Agenda and draft minutes

Proposed by Cllr Pipe and seconded by Cllr Fry.

Decision: that Cllr Dove be elected Vice Chair for the duration of the meeting.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 24 September 2019

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 September 2019 were confirmed as a correct record.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Cllr Pipe, in the interests of openness and transparency, declared, with regard to item 10 on the agenda, that he had received communications from the complainant as referenced within the file of evidence.  He had made no pre-determination on the matter and would step down as Chairman for that item, and the exempt business would be chaired by the Vice Chair.

To receive questions or statements on the business of the committee from town and parish councils and members of the public. Public speaking has been suspended for virtual committee meetings during the Covid-19 crisis and public participation will be dealt with through written submissions only.

Members of the public who live, work or represent an organisation within the Dorset Council area, may submit up to two questions or a statement of up to a maximum of 450 words.  All submissions must be sent electronically to elaine.tibble@dorsetcouncil.gov.uk by the deadline set out below.  When submitting a question please indicate who the question is for and include your name, address and contact details.  Questions and statements received in line with the council’s rules for public participation will be published as a supplement to the agenda.

Questions will be read out by an officer of the council and a response given by the appropriate Portfolio Holder or officer at the meeting.  All questions, statements and responses will be published in full within the minutes of the meeting. 

The deadline for submission of the full text of a question or statement is 8.30am on Friday 4^th September 2020.

There were no statements or questions from Town and Parish Councils or from the public.

To review the current Complaints Protocol in light of any lessons learned since the review in September 2019.

The Service Manager for Assurance presented the Annual Review of the Complaints Protocol.  He explained that the Protocol was based on national guidance with some localised arrangements and enhancements following last year’s sub-committee meeting. This was mainly to ensure greater transparency by making sure the Chairman and Vice Chair were cited on complaints at an early stage.

The Chair asked for an overview on a proposal he wished to put forward to adopt the Dorset Council’s policy/protocol regarding vexatious, malicious or repetitive complaints as the host authority for the panel and reference this within the Dorset Police and Crime Panel’s Complaints protocol.

The Service Manager for Assurance referred to 2.2 of the document which referenced vexatious behaviours but did not specify what was determined as vexatious or how it should be managed.  Dorset Council operates an “Managing Unreasonable Behaviour” protocol.

The Senior Assurance Officer for Complaints advised that unreasonable behaviour could go under many names and could impact staff and councillors.  Dorset Council’s Policy and Protocol had a very even-handed approach.  A panel including The Service Manager for Assurance, the Senior Assurance Officer, a Legal Officer and a Director would sit to determine if the criteria for unreasonable behaviour had been met, against a fair set of principles and a consistent approach.

Proposed by Cllr Pipe, seconded by Cllr Fry

Decision: that the host authority’s Managing Unreasonable Behaviour Protocol be referenced within the Police and Crime Panel’s Sub Committee Complaints Protocol.

Proposed by Cllr Dove, seconded by Cllr Pipe

Decision: that a dedicated complaints email address be included in the Complaints Protocol.

11:12 Cllr Goringe joined the meeting.

To note the Terms of Reference for the Complaints Sub-Committee.

The Service Manager for Assurance advised that the TOR were slightly updated last year to introduce an annual meeting of the PCP Complaints Sub Committee even if no complaints had been received as an opportunity to review practices and policies.

Decision: the panel agreed that the TOR were fit for purpose.

To receive a verbal update on any new and outstanding complaints concerning the PCC.

There were no new complaints to discuss.  The one live complaint was discussed as exempt business.

To consider any items of business which the Chairman has had prior notification and considers to be urgent pursuant to section 100B (4) b) of the Local Government Act 1972. The reason for the urgency shall be recorded in the minutes.

There were no urgent items.

To move the exclusion of the press and the public for the following item in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information within the meaning of paragraph 3 of schedule 12 A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

The public and the press will be asked to leave the meeting whilst the item of business is considered.

Proposed by Cllr Pipe

Decision

That the press and the public be excluded for the following item(s) in view of the likely disclosure of exempt information within the meaning of paragraph 3 of schedule 12 A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

The Vice Chair Cllr Dove took the Chair for this item.

The Panel’s remit was to determine if The Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer of The Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner had administered the complaint correctly and that the decision reached was the correct one.  An evidence file of all correspondence received that was relevant to the complaint was considered.

Decision: the panel agreed that, after reviewing all the information and additional submissions, The Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer had followed the correct legally sound process and adhered fully to the Complaints Protocol.  There were no further actions to take.  A letter would be sent to the complainant to confirm that the Sub Committee supported the Monitoring Officer’s decision and that if the complainant wished to challenge this decision the future recourse would be via the local government ombudsman.

To consider a complaint against the Police and Crime Commissioner.