1 hour |
In accordance therefore with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts as a Refusal Notice for the Whole of this request under Section 17(5) A public authority which, in relation to any request for information, is relying on a claim that section 12 or section 14 applies must, within the time for complying with section 1(1), give the applicant a notice stating that fact.
You may wish to refine and resubmit your request so that it reduces the time shown above to fall within the 18 hours, should you require any further advice in relation to this matter please don’t hesitate to contact the Freedom of Information Unit. Please also be advised that should the request be refined, it does not remove the public authorities right to cite exemptions if relevant.
(This is a response under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and disclosed on 03/11/2025)
|
Os oes angen y wybodaeth yma arnoch yn Gymraeg, cysylltwch â: If you require this information in Welsh, please contact: |