This is a default template, your custom branding appears to be missing.
The custom branding should be at https://www.kent.gov.uk/_designs/moderngov/template if you cannot load this page please contact your IT.

Technical Error: Error: The request was aborted: Could not create SSL/TLS secure channel.

  • Agenda item
  • Agenda item

    Draft refreshed ‘Safer in Kent: The Community Safety and Criminal Justice Plan’ and precept proposal for 2018/19

    Minutes:

    1.      The Commissioner introduced the updated Safer in Kent:  Community Safety and Criminal Justice Plan, noting that the Chairman had said that the Panel would consider the Plan and the Precept separately to allow reasonable scrutiny and discussion.

     

    2.      The Commissioner advised the Panel that the Plan had been updated and refreshed to reflect the changing needs of the residents, confirming that he would use these resident focused priorities to hold the Chief Constable to account for delivering the service required by the people of Kent.  The Commissioner provided information on the consultation activity and the results, which had been used to develop the updated plan.  He commented that the main priorities, as identified by residents had not changed overall; Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE), Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB), sexual offences, terrorism and radicalisation, burglary, knife crime, domestic abuse, gang-related crime.  The Commissioner noted that terrorism had become more important to some residents, most likely as result of the various incidents over the previous twelve months.

     

    3.      The Commissioner explained that the consultation had attracted just under 1700 responses, which was a good level to inform his updated plan.  He advised that the consultation had not been digitally exclusive, with the online questionnaire supported by face to face engagements and events as well as hardcopy literature provided at a range of venues.  The Commissioner commented that he had made particular effort to engage with diverse and minority communities via attendance at community venues such as mosques and Gurdwaras.  He commented that it was important to him to ensure his plan captured views from all communities in Kent.

     

    4.      The Commissioner explained that the consultation had asked about the current Kent Police Ride-along scheme and alternative methods of holding the Chief Constable to account.  As there had been mixed responses to these questions,  further work would be done to review options.  In terms of collaboration with other emergency services, there was significant support for continued joint work but the Commissioner gave reassurances that the positive responses would not be used to justify significant changes or reductions in estates via co-location without further review and engagement.  The Commissioner noted that it was positive that people wanted to see more collaboration between emergency services and he commented on the good work already underway with Kent Fire and Rescue Service and progress being made with the Ambulance Service.  The Commissioner highlighted that fewer respondents had answered the demographic questions which made it difficult to assess how representative the views were but he reiterated the positive engagement work undertaken directly with minority communities to ensure their views were captured in some way. 

     

    5.      In terms of key changes or updates to the Plan, the Commissioner explained that visible neighbourhood policing and effective roads policing had been amended to be more mindful of the need to protect vulnerable road users (e.g. cyclists and pedestrians) and also include greater emphasis on the work around supporting bereaved families following fatal road traffic collisions.  The Commissioner also highlighted that the planned recruitment of up to 200 additional police officers would enhance the frontline and that the Chief Constable had committed to deploying a significant amount of the additional resource to support local policing.  He also advised the Panel that the previous recruitment of 80 additional officers since he became Commissioner, combined with the recently deployed new investigation tool, as well as the maintenance of PCSO numbers at 300 had supported the commitment to neighbourhood policing.  The Commissioner advised that the Panel that this was further bolstered by planned work around Community Policing volunteers and the Commissioner’s cadet scheme.

     

    6.      The Commissioner summarised the update, noting that there were few substantive amendments, that the consultation response had supported the view that the public’s priorities had not significantly changed and that the amendments that had been made reflected a desire to be more explicit about much of the good work that was already being done by Kent Police, supported by the Commissioner in holding the Chief Constable to account for continuing to deliver a good service in line with the agreed priorities.

     

    7.      Members commented that they were pleased by the high response to the consultation and how the feedback had been incorporated into the plan.

     

    8.      Responding to questions, the Commissioner clarified that roads policing involved denying use of the county’s road network to those intent on causing harm through criminality.  He highlighted the positive roads policing successes such as the disruption of drug and weapons transport through the county and that he was keen to see greater use of Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) to support further improvements.

     

    9.      The Commissioner advised the Panel, in response to a question, that Kent had the most video-enabled criminal justice system, with all crown courts having access to video-links for remote hearings and that work was ongoing to improve the processes for magistrate courts.

     

    10.   Responding to questions, the Commissioner advised the Panel that the addition of requiring Kent Police to deliver an ‘accessible’ service referred to planned improvements to 101 call-handling as well as the development and implementation of an online reporting system.  He explained that an awareness campaign was in development to ensure the public understood all the methods for contacting the police and which would be most appropriate in different circumstances.  Members commented on equivalent work being undertaken in the Health Service and highlighted the need for effective communication and consistency.  Members and the Commissioner discussed the use of Police Front Counters, noting the need for a consistent and well communicated explanation of how and when these could be accessed and what support would be available.

     

    11.   The Commissioner noted comments from the Panel regarding the potential need to highlight Child Sexual Exploitation more explicitly within the Plan priorities, in recognition of its continued position as the highest priority as reported via the Commissioner’s public consultations.  The Commissioner reassured the Panel that the tackling exploitation, harassment and violence priority did reflect that he and Kent Police took the matter very seriously.

     

    12.   The Commissioner reassured the Panel that where some crime types, such as Public Order, were not highlighted as key priorities for the public, he and Kent Police expected continued diligence around policing these issues.  He advised that there were several crime types and elements of police work which may not be as visible and well understood by the wider public but that were very important for operational policing, protecting people from harm and reducing crime.  Consequently, these would continue to be key areas of work for Kent Police.

     

    13.   Addressing Panel comments regarding equality issues, the Commissioner confirmed that he would be holding the Chief Constable to account in terms of delivering good progress regarding the promotion of wellbeing and tackling inequality within the Leadership priority.  He also noted comments in relation to low levels of response to the consultation from BME respondents, reiterating the engagement work he had done with relevant communities to capture views from Kent’s diverse communities.  The Commissioner thanked Panel Members for offers of support in engaging with diverse communities in the future.

     

    14.   The Commissioner noted comments from the Panel, that while they supported the clear commitment to caring for victims, they thought the Plan on a Page would benefit from being more explicit regarding a commitment to deliver similar levels of support to witnesses of crime.

     

    15.   The Commissioner reassured the Panel that in addition to communication activity planned to help the public understand how to best contact the police, the recruitment of additional civilian staff would help improve call handling at the Force Control Room.  He added that it was very important the public reported all crime and ASB, so that the Police could record it effectively and work towards meeting the real demand for services.

     

    16.   Responding to questions, the Commissioner explained that while he was keen to do more work around prevention of crime and reducing reoffending, Police and Crime Commissioners had yet to be given the relevant authority around the wider Criminal Justice System.  However, he reassured the Panel that work was taking place to improve diversionary schemes and improved custody protocols to limit unnecessary criminalisation and take into account people’s wider needs and factors that may have led to potential criminal behaviour, such as being victims of domestic abuse, substance and alcohol misuse and homelessness.  He highlighted plans regarding a new scheme for veterans as a good example, noting the positive work being done by the SSAFA Armed Forces charity.

     

    17.   The Panel thanked the Commissioner for explaining the updated Plan and for answering its questions.

     

    RESOLVED that the Panel note the updated Safer in Kent:  Community Safety and Criminal Justice Planand recommends that:

    ·          the Plan wording be amended at Section 5 to make clearer what is meant by “denying use of the county’s road network to those intent on causing harm through criminality”;

    •  that child sexual exploitation be mentioned more explicitly within the Plan priorities: and
    • that there is a specific reference to support for witnesses in the “Plan on a Page”.

     

     

    18.   The Commissioner outlined the proposed Precept increase, particularly in terms of how it would fund the various improvements included within the Plan.  He advised the Panel that there were still significant challenges facing Policing across the UK, notably the increase in demand, expectations to deal with issues outside criminality as well as the increase in types of crime being identified.  The Commissioner commented that several forces have reported that only 1 in 5 issues dealt with by police relate to crime.  The Commissioner paid tribute the excellent work of all Kent Police Officers and staff in continuing to deliver a good service to the people of Kent, particularly in the face of such challenges.

     

    19.   The Commissioner explained that the budget settlement for Policing had been more positive than expected, noting that the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners had been successful in lobbying the government for better funding to meet the increasing demand for and complexity of policing.  He advised that the national settlement included £450m for the next year and the same again the year after.  He clarified that this figure includes £50m for counter-terrorism, £130m for additional pressures and significant operations and that the remainder would be funded through flexibility to raise additional funds through policing precept.  To allow this additional levy, the referendum cap had been raised from 1.99% to 7.6%, which equated to an extra £1 per month (£12 per annum) for a typical Band D house in Kent, amounting to a total £9.5m extra collected via the precept increase.

     

    20.   The Commissioner advised the Panel that despite the opportunity to collect additional funds to support improvements, he would continue to require  the Chief Constable to identify and deliver efficiency savings and further streamline the force, to ensure that all the money was spent as efficiently and effectively as possible.  Kent Police was still expected to save another £9m in 2018/19.  The Commissioner reassured the Panel that the Chief’s planned savings had minimum impact on the front line as they focused on efficiencies with procurement, overtime arrangements and collaboration.  However, he cautioned that savings would be more and more difficult to find each year, without having a negative impact on delivering front line services.  The Commissioner also advised the Panel that he had taken the £200k underspend within his Office as a saving, representing a 13% reduction in the cost of his Office.

     

    21.   The Commissioner advised the Panel the additional money from the precept, combined with the Force savings, the saving from his Office and money from reserves, if required, would fund the recruitment of up to an additional 200 police officers and 84 civilians.  He advised that this would be the largest Kent Police recruitment drive for a generation and that it would take time to progress but he was confident that using the funds to recruit additional officers and staff was the right thing to do.  The Commissioner reassured the Panel that PCSO numbers would be monitored and further recruitment be considered as it was expected that many PCSOs would apply for the Police Officer roles.

     

    22.   The Commissioner reassured the Panel that the consultation had shown considerable support for an increase in the policing precept, providing that it resulted in positive work by Kent Police.  He expected that the additional officers would reassure the public and offer good value for the extra money being levied.  The Commissioner offered to report back to the Panel at a future meeting on progress with the recruitment, providing that the proposed precept was agreed.

     

    23.   Members commented on the proposed precept, noting the Commissioner’s positive plans to use the additional money to recruit additional officers and staff.

     

    24.   Responding to questions regarding the budget and use of reserves, the Commissioner and his Chief Finance Officer explained that the National Audit Office had advised that a minimum of 5% of revenue budget be maintained in reserves and that all plans kept in mind the need to ensure use of reserves was sustainable.  The Commissioner commented that since 2011, many Forces had maintained, in his opinion, higher reserve funds than was necessary and he felt it was important to put that money to better use.

     

    25.   In terms of ensuring good value for money and appropriate use of the additional resources, the Commissioner advised the Panel that he had received assurances from the Chief Constable that the additional Officers and Staff would be focussed on local policing and ‘high harm’ crime, such as exploitation and abuse issues.  The Commissioner commented that he believed the proposed deployment arrangements struck a good balance across key policing areas, including hidden harm, high harm, local policing and roads policing.  The Commissioner clarified that while he recognised the value of PCSOs, he was confident that focusing on Police Officer recruitment was the most appropriate use of the funds.  The Commissioner explained that the precept increase and the relevant spending plans, if agreed, would be communicated to the public in a variety of forums and using online communications.

     

    26.   Responding to questions about the reserve levels, the Commissioner and his Chief Finance Officer reiterated that the planned use of reserves was in line with National Audit Office guidance and that they believed it was appropriate to reduce the level of reserves held due to the need to invest now to deliver a more efficient service in the long run.  The Commissioner reassured the Panel that sufficient reserves would be maintained and that capital underspends would be moved to reserves when appropriate.  Members noted the Commissioner’s explanation, though concern about eventual reserve levels by 2020 was expressed by some Members, with a view that this posed a risk to effective contingency planning and preparation for fluctuations in available funding.

     

    27.   Regarding collection of council tax and precept levy, the Commissioner explained that the Kent Police budget did include support for this work with local councils and that this spread the benefit of increased tax collection across all relevant authorities.

     

    28.   Responding to questions about retention and recruitment of staff, the Commissioner advised the Panel that he appreciated the challenge involved in the recruitment drive and assured the Panel that consideration was being given to ensuring new officers would be retained.  He also clarified that there would be further PCSO recruitment to maintain the staffing level at 300, including filling some existing vacancies and the likely movement of some PCSO’s to become police officers.  The Commissioner explained that the Police structure  included 210 PCSOs embedded in communities with the other 90 working in specialist roles such as co-ordinating missing person enquiries, supporting Domestic Abuse investigations and wider community safety activities.

     

    29.   Responding to a question regarding the impact of large scale operations, such as Operation Stack, and particularly the potential for significant disruption as a result of Brexit, the Commissioner explained that a Special Policing Grant may be applied for from the Home Office where costs of supporting exceptional operations exceeded 1% of the local Police budget.  The Commissioner also reassured the Panel that work was ongoing in terms of reviewing civil contingency plans with partner agencies.

     

    RESOLVED that the Proposed Precept be approved unanimously.

     

    Supporting documents: