Meeting documents

The Chairman welcomed members to the meeting.

Apologies were received from Paul Rogerson and Julie Burton.

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 August 2010 were agreed.

Context:

Part of the remit of the review is to ensure that the Safer and Stronger Bucks Partnership Board is discharging its crime and disorder functions. In May 2010, members received a briefing from Susie Yapp – Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities, who explained the structure of the Board, its role and the key partnership priorities it is working towards.

Members agreed that the briefing would be followed up by the use of a questionnaire for Board members, based on one originally used by Bracknell Forest Borough Council. The results of the questionnaires have been compiled into one document which is attached to the agenda.

Purpose:

For members to consider the results with a view to highlighting any gaps or concerns they want to see taken forward into the final report.

Papers:

·                   Questionnaire summary.

Members discussed the results from the Safer and Stronger Bucks Partnership Board (SSBPB) questionnaire which had been sent out to Board Members to drill down further into the operation of the Board.  Members were asked to look through and highlight any gaps or concerns.

The Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities commented that the responses from the Board were very positive.  She advised that Thames Valley Police (TVP) were looking at restructuring through a consultations paper ‘Policing in the 21^st Century.’  This was likely to result in a streamlining of their partnership reporting framework.  Currently, there are 16 police command areas throughout Buckinghamshire, Milton Keynes, Oxford and Slough.

Highlights from Questionnaire Results:

Question 4 - major achievements

Major achievements included:

• Reducing Serious Acquisitive Crime (SAC)
• The introductions of the I: on Bucks website
• The introduction of the Integrated Offender Management (IOM) model

A member commented that there had been great success in reducing serious acquisitive crime (SAC) and this should be highlighted in the review report.  The Chairman stated that the I:on Bucks website should be more widely publicised as it was a very useful tool.

Question 5 – Development of the Board

Responses clearly showed that the Board had developed well.  Some of the responses indicated that the Board had historically focused on the ‘safer’ element of its remit and needed to rebalance this by moving forward on the ‘stronger’ element, which included prevention, anti-terrorism, community cohesion and resilience.  The Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities agreed and stated that the Board had traditionally focused on the safer element as the priority had been to reduce crime rates.

The Board was now looking to achieve a greater balance and move forward on the stronger element.  To do this, membership of the Board would need to include individuals from local authority cohesion and equality posts.

Question 6 – Major obstacles

One respondent stated that the BCU Commander changed every 18-20 months and, in their opinion, this caused a lack of continuity.  The Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities responded that in actual fact the BCU Commander had only changed 3 times in the last 6 years and this stability had helped to reduce crime.  But, in addition to this, Paul Emmings, the current Commander for Buckinghamshire had also made dramatic improvements in one year.

Question 7 – Member appointments to the Board

Members agreed that the Board was clear about how members were appointed and the process for this was included in the terms of reference. Board membership was at strategic level i.e. Chief Executives.

Question 8 – How are decisions recorded?

The questionnaire results confirmed that decisions were recorded in the minutes which were typed on a laptop at the meetings.  The minutes were sometimes circulated within 20 minutes after the meeting to all members.  This was considered a very efficient method.

Question 14 – How is it demonstrated that the partnership adds value?

The Acting Head of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Context:

The review is now at the stage where members need to reflect on all the evidence that has been heard and agree on what they consider the main findings to be. The agreed areas will form the basis of the review report.

Purpose:

Members are asked to consider the key areas and findings contained in the interim report attached and advise if these are the correct ones or if they feel, based on the evidence heard, that others should be included. The Chairman will also be asking members to consider what action they would like to see taken in the form of recommendations relating to these.

Papers:

·                   Interim report: Key areas and draft findings

The interim report resulting from the review had been circulated and members agreed that it had captured the key areas. Areas for recommendations were discussed and key points resulting from the discussion are summarised below:

Safer and Stronger Bucks Partnership Board (SSBPB)

·                   Board Membership

Members discussed whether or not they should recommend that a member of the judiciary should sit on the Board.  The Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities felt that there was already sufficient links with the judiciary through the Bucks Commanders. Members were assured that Board members would liaise with other relevant agencies as and when required and so they decided not to include this as a recommendation.

·                   Partnership Arrangements

During the evidence gathering process, members had heard from two of the Local Area Police Commanders that they found the partnership reporting arrangements confusing – made worse by Buckinghamshire being a two-tier area. The Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities advised that the police consultation document referred to above was very likely to resolve these issues. Although members agreed not to include this as a recommendation – they requested that the views of the two Commanders be reflected in the final report.

·                   Focus of the Board

Members agreed that there should be a recommendation that the Board develops a great emphasis on its ‘stronger’ element.

Communications

·                   Community Messages

There was a discussion about two messaging services, Police Community Messaging (PCM) and Ringmaster. A member stated that PCM was very good as it aimed to give positive community safety messages as well as the more traditional ‘warning’ messages.

Members agreed that the review recommendations should publicise PCM and that I:on Bucks should be promoted to residents via local members. They also thought there should be a recommendation about positive messages being included in local forums such as Parish magazines.  The Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities stated that Sergeants wrote a neighbourhood update for TVP and that this same piece was used for several purposes.

Members discussed whether street signs should be used for community safety messages. They were advised that this already happened but that also putting up too many signs could have the opposite effect of making people think the area was unsafe. Signs such as the ‘Police Operation in Progress’ ones could be very effective in reducing crime and were used tactically in the area.

·                   Role of Members

The Chairman reminded the group of the role that members had as community leaders.  Members expressed the view that they were not always included in community safety information that was circulated – and that it would be useful to receive relevant briefings in this area. It was felt that the link between the police and elected members could be strengthened.

The Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities stated that members had a role in reflecting the public position and should be provided with briefings at appropriate times e.g. following local elections. Partners could be invited  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Context:

At the last meeting of the Task and Finish Group, an article by Sara Thornton – Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police was circulated. The article asks if the thinking behind the new Government’s plans for a ‘Big Society’, where volunteering is encouraged and more power is devolved to local people, could help keep people safe. Members asked for the article to be added to the agenda for discussion.

Purpose:

Members are asked to consider the content of the article and discuss if any of the ideas it contains should be reflected in the final report.

Papers:

·                   Article taken from The Daily Telegraph, 30 July 2010

Members discussed a recent published article on ‘The Big Society’ by Sara Thornton, Chief Constable, Thames Valley Police, which advocated getting more people involved locally in community safety.

A member stated that many volunteers did a great job but did not receive enough recognition. The Acting Head of Service for Localities and Safer Communities responded by saying that volunteers were highly commended for their achievements through local ceremonies – the police were also recognised when they had acted for going beyond the call of duty.

A member referred to Neighbourhood Action Groups (NAGs) and Neighbourhood Watch and questioned how enthusiasm and interest could be maintained for both. They were advised that Neighbourhood Watch was likely to be re-invigorated through the emphases on developing a big society.  It was felt that Neighbourhood Watch really did reduce the fear of crime, partly because it put people in touch with their neighbours.

Members agreed that the final report should reflect the ethos behind plans for a Big Society.

The Chairman felt that there was inconsistency with the NAGs but he had been pleased to hear from the Bucks Commander during the review that he intended to address this. 

Monday 13 September 2010, 10.00am – 1.00pm, South Bucks District Council – venue to be confirmed

The next meeting will be for members to finalise the draft report resulting from the review, and to agree reporting arrangements.

Monday 13 September 2010, 10.00am – 1.00pm, South Bucks District Council, Room 6.