Agenda item

To consider the Police and Crime Commissioner’s draft Annual Report.

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 receive back. In regard to the Panel’s question about where this money has been spent, the PCC stated that these additional funds were allocated towards improving the policing of Surrey’s most dangerous roads where it was felt that this additional funding would have the greatest positive impact. The PCC agreed to provide the Panel with further details of how the way in which this money is being spent in order to combat road deaths in the county.

·         The Panel inquired about the police’s duty of care responsibilities and where this ends, particularly in relation to individuals with mental health problems who have been detained by police. The PCC advised that technically the police’s duty of care ends when the individual detained is released from custody. An IPCC investigation would, however, be automatically triggered should someone who is mentally ill commit suicide soon after being released from police custody, which ensures that officers carefully consider how and when they release individuals so that they aren’t accused of misconduct.

·         Panel members mentioned that historically some individuals who are in training to be police officers have been required to pay for elements of their own training even before they received a job offer; the PCC was asked to clarify if this is still the case and, if so, whether it might improve the Force’s intake of police officers were this policy to be reconsidered. The PCC explained that this was introduced under the last Chief Constable before the current challenges around the recruitment and retention of staff existed. It was highlighted that this policy is still in use but that it is currently under review, together with a range of other measures that might help improve the recruitment of police officers.  .

·         Attention was drawn to concerns expressed by the PCC regarding the reduction in the police budget and the impact that this will have on the ability of Surrey Police to deliver an effective response to crime in the county. The PCC was asked how the these concerns regarding police funding can be reconciled with the annual report, which shows that crime rates in the county are continuing to fall. Panel members also suggested that PCC use the opportunity to consider more widespread service transformation which can provide a more positive narrative on the future of policing. The PCC advised the Panel that Surrey Police is working closely with agencies across Surrey and Sussex to transform how emergency services are delivered. Mention was also made of the collaboration with other police forces in the south east in relation to counterterrorism, as well as the acquisition of new technologies which enable police officers to record crimes and access other information through tablet computers. It was stressed that Surrey Police will continue to find the necessary savings while improving the service the police provide to the community.

·         The PCC was asked to clarify the measures taken by Surrey Police which have enabled it to become the best placed force in England and Wales to deal with the challenges of austerity according to Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabularies (HMIC). The Panel was advised that savings have been achieved through a number of different avenues including key projects such as the sale of large parts of the police estate which has provided capital funds as well as generating considerable savings through reduced running costs. The collaboration with Sussex Police in a number of areas has also been a particularly effective means of delivering savings.

·         The PCC’s perspective was sought on the way in which crimes are recorded by Surrey Police and the impact that this has on the Force’s crime statistics. Panel members were informed that there is a standards board which oversees the ethical crime recording in the county. HMIC has also expressed their satisfaction with Surrey Police’s crime recording policies following concerns articulated in the 2013/2014 PEEL Assessment.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.    The Panel noted the PCC’s Annual Report.

ACTIONS/ FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:

1.    That the OPCC provide detail of where money is being used in the county to combat road deaths.

2.    Panel to write to Surrey MPs requesting support in making the case for key worker housing as well as the possibility of a weighting allowance for Surrey police officers to improve the Force’s poor staff attrition.

PANEL NEXT STEPS:

            None