Agenda and draft minutes

Surrey Police and Crime Panel
Thursday, 27 June 2019 10.30 am

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

Contact: Vickie Neal 

Webcast: View the webcast

Items
No. Item

31/19

ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN

32/19

ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIRMAN

33/19

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

34/19

MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 179 KB

    To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 5 April 2019 as a correct record.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    1.    The minutes of the meeting held on 5 April 2019 were agreed as a true record of that meeting and were signed by the Chairman.

     

    2.    Cllr Watson requested that the item at minute number 20/19 on CCTV be allocated a date and was assured by the Chairman this would be discussed in relation to the Forward Plan later in the meeting.

35/19

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

    All Members present are required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter

    (i)            Any disclosable pecuniary interests and / or

    (ii)           Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this meeting

    NOTES:

    ·         Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest

    ·         As well as an interest of the Member, this includes any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)

    ·         Members with a significant personal interest may participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    There were none.

36/19

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 a written response will be circulated to Panel Members and the questioner.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    No public questions were received.

37/19

POLICE & CRIME COMMISSIONER'S ANNUAL REPORT pdf icon PDF 44 KB

    The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act (2011) places a duty on Police and Crime Commissioners to produce an Annual Report. Members of the Panel are asked to comment on the attached annual report prior to its formal publication.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) explained that the annual report was one of his statutory duties and that he had seen steady progress made against his plan but noted that there was always room to do more and the Panel’s comments on the draft plan would be incorporated into the final version.

     

    Members noted that although crime had not increased as much as the national average it had still increased and asked the PCC to expand on this.

     

    2.    The PCC suggested amending the report to highlight that while reported crime had increased, actual crime was static according to the Crime Survey of England and Wales. He expressed that an increase in reported crime could be seen as neutral or good news. It could be seen as neutral because the Home Office definition of crime had changed which impacted the statistics. He noted it was positive because people were reporting more and were more ready to discuss crimes such as Domestic Violence, Child Sexual Exploitation and Modern Slavery than they had been previously.

    3.    The PCC noted that some crimes had seen a real increase in occurrences, such as breaking and entering into vehicles, but that the police had been running public awareness campaigns to make people more aware of their personal belongings.

    4.    The PCC was confident that the police were on top of crime and would ensure Surrey stayed safe. He noted one exception to this and expressed that he was concerned about cybercrime which needed more attention nationally to reduce rates.

    5.    It was also noted that rates of clearing up crime were too low nationally and that this was true in Surrey, but that the PCC was holding the Chief Constable to account in this area.

     

    Members highlighted areas of the report that needed editing before the final version was published.

     

    6.    Members commented that the report only went into detail of four of the six priorities outlined in the Police and Crime Plan and asked that the final report include all priorities.

    7.    It was noted that the “Year At A Glance” did not mention the problems identified with disclosure and the fact that the PCC had asked for a review of this. The PCC noted that disclosure needed to be discussed in the final report as the issue was ongoing.

    8.    It was pointed out that the “Year at a Glance” stated that 75% of tax payers were happy to pay extra for additional officers and police staff, but actually it was 75% of people surveyed, and this should be made clear. The PCC agreed that the report should make it clear that 75% of people surveyed were happy with the rise in the Precept and this change would be incorporated into the report.

    9.    No mention of collaboration with other forces was given in the part of the report which focused on the “Making Every Pound Count” priority and this should be considered. On collaboration  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37/19

38/19

SURREY POLICE GROUP FINANCIAL REPORT FOR MONTH 12 FINANCIAL YEAR 2018/19 pdf icon PDF 628 KB

    The purpose of this report is to inform the Police & Crime Panel of the Surrey Police Group (i.e. Finances of both the PCC and Chief Constable) financial position as at the year-end 31 March 2019, comparing the expenditure and income incurred by both Surrey Police and the Office of the Surrey Police & Crime Commissioner, with the revenue and capital budgets approved by the Police & Crime Commissioner in January 2018 for the financial year 2018/19.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) introduced the report, and noted that the Surrey Police group as a whole had underspent in the year 2018/2019. He noted that the total underspend of £664 thousand came from a £50 thousand underspend from the OPCC and a £614 thousand underspend from Surrey Police Force.

    1. Members asked for an update on the Body Worn Video project, and whether projects which were underspent because they had not been implemented had since been implemented, or were likely to be rolled out by the end of this financial year.

    3.    The CFO commented that the Body Worn Video would be rolled out by the end of the financial year and that the new Head of IT was carrying out a review of current IT projects to ensure they were best value for money. He noted that some might be abandoned but the majority could be expected to be implemented by the end of the year.

    4.    Members asked for an update on the Body Worn Video project, and whether projects which were underspent because they had not been implemented had since been implemented, or were likely to be rolled out by the end of this financial year.

    5.    The PCC expressed that he was happy to update the Panel further on this in Part 2 as the information contained sensitive financial and contractual information.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Panel noted the report.

     

    Actions / Further information to be provided:

     

    None.

39/19

OFFICE OF THE POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER 2018/19 END OF YEAR FINANCIAL REPORT pdf icon PDF 46 KB

    The purpose of this report is to inform the Police & Crime Panel of the OPCC’s year-end financial out-turn for the 2018/19 financial year.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The CFO introduced the report and re-stated that the OPCC had underspent by £50 thousand in the financial year 2018/2019.

    2.    The PCC stated that he had done an investigation into the costs of the OPCC compared to the costs of the old Police Authority and found the OPCC to be considerably cheaper.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Panel noted the contents of the report.

     

    Actions/ Further information to be provided:

     

    There were none.

40/19

FEEDBACK ON MANAGEMENT MEETINGS BETWEEN THE POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER AND CHIEF CONSTABLE pdf icon PDF 46 KB

    This report provides an update on the meetings that have been held and what has been discussed in order to demonstrate that arrangements for good governance and scrutiny are in place.   

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    Members wanted to know how the PCC felt partnership working was going on joint prevention work. The PCC noted that partnership working was improving and that he would shortly be signing a concordat with the Leader of Surrey County Council to establish a framework for how the police and council could work together to cover areas such as social services to provide for Surrey residents.

    2.    He reported that on the ground Joint Enforcement Teams (JETs) were working well and that he was providing £50 thousand to local authorities wanting to set these up. He commented that he would like to expand the powers of JETs and grow the programme further.

    3.    Members wanted to know what actions were being taken by the Chief Constable to improve feedback to the public when reporting crimes. The PCC stated that the Chief Constable, police and PCC do a lot of work to brief the public on what they do. He noted that Surrey Police have a vast social media following and use websites such as Twitter to engage the public but that this could be improved and done in a more systematic way going forward.

    4.    Members asked for an update on the 101 forwarding message and whether the Chief Constable had reduced the length of the message. The PCC stated that the message still included important information to remind the public not to make inappropriate calls and that they could also use the online system to report crimes. The PCC noted that the Chief Constable was reluctant to re-record the message himself but that the PCC would check the message to see if there had been any changes.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Panel noted the update on the PCC’s performance meetings with the Chief Constable.

     

    Actions/ Further information to be provided:

     

    That the PCC provide information to the Panel on ways the public are briefed and provided with information relevant to them.

41/19

RECRUITMENT AND WORKFORCE PLANNING pdf icon PDF 26 KB

    For the Panel to receive details of recruitment and workforce planning.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The PCC introduced the report and noted that he had asked the force to provide information to him about how Surrey Police should aim to look in size and shape in the future. Members asked that they be able to see the findings of the information the PCC will receive from the force.

    2.    Members welcomed the increase in the neighbourhood support officers and in the recruitment of PCSOs. They noted the valuable work done by PCSOs who were approachable and knowledgeable about their local areas. The PCC also expressed thanks to PCSOs for the variety of skills they had to offer. He noted that in the short term he aimed to bring in more PCSOs because they were quick to train and that it was common for PCSOs to use the role to transition to becoming Police Officers.

    3.    Members asked how the PCC thought the 75% of people surveyed who supported the Precept increase would react to the different types of staff being recruited that were not neighbourhood police officers. The PCC stated that the additional money from the Precept increase was never intended to be solely for local neighbourhood policing and that all money is used to keep the public safe.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Panel noted the Surrey Police plans for recruitment and workforce planning.

     

    Actions/ Further information to be provided:

     

    The PCC to provide the findings of feedback from the force on what the force should look like in the future.

42/19

UPDATE ON FUTURE POLICE ESTATES pdf icon PDF 29 KB

    This paper provides a progress update in relation to the future estate, following the purchase of a site in Leatherhead for the new Surrey Police Headquarters.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The PCC introduced the report and noted that information was sensitive but could be shared with the Panel in Part 2 of the meeting.

    2.    Members asked for clarification over who had ownership and responsibility for the Future Police Estates project to which the PCC noted that he had the final sign off as the owner of police buildings and controller of funding on behalf of the taxpayer, but that the foundation of the estates project was operational, meaning the Chief Constable had input.

    3.    Members asked for information on project management and governance. The PCC stated that governance was being refined as part of the project as it moved from purchasing to building and that the Chief Executive was paying close attention to governance. It was stated that the PCC had external advisors to directly advise the OPCC in addition to the project team governance. The Chief Executive clarified that she was currently working through governance and assembling an Executive Board with the Chief Constable and lawyers. She agreed that the Terms of Reference of this board could be presented to the Panel and that building the future was about culture and agile working as well as the building and so needed robust governance.

    4.    Members noted that the date for the move was not until 2024 but asked the PCC if he could update them on when police counters were likely to happen in areas such as Woking and Reigate which were due to have stations closed. The PCC clarified that moves had no impact on local policing and that there would be a local police presence in every district and borough and that was a pledge for the remainder of his term as PCC. He also noted that nothing would happen until the Leatherhead site was complete and this would take time.

    5.    The PCC noted that the “so-called” Woking Police Station and Reigate Police Station host non-local elements and could be located anywhere in the county and so these functions would move to Leatherhead allowing for the disposal of what is called Woking Police Station. He explained that this site was not actually Woking Police Station as this was in Woking Borough Council’s offices. He expressed that the front counter would be moving next month into the council offices but as this was an operational matter it was not within his remit. He noted that the local police in Reigate would need a new building provided when the current building was disposed of but that the local policing team would remain in the borough.

    6.    Members asked for details on commercial negotiations with the existing tenant and how crucial these were to ensuring the move date in 2024 could go ahead. The PCC agreed to answer this in Part 2 of the meeting as it was information regarding negotiations and contracts that was not suitable to be discussed in a public forum.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Police and Crime Panel noted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42/19

43/19

COMMISSIONER'S QUESTION TIME pdf icon PDF 69 KB

44/19

COMPLAINTS RECEIVED SINCE THE LAST MEETING pdf icon PDF 54 KB

45/19

RECOMMENDATIONS TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME pdf icon PDF 49 KB

46/19

Re-Establishment of the Complaints Sub Committee pdf icon PDF 74 KB

47/19

Re-Establishment of the Finance Sub Group pdf icon PDF 84 KB

    To agree the membership and terms of reference for the Finance Sub-Group for 2019/20.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The Chairman and Vice-Chairman set out the background and explained the role of the Finance Sub-Group.

    2.    Councillor Hawkins explained she had been added to the membership in error and requested her name be removed from the list.

    3.    Councillor Povey volunteered to join the Sub-Group

    4.    Councillor Watson agreed to join the Sub-Group

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Panel agreed the terms of reference of the sub-group.

     

    The Panel appointed Councillors Andrew Povey and Hazel Watson as members of the Finance Sub-Group.

     

    Actions/ Further information to be provided:

     

    That Councillor Hawkins be removed from the sub-group as she had been added in error.

48/19

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

    Panel to note that the next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday 18 September 2019.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    This item was moved up the agenda for public information

     

    The next meeting of the Police and Crime Panel meeting will be held on Wednesday 18 September 2019 at 10.30am in the Ashcombe Suite, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames.

49/19

EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC

    Recommendation: That under Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972, 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 12 A 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 conversation of 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.

     

50/19

COLLABORATION UPDATE

     

     Surrey Police continues to undertake significant change activity through the ‘Policing Together’ programme with Sussex, and with other forces in the South-East region, in order to meet the financial challenges, increase resilience and improve service delivery. This paper describes the current status and recent progress in collaboration activities.

Minutes:

Key points raised in the discussion:

 

1.    Members asked the PCC to explain the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in greater detail. They asked for clarification over who was involved in the agreement and why other partners in the inter-force collaboration (such as Hampshire and Thames Valley) were not included.

2.    The PCC explained that the Government lacked leadership and so forces and PCCs were left to come to agreements themselves. He expressed that the MOU was as far as collaborative agreements could go under current laws.

3.    Members queried what would happen in the event of conflict between forces and asked whether the document had any teeth. The PCC commented that the document was an expression of intent and that more needs to be done but that national frameworks in place do not allow watertight collaborations.

4.    Members wanted to know whether there were any similar agreements in place with partners in Thames Valley and Hampshire police to which the PCC commented that there were but that they were fragmented and unsatisfactory because of the local and national government frameworks.

5.    The PCC assured members that the document would hold up as a foundation document in court if PCCs were to take each other to court, but that it is not good enough.

6.    Members asked the PCC what he would ideally want to see to rectify the situation. The PCC said he would want to see a parliamentary act to allow the Home Secretary or Ministers to delegate to local areas to allow Commissioners to do what is best for their residents. He would want to see the Chief Constable and PCC have powers, as well as regional and national powers which would allow people to stop tiptoeing around each other and save time and money. He stated that once a new Prime Minister and Cabinet were in place he would be writing to the Home Secretary to explain his feelings and concerns.

7.    Members asked whether legal advice had been sought when drawing up the MOU. The PCC commented that it had and it had used money which could have been spend on policing if a better national framework had been in place.

8.    Members asked the PCC to provide a list of areas where services are shared and where there is collaboration with other force areas.

 

RESOLVED:

The Panel noted the information contained within the report

Actions/ Further information to be provided:

PCC to provide information of what services and collaborative efforts are in place with partner police forces.

 

 

51/19

UPDATE ON FUTURE POLICE ESTATES

    Minutes:

    This item was requested at the meeting to discuss Part 2 information

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The PCC provided background about the sitting tenants on the site that has been purchased in Leatherhead. He detailed each of the three specific cases and the terms of each being removed from the site.

    2.    Members asked what work has been done on the selling of land for the three buildings that are due to be disposed of and when the Panel could expect to see Part 1 or Part 2 information about this. The PCC noted that there were plans for a detailed financial appraisal to estimate the amount each site could be sold for and that this was part of the wider project plan. He commented that this was not to be done until later in the process as it would be a waste of money to do it this early on.

    3.    Members requested that from this time next year a standing Part 2 item be added to the agenda to keep the Panel updated on the project. The PCC agreed to this.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Panel noted the updates provided.

     

    Actions/ Further information to be provided:

     

    A standing Part 2 Item be added to the agenda starting in June 2020.