Agenda and minutes

(Moved from 5 December 2012), Surrey Police and Crime Panel
Thursday, 13 December 2012 10.30 am

Venue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions

Contact: Damian Markland 

Webcast: View the webcast

Items
No. Item

10/12

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

11/12

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 22 KB

12/12

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

13/12

CONFIRMATION HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED DEPUTY POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER pdf icon PDF 63 KB

    To consider the proposed appointment of Mr Jeff Harris as Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner.

     

    The Panel will:

     

          i.        Put questions to the Police and Crime Commissioner’s proposed appointee for Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner; and

     

         ii.        Following deliberation later in the meeting, make a recommendation to the Police and Crime Commissioner as to whether or not the nominee should be appointed to the office.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman explained that, in accordance with Section 1 of the Police and Social Responsibility Act, the Panel had a duty to consider the proposed appointment of Mr Jeff Harris as Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner (DPCC) for Surrey. The purpose of the hearing was to allow Members of the Panel to question Mr Harris to establish whether he had the professional competence and personal independence to carry our the role.

     

    During the course of the question and answer session, Mr Harris clarified the following points:

     

    ·         The key duties of the DPCC would be to support the Commissioner in his partnership work, supporting the process of engaging with key partners and stakeholders. He would also be responsible for undertaking and reviewing specific projects, as determined by the Commissioner.

     

    ·         He saw the position of DPCC as a full-time role and, as a result, had given up his role with the Metropolitan Police. He would, however, be continuing his mentoring work with the Prince’s Trust.

     

    ·         He saw his relationship with the Chief Constable as a ‘critical friend’ and, if appointed, he intended to work with the Police’s senior management team to, amongst other things, improve partnership arrangements.

     

    ·         Whilst he acknowledged the financial constraints, he did not believe that partnership working required large sums of money to succeed. For example, he intended to explore business sponsorship opportunities, work closely with the third sector and encourage local communities to get involved.

     

    ·         He had never been a Freemason or a member of any other society.

     

    ·         He and the Commissioner had not worked together for many years and they had not been in regular contact during the interim. When invited by the Commissioner to become the DPCC, he had accepted on the basis that he believed he had the right skills and experience for the role, and that they would make a strong team. The Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner had been sensitive to the fact that the appointment could not be made until after the confirmation hearing, and all official press releases had therefore referred to him as the DPCC designate.

     

    ·         He had not been a Metropolitan Police Officer for 8 years.

     

    ·         Neighbourhood Policing was essential and junior Police Officers were integral to the process.

     

    ·         The Commissioner would lead on key strategic issues such as domestic violence and rape. However, he was well aware of the importance of these areas of policing.

     

    ·         It was acknowledged that there could potentially be occasions when he and the Commissioner held different opinions on a particular strategic issue, and he was happy to have full and frank discussions.

     

    ·         He believed that, if appointed, he would bring a varied skill-set to the role. In particular he considered himself to be a good communicator, negotiator and someone with significant experience of developing successful partnerships to achieve common goals. He also believed that his experience of working at a senior level in Local Government gave him a good understanding of the wider role of the Police.

     

    ·         Through his involvement with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13/12

14/12

Protocol between the Police and Crime Panel and the Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey pdf icon PDF 28 KB

    To agree the Protocol between the Police and Crime Panel and the Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman introduced the Protocol and explained that the document would guide the relationship between the Police and Crime Panel and the Police and Crime Commissioner. She stated that Panel Members had previously considered the document at length and that it was being presented for formal agreement.

     

    RESOLVED: That

     

          i.        The Protocol between the Police and Crime Panel and the Police and Crime Commissioner, as detailed in Appendix 1 of the report, be agreed;

     

         ii.        The Protocol be commended to the Police and Crime Commissioner;

     

        iii.        The Protocol be reviewed in 12 months time.

     

15/12

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER

    A question and answer session between the Panel and the newly-elected Police and Crime Commissioner to discuss his priorities and the working arrangements with the Panel going forward.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman once again welcomed Surrey’s Police and Crime Commissioner to the meeting and invited him to introduce both himself and his ambitions.

     

    During the course of his introduction, the Commissioner outlined the following key points:

     

    ·         He and his family had lived in Surrey for 27 years and he wanted the County to be an even better, safer and nicer place to live.

     

    ·         In addition to having thirty years police experience, he had also set up a number of companies and remained a Reservist Army Officer.

     

    ·         The biggest challenge facing Surrey Police was one of money. With significant cuts expected over the coming years combined with the fact that 83% of the budget went towards wages, there was a significant threat to policing.

     

    ·         There had already been a comprehensive review of expenses and he had asked for a full review of the Police’s asset transfer policy to ensure that they achieved the best return possible. The eventual DPCC would be supporting this process.

     

    ·         Surrey was the worst funded Police Service in the Country, with only 50% of its funding coming from Central Government. This was compared to up to 80% in some other areas.

     

    ·         He hoped to work closely with the Police and Crime Panel to ensure that he was able to get the most value out of the public purse. He would also be looking to use police powers to seize the ill-gotten profits of criminals to pay for more Police Officers.

     

    The Commissioner explained that during his election campaign he had made a number of promises that would now become the guiding principles for his time in office. These were as follows:

     

    ·         Take a zero tolerance policing approach: The Commissioner stated that he considered zero tolerance policing to be a mindset. He believed it was important for the Police to set down a marker and actively maintain the boundaries of acceptable behaviour. In order to start this process he would be working hard to change the mindset of not just Police Officers, but also those in local government and other key partners.

     

    ·         More visible policing: The Commissioner explained that he wanted to work closely with Neighbourhood Policing teams to ensure officers were more visible to residents. He also wanted to explore opportunities for Surrey Police to work more closely with neighbouring forces to share and respond to emergency calls, even if they were technically outside their area.

     

    ·         Put victims at the centre of the criminal justice system: The Commissioner stated that he would be working closely with senior management at Surrey Police to ensure that victims were given a quality service, from reporting a crime to giving evidence.

     

    ·         Give residents the opportunity to have a greater say in how the streets are policed: This would be achieved through a number of methods, including regular meetings between the Commissioner and the Police and Crime Panel, leaders and chief executives of boroughs and districts, and local chief inspectors. The Commissioner would also be setting up smaller, local meetings  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15/12

16/12

COMPLAINTS PROTOCOL pdf icon PDF 31 KB

    To agree arrangements for handling complaints against the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman introduced the Complaints Protocol and explained that the document would guide the way in which the Panel handled complaints against the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner. She added that the document had already been shared with all Members of the Panel and the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner. She therefore requested that Members agree the Complaints Protocol.

     

    RESOLVED: That

     

          i.        The Complaints Protocol, as detailed in Appendix 1 of the report, be agreed.

17/12

COMMUNICATION PROTOCOL pdf icon PDF 56 KB

    To agree the Panel’s Communication Protocol.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman introduced the proposed methods by which the Police and Crime Panel would promote its role and activities to ensure that the public had access to the information they needed to hold Surrey’s Police and Crime Commissioner to account. As with the other protocols already agreed, it was explained that the Communication protocol had already been shared with all Members of the Panel and the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner and was being presented for formal agreement.

     

    RESOLVED: That

     

          i.        The responsibility of the Panel to actively promote its role and activities be noted;

     

         ii.        The content to be provided on the Panel’s web pages, as detailed in paragraphs 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 of the report be agreed;

     

        iii.        The proposals for promoting the work of the Panel through Council newsletters and relevant events, as detailed in paragraph 2.6 of the report, be agreed;

     

        iv.        The proposals for Panel Member updates to their respective local authorities, as detailed in paragraphs 2.7 and 2.8 of the report, be agreed;

     

         v.        The proposals for webcasting Panel meetings, as detailed in paragraph 2.9 of the report, be agreed;

     

        vi.        The protocol for media relations, as detailed in Appendix A of the report, be agreed.

18/12

ESTABLISHMENT OF WORKING GROUPS AND SUB-COMMITTEES pdf icon PDF 45 KB

    To agree the membership and terms of reference for the following:

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The Chairman explained that, in line with the Panel’s Complaints Protocol, it was proposed that the Panel establish a Complaints Sub-Committee to informally resolve noncriminal complaints about the conduct of the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner, as well as conduct matters that were referred back to the Panel by the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

     

    In addition, to assist the Panel in its consideration of budgetary and financial matters, it was also proposed that the Panel establish a Finance Sub-Group.

     

    RESOLVED: That

     

          i.        The Terms of Reference for the Complaints Sub-Committee, as detailed in Appendix 1 of the report, be agreed;

     

         ii.        The following Members be appointed to the Complaints Sub-Committee for the remainder of the 2012/13 Council year:

     

    ·         Councillor Victor Broad

    ·         Councillor Margaret Cooksey

    ·         Councillor John O’Reilly

    ·         Councillor Clive Smitheram

    ·         Independent Member Anne Hoblyn

    ·         Independent Member Janice Turner

    ·         Councillor Dorothy Ross-Tomlin (ex-officio)

    ·         Councillor Terry Dicks (ex-officio)

     

        iii.        The Terms of Reference for the Finance Sub-Group, as detailed in Appendix 1 of the report, be agreed;

     

        iv.        The following Members be appointed to the Finance Sub-Group for the remainder of the 2012/13 Council year:

     

    ·         Councillor Bryan Cross

    ·         Councillor Penny Forbes-Forsyth

    ·         Councillor Charlotte Morley

    ·         Councillor Dorothy Ross-Tomlin (ex-officio)

    ·         Councillor Terry Dicks (ex-officio)

     

         v.        Subject to his approval, Councillor Victor Broad be appointed as an additional Member of the Sub-Group.

     

     

     

19/12

EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

    That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of the Schedule 12A of the Act.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    RESOLVED: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of the Schedule 12A of the Act.

20/12

DEPUTY POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER - PANEL DELIBERATION AND DECISION

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Having taken into account both the answers provided during the confirmation hearing and the information previously submitted by the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner, the Panel was satisfied that Mr Harris possessed the professional competence and personal independence to carry out the role.

     

    RESOLVED: To recommend that

     

          i.        The Police and Crime Commissioner proceed with the appointment of Mr Harris to the position of Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner;

     

         ii.        The Police and Crime Commissioner share with the Panel the criteria by which the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner’s performance will be assessed, and the outcome of any future appraisals.