The Ipperwash Inquiry - Symposium on Government/Police Relations: The Idea of the Political "Independence" of the Police: International Interpretations and Experiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter serves to clarify some of the key concepts. By graphically illustrating the relationship between degrees of ‘control’ and degrees of accountability it is argued that the two concepts are not incompatible. The term independence is then used in the chapter to refer only to decision-making that falls in what is pictured as the fourth quadrant: ‘full accountability’ with ‘no control’. The chapter then outlines the scope or range of the potentially ‘independent’ decision-making tasks.\nStenning discusses the growth of the ‘doctrine of police independence’. It is argued that what we might assume is a widely held value favouring police independence is in fact unique to certain jurisdictions and the United Kingdom ‘roots’ to the Canadian police services are more questionable than many writers assume.\nThe main task of this chapter was to present an international perspective. The chapter provides an overview of police independence in England and Wales, Australia and New Zealand. Regarding England and Wales, the chapter concludes that the scope and practical implications of police independence remain ‘unclear and open to contestation and debate’. In Australia police independence tends to be limited by the way in which the Australian police services are organized—on a state and Commonwealth governmental level rather than having local or municipal forces. In New Zealand there is one single national police service and therefore no local authorities that could make demands or issue instructions to the police. The NZ police are governed directly by the central government. However, three recent factors have expanded the discussion in NZ regarding the issues that surround police-government relations: a governmental review of the administration and management of the New Zealand Police; controversy over the state visit of the President of China to NZ in 1999; and the introduction of a Bill to amend the existing Police Act.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.042 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".