Agenda and minutes

(1)       The Chairman and Mr Sass updated Members on the membership of the formal panel, one nomination was awaited, from Canterbury, but this was expected imminently.  Once the final nomination had been received the top up seats could be allocated.  To allocate the top-up seats the leaders of the relevant groups with the largest proportion of members on each council would be contacted to nominate a member for the panel.

POST MEETING NOTE: the nominations have now been received and the full membership of the Kent and Medway Police and Crime Panel is published on the front page of this agenda pack.

(2)       The Chairman updated members on the appointment of the independent members on the panel.  An advertisement had been published in all the KM Group newspapers and Kent on Sunday, 20 applications were received which was shortlisted to 8.  Interviews took place in the week commencing 29 October and the panel unanimously agreed to recommend Mr Dan McDonald and Mr Gurvinder Sandher as the Panel’s independent members.  These appointments were approved by the Shadow Panel and would be ratified by the formal Panel on 29 November. 

(3)       The Chairman reminded members that the host authority expected to receive funding of £53,300 to administer and support the panel plus up to £920 towards expenses per panel member which should be claimed back from the host authority. 

(4)       RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 24 July 2012 were correctly recorded and that they be signed by the chairman as a correct record.  

Ms Kayleigh Nicholson, Programme Manager for PCC Transition, Policy Officer, Kent Police Authority will attend the meeting to answer Members’ questions on this item.

(1)    The Chairman offered his thanks to the Kent Police Authority Officers for providing the reports for the Shadow Panel’s meeting.

(2)    The Information Sharing Agreement was a draft document submitted to the Shadow Panel for comments and would be revised for the first meeting of the formal panel on 29 November.  The Agreement was not meant as an inhibitor to the Panel performing its role, rather a document drawn from statutory guidance and best practice to create a positive working relationship between the Panel and the Commissioner.

(3)    Members discussed the role of the panel in pre/post decision scrutiny.  The general view of the panel was that pre-decision scrutiny made it difficult for the panel to retain its independence when it came to being the check and balance on the work of the Commissioner. 

(4)    It was confirmed that the Panel did not have any powers to require information directly from the Police Force; it was assumed that the Commissioner would be the voice of the Police Force and that the Panel would seek information through the Commissioner;  although this did not prevent individual members speaking to the Police Force.

(5)    The section setting out the process for dispute resolution would be amended and a revised draft would be submitted to the formal Panel on 29 November for approval.

RESOLVED that the comments of the Panel be incorporated into a revised draft to be submitted to the Kent and Medway Police and Crime Panel.

Ms Laura Steward, Policy and Research Officer, Kent Police Authority will be attending the meeting to answer Members’ questions on this item.

(1)        The Chairman thanked the Officer from the Kent Police Authority for providing the complaints document for the Panel.  The Government had de-regulated much of the complaints handling and local resolution was considered to be a key factor. 

(2)        Members queried the appeals process for complaints and it was confirmed that currently there was no system for appeal. 

(3)        It was confirmed that a register would be kept of all complaints received by the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner.

(4)        The Panel agreed that the formal Panel should consider setting up a sub-panel to consider complaints; political proportionality should be taken into account for the purposes of the sub-panel. 

RESOLVED: that the report would be re-drafted following comments from the Shadow Panel and submitted to the formal Panel for approval.