Agenda and minutes
PDF 156 KBVenue: G44 - County Hall. View directions
Contact: Huma Younis or Sharmina Ullah Email: huma.younis@surreycc.gov.uk, Email: sharmina.ullah@surreycc.gov.uk
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN
To appoint a Chairman for the purpose of the meeting.
Note: As the Complaint Sub-Committee relies on a pooled membership, those in attendance will be required to nominate a Chairman for the purpose of the meeting. Minutes: It was proposed by Ken Harwood and seconded by David Fitzpatrick-Grimes that David Reeve be elected Chairman for the meeting. There were no other nominations.
Resolved: That David Reeve be elected Chairman for the meeting. |
|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
The Chairman to report apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies were received from Margaret Cooksey. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members of the Panel in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting. Minutes: Bryan Cross and Dorothy Ross-Tomlin both declared that they had known the complainant since 2007 through their roles as elected mayors in Surrey at that time. |
|
|
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
Recommendation: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972 and in accordance with the Panel’s agreed protocol, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under the relevant paragraphs of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act. Minutes: The Sub-Committee considered whether it would be in the public interest for its consideration of the complaint to be held in public. The Chairman invited the member of the Press present at the meeting to make representations in support of a public discussion, and they raised the following points:
·
The complaint related to a public official rather than a private
individual, and there was significant public interest in issues
relating to their conduct.
·
Public officials should be held to account in an open
process. · It was difficult to see how the private interest could outweigh the public interest, particularly in the light of the Police & Crime Commissioner’s stated commitment to openness and transparency.
The Sub-Committee noted that in reaching its decision it needed to balance these points against the reasons for holding the discussion in private, which were outlined as follows:
·
The Sub-Committee was not conducting a hearing, but was seeking
informal resolution of the complaint in accordance with its terms
of reference following referral back by the Independent Police
Complaints Commission.
·
The Regulations were intended to encourage informal resolution of
less serious matters and avoid unnecessary investigations, and
discussions about achieving an informal resolution may be
prejudiced by the presence of the public. The public interest would be best served by
resolving such matters as simply as possible.
·
Some of the information to be discussed by the Sub-Committee had
been provided in confidence. · The Police & Crime Commissioner would not be present to put his view to the Sub-Committee.
Following discussion of the points raised, the Sub-Committee unanimously agreed that on balance it was in the public interest for its discussion to be held in private, and
Resolved: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972 and in accordance with the Police & Crime Panel’s agreed protocol, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information under paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.
The Chairman adjourned the meeting from 10.45am to 10.50am.
|
|
|
COMPLAINT AGAINST THE SURREY POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER
In accordance with the Elected Local Policing Bodies (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012 and the Panel’s agreed complaints protocol, the Complaints Sub-Committee is asked to seek the informal resolution of the attached complaint. Minutes: The Sub-Committee discussed the complaint against the Police & Crime Commissioner and identified a number of issues about which further information was required from the Independent Police Complaints Commission before it would be able to reach its conclusions. It was therefore
Resolved: That further consideration of the complaint against the Police & Crime Commissioner be deferred pending clarification from the Independent Police Complaints Commissionof the reasons for their decision to refer the matter to back the Sub-Committee.
|
|
|
PUBLICITY OF PART 2 ITEMS
To consider whether the items considered under Part 2 of the agenda should be made available to the press and public. Minutes: Resolved: That the item considered under Part Two of the agenda should remain confidential and not be made available to the Press and public. |