Hampshire County Council Hampshire and Isle of Wight Police and Crime Panel (Statutory Joint Committee) Meeting

Apologies were received from:

·         Cllr Stuart Bailey (Hart District Council)

·         Cllr Karen Lucioni (Isle of Wight Council)

·         Cllr Gwen Robinson (Havant Borough Council)

·         Cllr Sarah Vaughan (Local Authority Co-opted Member)

It was noted that Cllr Ian Ward was in attendance as the deputy for Isle of Wight Council. Cllr Liz Fairhurst was in attendance from Item 7, as the deputy for Havant Borough Council.

Members were able to disclose to the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest they had in any matter on the agenda for the meeting, where that interest was not already entered in their appointing authority’s register of interests, and any other pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests in any such matter that Members wished to disclose.

No declarations were made.

The Minutes from the 27 January 2023 meeting were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

No questions or deputations were received by the Panel on this occasion.

The Chairman noted that Dave McKinney, who had served on the Panel as the representative of East Hampshire District Council from July 2019, did not stand in the recent local elections. The Chairman offered his thanks to Mr McKinney, noting that he had been an active member of the Plan Working Group, and later the Policy and Performance working group.

It was also noted that this would be Cllr Margot Power’s last meeting as a Member of the Panel, and the Chairman thanked her for her dedication and significant contribution to the Panel through both the Finance and the Policy and Performance Working Groups, as well as to the wider work of the Panel.

The Chairman welcomed Cllr Seán Woodward, who had recently been appointed as the representative of Fareham Borough Council. The Chairman offered his thanks to Cllr Joanne Burton, who sat on the Panel the previous year and had been appointed as the deputy Member for Fareham Borough Council for the forthcoming year.

Also welcomed was Cllr Dave Shields, who had been appointed as the representative of Southampton City Council until their AGM.

Thanks were offered to the Commissioner and her team for arranging a Panel visit to the contact and training centre at Netley in June.

The Chairman announced that a new agenda item would be added at item 9, to invite appointments to the Panel’s working groups, and that the published item 9, Police and Crime Panel – Work Programme, would now be heard as item 10.

The Chair invited announcements from the Commissioner, who highlighted the following to the Panel:

·         The new Chief Constable, Mr Scott Chilton, had joined the force in February. The Commissioner recognised the significant amount of work the new Chief Constable had undertaken during his first eight weeks in post and announced that changes to the operating model of the force, previously discussed with the Panel, were progressing well. The Commissioner also noted the success of Operation Blue Island, which had seen the arrest of and seizure of assets from a significant number of drug dealers across the policing area.

·         In February an announcement was made that the Constabulary would re-introduce named, dedicated Police Officers and Police Community Support Officers (PSCO) or Police Officers for every community across Hampshire and the Isle of Wight (IOW).

·         The Commissioner had launched the first round of a new initiative, the Commissioner’s Emerging Needs Fund, with a focus on rural crime, enabling local groups, organisations and councils to apply for funding to tackle and address crimes which specifically targeted rural areas.

·         In March, the PCC launched a new violence against women and girls (VAWG) perpetrator dashboard. The Commissioner further noted the excellent collaborative approach taken by the Police, Local Authorities and third sector organisations within Portsmouth and Southampton, where concerns were most prevalent, in seeking to tackle and prevent VAWG. The PCC had also, in April, allocated £130,000 of funding, alongside securing grant funding from the Ministry of Justice, to provide a nationally leading programme of support to perpetrators of stalking, which would seek to address behaviours and prevent re-offending.

·         An open day had recently been held at Winchester Crown Court, for which the PCC’s team had provided the communication support and strategy. Members heard that it had been the most successful crown court open day across the Country, with over 5,000 people attending.

·         Since the last meeting, funding had been provided by the PCC and her office to support anti-social behaviour (ASB) and youth crime prevention activities on the Isle of Wight and funding for a dedicated high harm team in the New Forest.

·         The mandatory requirement for new police officers to study for a policing degree had been removed, something which the PCC had lobbied for some time. Whilst the degree route was still open for those who wished to access it, it was anticipated that this would save in excess 100,000 hours of policing time per year.

The Commissioner addressed a question raised by the Panel in advance of the meeting, following a number of high-profile missing person enquiries recently reported in the press. As one of only five forces across England and Wales to have a Marine Unit, and one of the largest coastlines to police, Members heard that Hampshire and IOW Constabulary were well prepared and had the necessary the capacity and capability to respond to such incidents. The Commissioner further noted that two such cases had occurred in Hampshire, to which the police response was executed quickly and both missing people were found within hours.

A short adjournment was called by the Chairman from 10:45-11:00 to resolve a technical issue.

Cllr Liz Fairhurst joined the meeting at this point, as the deputy member for Havant Borough Council.

The Panel received a presentation from the Commissioner providing an update against delivery of the Police and Crime Plan, with a specific focus on Community Crimes that Matter, through which it was heard that:

·         61% of the objectives within the Police and Crime Plan were evidenced, meaning that, in the PCC’s view, those objectives had been met.

·         Data shared through the presentation, which evidenced which wards were subject to the most prolific ASB, was used by the PCC to hold the Chief Constable to account for effective policing delivery and improvement. This data was also used by the Commissioner’s team to better target interventions which prevented young people from being drawn into criminality.

·         The PCC provided funding for the provision of E-Bikes on the IOW, which had increased policing visibility and provided assurance for residents.

·         It was considered that the increase in the reporting of sexual offences was a reflection of increased in public confidence.

·         Contact from the community through casework reports to the PCC was welcomed, and had supported her oversight and scrutiny of the force.

·         The PCC and her office were encouraging local business owners to report incidents of business crime and shoplifting, particularly where there was concern regarding staff safety.

·         The Commissioner had sought to support efforts to tackle business crime by bringing in DISC, which was an information sharing platform which could be used by the Police and business owners to share information to prevent crime and identify concerns.

·         The PCC further highlighted the business navigator scheme, which was providing targeted intervention for prolific perpetrators of shoplifting and other business crime, with support and funding from Southern Co-op.

Data was provided by the PCC, showing the ethnic representation of the force and how this had changed over previous last 12 months. Also shown were a number of case studies demonstrating the impact of projects commissioned by the PCC.

The Commissioner offered her thanks to the Panel’s Policy and Performance Working Group who had, through its most recent meeting, provided greater clarity regarding the information required to support the Police and Crime Plan update, along with feedback on the data and format of the information to be provided. The Commissioner’s team commented that it had been a helpful meeting with 28 items raised by the working group to be addressed in the update, which had focussed on identifying what impact the PCC and her office were having through the delivery of the objectives of the Plan.

The Commissioner noted that ONS data, which was requested by the working group, had been provided through a briefing note in advance of the meeting, along with further information on DISC.

The Commissioner tabled to the meeting an example of an update provided to the working group by the previous Commissioner demonstrating delivery against the previous Police and Crime Plan. The Chairman noted, for clarity, that the information tabled was an excerpt of nine documents which had been provided by the previous Commissioner on that occasion, along with the support of a senior performance officer who had answered questions from the working group about project evaluation. This process had provided the Panel with in-depth detail of the progress of delivery during that quarter, and had enabled the Panel to more effectively support and challenge the previous PCC during the public meeting.

The Commissioner felt that the requirements of the Panel had previously been unclear, but committed to work with the Panel to deliver information the Panel required, in the format needed.

Members were invited to comment, through which it was heard that:

·         Members requested that the Commissioner bring an update to the next meeting on the recently published PEEL Inspection 2021/22 for Hampshire and IOW Constabulary, particularly focussed on how the Commissioner would be holding the Chief Constable to account for responding to the outcomes of the report. The Commissioner stated that she would be happy to provide an update on progress against the recommendations of the Inspection at each future meeting. The Commissioner further explained that, as well as a monthly 1-2-1 meeting, she held weekly performance reviews with the Chief Constable and spoke with him on several occasions each week.

·         The PCC also agreed to bring to each future meeting an update against the joint performance framework, agreed with the Chief Constable. The Chairman commented that this would provide helpful supporting evidence to the Panel.

·         Members noted that they had asked, over a period of more than a year, for baseline data against the deliverable objectives within the plan. Through the Policy and Performance Working Group the Panel had sought to work with the PCC’s senior management team to define and refine the information to be presented to the Panel at its public meetings. The working group had also agreed to review a draft of the information to be presented to the meeting and provide feedback, but this was not provided by the OPCC ahead of the meeting. 

·         The Panel felt that they had been very clear about what information was required and invited the PCC to seek clarity from the Panel if that was not the case. The Commissioner responded by stating that she had requested that the Panel confirm in writing the information they required, and had sought to convey an openness through this approach.

·         The Panel recognised the amount of work which had been undertaken by the PCC and her office since her election. Members expressed confidence that the PCC was making significant progress, however they could not evidence this through the information and data which had been provided to the Panel to date.

·         The Panel was clear that the intention of requesting this information and data was to support the PCC in the delivery of her Police and Crime Plan objectives, and to provide an opportunity for her to evidence and demonstrate how she was delivering against these for the benefit of residents across Hampshire and the IOW.

·         The Panel were keen to continue to work with the PCC and her team to clarify the Panel’s requirements. 

The Chairman explained that one of the Panel’s primary aims, in requesting evidence of delivery of the plan, was not to duplicate work or request additional data where it did not already exist, and this had been clearly communicated with the Commissioner’s senior management team.

Members were then invited to raise questions against the Police and Crime Plan Delivery update, through which it was heard that:

·         Road safety was becoming an increasing community concern, with residents expressing frustration regarding rat running and road racing. Members also challenged how the Community Speed Watch (CSW) scheme could be adapted to meet the nature of urban road safety challenges. It was noted that whilst funding was available through the road safety fund, there were far fewer CSW groups in urban areas, with the uptake mainly coming from rural and semi-rural communities.

·         The Commissioner had full confidence in the Chief Constable and his approach in addressing concerns raised by local communities, including the impact of traffic crime.

·         All Police Officers and all staff at the OPCC had recently been re-vetted, in accordance with the National Police Database.

·         Resource for the 101 call answering service was still a significant challenge. This had improved for a period, however there were now circa 80 vacancies being recruited for. The Commissioner was supporting the Constabulary to consider alternative options to attract additional interest in vacancies, including expanding the use of agencies to head hunt resource and looking at other potential office bases, to expand the pool of available candidates.

The Chairman closed the discussion by summarising that the Panel needed to be more prescriptive regarding the information it required from the Commissioner to evidence delivery of the Police and Crime Plan. Discussions at the meeting had highlighted that, whilst the information provided by the Commissioner and her team to date had been helpful, it wasn’t sufficient enough to enable the Panel to effectively fulfil its responsibilities to scrutinise and support the Commissioner in the delivery of her Plan. The Chairman extended an invitation to the Commissioner to the next meeting of the working group, to enable discussion to be held regarding the data and information the Panel required, and to ensure that a clear agreement could be reached on what would be requested/provided going forward. Following the meeting the Panel would write to the Commissioner to confirm its requirements in a way which was specific, clear and concise.

RESOLVED:

That the update on the delivery of the Police and Crime Plan is noted

Members were presented with a report from the Democratic Services Officer to the Panel, proposing an update to the Panel’s Informal Complaint Resolution Procedure and Guidance note on the management of unreasonable complainant behaviour.

Members raised a question regarding the disapplication of the Elected Local Policing Bodies (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2012, through which it was heard that the regulations may be disapplied if more than 12 months had passed since the incident giving rise to the complaint, providing no good reason for the delay had been provided.

RESOLVED

That the Panel agreed the updated Protocol for the Informal Complaint Resolution Procedure and Guidance note on the management of unreasonable complainant behaviour.

Members received a report from the scrutiny officer to the Panel which set out the work programme followed by the Panel during the municipal year.

Following comments from members the Chairman noted that the Estates Strategy would be brought forward for update early in the new municipal year and that Effective and Efficient Policing Delivery would be added as a standing item on the agenda going forward.  The Chairman also observed Members interest in an update on how the impact of climate change was being considered by the Commissioner.

RESOLVED:

That the work programme was agreed.

The Chairman invited the Democratic Services Officer to provide an overview of the current vacancies in the membership of the Policy and Performance Working Group and Complaints Sub-Committee.

It was heard that, as a result of changes to the Membership of the Panel following the recent local elections, there was a vacancy on the Complaints Sub-Committee for a Conservative Member and up to four vacant positions to be filled on the Policy and Performance working group. The officer further explained that the appointments were until the AGM of the Panel in July, at which date Membership of the Panel’s working group and sub-committee would be appointed for the new municipal year.

RESOLVED:

That Councillor Seán Woodward be appointed to the Complaints Sub-Committee until the Panel’s AGM.