Agenda item


Purpose of the report: This report sets out the prgress made towards achieving the

2021-2025 Police and Crime Plan since the last update to the Panel in November






Lisa Townsend, Police and Crime Commissioner

Damian Markland, Head of Performance and Governance


Key points raised during the discussion:


1.    The PCC was asked about the decrease in public confidence from 86% to 84% and efforts to improve this score. The PCC considered this to be important and commented that it may have been influenced by the national experience of policing including newspaper headlines on Police forces and the criminal justice system. More work was required to improve victim confidence in Surrey Police and this had been a growing area of focus in recent years.


2.    A Member asked about barriers in engaging partners in efforts to reduce violence against women and girls. The PCC said this was an important question and could not be tackled by the Police alone and partners were integral. The PCC referenced the statutory duty to collaborate across the public sector and recent work with schools to support the PSHE curriculum. There were some emerging areas of work that would likely involve work with partners that had not historically had a close relationship with the police, and this would need to be managed through appropriate governance processes.


3.    A Member highlighted the plateauing trend for victim satisfaction. What should the Panel expect to observe over the next six months given the planned initiatives and what support there is for victim support? The PCC reiterated her earlier response regarding Surrey Police’s recognition of this issue and that victims were being contacted and crimes being resolved but often victims were not being kept updated through the process. The Head of Performance and Governance stated that there was a Victims and Witnesses Group in Surrey that reviewed performance. The force’s internal Victim and Witness Care Unit also worked closely with victims of crime to provide appropriate support and guidance. The unit also made use of volunteers to help support individuals. There was also a dedicated website, where residents could find out about all local support services available in Surrey.


4.    A Member asked for any headlines from the survey into anti-social behaviour. The PCC highlighted five issues: anti-social driving and speeding, littering, anti-social parking, people using and dealing drugs and fly tipping. The PCC noted that not all of these were policing issues.


5.    A Member reflected on recent issues in Woking where residents had been harassed by groups and asked how this would be affected by a new ruling on police not intervening in verbal neighbourhood disputes. The PCC thought that this was difficult, wanted to avoid criminalising neighbours and that there were other agencies that could help de-escalate situations before the police needed to become involved.


6.    A Member raised the increased number of Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) collisions in the county and asked what proportion of KSI collisions are, in fact, caused by young drivers, and whether there any measures to encourage safer driving for older drivers. The PCC did not have any figures at the meeting, but these were available online and a rise was expected post-pandemic. The PCC agreed there was a need for lifelong learning and there might be a good case for re-testing in later life.


7.    The PCC was asked whether she was concerned that domestic burglaries were not in decline. The PCC felt this was always a challenge in Surrey owing to the number of wealthy residents and recognised there were hotspots for this crime. But outcome detections were up and campaigns and education on safety remained a priority for the PCC.

Supporting documents: