Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 29 September 2014 were taken as read, confirmed and signed subject to the reference to “PCC” on bullet point 5 of Minute 88 being amended to “CFO”.

The Commissioner was asked to provide a brief update on his review of Child Sexual Exploitation cases in Leicestershire.

The review had considered a large number of cases going back to the 1990s, and early indications had suggested that there had not been allegations of systematic abuse of vulnerable young people committed by a pattern or groups of men which had failed to be identified by the Force. However, the Panel were informed that it was apparent that a small number of cases would potentially need to be further investigated.

The Commissioner stated that the report arising from the review would be completed in early 2015 and would be presented to the Panel thereafter.

No questions were submitted.

The Chairman advised that he had agreed to consider the following two urgent items:

·         Government consultation exercise “Improving Police Integrity: Reforming Police Complaints and Disciplinary Systems”; and

·         The consideration of the establishment of task and finish groups.

The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.

Cllr. M. Sood declared a personal interest in respect of all items on the agenda as a member of the Police’s Independent Advisory Panel and as the Chairman of the Leicester Council of Faiths.

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner concerning an update on the Force Change Programme. A copy of the report, marked “Agenda Item 5”, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from a discussion, the following points were noted:

·         The Panel was also informed that some issues were identified as part of the HMIC inspection which needed resolving to prevent risk arising. There was one medium recommendation to further resource the Change Programme. The Commissioner reported that this had been achieved quickly by allocating staff to ensure the implementation of the Programme;

·         The audit was reported as amber-green, the second highest possible rating. The Commissioner made the Panel aware that the Joint Audit Risk and Assurance Panel produced an Annual Report which could be provided to the Panel;

·         The Commissioner continued to have regular public and private meetings with the Chief Constable. It was clarified that the Strategic Assurance Board was a private meeting and the Joint Audit Risk and Assurance Panel was a public meeting. The Panel were informed that the Commissioner and the Chief Constable held a weekly meeting which was open to the public, however it was necessary to have private meetings due to the sensitive nature of some of the items discussed;

·         The Panel was assured that impact assessments were produced as part of the Change Programme in order to ensure that it did not have an adverse effect on communities;

·         The Chairman, on behalf of the Panel, thanked the Force for their efforts in engaging with partners on the Force Change Programme;

·         The Communications and Engagement Plan was currently being developed and discussions were ongoing with partners about ways in which engagement activity could be joined up with other events led by partners taking place elsewhere. The document would be produced in the New Year and it was intended to share it with the Panel;

·         There was an overarching Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) for the Force Change Programme. Regular updates were provided on this at Change Board meetings.

RESOLVED:

(a)          That the report be noted;

(b)          That the EIA for the Force Change Programme be circulated to the Panel.

The Panel considered a report from the Commissioner which updated members on key strategic areas pertinent to the Commissioner in undertaking his role and a structural review of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC). A copy of the report, marked “Agenda Item 6”, and a copy of a diagram of the OPCC structure which was tabled, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion the following points were noted:

Strategic Update

·         The Commissioner had renewed the Chef Constable’s contract. He would now be in the role until at least June 2018. The Commissioner commented that they had developed a strong team and, in giving him the maximum length of contract he was able to, he would be allowing the Chief Constable the opportunity to see the Force Change Programme through to its conclusion;

·         It was felt that, in extending the Chief Constable’s contract, there would be a knock-on boost in staff morale at the Force;

·         The Force had been subject to a number of HMIC inspections, and had received a “good” rating in the PEEL Inspection. The Commissioner expressed his desire to achieve the highest rating: “outstanding”. Concerns were shared by the Commissioner and the Panel about the burden of the HMIC inspections and the resources they required;

·         The PCC attended a debrief on the outcome of the HMIC inspections. The inspections did not provide a list of recommendations at the end of the process, so it therefore required work of the PCC and the Chief Constable in order to establish a way forward to improve future results;

·         Joint partnerships between the police and communities were considered a success, particularly in regard to encouraging crime reporting amongst minority groups. There had however been some issues regarding the Force’s contact centre staff not being able to understand some of those reporting crime. The PCC offered to take this matter back to the Chief Constable.

Structural Review of the OPCC

·         HR processes had been completed in regard to the revised structure of the OPCC. Vacancies had been made available for internal application before being advertised externally in early 2015;

·         As a result of significant investment in commissioning, the post of Head of Partnerships and Commissioning had been created;

·         Only one Policy Advisor would be appointed to help the PCC at this time. This was an appointment outside of the usual human resources process required of Police appointments. A view was expressed by the Panel that the statement in Appendix A that Policy Advisors would “normally reflect the Commissioner’s own political affiliation” was redundant and, if included, would limit the pool of candidates the Commissioner might be able to employ;

·         Though the PCC had considered appointing up to five Policy Advisors, he had no plans to do so. There was a maximum cost which would mean that the Policy Advisor would only work one day per week for £200 per day;

·         The Policing Advisor post had been requested from the Force as it enabled high performing officers to be exposed to the political environment via the OPCC. It would enable collaboration between the Force and the OPCC for the benefit of both parties. The Panel felt that there was a danger of confusion between the two Advisor posts;

·         Some one-off capacity funding had been received by the OPCC from the Ministry of Justice which would help to establish the Victims and Witnesses support function;

·         The following three appointments had recently been made to the new structure: Head of Policy and Strategy, Resources Manager and an Assurance Officer. The new structure and the posts within it were part of the 2015/16  ...  view the full minutes text for item 101.

The Panel considered a report of the Commissioner concerning the Budget and proposed Precept for 2015/16 and an update on the Medium Term Financial Plan. A copy of the report, marked “Agenda Item 7”, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from the discussion, the following points were noted:

·         The PCC would be looking at a range of options for the precept and budget in light of the Government’s settlement announcement. He was currently working on the basis of a 2.0% rise in precept. A public consultation exercise was underway on the budget and precept. A number of responses had been received and this would be taken into account prior to coming to the Panel with a precept for 2015/16;

·         The Chairman felt that it would be worth the OPCC planning for the longer term, beyond 2015/16. He also highlighted the level of costs in the report for fuel and contingencies. He asked that these issues could be looked at ahead of the January Panel meeting.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

The Panel considered a report of the Commissioner concerning Quarter 2 Performance Report. A copy of the report, marked “Agenda Item 8”, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from the discussion, the following points were noted:

·         The Chairman drew the Panel and the PCC’s attention to a letter he had received from the Chairman of the County Council's Scrutiny Commission, Mr. S. J. Galton CC, which stated that body’s concern in regard to domestic burglary, vehicle crime and incidents of violence, all of which showed an increase in incidents when compared with the same period in the previous year. The PCC indicated that, whilst binary comparisons with the previous year showed a negative picture, performance in regard to these crimes was improving. Theft from motor vehicles was seen as a serious matter relating to the Force’s performance. The PCC continued to challenge the Chief Constable over persistent crime “hotspots”, such as this and accordingly initiatives were being put in place to improve public awareness of these crimes;

·         The Force was placed in a “Most Similar Group” (MSG) with seven other forces. There was a view that many of the forces in the MSG were not all similar to Leicestershire, though the PCC felt that the Force should aim to be either “average” or “above average” when compared with the MSG;

·         There was insufficient evidence of the work on commissioning in the report and what outcomes this work had led to. The OPCC indicated that he would include more of this information in future performance reports;

·         Satisfaction levels had decreased across the board. A strategic performance group had been assigned at the OPCC to look into this issue. It was known that, whilst the public were satisfied with the initial Police response to having reported a crime, they appeared to be less satisfied with the follow up on what happened to the criminal who had committed the crime against them;

·         The Chairman indicated that he would look into the issue of extremism and where a report on this might be considered in the future. The PCC indicated that he would be willing to bring this issue to the Panel in the future if it would be helpful it to be reassured about what the Police was doing on the Prevent Strategy.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

The Panel considered a report of the Commission concerning the Force’s use of Stop and Search. A copy of the report, marked “Agenda Item 9”, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from the discussion, it was noted that there was a danger of discrimination to certain groups who may in the past have been stopped and searched more than other groups. Whilst it was pleasing that the number of stop and searches had reduced, the productivity of having carried out less had not been made clear in the report. The PCC felt that it was important that stop and searches were carried out humanely and decently and that the reasons for doing so were made clear to the public.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

The next meeting of the Panel is scheduled to take place on 29 January 2015 at 1.00pm.

It was NOTED that the next meeting of the Panel would be held on 29 January 2015 at 1.00pm.

The Chairman had agreed to consider this urgent item in order to enable the Panel to have a discussion on the possibility of setting up a task and finish group to look at isolated pieces of work on behalf of the PCP. The matter was of an urgent nature as it would enable officer’s the time to consider how any approach might work in practice and some of the associated issues and prepare a report to be submitted to the Panel in the near future.

In addition to the issue of resources and officer support, there was an issue in regard to representation of Panel members on any smaller group. It was suggested that it may not be worth establishing any task and finish groups until after the 2015 local elections as the representation on the PCP was likely to change.

RESOLVED:

That a report setting out the issues in regard to the establishment of task and finish groups be submitted to a later meeting of the Panel.

The Chairman had agreed to consider this urgent item in order to enable a group response to be submitted on behalf of the Panel to the Government’s consultation exercise on the possibility of PCC’s taking over the role of handling complaints made against the Police. The matter was of an urgent nature as a result of the consultation deadline, which was 5 February.

The Chairman felt that there was a role for the Panel in handling complaints, as it was independent of the Police.

The PCC felt that it was important that the role of the Chief Constable was not undermined by any changes in the way complaints were handled. The PCC was happy for the Panel to see the response issued on behalf of the OPCC and the Force.

RESOLVED:

That Panel members be encouraged to issue a response to the consultation exercise.