Oxfordshire County Council logo

Agenda item

Police and Crime Plan Strategic Priority 4: - Serious Organised Crime and Terrorism - Performance Report

To consider the attached report of the Police and Crime Commissioner.

Minutes:

The Panel was provided with a report which detailed progress made (Year 4, 2020/21, to end of quarter 3) on delivery of the following four-year Police and Crime Plan key aims for addressing Serious Organised Crime and Terrorism:

 

1. Coordinated public awareness messages, campaigns and approaches by police and local authorities tackling terrorism and serious organised crime at a local level.

2. A ‘dare to share’ culture across all agencies, public or private, voluntary or community, who deal with vulnerable young people and adults.

3. Greater oversight across Thames Valley of activities to prevent violent extremism, share lessons learned and promote good practice.

4. Better engagement and information sharing between police and organisations supporting vulnerable migrants and rough sleepers, with the aim of preventing exploitation by organised criminals.

 

The Deputy PCC summarised that some of the work overlapped with previous items discussed but referred to work taking place around Modern Slavery, County Lines, Counter Terrorism  Policing, which the PCC has oversight of through the South East Chief Constables/PCC Forum, of which Thames Valley’s Chief Constable was lead. Details of actions and progress made were detailed in the report.

 

Members’ Questions

 

(1)      With the funding the PCC provides to various organisations to reduce re-offending and to reduce serious organised crime how does the PCC measure the success of these initiatives?

 

[The Deputy PCC reported that measuring performance depended on the organisation which was funded and their purpose. It depended on the wider point around contract management, which possibly could be discussed at a future Panel meeting.

 

There was an expectation around outcomes, but this very much depended on the type of organisation which was commissioned for the service. Performance would be monitored through the PCC’s Policy Teams and clearly poor performance would be reflected in non-renewal of contracts. Performance management was dependent on the size and type of organisation providing the service, but regular reports had to be provided to ensure objectives were being met.]

 

(2)      At present in order to report through Action Fraud, you have to be a victim of fraud. However, could the PCC make representations to extend this to attempts of fraud? In addition, can anything be done to take down scammers who were offering tailor made fraud apps on-line?

 

[The Deputy PCC reported that this on-line cyber fraud was a massive threat to us all but was probably under recognised by the general public. Phishing emails are an attempted crime and the scale of these scams were huge with the systems not up to tackling this problem. Representations should be made nationally with the business model of Action Fraud being looked at. The concept of a national reporting line for reporting fraud was probably correct because of the nature of the crimes, which were international. However, the delivery of the service was not good.

 

There were proposals to regionalise some of the work around digital investigations/ forensics because the SE Regional Crime Unit have significant capabilities and in some areas have led the country in the ability to seize crypto currency which was clearly a great way of getting criminal assets. This expertise will assist Police Officers; however, it was important that officers on the ground had basic expertise to deal with these crimes.]

 

(3)         What has been the impact of Covid 19 on tackling serious organised crime and County Lines? 

 

[The Panel was informed that in some ways the Pandemic had had a positive impact in terms of tackling serious organised crime and county lines. Lockdowns, particularly the first one, had made those out and about carrying out their various criminal activities, more obvious to the Police. Also, the Police had been given more time and space to continue some long term investigations.

 

A negative has been the increase in cyber crime brought on by greater use of IT in homes which has left the public more open to potential scammers and cybercrime. The move to more services on-line has led to greater exposure to potential fraud.

 

Reference was made to the imminent easing of Covid restrictions which may also be an opportunity for criminals to go back out onto the streets. This could be a challenging period for the Police. “Hot Spot” patrols would be in place to prevent potential suspects from returning to criminality.]

 

(4)                Congratulations should be given to the work of TVP on the work which has been carried out in relation to the seizing of criminal assets worth over £2.3m, however, what more needs to be done to bring serious organised crime offenders to justice?

 

[The Deputy PCC reported that bringing people to justice and seizing assets was important but so too was disrupting potential criminality. Reference was made to low level organised crime such as inquisitive rural crime and gave an example of the spate of cash machine thefts a couple of years ago. This was not just down to chance individuals; this was organised crime. There was a challenge in policing around the levels of harm. The theft of property without physical harm being caused can be considered a lower priority, but it was acknowledged that the balance had to be struck by forces to ensure that this organised crime was tackled.]

 

(5)      In relation to lower levels of organised crime which was escalating at the moment such as public order offences which have taken place in Bristol and London, there was a point when these offences could be perceived as terrorism. The Deputy PCC and Chief Constable were asked for their views.

 

[The Chief Constable reported that peaceful protests were what were wanted and what had happened in Bristol and London were quite rare. The vast majority of protests were peaceful and passed off with no incidents. In Bristol, some protesters were clearly intent on causing criminal damage and attacking the police. The Public Order Act gives the Police a number of powers such as Affray and the Riot Act, which were rarely used, and the Police had to balance the right to protest with the inconvenience which the protest can cause.

 

The Police can sometimes be criticised for not doing enough and for doing too much and it created a challenge for the Police to get the balance right.]

 

The Chairman praised the work of Police Forces throughout the country and commented that there appeared to be a hardcore of people who were hijacking peaceful protests with the intent of committing crimes. This organised crime was driven by cells which moved around the country and attached themselves to demonstrations which were being held with the best intentions. It was agreed that this topic be discussed at a future Panel meeting. [Action: PCP]

 

RESOLVED – That the report and the information contained in the report be noted.

Supporting documents: