Agenda and minutes

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

1.    RESOLVED that the minutes of the meetings held on 28 May and 5 June 2014 be approved as a correct record and that they be signed by the Chairman.

1.    The Commissioner introduced her report on her Engagement Strategy, outlining the changes in focus and implementation.  The Commissioner said that the key points included highlighting the continued focus on listening to communities and developing and maintaining a dialogue between the Commissioner, the police and relevant partners to improve local understanding.  The Commissioner said that this refined approach will acknowledge the excellent work carried out by Kent Police, the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner as well as the partner agencies and Kent Police’s corporate and internal communications teams.  The Commissioner said that, in common with other Commissioners her initial communication and engagement work was centred on explaining the role of the PCC but this phase of the strategy had now been largely completed. The Commissioner said that her revised  strategy will focus on  business as usual, promoting a corporate and professional image through tailored and balanced engagement and communication activities that are designed to suit the relevant audiences.

2.    The Commissioner summed up the main points of her refined strategy as being focused on local engagement, a more corporate and policy orientated online presence, improved partnership working and a closer relationship with the Police and Crime Panel.  Some specific actions planned included the creation of a new corporate PCC Twitter account, the retiring of the Commissioner’s Community Outreach bus, using Police local profiles to plan targeted engagement activities, encouraging Panel members to join the Commissioner in local engagement activities and a review of the general style and tone in response to Members’ comments at the previous Panel meeting.

3.    The Commissioner commented that it was her strong desire to ensure that Kent Police were supported in continuing to be an excellent Force.  The newly instituted People Board was one measure designed to achieve this and in addition, she would be making informal visits to Police Stations around the county and engaging with the staff support associations.  The Commissioner added that a positive aspect of the past issues discussed at the Panel and in the media had been to cause all involved to step back and reflect on ways to improve.

4.    The Chairman thanked the Commissioner for her comments, stressing the Panel’s primary focus was the need to change inappropriate behaviours such as ‘campaigning’ through excessive media presence, an alteration in tone and style to a more professional and respectful approach in the Commissioner’s dealings with all parties and general improvement in attitude to engagement with the Panel and the Police.

5.    The Commissioner emphasised that her reviewed engagement strategy reflected her refined approach of tailoring all further communication and engagement to suit the audience.

6.    Members engaged in a discussion with the Commissioner on various aspects of her report and verbal update.  The main points covered included advice on management of social media and pitfalls of holding more than one Twitter account as well as the nature of appropriate communication and how important leadership skills were in striking the right tone.

7.    Members raised concern that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

1.    The Commissioner introduced her report on Corporate Communications, stating that the history of the transfer of employment were already known to the panel and that she wished to explain the rationale behind her initial retention of the employment of the Corporate Communication and Research Bureau teams.  When agreement had been reached that all other Police staff would transfer employment to the Chief Constable, the teams in question had been conducting an ongoing piece of work relating to communication and engagement.  Given that this was fundamental to the work of the Commissioner and would also benefit Kent Police, the Commissioner said that it was agreed by the Home Secretary that ownership of these teams could remain with the PCC until such time as it was appropriate and manageable to complete their transfer.

2.    The Commissioner said that now that the new Policing model has been implemented, which has heightened the core role of communication and engagement, she had agreed with the Chief Constable that now would be an appropriate time to complete the transfer of employment.  Linked with this is the fact that Kent Police will shortly be creating a new role of Head of Community Engagement which will develop the positive work of the Force and the Commissioner’s office in terms of working with the public.  The Commissioner regretted that there had been delays to the final transition, particularly due to the uncertainty this could case members of staff but was firm in the view that it was the right thing to do to wait until an appropriate strategic model could be put in place.

3.    As a result of the communications and engagement project that the corporate teams had undertaken prior to the transfer, the new strategy for tailored police engagement would be rolling out soon with a pilot area already identified.

4.    Members welcomed the decision to transfer the teams to the employment of the Chief Constable and were pleased to hear more about the tailored communication strategies now being put in place as a result of the communication and engagement project the Corporate teams had been working on, particularly in terms of how this will benefit some communities that ignored police information because of the volume of leaflets and prevention advice that did not apply to them.

5.    Panel members praised the use of a pilot scheme in light of concerns that new communication strategies and tactics carried risks when first implemented as staff needed to acquire and develop new skills.

6.    The Commissioner emphasised that while the new strategy had highlighted opportunities to improve Kent Police’s engagement approach, she had nothing but praise for the work that had been carried out previously by the corporate communications team who had been exceptional at implementing ACPO approved communication programmes.

RESOLVED that the Police and Crime Panel note the Commissioner’s report.

1.    The Chairman explained that the this report had been produced to address the negative perception around the Police Contact Points that had been created as a result of their coverage in the ‘Meet the Commissioner’ Channel 4 documentary. 

2.    The Commissioner explained that the footage used was from the early stages of the scheme and did not reflect how Police Contact Points were currently being used and how effective they have been.  The report to the Panel was developed by Kent Police as the Police Contact Points are an operational resource used at the discretion of the Chief Constable.

3.    The Commissioner said that, since April 2014, the Police Contact Points have been staffed by a dedicated team of PCSOs.  This has allowed the scheme to evolve and change depending on demand from the community.  Such engagement is made easy through use of Twitter by the PCSOs who can advise the public of their whereabouts and also respond to requests for Police Contact Point attendance. 

4.    The Commissioner said that a recent review indicated that there had been between two and three formal outcomes a day from interaction between the public and Police at the Contact Points.  The Commissioner explained that “outcomes” refer only to information provided by the public resulting in either an Intelligence Report being submitted or the recording of a crime or incident.  The review did not record how many engagements had taken place where police staff and the public interact in a positive manner that can build confidence and develop relationships.  The Commissioner said that this aspect is a core part of visible community policing and must be taken into account, particularly in light of HMIC’s recent report that highlighted the difficulties Police forces are encountering in maintaining visible community policing while making spending cuts.

5.    The Commissioner said that local groups can now bid for Mobile Police Station attendance either for addressing local concerns or to support community events that will allow for positive engagement.  All deployments are now at the discretion of the District Commander, with a Chief Inspector having complete control of all resources within that area.

6.    The Commissioner wished to congratulate the Chief Constable for the excellent management of the Mobile Police Stations and she believes they will continue to be useful resource for Kent Police. The Panel noted the Commissioner’s confirmation that the mobile police stations are an operational resource under the control and direction of the Chief Constable.

RESOLVED that the Police and Crime Panel would note the Commissioner’s report.  The Chairman further thanked the Commissioner for responding to the requests for updates the last meeting by bringing all three formal reports to the Panel.

1.    A member requested  clarification on the decision to implement the People Boards regarding the limited number of only two per year.  The Commissioner explained that they were new but promising and more would be held if necessary.

1.    The Chairman explained that Mr Campbell, Policy Officer of the Panel, had produced the report in response to his review of correspondence arising from the Channel 4 documentary.

2.    Mr Campbell explained that his aim was to confirm that no complaints had been received but not recorded from amongst the correspondence received by the Commissioner’s office in the wake of the Channel 4 documentary. 

3.    In the course of assessing the correspondence, Mr Campbell said he had identified criticisms of the Commissioner and her Office arising from the documentary but that these did not constitute complaints.

4.    A member asked for clarification on what criteria were used in deciding what constituted a complaint rather than a criticism.  Mr. Campbell explained that his judgement was based on Home Office guidelines for such assessments as part of the complaints process. He said that an allegation that the Commissioner had committed an inappropriate act or failed in her duty through an inappropriate omission would constitute a complaint whereas negative comments about the Commissioner’s general behaviour or the cost of her role and staff would be considered criticisms.

5.    Another member raised a concern that the difference between a criticism and complaint was narrow and nuanced and that as a result, the approach outlined in the report may disadvantage some people who believe they are making formal complaints and expect an appropriate response and then only receive a general purpose thank you letter.

6.    Mr. Campbell clarified that his judgements about what constituted a complaint were not based on the Commissioner’s choice of response but were entirely decided by the content of the correspondence sent to the Commissioner.    He stated that the decision of how to respond to correspondence that did not constitute a complaint was entirely down to the Commissioner.

RESOLVED that the Police and Crime Panel note Mike Campbell’s report.