Agenda item

To receive an update from the Council’s representative on matters considered at the last meeting. 

45.1          Members received an update from the Council’s representative on the Gloucestershire Police and Crime Panel, on matters discussed at the last meeting of the Panel held on 14 September 2018.

45.2          The Council’s representative indicated that, when he had reported back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in July, a Member had enquired about crime detection rates.  He had raised this with Gloucestershire Constabulary and this had resulted in a lengthy report which had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting.  He did not intend to go into the detail of the report but indicated that the local Police Inspector would be happy to attend the next meeting of the Committee to take Members through the challenges and give reassurance about what was being done to address them. 

45.3          Members were advised that the Panel had received the regular Chief Executive’s report which gave updates regarding complaints, crime figures and topics discussed with the Chief Constable etc.  Tewkesbury Borough Council remained second out of 15 Most Similar Groups (where one was good) and there was a reduction of 2% in crime figures compared with the same period last year.  The Council’s representative indicated that the www.police.co.uk website was useful for finding out more information about crime in specific parts of the borough.  It was noted that a new “all age, all gender” independent sexual violence adviser service was being set up; this was a seven year contract awarded by the Police and Crime Commissioner for Gloucestershire Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre.  A number of questions had also been raised in respect of the ongoing badger cull; rural policing; and how motorists with dash-cam footage may be able to submit this to the Police in future.

45.4           Members were advised the ‘Creating a Child Friendly Gloucestershire’ proposals had generated the most discussion at the meeting with five gaps having already been identified: true voice of young people; voluntary sector; intelligence gathering; involving communities and businesses; and, mapping of work undertaken in Gloucestershire.  A steering group had been established to help move this project forward and would report back in early 2019; the group included the Chief Constable, Lord Lieutenant and the Director of Children’s Services as well as the Police and Crime Commissioner.  Members of the Panel had highlighted the good work already being carried out across the county and had spoken of the need to avoid duplication.  As part of the presentation, the Police and Crime Commissioner had highlighted funding issues for the Police and his intention to increase Council Tax by at least 4% in 2019. 

45.5          A briefing note had been provided to the Panel highlighting that the Police and Crime Commissioner now chaired the Gloucestershire Criminal Justice Board.  The role of the Police and Crime Commissioner in the “crime” part of his title continued to evolve as the Ministry of Justice devolved more powers down to a local level.  A review of the work of Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) – private sector companies which were given less serious crimes to deal with and received performance-related payment – was highlighted and it was noted that the current contract would be terminated in 2020 due to the project generally being viewed as unsuccessful.

45.6          The Panel had also received its regular report on the Police and Crime Plan priorities which covered activities achieved during the current quarter; activities expected in the next quarter; risks or issues identified; and an overview of the budget. 

45.7           A Member queried whether there was an update on the proposal for the Police and Crime Commissioner to take over the fire service.  In response, the Council’s representative explained that all Police and Crime Commissioners had been asked by the government to look at the possibility of taking over the Fire Service and the resulting paper had showed this would be difficult in Gloucestershire where the Fire Services and local authorities were not coterminous.  It was noted that there was now a Minister for Policing and Fire and the new association for Police and Crime Panels had been named the National Association of Police, Fire and Crime Panels so this seemed to be the route that the government wished to go down; however, it was yet to be seen if a robust business case could be put forward and this was an ongoing debate.

45.8           A Member indicated that he used the Police UK website to find out what crimes had taken place within his Ward.  Whilst it was very useful, he raised concern about data protection as it appeared to show incidents in areas where, because there were only a few houses, the exact house where the crime was committed might be pinpointed.  It was also noted that it was only when you delved deeper into the detail on the location maps could you determine exactly what was meant under different headings.  The Council’s representative felt that this was a good point and he undertook to raise it outside of the meeting.

45.9           In response to the questions that had been raised at the July meeting in respect of crime detection statistics, the Council’s representative confirmed that, in addition to regular monitoring by a Policy Officer, the Police and Crime Commissioner’s office produced a comprehensive crime report to the Police and Crime Panel on a bi-monthly basis.  The Constabulary’s own performance team also monitored detection rates and produced commissioned reports as and when required; a performance dashboard was available to both staff and officers to seek further information.  In terms of crime detection rates, since 2014, a new outcomes framework had been used to provide more meaningful information.  The outcome descriptors gave a more truthful picture and provided more detail about whether someone was charged or summonsed; if a crime was “taken into consideration”; if there were difficulties with gaining evidence and whether the victim supported or did not support further action; if the prosecution was prevented, or was not in the public interest; and if the investigation had been completed but no suspect had been identified.  The papers circulated to Members prior to the meeting showed the difficulties in reporting detection rates with Figure 3 showing that, in the period 1-31 July 2018, under the old crime detection rate regime 98% of burglaries (286) were undetected, with just 2% being detected; however, when the new 21 point outcome framework was applied to those statistics, 82% did have an outcome and the remaining 18% were still being investigated.  A number of the 82% (8% of the overall total) had a range of actions against them under the new framework; however, it was acknowledged that 74% of the overall total had been closed under the framework title “Investigation Complete – No Suspect”.  The Council’s representative explained that trying to define and detect burglary was extremely difficult as the offenders and victims were not in contact as they may be with other crimes, for example, drug offences; nevertheless, 74% was still quite a high percentage to go unpunished.  Several Members indicated that the figures were quite confusing and expressed the view that it would be beneficial for the Police Inspector to be invited to the next meeting to provide more details.  Subsequently, it was

RESOLVED          1. That the Gloucestershire Police and Crime Panel update be NOTED.

2. That the Police Inspector be invited to attend the next meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on 27 November 2018 to give a further update on crime detection and prevention.