Minutes:
- Whether a more visible Police presence can be obtained by using civilians to free up officer time?
- Whether there has been any analysis of the cost of employing additional civilian staff vs the increased time “on the beat”?
- Whether there is any analysis that shows that having staff out in the community is effective at reducing crime, or does it just give the public peace of mind?
(Mark Rhodes)
1. The Commissioner explained that in talking about civilian staff he was referring to PCSOs, and other staff roles including call handlers, IMU officers and civilian crime investigators.
2. With regards to increasing funding for community policing teams, out of the extra 200 police officers 50 went directly into community and local policing teams, community policing also increased more broadly by boosting the number of rural policing officers and also creating a road safety team.
3. The number of PCSOs had been increased from their levels in 2016 and new crime prevention PCSOs were being trialled, more investment was going into community policing through a mixture of police officers and police staff.
4. The commissioner was not aware of any bespoke analysis, however there had been work done by the association of PCCs and the National Police Chief’s Council on different methods of crime reduction and visibility which formed part of their bid to the treasury and included the use of officers and staff in order to support local communities.
Q2: Where there appears to be known drug dealers openly dealing in the district, being seen in the community and causing nuisance and ASB, could the Commissioner reassure the Panel that appropriate measures are being taken to hold the Chief Constable to account for delivering the Safer in Kent Plan as part of an effective and efficient Force, which includes supporting the fight against drug trafficking and misuse of illegal substances? (Jenny Hollingsbee)
5. The Commissioner offered reassurance that this had been raised with the Chief Constable and Assistant Chief Constable, where trends were identified action would be taken. The Commissioner was waiting to hear more about the efforts going in to tackling these issues through more local policing. At the Performance & Delivery Board (25 Sept) the Commissioner had given notice that he would ask the Chief Constable about Force action to tackle drug dealing in local communities.
6. The Commissioner gave some examples of where work had been going on to tackle drug related activity.
Q3: Could the Commissioner please confirm that he is satisfied with the Chief Constables preparations and plans for coordinating actions in Kent, particularly Ashford Borough, in response to traffic management and other issues in the event of a no deal Brexit. (Jo Gideon)
7. The Commissioner explained that in preparing for a deal or no-deal Brexit, Kent Police was working through the Kent Resilience Forum in order to manage potential disruption on the road network and ensure the smooth movement of traffic through the ports to support residents and businesses.
8. Highways England were responsible for the motorways and were working with Kent Police to ensure that appropriate resources were available. The Force was also working with the Department for Transport to ensure appropriate communication plans were in place. This required a substantial mutual aid request which was being managed nationally. The Force was continuing to develop comprehensive plans to mitigate disruption at Dover Port and Folkestone. In addition, the use of Manston and the impact on the M26 and the Dartford Crossing. Particularly with regards to Ashford, the Commissioner advised that the local council would be engaged through the Kent Resilience Forum. Brexit and policing were not just about ports, it was about the tools policing needed to get the job done. Policing and security should be an easy deal to do with the EU because all parties wanted to continue working together post Brexit.
9. Cllr Gideon referred to the temporary customs facility due to be based at Ashford and whether there was a contingency plan if junction 10a was not finished. The Commissioner confirmed that these issues would have been factored into the longer term planning around Brexit.
Q4: It has been in the media about Kent providing Taser training to Special Constables. I agree with the Chief Constable that it is “the right thing to do”. It is planned that only those officers who have served for more than ten years and who undertake 40 hours’ duty a month will be eligible to be deployed with Tasers. What are the views of the Police and Crime Commissioner on this, as Special Constables are trained to the same standards as regular officers, attend the same calls and do the same as Police Officers? And how has the Commissioner held the Chief Constable account on this criteria? (Elaine Bolton)
10. The Commissioner explained that the Chief Constable had taken a decision to equip all officers with Taser, including being the first to try and do the same with special constables. However, it was a challenge because of the lack of established national criteria for the use of Taser by special constables. It was currently not allowed by the Home Office and that needed to change in order for the Chief Constable to be able to deploy Tasers.
11. It was essential that all police officers were equipped with the tools necessary to do their job. The Commissioner had received a bespoke briefing from the Chief Officer of Kent Special Constabulary who had advised that the criteria for selection had been recommended by special constables themselves and it was also a means of ensuring limited training availability was filtered based on experience. When national guidance was published, Kent would comply and amend standards accordingly. The Commissioner added that it would be discussed further at the Performance and Delivery Board on 25 September.
RESOLVED that the Commissioner’s answers to Member questions be noted.