Agenda and minutes

A webcast of the meeting can be viewed here.

It was moved by Mr Dan Harrison CC and seconded by Cllr Garth (Bill) A Boulter:

“That Mr Dan Harrison CC be elected Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council.”

It was moved by Cllr Andrew Woodman and seconded by Cllr Liz Blackshaw:

“That Cllr Les Phillimore be elected Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council”.

The Chairman informed members that both candidates had been duly proposed and seconded. In accordance with item 4 of Standing Order 27 a secret ballot would therefore take place.

The Chief Executive announced the results of the ballot, as follows:

Two votes for Mr Dan Harrison CC and thirteen votes for Cllr Les Phillimore. The motion “That Cllr Les Phillimore be elected Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council” was carried.

Cllr Les Phillimore – In the Chair

It was moved by Cllr Les Phillimore and seconded by Cllr Christine Wise:

“That Cllr Liz Blackshaw be elected Deputy Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council.”

It was moved by Cllr Shital Adatia:

“That Cllr Bhupen Dave be elected Deputy Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council”.

However, there was no seconder for this motion so the motion could not be put.

The motion “That Cllr Liz Blackshaw be elected Deputy Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council.” was put and carried. Thirteen members voting for the motion and two against.

RESOLVED:

That Cllr Liz Blackshaw be elected Deputy Chairman for the period until the next Annual Meeting of the Council.

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 March 2025 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

There were no questions submitted.

The Chairman advised there was one urgent item for consideration, a report of the Director of Law and Governance for Leicestershire County Council, concerning a Review of Panel Membership.

The reason for urgency was to allow for the need for further conversations to take place with appointing Councils regarding the political balance of the Panel.

With the agreement of the Committee, the report was considered under item 12 on the agenda (minute 12 below refers).

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

No declarations were made.

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) which outlined for the Police and Crime Panel how he was fulfilling his duty through his work or the work of his deputy and office throughout January to March 2025. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 7’, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were raised:

(i)        The Chairman raised concern that there had been a 4.2% reduction in funding for the Victims Grant. As a result of this cut, the PCC had concluded ten projects on their end date of 31 March 2025. These included projects that provided onward counselling and support to specific groups such as men affected by domestic abuse. The PCC stated that the reduction was to Ministry of Justice (MoJ) funding from which police and crime commissioners commissioned practical and emotional support services for victims, based on their assessment of local need. The reduction in funding would therefore have an impact on victim-support services nationally. The Panel noted that the OPCC had written to the Government regarding the impact that the reduction on funding would have on services and victims.

(ii)       A question was raised regarding the type of data collected at community days and how this informed the PCC’s priorities. The PCC stated that he met with a number of people during community days and that a range of issues within those communities were often raised. The Panel noted that the outcome of all community days were tracked by the Office of Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC). The issues raised by residents would either be reported to the neighbourhood commander, be raised with the Chief Constable, be considered by its Corporate Governance Board, or it could be an issue which was within the OPCC’s remit to commission services for. A similar process would be followed following operations of increased police presence in particular areas.

(iii)      With regards to dog unit kennels at Leicestershire Police Headquarters, the PCC stated that he had visited the kennels on a number of occasions and had joined a group of police and dogs on duty. A member of the Panel highlighted a petition by the Thin Blew Paw Foundation which called on the Government to introduce mandatory financial support for retired police dogs. The PCC stated that he had discussed this issue with the Chief Constable, however it was decided that it was an unnecessary resource as police dogs were often successful rehomed with members of the public.

(iv)      A question was raised regarding whether there was any evidence to suggest that there had been a reduction in crime or improved trust as a result of the work delivered through the People Zones initiative. The initiative was designed to build on the positivity and skills of communities around Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland in order to make these areas safer for residents. The PCC stated that the initiative was evaluated externally and that the results of this evaluation had been resented to the Panel at a previous meeting.

(v)       Concern was raised that 4.6% of victim/survivors of domestic abuse and 14% of victim/survivors of sexual violence withdrew from engaging with the criminal justice system (CJS) despite the support available. The PCC acknowledged this concern and emphasised that this issue was being witnessed nationally. Rape cases were taking an increasingly long time to reach trial, which led to significant delays in the justice system and caused additional distress to victims. The OPCC would continue to work with the Force and victim support services to ensure that victims receive regular communication and the best  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) which provided an update on how he was fulfilling his duty to hold the Chief Constable to account for the performance of the Force through Corporate Governance Board meetings. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 8’, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussion, the following points were noted:

(i)        A question was asked regarding how the Corporate Governance Board ensured that that oversight translated into measurable accountability in terms of recommendations relating to leadership instability. Some members of the Panel felt that there had been a large staff turnover within the Office of Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC). The PCC stated that the Board had not looked into the issue directly. The Panel noted that of a chief officer team which consisted of six individuals, only one of those positions had changed. This was a Deputy Chief Constable who had stepped up to act as Temporary Chief Constable. The PCC had made a commitment that the structure would be in place for at least 12 months, in order to give that area a level of stability. The PCC stated that there were often a number of reasons why members of staff chose to leave the OPCC, similar to that in other public sector organisations.

(ii)       A member of the Panel asked how the OPCC had responded to key challenges and whether the Corporate Governance Board had recommended any changes to strategy as a result of key challenges. The PCC stated that he was confident that the Board was robust in working towards holding the Chief Constable to account. Corporate Governance Board papers were presented to the Panel on a regular basis and the Panel were invited to highlight areas which they think are missing from the scope of work undertaken by the Board.

(iii)      A question was raised as to whether a review had taken place relating to a public disorder event which had occurred in Leicester in 2022. The PCC stated that an internal report had been drafted with input from police officers from outside of the Force. This report would feed into a national enquiry on the issue. The Report outlined a number of recommendations which the PCC, through the Board, received assurances from Chief Constable that all of the recommendations had been applied. The PCC stated that the Force had responded swiftly and appropriately to the public disorder event, and that learning had been applied to the strategy for responding to similar events.

(iv)      The Panel were pleased with the work which had been undertaken by the PCC and the Force on Operation Pedalfast. Operation Pedalfast was Leicestershire Police’s city centre response to the use of illegal/modified e-scooters and e-bikes which did not conform to Electrically-Assisted Pedal Cycles (EAPC) regulations. The operation had been successful from an educational and enforcement prospective. The PCC stated that it could be possible to replicate the operation in others of the County.

RESOLVED:

That the update in relation to the Corporate Governance Board be noted.

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) relating to the East Midlands Special Operations Unit (EMSOU). A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 9’, is filed with these minutes.

In response to a question asked about progress made within the EMSOU since March 2023, the PCC highlighted that covert surveillance teams had specialised, which had led to a greater level of effectiveness at dealing with specific aspects of surveillance. The unit had also introduced a dedicated detective superintendent role which would be responsible for financial investigations. The Panel noted that the Chief Constables and Police and Crime Commissioners across the region met regularly in order to review performance within EMSOU.

RESOLVED:

That the report relating to the East Midlands Special Operations Unit (EMSOU) be noted.

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) which provided an update on the arrangements to monitoring the delivery of the Police and Crime Plan 2024 – 2029, that commenced in April 2025. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 10’, is filed with these minutes.

In introducing the report, the PCC stated that headline metrics, contained within the Police and Crime Plan 2024 – 2029, would be tracked by the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC). Performance and progress would be monitored on a regular basis through its Corporate Governance Board. This performance monitoring provided the PCC with assurances as to whether the Police and Crime Plan was having an impact on levels of crime. Progress against these metrics would be presented to the Panel as part of the regular update it received on the work of the Corporate Governance Board.

Arising from discussion, the following points were made:

(i)        The PCC emphasised that the Force and the OPCC had both a named senior contact and an internal Single Point of Contact (SPOC) relating to each delivery strategy relating to headline metrics within the Police and Crime Plan. In the event that the Panel were keen to scrutinise in more detail the progress against a particular delivery strategy, the relevant senior contact and SPOC would be in a position to provide further information.

(ii)          With regards to public scrutiny of the Police and Crime plan, the PCC stated that it had been supported by the Corporate Governance Board for the OPCC to undertake work in order to enhance public scrutiny of the Plan. In addition to community days, the PCC conducted engagement work with community safety partnerships, members of the public, and elected representatives and the OPCC would trial a public question function to enable the public to ask targeted and strategic questions regarding the delivery of the plan. Regular reporting to the Panel would ensure that the public had the opportunity to monitor the delivery of the Police and Crime Plan.

RESOLVED:

That the contents of the report on the arrangements to monitoring the delivery of the Police and Crime Plan 2024 – 2029 be noted.

The next meeting of the Panel is scheduled to take place on 8 September 2025.

RESOLVED:

It was noted that the next meeting of the Commission would be held on 8 September 2025 at 14:00.

The Committee considered an urgent report of the Director of Law and Governance for Leicestershire County Council regarding the Panel’s membership and any changes required to meet the balanced appointment objective as required by legislation. A copy of the report is filed with these minutes.

The Panel was asked to take this report as urgent in order to allow the need for further conversations to take place with appointing Councils regarding the political balance of the Panel.

The Director of Law and Governance explained that the membership of Police and Crime Panels was required to represent all parts of the relevant police area, represent the political make-up of the relevant local authorities (when taken together), and have the skills, knowledge and experience necessary for the police and crime panel to discharge its functions effectively. However, the current membership of the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Police and Crime Panel for 2025/26 did not reflect the requirements for precise political balance. There had been a number of complexities in achieving political balance for the municipal year 2024/25, which resulted in the composition of the Panel not aligning precisely with the mathematical requirements for political balance. Following the annual meetings of appointing Councils, the membership of the Police and Crime Panel for 2025/26 again did not reflect the requirements for precise political balance. The Panel proposed comprises one additional Labour member and no Green appointee.

The Panel indicated that membership of the Panel met the balanced objective, as far as reasonably practicable and that no further steps should be taken.

A member of the Panel raised concern that the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) had written a letter to local authorities outlining his concern that the membership of the Police and Crime Panel for 2025/26 did not reflect the requirements for precise political balance.

A member of the Panel placed on record their concern that the PCC had publicly made suggestions regarding the proposals for Local Government Reorganisation in Leicestershire.

Members of the Panel wished to place on record their thanks to Mrs. Deborah Taylor CC for her work as Chairman of the Panel since 2021.

RESOLVED:

(a)      That the Panel met the balanced objective, as far as reasonably practicable, and that no further steps be taken.

(b)      That Schedule 1 of the Constitution should be amended to reflect the Panel’s currently membership as four Conservative members, four Labour members, three Liberal Democrat members, one Reform member, and one Independent member.