Agenda item

To consider announcements by the Chairman of the PCP and the PCC and also to note and ask questions on the Topical Issues report.

The Panel received a report prepared by the Scrutiny Officer which contained topical issues since the last meeting.

Members’ Questions

(1)      What is being done to tackle the increasing number of thefts of dogs during Covid 19 across the Thames Valley which seems to be a new form of organised crime?

[The Panel was informed that dog thefts were an emotive issue and there had been a significant number of dog thefts recently reported on social media. There was an issue around how police report these crimes as there was no offence of dog theft. There needed to be a consistent approach across the country of recording and reporting.

The trade in dogs was part of serious organised crime and there was an issue around where people were purchasing puppies from something which local authorities had a role to play in terms of dog breeding licences. There had been recent cases in Sussex and Wales where puppy farms have been uncovered where illegal breeding of dogs was taking place.

The challenge was that crimes that involved dogs did not attract the sentences as they were classed as property crimes. The sentencing around crimes involving dogs needed looking at as the offences do not attract sentences.

The Deputy PCC in response to a further question on the number of dog thefts which took place in Thames Valley, reported that there were around 40 reported dog thefts in the last year. He reiterated that there was an issue around how well dog thefts were recorded.

The Chief Constable informed the Panel that there were 80 offences in 2018 and 35 in 2019.  Social media sometimes could create the impression that there was more of an issue than there was.

The Chief Constable was asked a question about detection of this crime and he said that he did not have those figures to hand but he imagined they would be low as you would have to catch the dog thief in the act. The Chief Constable said he would provide those figures for the Panel. [Action: PCC/ TVP]]       

(2)      What work is taking place with local authorities to secure funding to make streets safer, in light of the sad circumstances surround the death of Sarah Everard?  

[The Deputy PCC reported that there was a Safer Streets Fund and the process was underway to roll out one of these in Oxford centring around burglary and cycle theft. Bids had gone in this week for round two centring on neighbourhood crime and anti-social behaviour with the bids worked on in partnership with Community Safety Partnerships. The next round of bids would focus on CCTV and street lighting and joint working on the bids worked well in the Thames Valley.]

(3)      In light of the tragic death of Sarah Everard and the general discussion around the safety of women, in Aylesbury there is talk of extending a daytime Safe Space scheme for the night-time economy. Is this something the PCC and TVP could look at?

[The Deputy PCC replied that the tragic events surrounding Sarah’s death had focused everyone’s mind. Project Vigilance was a project which focused overt and covert resources, particularly around the night-time economy and which was launched in Oxford. This would be rolled out in other areas of the Thames Valley as there were significant benefits to that approach.

In relation to the Safe Space scheme being extended to the night-time economy, it would be interesting to see how this progressed as this would have obvious benefits to other areas in the Thames Valley.] 

(4)      There have been talks for many years of CCTV amalgamation in several towns such as Milton Keynes, Aylesbury and High Wycombe. Has there been any progress made with this?

[The Panel was informed that the bringing together of CCTV had many heralded benefits. It was hoped that the creation of the Buckinghamshire Unitary would speed things along to align all the CCTV contracts as aligned CCTV would have many benefits.]

(5)      Will TVP be following many Forces across the country and recording misogyny as a hate crime?

[The Deputy PCC reported that presently misogyny was not recorded as a hate crime, but the Home Office was due to make it a requirement later this year. The challenge would be what to record. For example, in relation to behaviour such as controlling behaviour, which category would that fall under. It was a subjective area and down to individuals?]  

(6)      Channel 4 News quoted national statistics from the College of Policing showing that 232 officers had been dismissed in 2020 including: - 31 for abuse of position for sexual purposes, 20 for assault, 12 for child sexual offences, 11 for domestic abuse and 17 for indecent images. Does the PCC review statistics of this kind for TVP and are they made public?

[The Panel was informed that any incident where an officer was dismissed was upsetting for everyone concerned because we expect high standards from officers. The encouragement in Thames Valley is that individuals have been identified and they have been reported and investigated and if dismissed, this has been done publicly. The culture and processes in the Thames Valley were good.

The Chief Constable reported that there were two officers dismissed last year for abuse of authority (unwarranted relationships with vulnerable people). Reference was made to the junior officer who had been dismissed for not paying for breakfasts which attracted public attention. The process was transparent and officers were often outed by their colleagues.]  

RESOLVED – That the topical issues report be noted, together with the responses given to the questions asked.