Agenda item

Question 1:

Section 61 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 gives the police extensive powers to remove two or more trespassers residing on land where they have been asked to leave and where there is reasonable belief that damage has been committed or threats and abuse offered or there are six or more vehicles. Will the Police and Crime Commissioner call the Chief Constable to account for failure to apply these powers particularly having regard to the costs running into tens of thousands of pounds that District Councils are incurring in terms of clear ups and legal costs, the fact that the land is harmed and local people are denied the amenity of this land where it has been designated for public use and lawful sports and pastimes? 

(Ashley Clark – Canterbury City Council) 

Due to technical difficulties the Member was unable to participate in this part of the meeting; the Commissioner advised that he was still content to answer the question and invited the Member to make contact outside the meeting if he so wished to facilitate further discussion. He confirmed that at a meeting of Kent Leaders a memorandum of understanding had been drafted and agreed regarding inter-authority cooperation. No concerns were raised on the state of relationships between local authorities.

Question 2:

Can the Commissioner please indicate where the enforcement of illegal drug use sits within his priorities for local policing? 

(Mark Rhodes – Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council)

The Commissioner reassured the Panel that a robust approach was taken in tackling both illegal drug use and distribution. He asserted that tackling drug related crime wherever it takes place remained a priority. The work of the Operation Eminent team was highlighted. Related statistics for the past year were shared and included: 3,685 arrests; 511 warrants; 3,421 drug seizures and 1,825 weapon seizures.

Question 3:

In the last year, Covid-19 has had a significant impact on the delivery of support and diversion activities funded through the PCC’s Safer Community Partnership grant.  This has further highlighted a challenge that pre-existed the pandemic.  The charities and activities the Maidstone CSP seeks to support, often highlight that the delivery of initiatives within a single financial year can be restrictive and does not allow for services to embed themselves within the borough.  For example they may build a relationship with a school but would need to withdraw if they can’t secure longer term funding.  The same issues have been noted in funding opportunities provided by the Kent Violence Reduction Unit.  Covid-19 has only exacerbated this as it has restricted access and has extended processes. Has consideration been given to providing funding that spans more than one financial year in order to support the implementation of more sustainable initiatives? 

(Fay Gooch – Maidstone Borough Council)

The Commissioner paid tribute to the Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) across Kent. He reminded the Panel that through his Crime Reduction Grants, CSPs, local authorities, charities, support services and the Kent Criminal Justice Board had received funding. It was confirmed that the grant operated on a yearly basis, due to its reliance on central government funding settlements.

Question 4:

Can the Commissioner update the Panel on any concerns he has regarding the impact Brexit arrangements have had on Kent Police generally, and in particular whether this has impacted on the Police’s capacity to maintain core policing services.  If he does have concerns, could the Commissioner explain to the Panel what actions he is taking to require or support the Chief Constable in addressing these concerns?

(Mike Hill – Kent County Council)

The Commissioner confirmed that he had received weekly briefings from the Chief Constable on EU Exit. He noted that the Chief Constable had not expressed any significant concerns, though the pressure caused from the management of lorry drivers entering Kent without negative Covid-19 tests was acknowledged. The Commissioner added that the Kent Resilience Forum continued to monitor developments from a multi-agency perspective.

Question 5:

As Road Safety fits within the priorities for Kent Police in the Commissioner’s Safer in Kent Plan, can the Commissioner please update the Panel on what actions he is taking to support effective enforcement in this area, particularly in relation to rural areas where challenges to enforcement have often been cited as barriers to speed limit changes, speech-check cameras and related initiatives?

(Sarah Hamilton – Tunbridge Wells Borough Council)

The Commissioner confirmed that road policing, including enforcement, remained a priority. He acknowledged that enforcement in rural areas was limited by road suitability and safety. Community Safety Units were encouraged to put forward campaigns for his support. The rural operations of the Road Safety Unit were highlighted, it was noted that road policing often prevented other forms of crime.

RESOLVED that the answers provided by the Commissioner be noted.