Agenda and minutes
PDF 174 KBVenue: Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions
Contact: Victoria White or Andrew Baird
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
ELECTION OF THE CHAIRMAN
Members of Surrey’s Police and Crime Panel to elect a Chairman for the 2015/16 council year. Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Dorothy Ross-Tomlin was proposed by Councillor Beryl Hunwicks and seconded by Councillor Victor Broad to be Chairman for the municipal year 2015/2016. The Panel unanimously voted, by a show of hands, to appoint Councillor Dorothy Ross-Tomlin as Chairman of the Surrey Police and Crime Panel. The Chairman thanked the Panel for their support and stated that she was looking forward to the important work that the Panel will be undertaking over the coming year.
RESOLVED: That;
1. Councillor Dorothy Ross-Tomlin be appointed as Chairman of the Surrey Police and Crime Panel for the 2015/2016 municipal year.
|
|
|
ELECTION OF THE VICE-CHAIRMAN
Members of Surrey’s Police and Crime Panel to elect a Vice-Chairman for the 2015/16 council year. Additional documents: Minutes: Councillor Ken Harwood was proposed by Councillor Charlotte Morley and seconded by Independent Member Bryan Cross to be Vice-Chairman for the municipal year 2015/2016. The Panel unanimously voted, by a show of hands, to appoint Councillor Ken Harwood as Vice-Chairman of the Surrey Police and Crime Panel.
RESOLVED: That;
1. Councillor Ken Harwood be appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Surrey Police and Crime Panel for the 2015/2016 municipal year.
|
|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
The Chairman to report apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies were received from Borough Councillor David Reeve and Borough Councillor Victor Broad.
|
|
|
MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING
To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 21 April 2015 as a correct record. Additional documents: Minutes: The Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner (DPCC) provided clarification on Item 5 of the minutes for the Police and Crime Panel meeting on 21 April 2015. It was highlighted that the function of the Cyber Crime programme which has been set up by the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) and which will be attached to the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) is to do preventative work in relation to cyber crime and that it will not have any investigative powers.
The minutes were agreed by the Panel as a true record of the meeting.
|
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members of the Panel in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting. Additional documents: Minutes: None received. |
|
|
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
To receive any public questions.
Note: Written questions from the public can be submitted no later than seven days prior to the published date of the annual or any ordinary public meeting, for which the Commissioner will be invited to provide a written response by noon on the day before the meeting, which will be circulated to Panel Members and the questioner. Additional documents: Minutes: None received. |
|
|
POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER'S ANNUAL REPORT
To consider the Police and Crime Commissioner’s draft Annual Report. Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions:
· The PCC gave the Panel a brief summary of the annual report for 2014/15, picking out some of the headline statistics from the report. Panel members were informed that £1.7 million in assets were seized from criminals in 2014/15 and that Surrey Police was the only force in the UK to increase the number of police officers last year.
· Details were also provided on some of the most significant challenges currently facing Surrey Police. This includes the management of resources in response to reduced funding from Central Government and which could result in the loss of 500 Surrey Police staff over the coming years. Attention was also drawn to the Force’s poor staff attrition rate which is symptomatic of the high cost of living in Surrey and proximity to London where police officers in the Metropolitan Police receive a significantly higher level of allowance.
· Panel members highlighted the challenges of retaining public sector workers across Surrey and suggested that key staff should receive an income that reflects the high cost of living in Surrey similar to the London weighting allowance in order to improve staff retention. Housing was also flagged as a significant contributory factor to the high cost of living in the county and an area where it might be necessary to provide protected housing for key public sector workers such as police officers. The Panel agreed to write to Surrey MPs requesting support in making the case for key worker housing as well as the possibility of a greater weighting allowance for Surrey police officers to improve the Force’s poor staff attrition rate.
· The PCC was asked for his thoughts on the outcome of the referendum held by the Bedfordshire PCC on raising the precept rate above the 2% threshold in light of the fact that the electorate in Bedfordshire voted against the proposed increase. The PCC declined to comment specifically on the referendum in Bedfordshire but did stress that Surrey residents have demonstrated a tendency to agree with the idea of raising the precept beyond 2% when the reasons for doing so are explained to them, as highlighted by the outcome of polling at the crime summits held by the PCC.
· Additional information was requested on the £1.7 million worth of assets seized from criminals and Panel members asked why the 18% of this money from seized criminal assets that Surrey Police receive back from Central Government was not being spent on visible, neighbourhood policing. The PCC responded by expressing his concern that police forces receive such a small percentage back from the assets that they seize from criminals. Panel members were, however, advised that lobbying is taking place on behalf of all police forces throughout the country to increase the proportion of money that they receive back from the seizure of criminals’ assets. Indications suggest that the Government is listening to these concerns and is in the process of considering whether to increase the percentage of money that police forces ... view the full minutes text for item 7/14 |
|
|
DEPUTY AND ASSISTANT POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONERS' OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW
The reports sets out details of the work that Jeff Harris, Shiraz Mirza and Jane Anderson have been undertaking and the outcomes they have achieved since the meeting of the Police and Crime Panel on 21 April 2015. Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions:
· The APCC for Victims provided the Panel with an update on the work being done by the OPCC on the commissioning of victims’ services, including steps being taken to ensure that funding is distributed fairly and correctly at the local level across the county. The APCC provided details of her involvement on a Board which coordinates the allocation of funding for victims’ services and which provides insight into money being injected by the OPCC, health services and other agencies in and around Surrey to ensure that services available to victims are complementary rather than a duplication.
· Panel members were also informed that funding efforts have primarily been directed towards supporting services which already exist in the county. The OPCC is open to funding new initiatives but these are reviewed carefully to ensure that all victims’ services commissioned by the OPCC are open and accessible and that pathways for providing support to victims of crime are clear.
· More information was requested on how the OPCC is monitoring the outcomes of commissioned services to ensure that victims of crime are being given the right level and type of support. The APCC highlighted that a Policy Officer has been assigned to receive frequent reports from organisations commissioned to provide victims’ services. Accurately measuring performance against outcomes can be a challenge, particularly in relation to specialist services but the APCC assured the Panel that assessing the performance of these organisations is high on the OPCC’s agenda and that they will continue to closely monitor the support being provided to ensure that it is right for victims.
· Attention was drawn to the £133,991 mentioned on page 33 of the agenda and the OPCC was asked to provide the Panel with a detailed breakdown of how this money has been spent to provide Panel members with information on the how the OPCC are funding victims’ services throughout Surrey.
· Panel members asked the OPCC to provide the Panel with information from victim satisfaction surveys to explore an external perspective on how victims’ services are performing. The APCC confirmed that data from police satisfaction surveys can be reported to the Panel but indicated that it could prove challenging to get this information from partner organisations due to data-sharing policies. It was confirmed that the OPCC would consider the most appropriate way of bringing this data to the Panel.
· Concern was expressed with the format of outcome sheets included in the agenda which detail how the DPCC and APCCs are performing against their proscribed targets. Panel members highlighted that these outcome sheets don’t provide the level of detail necessary for the Panel to effectively scrutinise the performance of the Deputy and Assistant Police and Crime Commissioners and suggested that a more appropriate format be used which facilitates a greater level of scrutiny. The APCC indicated that she shared the Panel’s frustration on this issue but advised that providing tangible measures of performance against outcomes would generate a great deal of paperwork. The PCC ... view the full minutes text for item 8/14 |
|
|
THE COMMUNITY SAFETY FUND
The Community Safety Fund (CSF) was awarded to Police and Crime Commissioners by the Home Office. This report provides the Panel with an overview of how the Community Safety Fund was distributed in the financial year 2014/15.
Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions:
· Discussions took place around efforts being made to extend the Junior Citizens programme to the remaining districts and boroughs which don’t currently offer the programme. Panel members advised the DPCC that Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) and South East Coast Ambulance Service (SECAmb) have indicated to them that they are unable to commit the resources to support the programme. In response, the Panel was advised that discussions with partner agencies including SECAmb and SFRS about their involvement in the Junior Citizens programme have been very positive and that both have expressed interest in extending their support should it be rolled out to the remaining five districts and boroughs in the county. The DPCC reiterated his willingness to negotiate with partners to ensure that the arrangements are in place to enable them to support the programme including arranging travel and a venue for the event to take place as well as providing funding.
· Panel members requested more detail on the Community Safety Fund (CSF) grant which was given to Eagle Radio. The DPCC indicated that Eagle Radio had agreed to provide social media training workshops to over 10,500 young people in Surrey to promote online safety and tackle cyber bullying. The Panel expressed an interest in the possibility of attending one of the workshops being conducted by Eagle Radio and requested that the OPCC make the Panel aware of upcoming events so that members can attend and lend their support. The PCC indicated that he would coordinate with SCC and district and borough council officers to establish an effective way of keeping the Panel and local members informed of upcoming events. Anne Hoblyn left the meeting at 12.00pm.
· More information was requested on how the OPCC monitors the spending of money allocated through the Community Safety Fund (CSF). The DPCC advised that representatives are sent out to look at each project funded through the CSF while reports and accounts are also requested from each project to ensure that the money is being spent in accordance with application proposals. It was further highlighted that there is an Audit Committee which oversees the allocation of CSF grants to ensure that funding is being given to the right projects.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Panel noted the report.
ACTIONS/ FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:
1. That the OPCC develop a way to alert Panel members and local members about issues and events happening in their districts and boroughs.
PANEL NEXT STEPS:
None
|
|
|
OPCC COMPLAINTS UPDATE
This report provides the Panel with an overview of the complaints processes and complaints received in the financial year 2014/15.
Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions:
None
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Panel noted the report.
ACTIONS/ FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:
None
PANEL NEXT STEPS:
None
Jane Anderson left the meeting at 12.15pm
|
|
To consider the feedback from meetings between the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Chief Constable. Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions:
· The Panel requested an update on the 101 service and whether this service has been improved. The PCC highlighted that steps have been taken to improve the 101 service although challenges do remain, particularly in relation to recruitment as well as a contractual issue with BT which has gone into remediation. It was agreed, however, that considerable improvements are required in the delivery of the 101 service.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Panel noted the report.
ACTIONS/ FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:
None
PANEL NEXT STEPS:
None
|
|
|
CRIME SUMMIT REPORT 2014 - 2015
Over the past 12 months, the Police and Crime Commissioner, with the assistance of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner, have held 11 Crime Summits across the county in accordance with the fourth of the six People’s Priorities: to ‘give you the opportunity to have a greater say in how your streets are policed’. This report summarises the work done towards these events, the results and recommendations for future events in 2015-2016.
Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions:
· The PCC highlighted that crime summits have proven to be an extremely important way of engaging with the community but stressed that they operate alongside a number of other ways of engaging with the community such as social media and the PCC’s website. The Panel was informed that there are plans to do sub-meetings in the larger districts and boroughs in 2015/16 to give more people the opportunity to attend crime summits. Panel members welcomed the PCC’s idea of holding more localised crime summits highlighting that this will enable these meetings to be more community focused and will provide more feedback from residents on their concerns.
· The Panel inquired about the PCC’s plans to attract a more diverse audience to crime summits in order to make the audience more representative of Surrey’s communities. The PCC advised Panel members of plans to make more effective use of the local media to advertise crime summits to a wider range of communities. The Chief Executive of the OPCC indicated that the PCC will be hosting a phone in session so that residents can put questions to the Commissioner and provide feedback on his performance.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Panel noted the report.
ACTIONS/ FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:
None
PANEL NEXT STEPS:
None
|
|
|
COMPLAINTS RECEIVED SINCE THE LAST MEETING
To note complaints against the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner received since the last meeting of the Police and Crime Panel. Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions:
None
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Panel noted the report.
ACTIONS/ FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:
None
PANEL NEXT STEPS:
None
|
|
|
RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMPLAINTS SUB-COMMITTEE
To agree the membership and terms of reference for the Complaints Sub-Committee. Additional documents: Minutes: The Panel agreed that, in line with the Panel’s Complaints Protocol, the Complaints Sub-Committee was to be re-established to informally resolve non-criminal complaints about the conduct of the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner, in addition to conduct matters which are referred back to the Panel from the IPCC.
The Panel also agreed that those holding the role of the Chairman and Vice-Chairman should be given full voting rights on the Complaints Sub-Committee rather than just being Ex-Officio Members.
RESOLVED: That,
1. The Complaints Sub-Committee be re-established for the municipal year 2015/2016.
2. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman are established as full members of the Complaints Sub-Committee.
3. The Complaints Sub-Committee to have the following membership:
· Councillor Victor Broad · Councillor Margaret Cooksey · Councillor John O’Reilly · Independent Member Anne Hoblyn · Councillor Dorothy Ross-Tomlin (Chairman) · Councillor Ken Harwood (Vice-Chairman)
|
|
|
RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FINANCE SUB-GROUP
To agree the membership and terms of reference for the Finance Sub-Group. Additional documents: Minutes: The Finance Sub-Group was proposed to be re-established to assist the Panel in consideration of budgetary and financial matters.
RESOLVED: That,
1. The Finance Sub-Group be re-established for the municipal year 2014/2015.
2. The Finance Sub-Committee to have the following membership:
· Councillor Victor Broad · Councillor Charlotte Morley · Independent Member Bryan Cross · Chairman (ex-officio) · Vice-Chairman (ex-officio)
|
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME
To review the Recommendations Tracker and Forward Work Programme. Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions
· The Panel expressed concern with the availability of the unaudited accounts for Members to scrutinise. The Treasurer and Chief Finance Officer advised that the dates of the current meeting cycle are slightly out of sync with statutory deadlines for the OPCC to publish their unaudited account. The Panel was advised that the unaudited accounts will be circulated to the members of the Finance Sub-Group as soon as they are available. Members of the Finance Sub-Group were also given a standing invite to attend budget meetings between the OPCC and Surrey Police..
· The PCC agreed to include specific dates on the recommendations tracker so that the Panel know when recommendations will be completed.
· The Panel requested that items on the Police Estate strategy and an update on the Joint Enforcement be added to the Forward Work Programme.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The Panel noted the report.
ACTIONS/ FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:
1. That the OPCC will circulate the unaudited accounts to members of the Finance Sub-Group once they have been published.
2. The OPCC is asked to include specific dates on the recommendations tracker so that Members know when actions will be completed.
3. An item on the OPCC’s estates strategy will be added to the forward work programme.
4. An update on the Joint Enforcement Team initiative will be included on the forward work programme.
PANEL NEXT STEPS:
None
|
|
|
VERBAL UPDATE ON ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS INCLUDING DEEPCUT
Verbal strategic update on ongoing investigations including Deepcut. Additional documents: Minutes: Key points raised during the discussions:
· The Commissioner provided a brief update on ongoing investigations being conducted by Surrey Police. RECOMMENDATIONS:
None
ACTIONS/ FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:
None
PANEL NEXT STEPS:
None
|
|
|
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting of the Police and Crime Panel will be held on Tuesday 29 September at 10.30 am. Additional documents: Minutes: The Panel noted that its next meeting will be at 10.30am on 29 September 2015.
|