Meeting documents

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 2015/2016 Annual Report.

The Panel welcomed the PCC’s fourth Annual Report and congratulated him on the Report particularly emphasising the following points:-

• Thames Valley Police has had 5 successive years of budget cuts. In 2015/16, £12.8m was removed from the budget, bringing the total budget reduction since 2011/12 to £70m. Despite these budget cuts, the performance of TVP has remained high as can be evidenced by HMIC reports.
• The provision of Community Safety Funding grants totalling £3.1m being provided to County and Unitary Councils across Thames Valley to fund crime prevention and community safety activities that support the Plan.
• The use of body worn video equipment which has increased the number of guilty pleas. There will be the use of approximately 1100 units across the Force which should ensure that every police officer on patrol should be able to have access to this equipment. Smart phones were also currently being rolled out.
• Members expressed concern that crime reduction in some areas may not necessarily be related to good performance but possibly because the profile of crime was changing such as household burglary. The PCC referred to an article he had written which he hoped would be published shortly (a copy was requested) on concerns around the increasing incidence and impact of cyber crime. He referred to Portsmouth University research which states that £190 billion is lost because of cyber crime which makes a huge dent in national finances, some of these proceeds of crime going abroad. The Panel welcomed the proposal for the need to introduce a ‘National Agency’ to address cyber crime and would like to be updated on this area.

http://uopnews.port.ac.uk/2016/05/25/fraud-costing-uk-economy-193bn-a-year/

Action: OPCC

Panel Members raised the following issues on discussion of the Annual Report:-

• Cllr Culverhouse asked about visible presence of officers on the beat – the PCC reported that there was a slight decrease of officers which was being supplemented by improved technology and an increase in the use of special constables. The use of IT should mean that police officers will spend less time undertaking administrative tasks at the police station which will help improve visibility. However, police visibility still remains a concern of Panel Members.
• In terms of targeting areas of high crime and working in partnership the PCC referred to the fact that CCTV was a valuable aid and crime deterrent. Members noted his concerns about any council cuts to CCTV budgets and that the Force would be unable to support additional funding in this area which could lead to a rise in crime being undetected. It was up to the political governance of each council to decide how much resources were allocated to the monitoring of CCTV. The Chief Constable however informed Members of a recent meeting with Local Authority Chief Executives where further improvements to CCTV was discussed which should help reduce revenue expenditure (any information on these improvements would be welcomed by Councils).

Action: OPCC

• Cllr Webb expressed concern about the fact that the PCC had still not appointed a Deputy PCC or ‘Assistant PCCs’, bearing in mind the size of the Thames Valley and that he was now attending national working groups. They also promoted consideration of the PCC employing a part time driver to ensure that he used his time more effectively when attending meetings across the Thames Valley. Panel Members asked for timescales for considering any changes to his Office.

Action:OPCC

• Whilst Members support the use of Restorative Justice Ms Girling expressed  concern whether this was providing value for money, particularly when £270,000 had been spent on 25 completed cases whilst £780,000 had been spent on victim support for 1459 face to face visits. The provision of Restorative Justice was also not a mandatory requirement. The Panel noted that the PCC was aware of the issue of relative cost and value for money of the various support services commissioned for victims and that the OPCC was keeping an eye on outcomes and effectiveness as part of its routine contract management performance monitoring arrangements, in readiness for when the current victims services contracts come up for renewal. Members would appreciate an update on this at the relevant time.

Action: OPCC

• Cllr Burke commented that it would be helpful to have more performance information particularly comparisons on previous years. The Panel noted that the number of performance indicators in the PCC Police and Crime Plan 2013-2017 and the Force's Annual Delivery Plan were deliberately limited in response to the previous Home Secretary’s concerns that the previous culture of performance targets had distorted policing priorities, which should be simply focused on cutting crime. However, the Panel would welcome clearer service outcomes in the new Plan rather than just providing information on how much funding has been spent in different areas.
• Ms Girling referred to a 2014 article which related to the Crown Prosecution Service being criticised for discontinuing a case particularly on cost considerations. The PCC commented that he did not think the balance was quite right yet but it was a difficult area particularly with historical cases now being addressed where there was sufficient evidence.
• Cllr Sinclair referred to ‘single crewing’. The Chief Constable reported that there was a ‘safer crewing policy’ and that a risk assessment was undertaken by the Duty Manager about whether there should be single or double crewing for specific operations.

RESOLVED

The Panel used its powers in accordance with Section 28 of the Act to review, report and make recommendations regarding the Police and Crime Commissioner’s 2015/2016 Annual Report and the Scrutiny Officer would send a formal response to the OPCC on the PCC Annual Report based on the comments above.