Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from:

• Councillor Reg Barry, Additional Local Authority Co-opted Member
• Councillor Trevor Cartwright MBE, Fareham Borough Council
• Councillor Adrian Collett, Hart District Council
• Councillor Tonia Craig, Eastleigh Borough Council
• Councillor Lisa Griffiths, Winchester City Council
• Bob Purkiss MBE, Independent Co-opted Member
• Councillor Ian Richards, Test Valley Borough Council
• Councillor Frank Rust, Additional Local Authority Co-opted Member
• Councillor Leah Turner, Havant Borough Council

To enable Members to declare to the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest they may have in any matter on the agenda for the meeting, where that interest is not already entered in their appointing authority’s register of interests, and any other pecuniary or personal interests in any such matter that Members may wish to consider disclosing.

Members were able to disclose to the meeting any disclosable pecuniary interest they may have in any matter on the agenda for the meeting, where that interest is not already entered in their appointing authority’s register of interests, and any other pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests in any such matter that Members may wish to disclose.

No declarations were made.

To confirm the minutes from the previous meeting.

The Minutes from the 26 January 2018 meeting were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To receive any questions or deputations in line with Rule 31 and 31A of the Panel’s Rules of Procedure.

No questions or deputations were received by the Panel on this occasion.

To consider a paper outlining the Police and Crime Commissioner’s response to the recommendations of the Police and Crime Panel on Traffic related crime and nuisance.

The Police and Crime Commissioner’s (hereafter referred to as ‘the Commissioner’) comments on the recommendations from the ‘traffic-related crime and nuisance”  proactive scrutiny were noted.

The Chief Executive of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) was invited to provide comments.

In response Members heard that the recommendations of the Panel were welcomed by the Commissioner and his office and that great benefit was drawn from the proactive scrutiny work of the Panel. Work already undertaken through previous scrutiny topics is now feeding into policing scrutiny.

In order to enhance road safety across Hampshire and the Isle of the Wight, the Commissioner considered partnership to be absolutely vital and that finding better ways to enforce safe and legal driving behaviour was critical. The Commissioner was mindful of the continued concern regarding traffic issues and noise disturbance on the A32. Hampshire County Council have agreed to take the lead in responding to these concerns and the Commissioner welcomes the steps they are making.

The OPCC, following the Panel’s scrutiny, are reviewing engagement with stakeholders and, as part of this work, are considering how information can be shared more effectively with local Town and Parish Councils.

The Panel’s scrutiny also discussed the work of the Community Speedwatch groups across Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. It was heard that Hampshire Constabulary were looking at a new initiative regarding citizens in policing. To support this work the OPCC were seeking to analyse data from across all groups, to develop a mapping tool to identify the hotspots for speeding across the County, however were experiencing difficulties as data was not recorded consistently or in the same way by all. The Chief Executive further explained that he had spoken to the constabulary lead for Community Speed Watch and requested their support in accessing the more detailed information stored within the machines used to record speeds by the groups.

Questions were asked of the Chief Executive of the OPCC. In response the Chief Executive explained:

·         He would seek clarity from Hampshire Constabulary regarding the legality of using private dash cam footage.

·        The use of average speed cameras was still being considered, including seeking updated costs for instillation, however the key concern was the potential for increasing road deaths through drivers choosing alternative, more dangerous routes, to avoid average speed recording.  The OPCC are also continuing to liaise with Hampshire County Council, lobbying for a change in their policy for the installation of Speed Indicator Devices. 

·         The new Tableau system, developed by the OPCC, would be ready to go live in June. The system takes a ground-breaking approach to identify concerns by locality and will provide both county level and local data. The primary reason for its design was for use by Community Safety Partnerships, but it will also be made available to other strategic and community partners as well as options being considered for use by other appropriate organisations access on a commercial basis. The OPCC have committed to the ongoing analysis of data  ...  view the full minutes text for item 166.

To agree the outcomes and recommendations of the Panel’s review of ‘Cyber Fraud’.

The final draft of the outcomes and recommendations from the ‘Cyber Fraud’ proactive scrutiny was presented before the Panel, by the Police and Crime Plan working group.

Members agreed the outcomes and recommendations from the ‘Cyber Fraud’ proactive scrutiny. The Chairman explained that these would be sent to the Police and Crime Commissioner for Hampshire for response.

The Chairman further explained that the Panel’s letter of recommendation would be published on the Panel’s website and shared with those who provided evidence to the review.

To consider a report setting out the proposed proactive scrutiny work programme of the Panel.

This proactive scrutiny session will allow the Police and Crime Panel to scrutinise and support the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) in his intention to prevent and tackle hate crime across Hampshire and the Isle of Wight.

This scrutiny will consider how the PCC is listening to and engaging partners, community associations and members of the public across the two counties in efforts to enhance outcomes for victims and to encourage them to come forward to report their concerns. The review will also consider how effectively the PCC is holding the Chief Constable to account for policing strategy focussed upon tackling and preventing hate crime.

The scope for this session is attached as Appendix One. Written evidence has been received and is attached as Appendix Two.

The Panel will hear oral evidence from the below stakeholders:

a)    Age UK Isle of Wight

b)    Hampshire Constabulary

c)    KROMA

d)    Muslim Council of Southampton

e)    Police and Crime and Commissioner for Hampshire and the IOW

Members heard that this proactive scrutiny session would be focused on the topic of ‘Hate Crime’. A scope for this review (see Appendix One to Item Eight in the Minute Book) had been agreed by the Plan working group, who had written to stakeholders in the previous weeks to collate evidence (see Appendix Two to Item Eight in the Minute Book).

The key questions asked of witnesses were:

1)     Since the publication of the Police and Crime Plan in 2016, how successful do you feel the PCC has been in his pledge to address hate crime? What changes have you observed, since this time, in the approach to supporting victims and those vulnerable to hate crime within our communities?

2)     Are you aware of the current strategic approach to policing hate crime? Can you identify any areas where the policing provision, within Hampshire and the Isle of Wight, in response to hate crime could be improved?

3)       How effective do you feel the PCC and his office have been in engaging with partners to enhance the approach to preventing hate crime and to encourage greater community cohesion? What opportunities do you feel exist for greater engagement?

4)     What engagement is currently being undertaken with local residents and victim support groups to better understand their concerns regarding hate crime? How could the PCC support or improve the current approach?

5)     What do you think should be the priorities for action to address hate crime and enhance community cohesion within Hampshire and the Isle of Wight? What challenges exist which could prevent or delay these actions from being delivered?

6)     Are there any examples of successful approaches in tackling, and supporting victims of hate crimewhich you or your organisation are aware of, either within Hampshire and the Isle of Wight or in other areas?

7)     Is there anything further that you can provide to the Panel that will assist us with our proactive scrutiny of this topic?

It was heard that this proactive scrutiny session would allow the Panel to scrutinise and support the Commissioner, given his intention to prevent and tackle hate crime across Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. This scrutiny would consider how the Commissioner is listening to and engaging partners, community associations and members of the public across the two counties in efforts to enhance outcomes for victims and to encourage them to come forward to report their concerns. The review would also consider how effectively the Commissioner is holding the Chief Constable to account for policing strategy focussed upon tackling and preventing hate crime.

Noting a refreshed layout for the session, the Chairman invited Councillor Simon Bound, on behalf of the Panel and the Panel’s Plan Working Group, who take a lead for proactive scrutiny work, to act as facilitator for the session.

Councillor Bound explained that the oral evidence giving session would take the format of a witness expert panel, with all representatives present being given the opportunity to answer questions from the wider Panel.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 169.