Agenda item

Under Section 28, paragraph 3 of the Act, a police and crime must review the draft police and crime plan, or draft variation, given to the panel by the Police and Crime Commissioner and make a report or recommendations on the draft plan or variation to the Commissioner, to which the Commissioner must have regard.

The Panel is asked to review and make reports or recommendations on the Police and Crime Plan 2017 – 2021, informed by any recommendations of the Working Group agreed under item 4.

81.     The Panel considered a Report by the Police and Crime Commissioner which introduced a new Police and Crime Plan 2017-2021 following the re-election of the Commissioner in 2016. The Chief Executive, OPCC, introduced the report and advised the Panel that during the production of the Plan consultation was undertaken with the public, the PCP working group and a reference group. The Plan was formulated in accordance with official guidance. The Plan included a section on measuring success and would incorporate links to partners and agencies in line with the recommendations of the Working Group.

82.    The Panel raised the following issues and questions of the Commissioner:

·         There was disappointment expressed that the Plan was not inspirational.

·         The absence of definitive measures in the Plan and how the success of the objectives of the introduction of the Local Policing Programme (LPP) were required.

·         The new Plan appeared to be a continuation of existing policy and was a missed opportunity to introduce new priorities and areas of work. There were no tangible measures in the Plan and there was insufficient effort to inolve the public in setting objectives.

·         A query was raised regarding the level of cases heard in Sussex that involved a victim statement. The section of the Plan concerning victims should encourage people working with victims to make statements. The Commissioner would attempt to find out the level in Sussex.

·         An appropriate and tangible measure for accessing local policing services could be the maximum time a caller would have to wait for a call to the 101 phone line to be answered. The Commissioner was asked if she had a commitment on maximum call answering times. The Commissioner explained that of importance was the caller satisfaction with the outcome of the call. Work was ongoing with the Chief Constable to determine if improvements to the 101 service could be made but a measure on call answering times in the Plan was not appropriate.

·         The project in the three Mid Sussex towns to upgrade CCTV was raised and the possibility that it could be included in the section of the Plan relation to the use of technology. The Commissioner would provide an update on the project.

·         The absence of a foreword to the Plan was raised and the Commissioner was asked what would be included in the passage. The Commissioner confirmed that it had not been written but a note had been made of the Panel’s desire to see greater inspiration in the document.

·         The paragraph in the Plan relating to roads in Sussex was bland. To represent areas in Sussex, with a high level of KSIs, the Commissioner should incorporate specific measures in the Plan to asses performance against the objective to address cause of death and injury on the roads of Sussex. The Commissioner explained that the Plan was a strategic document and the operation delivery plan established by Chief Constable would include measures in respect of this objective.

83.      The Panel agreed that a summary of comments concerning the draft Plan would be composed by the Clerk to the Panel and submitted to the Commissioner.

84.     Resolved – that the Panel notes the draft Police and Crime Plan and delegates to officers the composition of a summary of comments on the Plane to be sent to the Commissioner.