Agenda and minutes

1.    The Chairman welcomed Members and the Commissioner to the Police and Crime Panel meeting and advised Members that the meeting would be webcast and filmed by television cameras. 

1.    The Chairman explained that the purpose of the meeting was to review, with the Commissioner, the Channel Four documentary ‘Meet the Commissioner’ which had attracted media and social media comments, most being critical, some highly critical, accepting that this was a carefully edited programme, designed to some extent to shock and entertain, it had clearly been a public relations disaster and the Panel needed to consider how it happened, what damage had been done and what steps could be taken to recover the situation. 

2.    Mr Campbell reminded the Panel that the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act enabled the Panel to review or scrutinise any decision of the Commissioner, make any report, and make any recommendations to the Commissioner.  The Panel could require the Commissioner to respond in writing, to come back to future meetings with any actions or to report back to the Panel.  The Act also requires the Panel to exercise powers with a view to supporting the effective exercise of the PCC’s functions, the office of the PCC rather than the particular holder.

3.    The Commissioner offered an apology, especially to the hard working men and women of Kent Police, some of whom were very upset about the documentary, it was not the Commissioner’s intention to upset them.  The only reason the Commissioner agreed to do the documentary was to help people better understand the complex and challenging role of the PCC.   The Commissioner did not believe the programme did that well, and she was deeply sorry for the negative reporting and upset it had caused.  When approached to do the programme the Commissioner took advice but the final decision was the Commissioner’s, with the benefit of hindsight it was the wrong decision and she was sorry.  There had been accusations of damage to the reputation of Kent Police; it was never the Commissioner’s intention to draw adverse publicity to the excellent work carried out by officers and staff as well as the Commissioner’s staff and the work of fellow Commissioners.  The Commissioner confirmed that she would continue to do her job, being the link between the people of Kent and the Police and delivering promises within Police and Crime Plan, however the Commissioner’s approach to engagement was being reviewed, she would still be out and about and open and transparent, but there would be a change of emphasis on the excellent work being delivered rather than the role of the Commissioner. 

4.    The Chairman opened the questions by asking why the Commissioner agreed to the programme, such documentaries were considered notoriously dangerous particularly with the decision to cede editorial control.  In addition, why did the Commissioner not inform the Panel of the significant decision to take part in the programme?  The Commissioner confirmed that it was done with the best of intentions, advice was taken but the Commissioner made the final decision to do an education piece explaining the role of the Police and Crime Commissioner.  The work of the company was researched, but  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.