Meeting documents

RESOLVED

That Cllr Egleton be elected Chairman for the Thames Valley Police and Crime Panel for the ensuing year.

RESOLVED

That Cllr Mallon be appointed Vice Chairman for the Thames Valley Police and Crime Panel for the ensuing year.

New Members of the Panel were welcomed as follows:-

Cllr Bendyshe Brown – Buckinghamshire County Council

Cllr Dhaliwal – Slough Borough Council

Cllr Hayes – Oxford City Council

Cllr Webster – West Berkshire Council

Cllr Wood – Cherwell District Council

There were no declarations of interest.

To agree the Minutes of the Meeting held on 7 April 2017

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 7 April 2017 were agreed as a correct record subject to the following amendments:-

·         Page 9 second paragraph – should say ineffective trials rather than cracked trials – which are trials that do not go ahead.

·         4^th paragraph – Julia Girling made a comment that some domestic abuse victims are relocated out of their area and sometimes there is very little hand over which makes them feel vulnerable and re-victimised.

·         Feedback from the public had been that sentencing was not tough enough and did not provide an effective deterrent.

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 Public Question Time Scheme and submit your questions by email to contact@thamesvalleypcp.org.uk at least three working days in advance of the meeting.

http://www.southbucks.gov.uk/article/5242/Public-questions-at-Panel-meetings

There were no public questions.

The Panel uses its powers in accordance with Section 28 (4) of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 to review, report and make recommendations regarding the Police and Crime Commissioner’s 2016/2017 Annual Report.

The PCC presented his fifth  Annual Report for 2016-17 and highlighted the following issues:-

Strategic Objective 1

Cut crimes that are of most concern to the public and reduce re-offending

·         There has been an increase in crime of 7.2% but the national average increase is 19%. The increases in domestic burglary (up 13.6%) and all violent crime (up 7.9%) will naturally be of concern to the public. The increases are in part due to the continued drive for improving reporting and recording of crime by the Force. Nevertheless there appear to be real increases in crime in some areas across the Force and these will be examined in depth as part of the new Service Improvement Review process.

·         Thames Valley Police force are categorised by HMIC as most similar to Sussex, Hampshire, Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire, Essex, Avon and Somerset and Leicestershire.

·         Thames Valley were doing well on reducing reoffending compared to other Forces.

·         The number of homicides has increased by 1% (19 in the past year) but three of the recorded homicides included in the 2016/17 figures are in relation to the deaths of three men at Didcot Power Station in February 2016 (Demolition Project).

Strategic Objective 2

Protecting Vulnerable people

·         This was a key priority area for the PCC

·         Thames Valley was one of the first areas to set up Multi Agency Safeguarding Hubs which was represented good practice. There was a concern that there were too many MASH in Berkshire and also there needed to be further input from the education sector. He would review the MASH later this year with a view to combining some MASH in Berkshire as they were not large enough to be sustainable or effective.

·         He also had concerns about safeguarding in language schools and had discussed this issue with the Sussex PCC.

·         Various local partnership arrangements exist to identify and protect those at risk of Female Genital Mutilation.

Strategic Objective 3

Work with partner agencies to put victims and witnesses at the heart of the criminal justice system.

·         Funding for the Local Criminal Justice Board was better than other areas.

·         Commissioning services were working well – his staff were re-designing victim services across the Thames Valley to improve access to support services and the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery.

Strategic Objective 4

Ensure police and partners are visible, act with integrity and foster the trust and confidence of communities

·         Satisfaction rates of victims remain high at 88%, compared with the national average of 84%.

·         The Complaints, Integrity and Ethics Panel  continues to constructively challenge the Force on how well it delivers services and this year examined stop and search data.

·         There has been specific work to improve trust and confidence amongst gypsy, romany and traveller communities – the PCC received a reasonable amount of correspondence on this area from the public, including complaints which were difficult to solve, particularly with the use of Section 61 powers where people could be removed from a site. However, some communities could leave sites with some  ...  view the full minutes text for item 113.

To note the report and highlight any issues to bring to the attention of the Panel and PCC.

Members noted the report and welcomed the information from each of the Community Safety Partnerships, including information from Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Committees and were impressed with the innovative work being carried out by CSPs.

Cllr Burke expressed concern that she was not a Member of her CSP and that this was an important link to being a Member of the Panel. She suggested that it would be helpful if the Chairman wrote a general letter to CSP Chairman emphasising that this link was crucial. The Chairman commented that this was a matter for individual Councils to address. Cllr McCarthy commented that he was not on his CSP but that this did not hinder the work with the Panel. The Chairman commented that they did not have to be a Member but could observe the meetings to act as a link to the Panel. The Chairman reported that he was happy to write a general letter.

Cllr Webster referred to the perception of crime and that it was important for the police to focus on actual crime rather than reduce the perception of crime. It was important also for Members to have links/or to be aware of the work of other useful bodies such as the Health and Wellbeing Board.

Iain McCracken provided an update on the work of his Council in relation to Domestic Violence and Members noted the following:-

•           The Domestic Abuse Service Co-ordinating Project was initiated in April 2011 as one of the projects funded by the Bracknell Forest Community Safety Partnership to tackle domestic abuse. 

•           It aimed to address a gap in service to standard and medium-risk victims and perpetrators by providing an enhanced level of support to victims as well as provide an enhanced level of management and supervision of perpetrators.

•           The 2011/12 cohort (11 couples in total) was monitored to establish the effectiveness of the approach and results showed a reduction from 69 repeat calls to the police in 2011/12 to 24 calls in 2012/13

•           In 2013 at the Thames Valley Police Evidence Based Policing conference, Professor Lawrence Sherman and Dr Heather Strang of the Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge were approached by the Chair of the DASC Project, a police officer with the Force, who proposed to test the DASC programme with a randomised controlled trial (RCT).

•           The proposal was made in order to provide an unbiased and evidence-based evaluation of this multi-agency approach. The proposal was accepted and the author was accepted as the principal researcher for the trial. The trial commenced in 2013, focused on standard and medium harm offenders and victims who are repeat subjects of reports of Domestic Abuse.

•           The intention was to test the hypothesis that "a multi-agency integrated case management system, will reduce both the frequency and severity of incidents. The trial was well conducted: the treatment group received a high proportion of the intended treatments. The control group received "normal" follow up with very little cross contamination. The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 114.

To adopt and publish the Annual Report and ask Panel Members to submit the Annual Report to their respective Authorities for information.

The Panel noted the draft Police and Crime Panel Annual Report.

The draft report included a section for Panel Members who were asked ‘what could the Panel do better’. One of the areas that was raised in this section was public engagement. Nationally Panels did find public engagement fairly limited and locally Thames Valley had the additional issue of covering such as a wide media area it was difficult to get consistent messages out to the public. The Chairman asked that Members liaise with their Communication Teams and their Council to publicise this report as much as possible. One of the new Panel Members reported that she had public relations skills and could help in this area.

Cllr Bendyshe-Brown asked that the following amendment be included in the Annual Report:-

Page 6 – In relation to the Cyber Crime event the report should be amended to say that CSPs are looking at a Strategy from which local areas can develop local or collaborative action plans.

Cllr Hayes referred to feedback from Panel Members which related to lack of public engagement and also obtaining a timely response from the Office of the PCC. He also commented that the public still did not understand the role of the Police and Crime Commissioner. Curtis James Marshall referred to the low turn out for the PCC elections and commented that this was a wider issue and more publicity needed to be undertaken by the Home Office. Cllr Hayes asked the OPCC whether they would be prepared to commit to a 2 week response period. Cllr Egleton reported that it would need to take slightly longer than 2 weeks because of the need to liaise with Thames Valley Police. He also referred to public engagement and commented that the Panel did have a public question time but that it had not been used much by the public.

The Panel also had a recommendation monitoring item to follow up on recommendations made to the PCC. Cllr Burke commented that it was difficult for the public to ask questions as the Panel agenda was only published the week before the meeting. Cllr Egleton reported that the Work Programme of the Panel was published giving advanced notice of items and also that the public had time to put questions to the Panel once the agenda had been published. If any Members had any concerns they could put a request in writing to the Scrutiny Officer asking for the rules of procedure to be amended.

Reference was made to the fact that Oxford Scrutiny Committee had suggested that the Panel should rotate. The Panel had held meetings across the Thames Valley in previous years but there had been no public attendance and had made it harder for Panel Members to attend.

Cllr Mallon suggested that Members of the Panel should put forward any ideas for the Work Programme which would engage the public. He also commented that the PCC does attend Council meetings once a year to engage  ...  view the full minutes text for item 115.

To note the PCC response to the recommendations from the Panel and to raise any areas for further action.

As there had been robust discussion of other items on the agenda the Chairman asked the OPCC to respond to the recommendation monitoring report in writing.

To review the Rules of Procedure and Panel Membership and approve the Panel budget.

The Panel received the report of the Scrutiny Officer on the Panel rules of procedure, Panel membership and budget. No amendments had been submitted to the rules of procedure.

In terms of Membership the following changes were made:-

Budget Task and Finish Group – existing Members to continue but Cllr Burke will be replaced by Cllr Bendyshe Brown

Preventing CSE Sub Committee – existing Members to continue with the addition of Cllr Webster.

RESOLVED

That the Panel budget as outlined in the report be approved and Panel membership be agreed subject to the changes outlined above.

Members are asked to note the report.

The Panel received the report of the Scrutiny Officer on the Complaints Sub-Committee. The PCC was asked to response in writing to the recommendations made by the Sub-Committee.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

To note and ask questions on the topical issues report.

The Panel received the report of the Scrutiny Officer on topical issues. In relation to the Cyber crime event this had been discussed earlier during the item on the PCC Annual Report. The PCC reported that he did not believe that any PCC had done something as collaborative as this.

Members also welcomed the taxi licensing event which was held at the end of May and noted that a number of authorities across the Thames Valley and outside of the area had signed up to a Thames Valley wide Working Group to identify how they could work together on addressing safeguarding concerns in the Thames Valley.

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

The Work Programme was noted.

8 September 2017

8 September 2017 at 11am at Aylesbury Vale District Council