Meeting documents

There were no declarations of interest.

To agree the Minutes of the meeting held on 25 September 2015.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 25 September 2015 were agreed as a correct record subject to an amendment to item 2 – Minutes:-

"Dee Sinclair had expressed concern about taxis applying for licences in other local authority areas to the area they were trading in and also the need for local authorities to have a co-ordinated system. "

Anyone who works or lives in the Thames Valley can ask a question at meetings of the Police and Crime Panel, at which a 20 minute session will be designated for hearing from the public.

If you’d like to participate, please read the Buckinghamshire Public Question Time Scheme and submit your question by email to contact@thamesvalleypcp.org.uk at least three working days in advance of the meeting.

There were no public questions.

Acting Detective Chief Superintendent Ray Howard, Head of Intelligence and Specialist Operations will be attending for this item to give a presentation on cyber-crime.

Detective Chief Superintendent Ray Howard and Acting Asst Chief Constable Richard List were in attendance. A/ACC Richard List introduced the item. Crime is changing moving away from burglary into an era of "new" crimes such as modern slavery, CSE and also cyber crime, which is largely driven by powerful changes in technology. In 2025 computers will be 25% more powerful.

Cyber crime sits in the middle of all risk. Reference was made to an iceberg; under  water lay crime which not been reported to the police. The police have to look for this crime and this is a huge change in the criminal landscape. It is not a crime type; cyber crime is a crime theme and cuts across all types of crime in terms of investigation and the need to seize cyber equipment. A picture was shown of how life had changed in eight years with the prevalence of smart phones and tablets. Technology is part of main stream society in a short space of time. It creates opportunities for crime and this can be compared to the advent of the motor car. There is a mass of digital information and evidence out there. Figures include:-

·         182.9 billion emails sent and received each day worldwide

·         1 website in 1991 to 1 billion in 2014

·         Internet users 2,925,249,355

·         In the UK 21 billion texts and 50 billion instant messages sent per year – instant messages are free and texts cost money therefore instant messaging is increasing

·         24 million broadband lines in the UK

·         15 million twitter users in the UK

·         UK mobile phone subscriptions 89.9 million

·         Facebook holds 219 billion photographs worldwide

·         Percentage of teenage girls who claim to have been bullied on Instagram – 9% - there are other websites used for bullying purposes

·         50 billion devices will be connected to the Internet by 2020 – the internet of things which could be cars, washing machines, household goods etc.

Cyber crime is defined as:-

Cyber Dependent Crimes, where a digital system is the target as well as the means of attack.  These include attacks on computer systems to disrupt IT infrastructure, and stealing data over a network using malware (the purpose of the data theft is usually to commit further crime).

Cyber Enabled Crimes. ‘Existing’ crimes that have been transformed in scale or form by their use of the Internet.  The growth of the Internet has allowed these crimes to be carried out on an industrial scale. e.g.  girl sending pictures of herself over the internet to a person in Turkey. The computer was then seized and following investigation it was found out that the perpetrator had been in contact with hundreds of people and the police need to understand of those contacted who are victims or defendants.

Crime prevention and detection usually works on three points; the offender, location and the victim. This falls apart with cyber-crime as there is no location or multiple locations and often no boundaries. A new system is now used with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

The Vice-Chairman will present the report of the Sub-Committee and ask the Panel to agree the recommendations in the report.

The Vice-Chairman of the Child Sexual Exploitation Sub-Committee reported on the first meeting which had been held on 3 November 2015. He reported that the NSPCC website shows that over 2,400 children were victims of sexual exploitation in gangs and groups from August 2010 to October 2011. 10% of children on Child Protection Plans had suffered some form of sexual exploitation. There were 476 occurrences linked to CSE in 2014/15. The Crown Prosecution Service prioritised CSE and there was a joint protocol which helped ensure that both organisations are prepared and empowered to deal with the changing nature of case work and to provide greater consistency in the handling of these cases.

The Police and Crime Commissioner reported that a study was being carried out by Oxford University on CSE and also there was a national Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse which will investigate whether public bodies and other non-state institutions have taken seriously their duty of care to protect children from sexual abuse in England and Wales which would be led by Hon Lowell Goddard. The PCC commented that he hoped this Inquiry would also look into the Operation Bullfinch recommendation (see two below).

In terms of the future Work Programme, Cllr Angela Macpherson reported that it would be useful to look at the co-ordination of partnership working across the Thames Valley as many local authorities are looking at this issue from different angles and it was important that recommendations are actioned and collected together.

The Panel AGREED the following recommendations:-

1. That the Scrutiny Officer should speak to the LSCB in Oxford to gain a better understanding of any issues concerning language schools and if necessary invite them to a future Sub-Committee meeting.

This was raised as a concern by the PCC and a Panel Member because this area was not regulated.

2. That the PCC and Panel Members lobby Government to implement the Bullfinch recommendation or to look at the opportunity to commission independent academic work subject to available resources due to limited budget.

The Bullfinch recommendation not implemented was as follows:-

"With a significant proportion of those found guilty nationally of group CSE being from a Pakistani and/or Muslim heritage, relevant government departments should research why this is the case, in order to guide prevention strategies’

3. That the most effective MASH model be scrutinised by Sub-Committee Members and as appropriate Panel Members should promote the adoption and implementation by all local authorities across the Thames Valley of best practice. That the Sub-Committee look at the co-ordination of work undertaken by the MASH’s across the whole of the Thames Valley.

The PCC expressed concern about the ability to provide resources for six MASHs in Berkshire which could impact on their effectiveness. Members thought it would be helpful to identify best practice which can be shared and to ensure that there was good co-ordination across the Thames Valley.

4. That the Panel Members be asked to identify which of their Authorities scrutinise their LSCB’s and at what frequency

As the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Ian Thompson, Chief Financial Officer to provide an update on the Police Funding Formula.

The Home Office recently announced that it will be revising the policing funding formula, which determines the level of grant funding police forces receive from central Government. The formula was being changed as it was out of date. There are five proposed principles behind the new proposal - being robust, stable, transparent, future proof and incentivising Government objectives. 

The PCC reported that the Thames Valley Police were relying less on the Government Grant and were an efficient police force at roughly £100 grant per head of the population. The Thames Valley suffered considerably with funding compared to other Forces and larger police forces particularly suffer from the new formula. Some Forces could receive £165 per head with the new formula. The proposed new formula could lead to further cuts in the grant of at least £6-7 million per annum. The new formula took account of population, deprivation and the number of licensed establishments in the area and how close they were to police cells rather than how far away they were. A Force covering an area with 1000 public bars could receive the same funding as one with 100 bars. The last criteria would have an impact on Thames Valley because of the size of this region. It also impacted adversely on other large or rural geographic force areas such as Devon and Cornwall, Sussex, Cumbria, Surrey and North Yorkshire. In addition no account was taken of the number of roads in the formula and the cost of roads policing.

The Government had now delayed the funding formula by a year because of calculation errors.

The PCC’s Chief Finance Officer reported that the 2016/17 grant settlement was expected on 17 December and there would be no budget projections until then. Cllr Dee Sinclair asked whether the criteria for the funding formula would be changed or whether it would be just re-calculated. The PCC reported that there should be far more consultation next year on the formula and the Home Office would write to PCC before the start of the next review.

The report was noted.

For the Panel to note the PCC response on the report of the Committee for Standards in Public Life.

In October 2014 the Committee on Standards in Public Life began an Inquiry into local policing accountability in England and Wales as to whether the accountability model was effective in supporting and promoting high ethical standards. In June 2015 it published its report ‘Tone from the top – Leadership, ethics and accountability in policing’. The report made 20 recommendations to the Home Office, Police and Crime Commissioners, Police and Crime Panels and relevant Associations.

The Panel noted the attached response of the Police and Crime Commissioner and agreed the tabled response of the Panel.

For the Panel to note the PCC response to recent HMIC Reports.

The PCC reported that he was required to publish comments on reports relating to the Force sent to him and the Chief Constable by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary. The Chief Constable then presents comments to the PCC Policy, Planning and Performance meetings to facilitate transparency and accountability which are available on his website.

http://www.thamesvalley-pcc.gov.uk/Transparency/Agendas-and-Minutes.aspx

The last HMIC reports were discussed at the last Policy Planning and Performance meeting:-

·         In Harms Way: the role of the police in keeping children safe

·         Online and on the edge: real risks in a virtual world

·         Building the picture: an inspection of police information management

·         The welfare of vulnerable people in police custody.

The PCC reported that HMIC reports were a valuable source of information.

The Panel noted the report.

Members are asked to note the report

The report of the Complaints Sub-Committee held on 25 September 2015 was noted by the Panel.

To note and ask questions on the general issues report.

The report on general issues covered the following areas:-

·         Police Funding Formula

·         Bedfordshire PCC looking at ways to help budget cuts

·         HMIC Police Efficiency Report

·         Article on complaints

·         Good practice for police and crime panels

·         Terrorism.

The Panel noted the report.

For Panel Members to put forward items for the Work Programme including ideas for themed meetings.

The Panel noted the Work Programme and agreed that cyber crime should be looked at in more detail, including the Prevent agenda, taxi licensing and illegal traveller sites.

29 January 2016 at 11am

29 January 2016 at Aylesbury Vale District Council