Categories
Police

Police Public Confidence and Engagement

Police Public Confidence and Engagement

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) undertake regular surveys to assess the public’s perceptions of the police, as well as their confidence in the police complaints system and the IOPC. 

The IOPC also seek regular feedback from their stakeholders to understand what is working well and where improvement may be needed.

This feedback helps shape and inform the IOPC’s wider work to influence changes in policing, ensure accountability and encourage best practice and high standards of service. The surveys are an important tool for measuring the progress of the IOPC. 

The IOPC/Police Public Perceptions Tracker Report 2024/25 published on the 17th June 2025 by the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) presents findings from a survey conducted by YouGov, tracking public attitudes towards policing and the IOPC in England and Wales.

IOPC-police-public-perceptions-tracker-report-2024-25Download
  • Half of the pubic say they feel positive towards the police (49%) and this sentiment has remained stable over the last three years.
  • 48% of the public say they were not confidence in the police dealing fairly with complaints made against them (versus 42% who were confident).
  • A majority of the public say that they would complain if unhappy about an officer’s behaviour towards them.
  • Awareness of the IOPC is at the highest level since we were created but remains below the level when we were the IPCC.
  • A majority of the public think that the IOPC is completely or somewhat independent of the police (70%).
Public Perceptions Tracker Key findings for 2024/25 – IOPC

Must Read ! Sussex Police, the King and High Sheriff

Overview of the Police Public Perceptions Tracker Report 2024/25

  • Purpose: The report tracks public awareness of the IOPC, perceptions of its independence, confidence in the police complaints system, and attitudes towards the police, providing insights to improve policing oversight.
  • Methodology: Data was collected through online surveys conducted in four waves (April, July, November, December 2024, and January 2025) with a sample of more than 4,000 adults, weighted to represent the UK adult population. The data was gathered by YouGov.

Other Key Findings

  1. Awareness of the IOPC:
    • Awareness of the IOPC remains high, with 70% of respondents having heard of the organization, consistent with recent years.
    • However, detailed knowledge remains low, with 54% of respondents unsure about the IOPC’s specific role or activities.
  2. Perception of IOPC Independence:
    • 43% of respondents believe the IOPC is independent from of the police, a slight increase from previous years.
    • Perceptions vary by demographic: older respondents (65+) and white respondents are more likely to view the IOPC as independent, while Black respondents and younger people (18–24) are more skeptical.
  3. Confidence in the IOPC:
    • Confidence in the IOPC doing a “good job” job increased marginally to 47%**, up from 44% in 2023/24.
    • 52% believe the IOPC can help improve policing by identifying areas for learning, though only 38% are confident it holds police accountable.
  4. Likelihood of Making a Police Complaint:
    • 56% of respondents would likely make a complaint if dissatisfied with police conduct, stable compared to prior years.
    • Barriers to complaining include lack of trust in the process (34%) and fear of repercussions (22%), particularly among minority groups.
  5. Public Views on Police:
    • Negative sentiment towards the police has risen, with 28% expressing negative feelings in January 2025, up from 14% in January 2020.
    • Confidence in how police handle complaints dropped to 35%, influenced by high-profile cases like the Sarah Everard murder and other police misconduct scandals.
    • 44% believe police are effective at maintaining law and order, but only 30% trust them to act fairly.
  6. Demographic Variations:
    • Black and Asian respondents report lower confidence in the IOPC and police compared to white respondents.
    • Younger people (18–34) are less likely to trust the complaints system or feel positive about the police.
    • Women are slightly more likely than men to express concerns about police fairness and accountability.
  7. Contextual Challenges:
    • The report notes a challenging context for policing, with trust eroded by recent misconduct cases and media coverage.
    • The IOPC’s role in addressing systemic issues, like race discrimination and violence against women, is seen as critical but faces public skepticism.

Implications and Recommendations

  • Enhancing Awareness: The IOPC should focus on increasing public understanding of its role to boost trust and engagement.
  • Addressing Barriers: Targeted outreach to minority and younger groups could reduce barriers to making complaints.
  • Improving Trust: Strengthening transparency and communication about how complaints are handled may improve perceptions of police accountability.
  • Learning Opportunities: The IOPC’s work in identifying police learning opportunities is valued, but more visible outcomes could enhance public confidence.

Conclusion

The 2024/25 Public Perceptions Tracker highlights steady IOPC awareness but persistent challenges in public trust towards both the IOPC and the police. While slight improvements in confidence and perceptions of independence are noted, negative views of policing and scepticism about complaint handling underscore the need for continued reform and engagement to rebuild trust.

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Impartiality, Police Professional Standards Department, Are the Police for Hire ?, Crime Reporting, What is a Police and Crime Commissioner ?, Sussex Police, Policing, Police News, Two Tiered Policing, Thought Police, Police Digital Service, Knowledge Hub – Police Digital Service, Wasting Police Time, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), Met Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 9th June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent