To consider the PCC’s Annual Report for 2019-20.

Under the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, the Police and Crime Commissioner was required to produce and publish an Annual Report which summarised the exercise of the PCC’s functions in each financial year and the progress which had been made in the financial year in meeting the objectives contained in the PCC’s Police and Crime Plan.

The PCC introduced the report and informed the Panel that the report covered the activities undertaken and progress made by the PCC during the period 1 April 2019 to 31 March 2020, in meeting the objectives contained in his Police and Crime Plan 2017-2021.

The TVP performance headlines were reported. Crime levels reported to TVP increased by 7.6% in 2019/20 compared to the previous year (2018/19).  This

compared to a national increase of 6%.

Although challenges remain, there had been a number of successes such as a 4.1% reduction in residential burglary. A proactive increase in the use of Stop & Search was directly related to the increase in the number of possession of weapons (+18%) and possession of drugs (+21%) incidents.

The PCC referred to volume crime outcomes which continued to be a challenge and reference was made to an increase in both rape and sexual offence crimes  on last year. This was primarily due to better reporting and putting more resource into this area. There remained challenges in getting these cases through the Courts.

Reference was made to inspections from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Service where generally TVP received good reports. However, outcomes of crime were not taken into consideration and two of the best inspection reports were for forces who had the worst outcomes of crime in the country.

Questions

(1)       In relation to Strategic Objective 3, Reducing Re-offending, the Police and Crime Commissioner was asked about the increase in the use of “Stop and Search” and whether he had details on the breakdown of who was being targeted and whether it was being carried out proportionately.

[The Police and Crime Commissioner reported that he did not have the figures but “Stop and Search” was being used very much in line with how it was previously used. The reduction in “Stop and Search” resulted in higher crime communities. The use of “Stop and Search” was carried out very much on the judgement of the Police and he believed it was used reasonably. The Complaints, Integrity and Ethics Panel and the Audit Committee regularly monitored the figures. It was agreed that details on “Stop and Search” would be circulated to Panel Members outside the meeting.]

(2)       How should the Panel interpret the report in terms of performance as there were no outcomes detailed in the report. Was there a reason for changing the format from last year? 

[The Police and Crime Commissioner said this could be looked at. The Chairman commented that comparisons could be made with previous years if the formatting was the same and outcomes were included to show the performance in the PCC’s Strategic Objectives. The Police and Crime Commissioner agreed to this.]

(3)       The Police and Crime Commissioner was asked for an update on the rationalisation of the Real Estate, particularly in relation to Princes Risborough, where the Police Station was meant to be a joint facility with the Fire Station.

[The Police and Crime Commissioner replied that the rationalisation of TVP’s Real Estate was taking place, however, it was realised that the rationalisation could be much bigger because of Covid 19, with people satisfactorily working from home. Details on progress with Princes Risborough Police Station would be provided to the Panel Member.

The Chairman referred to the whole of the public sector real estate and it was acknowledged that across the public sector, including local authorities and the emergency services, work needed to take place jointly on rationalising buildings which would save money and improve the public’s access to various public services.]

(4)       The Police and Crime Commissioner was asked about the successes in the Police use of drones to augment helicopters and whether their use would be extended.

[The Police and Crime Commissioner replied that drones would be used more and referred to the expense of using National Police Air Service (NPAS) helicopters. The NPAS fleet of 19 helicopters were coming towards the end of their lifespan and there was no reasonable prospect of being able to replace them because of the cost. Drones were relatively inexpensive and were very effective. Helicopters cost £2,000 to £3,000 to hover over a public event. The use of drones would increase in the future.

Reference was made to limitations of drones whereby due to Civil Aviation rules, drones could not operate outside the sight of its operator.]

(5)       Could the Police and Crime Commissioner provide details on the improvements which have been made in the management of Organised Crime Groups and County Lines?

[The Police and Crime Commissioner informed the Panel that these were major issues, although TVP had greater control because in the south east of England, serious organised crime was headed up by TVP on behalf of the Police Forces in this area.

The Chief Constable informed the Panel that “County Lines” was an issue for many forces, although during Covid 19 this was reduced because of restrictions on movement which reduced the transportation of drugs and people. TVP did work very hard and well with other forces in disrupting “County Lines” operations and this was a priority for the force and for the Government.]

(6)       The Police and Crime Commissioner was asked about the grants he gave out for Community Safety, which ensured some good work was carried out. In relation to Victims and Witness services, was the funding based on needs or was it shared out equally?

[The Police and Crime Commissioner reminded the Panel that he was one of very few Police and Crime Commissioners who funded Community Safety Partnerships. The imbalance of funding came about because of the way the Ministry of Justice was distributing funding to Councils. The PCC tried to balance this up by funding through Community Safety Partnerships. Thames Valley PCC had a very good Victims First Service which was based in Reading and worked well for victims. A great deal of work was done in Slough and he did not believe that the work was carried out disproportionality in the Thames Valley.  

The Chief Finance Officer of the PCC commented that Victim Services commissioned or co-commissioned services for domestic abuse through local authorities. That was complex needs domestic abuse services.]

(7)       The Police and Crime Commissioner was asked for details on what TVP was doing in relation to internet fraud and scams?

[The Police and Crime Commissioner replied that fraud was one of the biggest crimes in the country and it does not receive the resource or effort on a national level that other crimes received. There were not enough officers trained to deal with it and there were no regional anti-fraud teams. The Police possibly only investigated around 2% of fraud cases which was a national disgrace. Reference was made to Action Fraud, which was the national fraud service, based in a call centre in Glasgow and run by the City of London Police.]                           

RESOLVED - That a letter be sent to the OPCC in accordance with Section 28(4) of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 to review, report and make recommendations, if appropriate, regarding the PCC’s Annual Report 2019/20.