Cleveland Police and Crime Panel Minutes

Date:
Tuesday, 6th October, 2020
Time:
5.00 p.m.
Place:
Remote Meeting Via Microsoft Teams
 
Please note: all Minutes are subject to approval at the next Meeting

Attendance Details

Present:
Cllr Tony Riordan(Chair), Cllr Graham Cutler(Vice-Chair), Cllr Lee Cartwright, Cllr Barrie Cooper, Councillor Chris Jones, Mr Paul McGrath, Cllr Steve Nelson, Mayor Andy Preston, Cllr Vera Rider, Mr Luigi Salvati, Cllr Norma Stephenson O.B.E, and Cllr Steve Walmsley.
Officers:
Julie Butcher, Nigel Hart, Michael Henderson, Sarah Whaley, Gary Woods, Peter Bell (Stockton-on-Tees Borough Council).
In Attendance:
Lisa Oldroyd (Acting Commissioner), Simon Dennis, Elise Pout, Michael Porter, (Commissioner's Office), DCC Helen McMillan, Will Green (Cleveland Police).
Apologies for absence:
Cllr Dave Hunter and Cllr Matthew Storey.
Item Description Decision
Public
PCP
26/20
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
There were no interests declared.
PCP
27/20
MINUTES
RESOLVED that the minutes of the meetings held on 7 July, 10 September, 15 September 2020 be agreed as a correct record.
PCP
28/20
MEMBERS’ QUESTIONS TO THE COMMISSIONER
There were no Members’ Questions to the Commissioner.
PCP
29/20
COMMISSIONER'S UPDATE
RESOLVED that the report be noted.
PCP
30/20
DECISIONS OF THE COMMISSIONER AND FORWARD PLAN
RESOLVED that the report be noted.
PCP
31/20
COMMISSIONER’S SCRUTINY PROGRAMME
RESOLVED that the report be noted.
PCP
32/20
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
Members were informed that no Public Questions had been received.
PCP
33/20
FORWARD PLAN
RESOLVED that the Forward Plan be noted.
5.00pm to 7.00pm

Preamble

ItemPreamble
PCP
27/20
Consideration was given to the minutes of the meetings held on 7 July, 10 September, 15 September 2020.
PCP
29/20
Consideration was given to a report that provided an overview of the activity of the former Police & Crime Commissioner (PCC) and the Acting PCC (A/PCC) since the last meeting held in July 2020.

The report highlighted specific updates aligned to the priorities of the Police & Crime Plan, as agreed by the Panel in July 2020.

The report was considered in conjunction with progress detailed in the PCC Scrutiny and Decisions of the PCC reports. Collectively, these reports provided progress in all areas of the Police & Crime Plan.
The report covered the following key areas:-

- COVID 19
- Investing in Our Police
- A Better Deal for Victims and Witnesses
- Tackling Offending and Reoffending
- Working Together to Make Cleveland Safer/Securing the Future of Our Communities

A member asked a question around the support that rape victims were given. The Acting PCC responded that the Independent Sexual Violence Advisers Service was a specialist adviser service that was there to help people through the criminal justice process and help the victim make any decisions. There was also a Sexual Violence Referral Centre to help capture evidence and there was wrap around support given to the victim going forward. The Police and the criminal justice system were seeing a rise of cases due to the impact of COVID 19.

A member requested that the Howard League Commission receive the data around gambling screening. The Acting PCC agreed that this would be possible.

A member asked a question around the funding for Safer Streets and if this was annual funding. The Acting PCC reported that Government had not committed to further funding yet but if further funding did become available a further bid would be submitted.

A member made a comment about the good figures around domestic abuse cases and that it may be worthwhile the Panel receiving a briefing note on the figures and as Chair of the Safer Stockton Partnership he would welcome a presentation of the figures at a future meeting of the Partnership. The Acting PCC responded that a joint presentation / report on how the response had been developed by the PCC office and other partners would be possible.

Regarding rules around COVID 19 it was noted that Cleveland Police were adopting the 4 E’s approach and each incident would be judged with common sense.

A member asked a question around the SARC (Sexual Assault Referral Centre) Service and if the same facility would be retained. The Acting PCC responded that the same facility would be used and in terms of co-commissioning with neighbouring PCCs and NHS England that would continue which would add sustainability and resilience to the service.

In responses to concerns raised around the 101 service the Panel was informed that the 101 service was an integral part of the service improvement plan.

A member asked a question around police response times to incidents. The DCC responded that an assessment was applied to each incident to grade the response. The Acting PCC also added that she would forward the details of the Victim Care and Advice Service to the member and the rest of the Panel.
PCP
30/20
Consideration was given to a report that provided an update on decisions made by the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) and the Forward Plan.

The Police and Crime Commissioner made all decisions unless specifically delegated within the Scheme of Consent/Delegation. All decisions demonstrated that they were soundly based on relevant information and that the decision-making process was open and transparent.

In addition, a forward plan was included and published on the PCC website which included items requiring a decision in the future. This was attached to the report.

Each decision made by the PCC was recorded on a decision record form with supporting background information appended. Once approved it was published on the PCC website.

Decisions relating to private/confidential matters would be recorded; although, it may be appropriate that full details were not published.

Decisions made since the last meeting of the Police and Crime Panel were attached to the report.

A member raised a question around the Oracle System and whether the system was already in use by Sopra Steria. The Acting PCC responded that as outlined in the decision record the Oracle System was in place however it was a very old version of the system and it had been upgraded. The Chief Finance Officer added absolute assurance that procurement process was done in an open and fair manner and that bids were not specific to the Oracle System. There were a number of bids that could have taken on the roles and responsibilities. There was no benefit to the incumbent.

A member raised a question around the HAT programme extension and if the Panel would get a further evaluation report. The Acting PCC responded that at the end of November 2020 the PCC office was expecting the finalisation of an independent evaluation by Teesside University. As soon as that was available the Acting PCC would be happy to share it with the Panel.
PCP
31/20
Consideration was given to a report that provided an update on the PCC’s scrutiny programme.

Holding the Chief Constable to account was the key duty of the Police & Crime Commissioner and must encompass all the functions of the Chief Constable and functions of those who were under the Chief Constable’s direction and control.

The PCC had a range of scrutiny approaches in place to engage with the Chief Constable and hold Cleveland Police to account. These took place on a daily, weekly and monthly schedule and include a range of meetings, data and feedback from partners and the public.

Changes were made to the scrutiny regime in July 2019 that resulted in a thematic approach to scrutiny across the priorities within the Police and Crime Plan and a greater depth of information was provided by Cleveland Police in order for the PCC to hold the force to account. The new approach could be seen in the sharper questioning and clearer minutes, which were attached to this report for information.

The processes would continue to develop and it had been made clear that there will be greater use of independent scrutiny approaches such as Internal Audit (Joint Independent Audit Committee), internal scrutiny panels such as the Out of Court Disposals, the Use of Force and Domestic Abuse Scrutiny Panels as well as identifying those services which would benefit from a wider multi agency scrutiny approach.

During 2020/21 the Cleveland Police Service Improvement Programme (SIP) would be a key feature of the scrutiny programme, where SIP programme control documents would be routinely reviewed, and progress tracked against the programme stage plan.

OPCC representatives would attend the Delivery and Assurance groups for each of the SIP work streams and would provide feedback on respective programme activities including impact, highlighting and/or identifying any risks of opportunities that may affect delivery and provide performance pack to inform the PCC and External Assurance Process for SIP. Information and evidence that was found would also be shared with HMICFRS to correlate with the evidence they were finding from the Force.

Assurance would also be provided by linking the scrutiny programme to the various internal and external forums and on a quarterly basis. Wider scrutiny arrangements were also in place including (and not limited to):
• Ethics Committee
• Feedback from complaints
• Issues raised at community meetings and focus groups and consultation

Scrutiny, Performance and Delivery meetings

Since the previous Police and Crime Panel meeting the following meetings had taken place, attached to the report
- 22 June 2020
- 19 August 2020 - The meeting was an in-depth look at the Force Control Room.

In addition to the meetings above, the Commissioner continued to attend the following to complement the scrutiny programme:

• Daily review of the Control Room and Serious Incident Logs;
• Weekly accountability meetings with the Chief Constable;
PCP
33/20
Members were presented with the Forward Plan.

Can't find it

Can't find what you're looking for? Let us know and we'll do our best to point you in the right direction