Agenda item

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) which presented a draft of his Annual Report 2023/24. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 5’, is filed with these minutes.

In introducing the report the PCC emphasised that he believed the current police funding formula to be unfair which left Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland disadvantaged compared to other areas. The PCC said he had been lobbying the previous government for change of the formula and would continue to lobby the new government. The PCC thanked the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner and the Chief Executive of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) for their work over the year.

Arising from discussions the following points were noted:

(i)           The PCC said that he intended to focus on creating safe and viable communities and ensure that the local economy was flourishing and that businesses were profitable. To achieve that aim he would be working with businesses and other partners to tackle retail theft. Shoplifting offences had seen a 29.1% increase over the past year in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland and also a significant increase nationally. It was also believed that assaults on shop staff had increased but the exact figures were not clear from the data as assaults on shop staff were not recorded separately to other assaults. The PCC had now asked the Chief Constable to ensure that assaults on shop staff were recorded separately. Once the extent of the problem was known the PCC could put measures in place to tackle the issue. A member raised concerns that the shoplifting of goods below £200 was a summary offence and therefore would usually be dealt with by an Out of Court Disposal. The member emphasised that thefts of under £200 could still have a large impact on shopkeepers and the member asked if this threshold could be lowered. In response the PCC acknowledged that the £200 figure needed reconsidering. The PCC explained that in the past shoplifting had involved small amounts of money and been non-violent. Now organised gangs were getting involved and the issue was becoming more of a priority nationally. Whilst the increase in the cost of living was a contributory factor there were other factors such as substance misuse and people stealing to pay for drug habits.

(ii)         A member welcomed the PCC’s support with rolling out the DISC app which was an incident reporting tool for retailers.

(iii)        Members joined the PCC in welcoming the work of the Violence Reduction Network (VRN) and thanked the Network’s Strategic Director Grace Strong. It was noted that the impact of the VRN would be seen over the long term though positive results were starting to be seen now. Sometimes the impact of interventions was hard to measure, especially when they were diversionary and intended to prevent individuals getting involved in future crime. What could be measured was the number of diversionary activities that were taking place.

(iv)       In response to concerns raised about cybercrime and the cyberattack on Leicester City Council in March 2024, the PCC explained that Leicestershire Police was working in partnership with public bodies to tackle the problem, and the PCC held the Chief Constable to account for this work and so far had been impressed by the work that was taking place.

(v)         The PCC had awarded a new £2.5m 5-year contract to Catch 22 to provide enhanced support to victims of crime across Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland (£500,000 across 5 years). A member queried whether this funding award was secure, given that other recent funding had been reduced, such as the Safer Streets funding from the Home Office. In response it was explained that the PCC was contractually obliged to provide Catch 22 that funding and could not now reduce the amount. Should the PCC be forced to make budget cuts in the future, the savings would have to come from elsewhere.

(vi)       The OPCC and the VRN were collaborating on a project developing a virtual reality headset video ‘First Phone: Keeping Children Safe Online’ to reduce children and young people’s vulnerability to becoming involved in serious violence by teaching them safer online practice. In response to a query from a member as to how this linked in with the work of Warning Zone and whether there was any overlap it was agreed that clarification would be provided after the meeting.

(vii)      The Chief Constable chaired the Local Criminal Justice Board due to his national portfolio in Criminal Justice. The PCC was happy with the impact the Chief Constable had on the Board and the improvements that had been made. There was a question as to whether the new Government would be making changes to Local Criminal Justice Boards but as yet no information was available.

(viii)    The PCC had set up a Hate Crime Scrutiny Panel, and a Hate Crime Hub was being developed with partners to support victims of hate crime. In response to a request from the Panel for more detail on these initiatives the PCC agreed to bring a report to a future meeting of the Panel.

(ix)       A member asked if the Force Performance section of the Annual Report could include a table to make the figures easier to read and the PCC agreed to include this in the final version of the report. The data indicated that rape offences had decreased a further 11.6% over the past year and it was queried whether this was due to a lack of reporting rather than a reduction in actual offences being committed. At Corporate Governance Board meetings the PCC held the Force to account for their performance in relation to rape offences and a report specifically on this topic would be coming to a future meeting of the Panel.

(x)         The PCC had invested in a wide range of community-led projects designed to support the priorities of his Police and Crime Plan and this had resulted in 3 grant rounds and over £390,000 of funding being provided to community organisations. The Chair noted from a map in the report that most of the organisations that had been awarded funding were based in the Leicester City area and therefore asked what was the criteria for this funding to be awarded. In response the PCC explained that the bids were open to all areas of Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland and it was dependent on the amount and quality of bids received for each area. Leicester City and Loughborough tended to have more crime so more bids came from those areas. However, the OPCC had put measures in place to try and get successful bids from other areas such as holding bid writing workshops.

RESOLVED:

That the contents of the draft Annual Report 2023/24 be noted.