Councillors and committees

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Remote, public webcast link: https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/councillors-and-committees/webcasts

Contact: Amelia Christopher  Email: amelia.christopher@surreycc.gov.uk

Media

Items
No. Item

56/20

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

    • Share this item

    The Chairman to report apologies for absence.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    No apologies had been received.

     

57/20

MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 370 KB

58/20

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

    • Share this item

    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.

59/20

PUBLIC QUESTIONS pdf icon PDF 92 KB

    • Share this item

    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:

    One question was received from Paul Kennedy (District Councillor - Mole Valley District Council). The response can be found attached to these minutes as Annex A.

     

    A supplementary question was asked by Paul Kennedy and the response can be found below.

     

    · Supplementary question asked by Paul Kennedy:

     

    The questioner asked the Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) if it was his policy during the pandemic to deter or at least discourage people from using the 101 service.

     

    See Annex B – for full written supplementary question and additional information.

     

    Response:

     

    The PCC emphasised that it was neither the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner’s (OPCC) nor Surrey Police’s policy to discourage people from using the 101 service, as members of the public are urged to get in touch with the OPCC and Surrey Police through any means which they felt comfortable.

     

    He added that if residents chose to call the Contact Centre, the call operator would suggest at the beginning of call that the resident could submit their query online as that might be an easier method for the resident; especially as online chats could be recorded straight away as calls needed to be transcribed. He explained that the best way to contact Surrey Police was the best way for residents.

     

    He echoed the fantastic job that staff in the Contact Centre were continuing to do, noting that at the start of the Covid-19 pandemic the Contact Centre had been split into six centres and at present that had reduced to two.

     

    It was agreed that a written answer would be provided to the questioner, to answer the additional information provided (Annex B).

     

60/20

SURREY POLICE GROUP FINANCIAL REPORT FOR MONTH SIX FINANCIAL YEAR 2020/21 pdf icon PDF 270 KB

    • Share this item

    The purpose of this report is to inform the Police and Crime Panel of the Surrey Police Group (i.e. OPCC and Chief Constable combined) of the financial position as at the 30September 2020 as well as a prediction for the situation at the end of the year.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Kelvin Menon - Chief Finance Officer and Treasurer, Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC)

    Alison Bolton - Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer, Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC)

    David Munro - Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.   The Chief Finance Officer and Treasurer (OPCC) noted that the report covered the first six months of the financial year and a prediction of the outturn for the end of the year. At present the underspend was predicted at £0.7 million and that was after absorbing £2.3 million of Covid-19 costs.

    2.   He explained that the largest variances related to wages and salaries, with a predicted overspend at the end of the year of £3.1 million due to the phasing of police officer pay, officer and staff overtime and £1.8 million of that overspend was due to increased agency costs as for example thirty investigative assistants had been recruited.

    3.   He noted that recruitment in relation to the precept increase and uplift was on track.

    4.   He noted that Covid-19 costs totalled £5.8 million and of that, £3.5 million had been reimbursed; £3.1 million had been reimbursed for Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and £400,000 reimbursed for Covid-19 Surge Funding and another £260,000 had been claimed for income loss for April-July - although that had not yet been received. He added that no money to cover additional staffing or overtime had been received from the government. 

    5.   Regarding capital he noted the forecasted £2.5 million underspend, however only £3.5 million had been spent within the actual 2020/21 spend against the total budget of £17 million, so he expected that the underspend would be larger by the end of the year as some projects were scheduled to span over two years.

    6.   A Panel member noted that in the original costs there was reference to the STORM system and asked whether that was a replacement for the NICHE system or if it was an additional cost. In response, the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer (OPCC) explained that STORM was a different system to both EQUIP and NICHE; as it related to call handling and the Contact Centre - a more detailed answer would be provided.

    7.   A Panel member understood that the data collecting system on rural crime via flagging on NICHE had not worked effectively and as a result there was a re-training programme so that officers understood what a rural crime was and when to flag it. He asked whether the new STORM system could integrate rural crime flagging. In response, the PCC explained that rural crime could be flagged on NICHE, Surrey Police’s main crime recording system, he noted that police officers were encouraged to report rural crime but the problem was deciding when a rural crime was a rural crime or just a crime that happened in a rural setting. Flagging rural crimes was a matter of judgement for police officers on the ground and he noted that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60/20

61/20

OFFICE OF THE POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER MONTH SIX FINANCIAL UPDATE 2020/21 AND ESTIMATE FOR YEAR END OUTTURN pdf icon PDF 302 KB

    • Share this item

    The purpose of this report is to inform the Police and Crime Panel of the OPCC’s financial performance at Month 6 for the 2020/21 financial year together with an estimate of the year end outturn against budget.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Kelvin Menon - Chief Finance Officer & Treasurer, Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC)

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The Chief Finance Officer and Treasurer (OPCC) highlighted the estimated year end outturn with an underspend of just under £8,000, adding that the OPCC was on budget.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Police and Crime Panel noted the financial performance of the Office of the Police & Crime Commissioner for Surrey for the nine-month period ending 30th September 2020.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    None.

     

     

62/20

POLICE AND CRIME PLAN 2018-2021 - PROGRESS pdf icon PDF 449 KB

    • Share this item

    The PCC published a refreshed Police and Crime Plan in May 2018 for the period 2018 to 2020. This built on the previous plan issued in 2016. The refresh was informed by emerging crime trends, consultation, scrutiny of current force performance and meetings and visits with Surrey Police, public and partners. This report provides an update on how the plan has been met to date, noting that the current plan has been extended to May 2021.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    David Munro - Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.   The PCC noted that he was pleased with the Police and Crime Plan’s progress, despite the disruption caused by Covid-19.

    2.   Panel members raised concerns on the Plan’s performance measures:

    -  A Panel member disagreed with the PCC’s optimism as he highlighted that each of the Plan’s performance measures for 2020/21 to date were worse than the baseline 2015/16 figures. For example, the ‘Positive Outcome Rate for crimes against vulnerable people’ had dropped by 50%. He queried why every single performance measure had worsened.

    -  In response, the PCC noted that the statement that the performance measures had worsened was inaccurate, as for example the following performance measures: ‘%of public from survey believing that the police deal with antisocial behaviour and crimes that matter in their area’, % of victims of crime surveyed satisfied with police service’ and ‘% people who feel confident in neighbourhood police’ had all improved in 2020/21 to date compared to 2019/20 figures. 

    -  Regarding the 2015/16 baseline figures, the PCC noted that it had taken forces a long time to recover from successive budget cuts by the government and was pleased that since the baseline, increased government funding would hopefully lead to an increase in the performance measures.

    -  A Panel member noted concern with the 50% drop regarding the ‘Positive Outcome Rate for crimes against vulnerable people’, particularly as Covid-19 had exacerbated crimes against vulnerable people and sought an explanation for the decrease. In response, the PCC stressed that he was unsatisfied with the positive outcome rate and efforts were being made to address that, for example through the Prevention and Problem Solving Team. He added that the country had been in turmoil as a result of Covid-19 and so to be cautious when drawing conclusions from the 2020/21 figures.

    -  As a result of the decrease in percentages of the performance measures since the 2015/16 baseline, Panel members noted that they struggled with the recommendation to note the progress made against the Plan particularly as the ‘Positive Outcome Rate for crimes against vulnerable people’ had halved. In response to the recommendation, Panel members suggested that the Panel should express its concern on the lack of progress and ask the PCC to report back in more detail on the improvements and the Chief Constable’s new plan to address the matter.

    -  In response, the PCC agreed that the low ‘Positive Outcome Rate for crimes against vulnerable people’ was a concern and that the rate for all crimes needed improving. He explained that there had been steady progress on the performance measures since the restructuring of Surrey Police five years ago with the introduction of the Policing in Your Neighbourhood (PiYN) model.

    3.      A Panel member asked ifthere were examples of reviews being undertaken on the use of the Surrey Community Trigger by individuals who were not happy with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 62/20

63/20

HMICFRS INSPECTION REPORTS pdf icon PDF 242 KB

    • Share this item

    This report provides a summary of the findings regarding Surrey Police, from the latest inspection reports by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services (HMICFRS) which is the independent inspection body for policing. The Police and Crime Panel’s role is to ensure that the Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey (PCC) is taking into account inspection reports and the recommendations therein when holding the Chief Constable of Surrey Police to account. 

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    David Munro - Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner

    Alison Bolton - Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer, Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC)

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.      The PCC explained that the table in the report outlining the annual PEEL (Police Effectiveness, Efficiency and Legitimacy) inspections reported in September 2019 - compared back to 2017 - by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) were outdated and force inspections for 2020 had been suspended due to Covid-19.

    2.      A Panel member asked the PCC how one of the Areas for Improvement identified in the 2019 PEEL inspection that ‘the force should ensure its aversion to risk is not constraining ideas and creating unnecessary bureaucracy and internal demand’ had been addressed. In response, the PCC stressed that Surrey Police was not pleased with the overall Requires Improvement rating for Efficiency as it did not believe that it aligned to the considerable improvements made since 2017. The PCC noted that HMICFRS had been consulted upon how to address the rating and that he would provide the Panel with more information on the matter as detailed in the original report.

    3.      Discussing the above point in more detail, the Vice-Chairman stressed that it was a concern to note that Efficiency had decreased from a Good rating in 2017 to Requires improvement in 2019 and asked what action had been taken to improve Efficiency in terms of meeting current demand and using resources as well as planning for the future.

    -  In response the PCC reiterated that the force disagreed with that rating as a large amount of work had been undertaken in both the long term: such as the Building the Future project, improving the carbon efficiency of its fleet and the rollout of Body Worn Video technology; and in the immediate term: such as the newly formed Prevention and Problem Solving Team as well as the Surrey High Intensity Partnership Programme (SHIPP).

    -  The PCC noted that there was not one action plan to address Efficiency as such, but he would provide his and the Chief Constable’s responses to the 2019 PEEL inspection report as well as the progress made to date on addressing the Areas for Improvement.

    4.      A Panel member was concerned with the Areas for Improvement identified which suggested that Surrey Police could do more to support its staff, particularly concerning ‘the review of its occupational health unit (OHU)’; that ‘the force should improve how it records and monitors its ‘Focus’ discussions to […] effectively capture issues such as wellbeing’; ‘the force should ensure that it has a talent programme that is open to everyone and consistently applied’.

    -  In response, the PCC agreed that ensuring there were good systems in place for the wellbeing and health of staff and officers was vital. He noted that Durham University which specialised in those fields were asked to hold a survey of staff and officers to assess what their  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63/20

64/20

HOME OFFICE REVIEW OF POLICE & CRIME COMMISSIONERS - PART ONE pdf icon PDF 186 KB

    • Share this item

    In July 2020, the Home Office announced that it would be undertaking a review of the role of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs), the first such exercise since their inception in 2012. The intention is to ‘sharpen accountability, scrutiny and transparency’ and ensure that PCCs put the ‘law-abiding silent majority’ at the centre of decision-making. The review is in two parts. The first took place over the summer and has been reported to Ministers (though not yet publicly) in October.

     

    The Home Office’s Terms of Reference for the first part of the review are attached to this paper, as is the PCC’s full response; as well as the Surrey Police and Crime Panel’s response on the Home Office’s PCC Review: Part-one – Response to Local Government Association’s (LGA) Key Research Questions, the LGA’s response – 17 September 2020, and the National Association of Police, Fire and Crime Panels’ – NAPFCP response.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:


    None

     

              Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.      A Panel member referred to the OPCC’s response to Part One of the Home Office’s PCC Review regarding preparation for Part Two and whether the levers currently available to PCCs were sufficient to allow them to cut crime effectively in their force areas. He noted he was satisfied with the first paragraph of the PCC’s response regarding the benefits of PCC’s acquiring a General Power of Competence, which acknowledged that PCCs had limited powers to enter into property transactions unless they could show there was a direct policing purpose that justified each specific transaction.

    2.      The Panel member explained that he had difficulty in agreeing with the second paragraph of the PCC’s response as there was no mention of the governance issues within local government in relation to the selling, developing and buying of property. He emphasised that such business transactions needed to be profitable and advice on such matters needed to be scrutinised by the Panel as part of its governance oversight on the PCC’s actions. In response, the Chairman noted that the responses on the PCC Review had been submitted but would request further detail and expansion as to how to manage the General Power of Competence in relation to local governance issues, in consultation for Part Two of the PCC Review.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Police and Crime Panel noted the report and appendices.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    1.    R46/20 - The Panel will request further detail and expansion on the possible acquisition of a PCC General Power of Competence in consultation for Part Two of the PCC Review; regarding local governance issues in relation to the selling, developing and buying of property as the Panel has a responsibility to scrutinise the PCC’s actions and advice received on such matters.

     

65/20

BUILDING THE FUTURE - UPDATE pdf icon PDF 193 KB

    • Share this item

    The purpose of this report is to update the Panel on key aspects of delivery for the strategic change programme ‘Building the Future’ (BTF) since the Panel’s last meeting in September 2020. 

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    David Munro - Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    The PCC noted that the project which included the move to the new Surrey Police headquarters in Leatherhead along with other property moves, was progressing well and that an announcement would be made shortly on the chosen architect.

    2.    The PCC added that positive discussions were had with Guildford Borough Council and Mole Valley District Council on the move and noted there was a lot of planning to be done over the next five years. He was pleased that the force was looking to retain and relocate the renowned Police Dog Training School situated at Mount Browne.

    3.    A Panel member commented that he had had experience of office moves which were often traumatic for staff and queried if staff and officers were kept informed on the project. In response, the PCC reassured the Panel that staff and officers had been kept well informed throughout the project, the trade unions had been consulted as had the Police Federation of England and Wales. He recognised that the move would be a traumatic time and that it was paramount that staff and officers be supported.

    4.    The Vice-Chairman asked if the PCC could provide more detail on the work that had been initiated to assess the requirements for Neighbourhood bases for Mole Valley and Reigate.

     

    Councillor Bob Milton left the meeting at 11.44 am

     

    -  In response, the PCC noted that the force wished to retain a base in Mole Valley which was currently located in the District Council’s building - Pippbrook. He was not aware of any specific reasons why the base should need to relocate, but if it was to, it would be re-provided elsewhere in the district. Regarding Reigate’s base, he noted that there were disposal plans for the existing police station once the Leatherhead site was operational; adding that it was his pledge as PCC to ensure a police base in each of Surrey’s boroughs and districts.

               

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Police and Crime Panel noted the contents of the report.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    None.

     

66/20

FEEDBACK ON PERFORMANCE MEETINGS BETWEEN THE POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER AND CHIEF CONSTABLE pdf icon PDF 202 KB

    • Share this item

    One of the main responsibilities of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) is to hold the Chief Constable to account for delivery of the Police and Crime Plan.  David Munro has set up a governance framework to discharge this duty.  The main part of this framework is to hold six-weekly Performance Meetings where the Chief Constable reports on progress against the Police & Crime Plan and other strategic issues. This is supplemented by workshops and one to one discussions between the PCC and Chief Constable, and other senior officers, when required. 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:

    Witnesses:

     

    David Munro - Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.    A Panel member noted that it was positive to see Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) recruits up by 46% on last year’s figures, however requested that the actual figures be provided. In response, the PCC noted that just over 5% of police officers in Surrey Police identified as BAME. The force’s aim was to represent its community and the influx of new recruits as a result of the precept rise and national uplift was helping increase BAME representation - 10% of Surrey’s population were BAME at the last census. 

    2.    The Panel member also asked if there were figures available on the eight other protected characteristics named under the Equality Act 2010. In response, the PCC explained that some of the other eight protected characteristics were simple to measure as for example ‘sex’ was measured through the number of women in the force, which was just under 50%. However, the PCC stressed that ‘sexual orientation’ and some other protected characteristics were difficult to measure as they were sensitive. He noted that none of the nine protected characteristics were any cause for concern regarding representation.

    3.    The Vice-Chairman asked as to the nature of the restructuring in investigation structure that the Chief Constable had put in place to address the 7% decline in the reduction of positive outcomes. In response, the PCC reiterated that he was unhappy with the positive outcome rates and that the detailed report would be brought back (see item 7 - R38/20).

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Surrey Police and Crime Panel noted the update on the PCC’s Performance Meetings.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    1.   R47/20 - The PCC will provide the latest figure on BAME recruits.

    2.   R48/20 - The PCC will provide figures on the eight other protected characteristics named under the Equality Act 2010 - where possible i.e. ‘sex’ measured through the number of women in the force, acknowledging that some of the protected characteristics were sensitive.

     

67/20

COMMISSIONER'S QUESTION TIME pdf icon PDF 252 KB

    • Share this item

    For the Panel to raise any issues or queries concerning crime and policing in Surrey with the Commissioner.

     

    Notes:

    The deadline for Member’s questions is 12.00pm four working days before the meeting (18 November 2020).

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    David Munro - Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    See Annex C - Submitted Questions and Responses

     

    1.      Councillor Will Forster (Woking Borough Council):

     

    Thanked the PCC for his response and pursuance on the matter of looking into the possible reopening of Woking Magistrates’ Court or using the Coroner’s Court for magistrate cases and lobbying the government to address the backlogs in the Crown Court; as delays in the Criminal Justice System (CJS) have a large impact on the work of Police and Crime Panels and PCCs.

     

    In response, the PCC noted that the delays in the CJS was a grave concern. He reported that Surrey’s courts were back to where they were before Covid-19 regarding the throughput, however they had lost months and so had been consulted on regarding their plans to tackle the backlog. He had raised the suggestion of reopening the former Woking Magistrates’ Court (now Surrey Coroner’s Court) for magistrate cases with Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service’s (HMCT) Surrey & Sussex Cluster Manager. He added that the strategy in Surrey unlike in Sussex was to utilise existing courts more fully.

     

    2.      Councillor David Reeve (Epsom and Ewell Borough Council) - Chairman:

     

    The Chairman asked for reassurance on whether the new recruits as a result of the precept rise and national uplift were included in the 177 current vetting cases.

     

    In response, the PCC reassured the Panel that before new recruits joined Surrey Police they needed to be vetted through a systematic and thorough process.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Police and Crime Panel raised any issues or queries concerning Crime and Policing in Surrey with the Commissioner.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    None.

     

68/20

SURREY POLICE AND CRIME PANEL ANNUAL REPORT 2019-2020 pdf icon PDF 298 KB

    • Share this item

    In accordance with best practice for scrutiny and transparency as noted in Schedule 3 – In-Year Monitoring Information Requirements of the Home Office Grant Agreement, an annual report by Police and Crime Panels is an important Key Performance Indicator (KPI) to be monitored and reported on.

     

    This is a newly introduced report which provides a summary of the activity of the Surrey Police and Crime Panel during July 2019 - May 2020 and the next annual report of the Panel will be aligned to its annual meeting in June 2021.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Amelia Christopher - Committee Manager, Surrey County Council (SCC)

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.      The Committee Manager (SCC) explained that the report had been newly introduced as it formed part of the in-year monitoring information requirements and Key Performance Indicators in accordance with best practice for scrutiny and transparency as noted in schedule 3 of the Panel’s Home Office Grant Agreement.

    2.      She also highlighted that the report covered the Panel’s activity between July 2019 and May 2020. It included key governance points such as the Panel’s role as noted in its terms of reference, its membership, agenda items, key decisions made such as agreeing the precept and reviewing the PCC’s annual report and plan, complaints considered by the complaints sub-committee, a summary of key points made by the finance sub-group, the end-year and mid-year claims and any visits or training Panel members undertook.

    3.      The Chairman thanked the Committee Manager (SCC) for compiling the report and noted that it would be put on the Panel’s website.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Police and Crime Panel noted the Surrey Police and Crime Panel’s Annual Report 2019-2020.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    1.   R49/20 - The Committee Manager (SCC) will put Surrey Police and Crime Panel’s Annual Report 2019-2020 on the Panel’s website.

     

69/20

SURREY PCP BUDGET MID-YEAR CLAIM 2020 pdf icon PDF 148 KB

    • Share this item

    The Surrey Police and Crime Panel has accepted a grant from the Home Office to meet the costs of the Panel, including the administrative support. This purpose of this paper is to report on the use of the grant in 2020 (April 2020 - September 2020), as noted in the Panel’s mid-year claim submission to the Home Office submitted by the 31 October 2020 deadline.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Amelia Christopher - Committee Manager, Surrey County Council (SCC)

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.   The Committee Manager (SCC) explained that the report was newly introduced, thanking the Vice-Chairman for the suggestion in order to increase transparency. As although the mid-year claim was sent to the Home Office, it had not been published as a report to the Panel like the Panel’s end-year claim.

    2.   She outlined that the expenditure included travel expenses, refreshments, printing and postage as well as webcasting, and that it was less than last year’s mid-year claim due to Covid-19 and the Panel being held remotely.

    3.   She noted that the Home Office Grant was underutilised in key areas such as training and emphasised that full Panel training was a priority and would be arranged for early 2021.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Surrey Police and Crime Panel noted the report.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    1.   R50/20 – The Committee Manager (SCC) will arrange full Panel training for early 2021. 

     

70/20

COMPLAINTS RECEIVED SINCE THE LAST MEETING pdf icon PDF 110 KB

    • Share this item

    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:

    Witnesses:

     

    Amelia Christopher - Committee Manager, Surrey County Council (SCC)

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.   The Committee Manager (SCC) explained that the Complaints Sub-Committee received one complaint since the last Panel meeting.

    2.   She summarised the handling of the complaint, noting that on receipt of the complaint the complainant and PCC were consulted upon to provide supporting information. On considering that information, the Director of Law and Governance (SCC) and the Senior Principal Lawyer (SCC) were consulted and it was recommended to the Chairman that in accordance with section 3 of the Panel’s agreed Complaints Protocol on the disapplication of the Elected Local Policing Bodies (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012; it was recommended that the complaint should not be subjected to resolution by the Panel’s Complaints Sub-Committee with regard to Part 4 of the Regulations.

    3.   The Committee Manager (SCC) explained that the Regulations could only be disapplied if the complaint fell under certain categories, complaint PCP 0035 was disapplied and therefore required no further action as the complaint was both repetitious - it was deemed a reformulation of a complaint considered in 2017 - and it related to an incident that was more than 12 months old.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Police and Crime Panel noted the content of the report and that the Complaints Sub-Committee had received one complaint since the last Panel meeting.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    None.

     

71/20

RECOMMENDATIONS TRACKER AND FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME pdf icon PDF 8 KB

    • Share this item

    To review the Recommendations Tracker and Forward Work Programme.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Witnesses:

     

    Amelia Christopher - Committee Manager, Surrey County Council (SCC)

    David Munro - Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner

     

    Key points raised in the discussion:

     

    1.      The Committee Manager (SCC) and subsequently Chairman, thanked the PCC and OPCC for their comprehensive responses to the actions.

    2.      She noted that in relation to recommendation R30/20, a report had been annexed to the tracker noting the organisations being liaised with regarding the co-commissioning of enhanced substance misuse support and to consider both Alcoholics, and Narcotics Anonymous.

    3.      She reported that a few actions remained outstanding, highlighting that R22/20 regarding the Country Watch crime prevention initiative, was being followed up and R31/20 on the more detailed breakdown on the distribution of the newly recruited staff and officers by 2021/22 had been provided to Panel members.

    4.      She welcomed any comments on the draft Forward Work Programme for 2021.

    5.      She also noted that she had received expressions of interest from the Panel’s co-opted independent members to join the Complaints Sub-Committee and the Finance Sub-Group.

    6.      The PCC reassured the Panel that he was aware of the complaint made against Surrey Police’s Deputy Chief Constable, adding that the Chief Constable had asked another force’s Professional Standards Department to investigate the matter.

     

    RESOLVED:

     

    The Panel noted the Actions & Recommendations Tracker and provided input into the Forward Work Programme.

     

    That the independent members joined the following:

     

    -       Mr Philip Walker joined the Complaints Sub-committee.

    -       Mr Martin Stilwell joined the Finance Sub-Group.

     

    Actions/further information to be provided:

     

    1.    R51/20 - The Committee Manager (SCC) will update the membership list of the Complaints Sub-Committee and the Finance Sub-Group to include the independent members.

     

72/20

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

    • Share this item

    The next public meeting of the Police and Crime Panel will be held on 5 February 2021.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    The next meeting of the Surrey Police and Crime Panel will be on 5 February 2021, the location is to be confirmed however this will most likely be remote via Microsoft Teams due to Covid-19.