Agenda and minutes

Sir Clive Loader, Police and Crime Commissioner

Simon Cole, Chief Constable

The minutes of the meeting held on 30 January 2013 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

There were no urgent items for consideration.

All members of Community Safety Partnerships declared non-pecuniary personal interests in all matters relating to those partnerships.

Mr J T Orson CC, Cllr T Pendleton, Cllr B Roper and Cllr S Russell all declared non-pecuniary interests as members of the Strategic Partnership Board.

Cllr C Golding declared a non-pecuniary personal interest as he was a non-executive director of the Probation Trust.

Col R Martin declared a non-pecuniary personal interest as he was a trustee of Warning Zone, which was in receipt of funding from the Police.

Cllr M Sood declared a non-pecuniary personal interest as the Chairman of the Leicester Council of Faiths.

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner introducing the Police and Crime Plan to be published by 31 March 2013.  A copy of the report, marked B, is filed with the minutes.  The Panel also considered the Equality Impact Assessment (together with the associated Action Plan)  that had been carried out on the Police and Crime Plan, and comments, including suggested minor amendments to the text of the Plan, that had been drafted to assist the Panel in its consideration.  Copies of these are also filed with the minutes.

The Chairman welcomed the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) and the Chief Constable to the meeting.

The PCC introduced the Police and Crime Plan and highlighted that it had changed significantly from the draft received by the Panel at its meeting on 30 January, as a result of the Panel’s comments and feedback from wider public consultation: in particular, the section on partnership working had been extensively amended.  The PCC drew attention to the Equality Impact Assessment which had been produced by independent experts on behalf of his office. 

The PCC assured the Panel that there would minor changes made to some of the policing targets, to reflect the recent Home Office announcement regarding sanctioned detection rates, before the Plan was published.

The PCC reminded the Panel that a further version of the Plan would be produced in September, taking account of the commissioning decisions he would be making in June and the work being done on closing the gap between future spend and future funding of the police force.  There would, therefore, be further consultation and opportunities for the Panel to influence the Plan as it developed.  He finished by assuring the Panel that he welcomed the supportive challenge offered by it.

The following points rose from discussion:

·         The Panel was pleased to hear that the PCC was receptive to its input and accepted its role as ‘critical friend’.  In the light of the Francis Report arising from the Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust Public Enquiry, it was noted that it was crucial the Panel retained its independence of the PCC and ability to hold him to account when necessary.

·         The Panel welcomed the changes made to the Plan since the version received at its meeting in January and congratulated the PCC on having listened and responded positively to its comments and to the wider responses to his consultation.

·         The amendments to the section on partnership working were particularly welcomed but the Panel emphasised the complexity of the arrangements across the area and across organisations and warned the PCC that there was still a lot of work he would need to do in this area.

·         There were a number of voluntary sector structure organisations across the Force area that the Office of the PCC could approach to provide representation of the wider community and voluntary sector on the Volunteer Forum.

·         The PCC was urged to do more to include targets and outcomes around vulnerability in future versions of the Plan.

·         The Panel would need to agree a timetable and work programme for future meetings that was synchronised with the Office of the PCC’s timetable for reporting to allow it to monitor the PCC’s performance, including against the targets in the Plan.

·         The PCC emphasised the importance of early intervention work and its potential to provide significant savings for the future: he was committed to working with the Supporting Leicestershire Families to contribute to this agenda.

·         Members of the Panel suggested that a focus on prevention of crime would be more reassuring to the public than raising  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

The Panel noted that a timetable of meetings and work programme for the Panel needed to be developed and that this work should take account of the reporting timetables of the Office of the PCC.  It was reported that there remaining constitutional issues that the Panel needed to agree.

AGREED:

a)    That officers be requested to draft a timetable and work programme for the Panel, taking account of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner’s reporting processes;

b)    That a sub-committee of the Panel be established to consider the remaining constitutions issues and to report its recommendations to a future meeting.

Barrie Roper reported that this would be his final meeting as he was retiring from Rutland County Council in April.

On behalf of the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Roper for his contribution to the Panel’s early days and its formation and development, and for his earlier contribution to the people of Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland during his service on the Police Authority, which included chairing it through the transition process to hand over to the PCC.  The Panel wished Mr Roper the best of luck in the future.