Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received Cllrs P Barrow, B Dove, T Johnson and Iain McVie.

The following Members of the Panel had advised that they were unable to attend in person, but would be attending the meeting via MS Teams:

Cllr M Haines

Cllr M Howell

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 29 September 2022.

The minutes of the meeting held on 29 September 2022 were confirmed and signed.

The PCC confirmed that there was no update on the 101 contract.

The PCC also confirmed that all uniformed operational encounters with the public were to be recorded on body-worn video cameras by all officers present that were equipped with such equipment and that all officers were to be provided with these devices as personal issue. The captured footage was then downloaded to secure storage at the end of each operational shift, or, in exceptional circumstances, as soon as practicable.

To disclose any pecuniary, other registrable or non-registrable interests as set out in the adopted Code of Conduct. In making their disclosure councillors are asked to state the agenda item, the nature of the interest and any action they propose to take as part of their declaration.

If required, further advice should be sought from the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.

In relation to the Road Safety report, Cllr Haines reminded the Panel that she was part of a Community Speed Watch Programme.

To receive questions or statements on the business of the committee from town and parish councils and members of the public.

Representatives of town or parish councils and members of the public who live, work or represent an organisation within the Dorset Council area are welcome to submit up to two questions or two statements for each meeting. Alternatively, you could submit one question and one statement for each meeting.

All submissions must be emailed in full to elaine.tibble@dorsetcouncil.gov.uk by 8.30am on Monday 12 December 2022. When submitting your question(s) and/or statement(s) please note that:

· no more than three minutes will be allowed for any one question or statement to be asked/read

· a question may include a short pre-amble to set the context and this will be included within the three minute period

· please note that sub divided questions count towards your total of two

· when submitting a question please indicate who the question is for (e.g. the name of the committee), Include your name, address and contact details. Only your name will be published but we may need your other details to contact you about your question or statement in advance of the meeting.

· questions and statements received in line with the council’s rules for public participation will be published as a supplement to the agenda.

· all questions, statements and responses will be published in full within the minutes of the meeting.

Dorset Council Constitution - Procedure Rule 9

There were no statements or questions from members of the public or local organisations.

To receive the Q2 Monitoring Report

Before the monitoring report was introduced, the Chairman requested information relating to the PCC’s stance on reclassifying cannabis to a Class A drug. In response, the PCC highlighted his concerns surrounding its status as an “entry-level” drug and the harm that it caused to the health and wellbeing of its users, which could lead to “harder” drugs. The stance taken by the PCC was to provoke discussion. The ultimate objective of the PCC and his officers was to keep Dorset’s residents safe.

The Chairman also queried the vetting processes for police staff and misogynistic behaviour that had been highlighted in a national report by the HMICFRS and requested clarification that the relevant recommendations would be actioned by the Chief Constable. In response, the PCC confirmed that there had been no concerns in relation to either of these issues and that a series of recommendations had been made, which had been duly accepted by the PCC and Dorset Police. He further added that Dorset Police would always review and act on the recommendations of the IOPC where appropriate.

Following the clarification of the above points, the PCC introduced the report and highlighted areas of progress within the six priority areas of the PCC’s plan.

Priority 1 – Cut Crime and Anti-Social Behaviour (00:16:54 on the recording)

The PCC’s report covered following themes within Priority 1:

• Road Safety
• Burglary
• Crime and ASB
• Fraud and Cyber Crime
• Supporting Young People

The PCC responded to comments and requests for clarification from Panel Members, details included:

• The PCC had submitted a letter, co-signed by the leaders of both Dorset Council and BCP Council to the Minister for Transport that requested the ability for both Councils to increase parking fines due to the difficulties that were experienced with illegal and inconsiderate parking during the summer season, however, this had not yielded the desired results, but would be pursued nonetheless.
• Burglaries were graded according to threat and the appropriate response would be determined. Category 1 and 2 burglaries were attended 100% of the time. Where a burglary didn’t fit into categories 1 or 2, 50% would be attended at the time, where the remainder would be followed up by subsequent attendance by officers from a local station.
• The PCC requested that any negative instances when trying to report a crime or when interacting with the police were communicated to him so that he could raise with the Chief Constable and ensure constant improvement of the police force.
• Dorset Police were regularly expected to assist other constabularies when policing events, some of which were high profile, but did not receive any additional financial assistance for the summer season, whereby many visitors were attracted to the area and a huge pressure was put on the force.

Actions:

PCC to report back as part of the Q3 report with the response to the issues raised relating to theft outside of the home.

Priority 2 – Make Policing more Visible and Connected (00:40:36 on the recording)

The PCC’s report covered following  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

This paper updates members on the Police and Crime Commissioner’s work on road safety.

The PCC introduced the report on Road Safety which set out the work undertaken in relation to road safety

The PCC responded to comments and requests for clarification from Panel Members, details included:

• The PCC regularly engaged with other road safety partners in relation to road traffic collisions where there were no injuries, i.e. whereby there has been damage to property only and that while there was a data gap, the force’s safety teams and camera operators didn’t exclusively deploy to areas on the basis of injuries and collisions.
• The force regularly received considerable evidence of poor driver behaviour and pro-actively acted upon community concerns. The PCC reiterated the importance of the police force ensuring that all work relating to road safety was joined up.
• Nuisance drivers or “boy/girl racers” should be reported to the police and action would be taken. The police had the ability, where appropriate, to issue such drivers with an S.59, which allowed for vehicles to be seized.
• It was possible to utilise a noise camera to manage the issue of vehicle noise, however, for these to be utilised a PSPO would need to be in place and the PCC offered financial support to provide such cameras.
• The revenue that was generated by the Driver Awareness Courses worked on a cost recovery basis and was in compliance with the NPCC guidelines. The charges for the scheme reflected the cost of being able to make available the course, the cost of operating the ‘no excuses’ road safety team, the ANPR interceptor team, fixed and mobile ANPR cameras, road safety support team and the road safety partnership. This funding was invested back into where it needed to be.  

Actions:

PCC to provide details of funding for speed cameras.

Noted

To provide Members with a summary report on the how the Precept is being, and has been, used throughout 2022/23.

The PCC introduced the report which set out how the precept was being utilised for the 2022/23 financial year.

The PCC responded to comments and requests for clarification from Panel Members, details included:

• The Regional Organised Crime Unit (ROCU) was held to account by the PCC and had various funding streams to ensure its effective operation. Performance was monitored quarterly, and the PCC considered that the ROCU was well governed.
• When bids had been submitted for the funding of additional police officers Dorset Police had been awarded enough to recruit 15 new officers.

Noted

To receive a verbal update.

Marc Eyre, Service Manager for Assurance, gave a brief verbal update relating to complaints and advised that there was currently one complaint being investigated and that within the terms of reference for the complaints sub-committee there was a line that indicated that the complaints protocol would be reviewed annually, which had not yet taken place and that the committee would meet informally and report back to the February meeting of the Panel for ratification of any changes made.

Actions:

PCP Complaints Sub Committee to hold an informal virtual meeting to review the protocol.

To receive and review the PCP Forward Plan.

The Forward Workplan was noted and it was confirmed that an informal Meeting would be held in March 2023 to challenge the current plan to ensure that it remained fit for purpose.

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 was no urgent business.

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.

There was no exempt business.