Agenda item

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 themes within Priority 2:

 

• Uplift and Visibility
• Engagement and Connectivity
• Customer Service

 

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

 

• Dorset Police had recently changed its supplier and methodology relating to the engagement survey and it therefore the figures could not be directly compared with the previous figures.
• The summer survey that had been undertaken was very much a perception-based survey and did not go into a considerable amount of detail.
• It was pleasing to hear that members of the public had valued the recent engagement event in Dorchester by community officers and this was something that the PCC was seeking to expand upon.

 

Actions:

PCC to send further details relating to the summer safety survey to panel members.

PCC to report back on the force’s Gold Group findings on 101 and emergency response.

 

Priority 3 – Fight Violent Crime and High Harm (00:49:20 on the recording)

 

The PCC’s report covered following themes within Priority 3:

 

• Addiction and Substance Misuse
• Violence Reduction
• Child Abuse
• Violence against Women and Girls
• Domestic Abuse and Stalking

 

The PCC corrected one of the figures in the report relating to serious violence from 11.4% to -6%.

 

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

 

• Within the ‘From Harm to Hope’ strategy, outcomes were clearly defined as part of the guidance that had been provided, which were being integrated into each of the sub-groups and the outcomes for the area would be brought forward to a future meeting.
• The PCC was pleased that the number of domestic abuse and stalking prevention orders was increasing and demonstrated that the force now had the capability to do what was required.
• There was close working between both of the Community Safety Partnerships covering the Dorset Area and Dorset Police to prevent child abuse.

 

Actions:

PCC to provide panel members with the measures of success and a slide would be sent in advance of the next meeting.

 

Priority 4 – Fight Rural Crime (01:04:46 on the recording)

 

The PCC’s report covered following themes within Priority 4:

 

• Rural Resources
• Fly-Tipping
• Country Watch
• Wildlife Crime

 

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

 

• Special Constables were being recruit for specific tasks to ensure that peoples specialisms were being utilised. 
• The PCC had met with representatives of the NFU and had discussed the changes in the rural crime team and the work that they had recently undertaken including the recovery and return of stolen farm machinery, fly-tipping and firearms.

 

Priority 5 – Put Victim and Communities First (01:14:05 on the recording)

 

The PCC’s report covered following themes within Priority 5:

 

• Criminal Justice Service and Restorative Justice
• Victims and Community
• Business and Retail Crime
• Vulnerability
• Hate Crime

 

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

 

 

• Sanctions relating to shoplifting offences were determined by magistrates as opposed to the police, and the Panel were assured that magistrates would differentiate between serial offenders and someone that was trying to feed themselves and/or their family.
• The PCC would liaise with both Council’s respective Licensing Teams and Committees in relation to problem gambling.
• The PCC was happy to bring an item base on restorative justice to the Panel, subject to the agreement of it being added to the forward workplan.
• Where it was identified during an interview with the police that a shoplifter had serious financial problems, they could be signposted to financial support networks.
• The PCC was concerned at the volume of gambling related advertising that tv audiences were being exposed to and the impact that it could have.
• The PCC felt that Out of Court Disposals could be effective when correctly managed and highlighted that he was currently happy with the management, largely thanks to the input from the scrutiny panel, which was keeping things on track.

 

Actions:

A paper on the value of the Restorative Justice Service will be added to the Forward Plan.

 

Priority 6 - Make Every Penny Count (01:32:25 on the recording)

 

The PCC’s report covered following themes within Priority 6:

 

• Funding
• Evidence Based Policing
• Efficiency
• Philosophy and Co-operation

 

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

 

• The Chief Constable had undertaken a number of actions to bring the in-year expenditure back in line with the budget by the end of the financial year, through the use of a cost challenge process, which reviewed all areas of spend across the force to identify savings for both the in-year and next year’s budget. The stablished vacancy review process was carefully managed. The recruitment of police officers was not affected by the challenge process.
• The capital budget was monitored quarterly by the Capital Strategy Group and by the Resources Control Board on a monthly basis to ensure any implications of slippage in projects were addressed. Currently there were no implications for the delivery of the police and crime plan as spend was either operational in nature or would deliver within the timeframe of the plan.
• The revised capital programme had been updated based on the latest information available and it was expected that the vehicle replacement programme, although delayed due to supply chain issues, would deliver on time. The largest area of slippage related to the estates programme, in particular the development of the new police HQ, which was delayed by the planning permission and procurement processes. Work was now underway and the expenditure would begin to flow into the monitoring reports. Other areas of were either complete or on track for completion in early 2023 and revenue costs had been built into the MTFP. The PCC confirmed the sustainability of the projects.
• The borrowing costs had been factored into the budgeting process for 2023/24.
• The PCC highlighted the difficulties in securing speed cameras in certain communities due to certain requirements that need to be met and funding arrangements.

 

NOTED