Agenda and minutes

The Chair announced that she had agreed to take an item of urgent business at the end of the meeting to receive a verbal update from the Police and Crime Commissioner on the settlement figures for the pre-cept.

Apologies for absence were received from Parisha Chavda (Independent Member), Councillor Mullaney and Councillor Clarke.

It was noted that Councillor Russell was present as a substitute in place of Councillor Clarke.

Members will be asked to declare any interests they have in the business on the agenda.

Members were asked to declare any pecuniary or other interest they may have in the business to be discussed.

There were no such declarations.

The minutes of the meeting held on 26^th September 2022 are attached and Members will be asked to confirm they are an accurate record.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the previous meeting held on 26^th September 2022 be confirmed as a correct record.

No actions to take forward currently.

None received for this meeting.

None received for this meeting.

Members to receive a report informing the findings of the review of the Office of Police and Crime Commissioners Commissioned services and to introduce the new draft Commissioning Strategy including details of internal processes.

Members will be asked to comment on and note the progress to date.

The Police and Crime Panel received a report informing the findings of a review of the OPCC Commissioned Services.

The Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) introduced the report and gave an outline of the background leading to the review of commissioned services, the review findings and steps taken to address the failings and the plans to introduce a Commissioning Strategy.

The PCC reported that he had inherited a situation regarding commissioned services that was failing to meet high standards; as well as clear systemic failures the review found a lack of due diligence, lack of record making, and a lack of accountability which the report showed along with the lessons learnt and steps put in place to tackle the issues uncovered.

Members of the panel noted the intention to deliver a proper commissioning service through the new strategy and that it included provision to clearly monitor performance, value for money and to give adequate assurance of accountability.

The Chair  commented that the review findings were a concern to read and seemed to show a mismanagement of public funds. The Chair was grateful this area had now been looked into and that there was a clear indication of what had been happening and the steps taken to address those matters.

Members queried whether the issues found were inherent in the system from the beginning or had occurred later and were informed that this appeared to be a systemic issue. The review had to cover a period of time with a cut-off date created and so it was probable there were earlier issues, although the review found issues with contracts and records management from 2015 onwards, with issues continuing to occur as recently as June  2022.

Members noted there had been a number of changes in staffing at the OPCC and suggested the impact of that and loss of “organisational knowledge” may have made a difference to processes being followed. There was also some confusion that the report suggested some details were not available, yet those were accessible on the OPCC website.

Members were also conscious that some elements of the failings might be Covid specific noting many organisations processes were altered to facilitate people working from home and it was queried whether that had led to some of the issues such as lack of record marking or failing to back up later.

Regarding record keeping, some of that was related to Covid but that was expected to be backed up later and it wasn’t.

In relation to the criteria for contracts it was noted that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) changed requirements some time ago, and a needs assessment was required as part of the process for bids however, as far as the specifications in contracts, whilst there was a MoJ element the requirements OPCC had were around core servicing and a specification in the contract between provider and OPCC contract so it was difficult to look back at what was funded and why, which has led on to the points  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

Members to receive a report informing about the creation of a Local Criminal Justice Board for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.

Members will be asked to note the contents of the report.

The Police and Crime Panel received a report informing about the creation of a Local Criminal Justice Board (LCJB) for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.

The Police and Crime Commissioner introduced the report and explained that for some time a regional board had operated, however there was a consensus that the regional board was not delivering, and so Police and Crime Commissioner’s across the midlands region had decided to introduce an individual LCJB for each force area.

The PCC stated that Force collaboration was important and that he was keen to do all he could to address the unsatisfactory situation of long court delays and see the process of justice speeded up.

Members were advised that the new LCJB would focus on mutual support, and whilst that was established the regional board would continue to co-exist for a year meeting less frequently before being dissolved.

Members understood the desire to do this at local level but enquired how confident the PCC was that other agencies with a wider footprint would give it time and attention, and how would a local board impact on matters such as regional specialist courts that were shared across region.

The PCC stated he was very confident that other agencies would engage with the LCJB, and that the system of local boards worked very well elsewhere. It was reiterated that the regional board was continuing for a time albeit in shadow form and could be resurrected if it was found to be necessary.

Members enquired about the LCJB make-up and were informed that membership comprised representatives from institutions such as the Court Service (Crown and Magistrates Courts), Police, Crown Prosecutions Service (CPS), Probation and those organisations determined for themselves who to send to meetings although it was envisaged there be continuity of individuals attending to maintain focus on issues and awareness.

Members referred to the issues in the criminal justice system, long backlogs of perpetrators being brought to justice and frustration within the probation service and welcomed the steps being taken to try to address that situation.

There remained some concern amongst members about losing the regional board and loss of opportunity that went with that such as sharing experiences, good practice, and ideas etc.  Members felt it was essential to receive updates on the LCJB meetings along with outcomes and any comparator information to other LCJB that could be used to show success rates.

Members referred to the ongoing economic situation and serious cuts to budgets that had impacted severely on the criminal justice and enquired if there was any move to support more funding into the system. The PCC responded that financing was not within his remit however he did meet and lobby ministers on behalf of our own force budgets but also other  bodies within the force area where things were needed.

The Chair thanked the PCC for the report.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the contents of the report be noted,

2.    That regular updates on the LCJB meeting be provided to the panel,

3.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

Members to receive a report updating on the changes made by the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner to the funding allocations made to the Community Safety Partnerships (CSP’s) across Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.

Members will be asked to comment and to note the contents of the report.

The Police and Crime Panel received a report updating on the changes made by the OPCC to the funding allocations made to the Community Safety Partnerships (CSP’s) across Leicester, Leicestershire, and Rutland.

The Police and Crime Commissioner introduced the report outlining the background and reminding there was no statutory requirement for this funding and the rationale for division of monies was based on unknown parameters.

Members were also informed that through the current system there had been numerous underspends that were not reported in a timely manner and a significant lack of monitoring information provided.

The PCC advised that a key piece of work was undertaken to develop a new system in consultation with the CSP’s across the area, who had engaged positively with officers, and the new system would improve accountability, monitoring, transparency, outcomes, value for money and provide certainty over the distribution criteria as well as hopefully reducing underspends.

The Chair noted that a conference had been held at the end of October 2022 for CSP’s to attend, hear more detail about the formula and provide feedback which had been taken into account when deciding upon the new procedure.

Members were invited to comment which included the following points:

There was some concern that there would be a cut of £40k to Leicester CSP funding especially in context of recent issues in the city. Members enquired whether the metrics had been tested in terms of impact on the city and whether there was sufficient objectivity in the figures, and would the outcomes be different it they were run in a different way. Assurance was also sought that those most vulnerable and at risk of the worst crimes were not at further risk with a pure data approach being taken to the funding formula.

The PCC asserted that the city would get a fair deal under the system, despite the reduction and reminded members of the opportunity given to all CSP’s to attend the conference held in October 2022 where it was set out in very full detail how the formula was worked out. It was advised that an evidence based approach was being taken.

Members were informed that CSP’s were consulted and given several opportunities to feedback, meetings were held across the force area and based upon feedback received the formula was created. The PCC commented that there was no statutory obligation to provide funding for this area of work, but he felt it was the right thing to do and it was important to have a proper system in place. It was also advised that after developing the formula it was presented to CSP’s for further feedback and there were no criticisms in terms of the way it was worked out. It was reminded that the city had underspent its allocation in the past and the point was made again that the city indicated at its last CSP meeting they had a £45k underspend so this formula suggests it would be more accurate moving forward.

It was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

Members to receive a report providing an update on the People Zones initiative.

Members will be asked to comment and note the contents of the report.

The Police and Crime Panel received a report providing an update on the People Zone’s initiative.

The Police and Crime Commissioner introduced the report advising that this was an initiative led by the project team at the OPCC and that People Zones had been in place since 2018 under the previous PCC. There were currently 3 people zones: Bell Foundry (Charnwood), New Parks (city) and Thringstone & Whitwick (North West Leicestershire).

The PCC advised that the initiative had potential to develop great benefits to more deprived areas of LLR, however it had been under resourced in the past with just one member staff on people zones and not in full time capacity. As a result, more resources were being made available and proper leadership had been introduced into the scheme.

Chief Inspector Streets provided more details of the work undertaken in recent months and drew attention to the following points:

·         The Mapping For Change project had produced a full research report for the Bell Foundry people zone which would be brought to the people zone steering group before sharing a summary with partners.

·         Similar reports were due to be available in relation to the New Parks people zone (by Christmas) and Thringstone & Whitwick people zone (by New Year).

·         The Community Leadership Programme had recruited a new cohort of 3 and an induction was taking place shortly; previous participants of the programme had done on to join the wider Community Leaders Network which worked in partnership to support communities, with People Zones being one of their focuses.

·         Appendix B provided a screen shot of a community asset map which provides links to services, information and events in the People Zone and was accessible at all times.

The Chair thanked officers for the report and was pleased to see the people zones initiative receiving more funding and being progressed.

Members expressed strong support for the people zones initiative and the projects being undertaken with those areas.

It was suggested that these were areas would benefit from more frontline policing to build resilience in the community as too would other areas across the force and it was enquired how  officers were being utilised in communities.

The PCC stated that community policing was essential, and he believed in that, he had written the police and crime plan to include it and provided funding to make it happen. Important work was also undertaken by PCSO’s across the community and especially in the 3 people zones. Chief Inspector Streets replied that the people zones and local policing teams were all linked in with the projects and there was a representative from each area on the steering groups.

The Chair suggested that Members could pursue the conversation about community policing outside this meeting with Neighbourhood Policing/Local Policing teams.

Clarity was sought on the funding given to projects in people zones and the resources in terms of staffing. It was advised that there was no funding of individuals or wages for people on projects. Any staff working on projects  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

Members to receive a report providing an update on complaints received relating to the Police and Crime Commissioner  over the last 12 months.

Members will be asked to comment and note the contents of the report.

The Police and Crime Panel received a report providing an update on complaints relating to the Police and Crime Commissioner over the last 12 months.

The City Barrister and Monitoring Officer introduced the report reminding members of the regime for complaints and the primary purpose to satisfy the panel there was a process and that they were satisfied it was compliant with the law. 

It was noted that previously Members had asked whether more granular details could be included in complaints reports. The City Barrister and Monitoring Officer advised that would need to be dealt with sensitively as the PCC and complainants had a right to a confidential process.

It was noted that since the last report in December 2021, two complaints had been referred to the City Barrister and Monitoring Officer, the outcome of the 1^st was noted in the report at paragraph 6; the 2^nd was still pending whilst the report was being written but since then it had been decided that complaint was not a conduct matter.

The City Barrister and Monitoring Officer advised that there had always been full engagement and clarity with the PCC.

Members were satisfied the regime was compliant, worked well and provided the level of accountability required.

RESOLVED:

                         That the contents of the report be noted.

Members to receive a verbal update following review of the Constitution and Terms of Reference of the Panel by the Monitoring Officer in accordance with the duty under Part 3 paragraph 115 to do so once per year.

The City Barrister and Monitoring Officer provided a brief update following his review of the Constitution and Terms of Reference of the Panel in accordance with the duty under Part 3 paragraph 115 to do so once a year.

Members were advised there were no amendments proposed to the constitution.

Members were also reminded that there were opportunities to seek clarity about any aspect of the Constitution or Terms of Reference of the panel throughout the year and the City Barrister and Monitoring Officer would give advice on that either individually or collectively, noting that such enquiries do not necessarily require amendment to the Constitution.

RESOLVED:

                        That the update be noted.

Members to receive the Task Group report with outcomes from the s106 funding review.

Members will be asked to endorse the recommendations.

The Police and Crime Panel received the Task Group report with outcomes from the section 106 Funding Review.

The Chair introduced the report and thanked the panel members who were involved noting that membership was representative of the city, county and Rutland. The Chair also thanked officers for their involvement and support with this piece of work.

The Chair explained that the review was prompted by a range of factors and concern that s106 money was not included within the budget. Once the review started it found there were huge sums across LLR sitting in accounts and not being spent for  the benefit of the community. The task group undertook a deep dive and found bids had been made so far in advance that by the time a trigger was reached the original proposals were no-longer relevant to the present time.

The task group considered that the benefits o re-purposing existing bids would lead to more certainty in future budgets for capital programming and a better understanding of plans for the future.

It was proposed that the Police and Crime Panel support the task group findings and endorse the recommendations to the Police and Crime Commissioner/Force as follows:

1.    The Force to take steps to repurpose s106 agreements that are no longer viable through liaison with local authority planning officers and developers to ensure that funding is secured.

2.    The Force to produce a defined list of items to be linked to its Investment Strategy and which can be used for repurposing agreements.

3.    The Force to progress work in partnership with planners and/or Community Safety Partnerships to align timescales and awareness of new larger developments and to co-ordinate needs with other infrastructure projects.

4.    The Police and Crime Commissioner to provide for resources to enable establishment of sufficient officer support to the s106 area of work and to facilitate the spend of s106 monies and pursuit of new bids.

5.    The Police and Crime Commissioner/Force to develop and introduce a monitoring system to enable oversight and management of all s106 agreements and to monitor use of monies received.

6.    The Police and Crime Commissioner/Force to liaise with planning officers in determining any new method for future bids.

The Police and Crime Commissioner put on record his thanks to the task group and officers for the huge amount of work undertaken during the review and for highlighting this area. The Police and Crime Commissioner agreed it was important to take this forward and to do so as quickly as possible and to adopt the recommendations, which he noted most were now being done and the rest would be implemented. The PCC recognised that securing monies from s106 funding was in the interests of the local authorities, police and importantly residentsof Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland.

Members commented that it was also important moving forward to ensure that any new bids were agreed in an enabling format rather than constraining format and that was a fundamental change needed.

Members also commented  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

Members to receive the panel’s work programme and to consider any future items for inclusion.

Members considered possible items for future inclusion.

Members referred to recent media reports about fraud and scams however it was noted that a large amount of that did not necessarily fall under the police and involved trading standards. The PCC indicated that he would seek a report from the Chief Constable to the Corporate Governance Board on frauds that fall under the police remit and provide an update around that in a future meeting.

Members asked that an item be added to a future meeting to show the updated structure of the OPCC.

Members referred to the topical issue of crime on women and suggested an item with a broader view on that be brought to a future meeting. The PCC acknowledged this was an enormously important subject that touched on several areas and such a report could be linked to commissioning services.

RESOLVED:

That the work programme be received, noted and updated accordingly with items suggested for future inclusion.

The Police and Crime Commissioner introduced members of his team present at the meeting today: Sajan Devshi, Performance and Assurance Officer;  Kira Hughes. Temporary Chief Finance Officer, Michael Veale Temporary Chief Executive Officer; Chief Inspector Nicola Streets, Strategic Lead for People Zones;  Charlotte Highcock, Temporary Head of Commissioning.

AOUB 1

The Police and Crime Commissioner informed members that shortly before this meeting he had received an email providing early detail of the settlement likely to be received for purpose of setting budget, although full detail was still awaited the government had indicated that the pre-cept could be increased up to £15 per band D property, this was a significant change which would need to be worked through.

The Chair thanked the PCC for this preliminary announcement.

There being no further business the meeting closed 14.55pm.