Minutes:
1. Question 1: Can the Commissioner tell the Panel what steps he takes to ensure that the Chief Constable is managing the fitness requirements for officers in an effective way and whether he is satisfied that absence levels in the Force are being managed effectively (Cllr Dearden)
2. The Commissioner explained that there was a national requirement that all police officers had to pass a fitness test and then continued to be assessed as part of their role. There was an annual process to ensure officers were fit for duty. Officers and special constables got support and assistance to ensure they could keep up with requirements and the Chief Constable led circuit training classes. The Force also offered an alternative test for those with a disability, if anyone was unable to pass the test a bespoke plan would be put in place to improve fitness, if fitness didn’t improve the force would consider invoking unsatisfactory performance procedures.
3. Regarding absence, the Commissioner received updates at his Performance and Delivery Board, the average days’ absence for officers had reduced slightly, but there had been a slight increase for police staff. There was also a self assessment tool ‘feel well live well’ 790 individuals took part in this.
4. Question 2: Following the recent increase in incidents of knife crime in London, what action is the Commissioner taking to ensure that Kent police are well prepared to deal with any similar increase? (Cllr Hill)
5. The Commissioner advised the Panel that knife crime and violent crime featured within the Police and Crime Plan for the Chief Constable to address. This remained amongst the top priorities of people in Kent. The Police were aware that when there was an issue in London there was a risk that it would impact on Kent. The Commissioner mentioned Operation Raptor, violence was often linked to other crime such as drugs for example. The Commissioner was responding proactively to the Government’s new Serious Violence Strategy. A Violence Reduction Challenge had been set up to bring organisations together to come up with a local plan to deal with violence. The Commissioner was keen to involve people with direct experience and was determined that this would be a challenge, not just another strategy.
6. Question 3: Swale Borough Council was informed on 19 March 2018 by the Office of the PCC that any previously agreed roll-over of unspent/unallocated funds from 2017/18 could no longer be rolled forward and had to be spent or returned by the end of the financial year. This unexpected news in the last two weeks of the financial year resulted in a number of difficulties ensuring that remaining funding was spent to meet both the PCC’s and local priorities. This exacerbated frustrations experienced during the year resulting from in-year changes in the conditions of the grants, changes which may in part have resulted in the accumulation of underspent/unallocated funds resulting from delays in the commencement of a number of projects.
Can the Commissioner please explain the sudden change in direction and advise Councils whether the principal of 'roll-over' remains an option in appropriate circumstances or whether going forward we should plan on the assumption that 'roll-over' is no longer an option? (Cllr Horton)
7. The Commissioner explained that there had been a number of changes to the way in which funding was allocated. It was essential to ensure councils were held to account for how money was spent. Funding had been increased by 10% and the Commissioner considered that the Community Safety Partnerships should have had plans to spend their funding in year. The Commissioner wasn’t aware, prior to seeing the question, that there was a problem with this council or any other.
RESOLVED that the Panel note the Commissioner’s answers.