Agenda item

RESOLVED that: the Panel notes the report.

The PFCC presented the report, highlighting the following points:

·         Significant work had been done on the force’s performance and efficiency and he now wanted to see this reflected in the outcomes it achieved.

·         The work of the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACES) Team was now complemented by four specialist Domestic Abuse Support Officers, who supported people involved in incidents classified as low level.

·         He had provided additional resources to enhance the force’s response to people with mental health needs.

·         He supported the force to increase its focus on neighbourhood policing and was proud of the increased number of officers now working in this area. New liveried vehicles that had been introduced would also help to increase the force’s visibility in the community.

·         A further successful bid had been made to the national Safer Streets fund.

·         The Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) camera network in Northamptonshire had been doubled in size and had resulted in 340 recent arrests.

·         The report included information from the PFCC’s Performance Framework giving an assessment of progress on some of the priority areas in the Police & Crime Plan.

The Panel considered the report and members made the following points during the course of discussion:

·         Concern was raised that there was still not sufficient visible policing in the county: St George ward in Northampton and Kingswood ward in Corby were given as examples. It was argued that a dedicated Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) in St George was needed to provide a visible police presence and help to address anti-social behaviour.

·         The aim of increasing neighbourhood policing should not involve officers just going out in police cars, which could cause them to miss out on local intelligence.

·         Feedback obtained from young people at a youth club in Corby was that they were reluctant to speak to detached youth workers as they were not known locally and were suspected of being undercover police officers. The PFCC should consider making more use of voluntary youth workers already in the area: employing them could build on existing working relationships.

·         County lines crime occurred across the county and it should be apparent what was happening in cases when a young person went away for some time and then reappeared with new clothes or a new phone. Further information was sought as to whether the force had a specific team for county lines who local elected representatives could work with on this matter.

·         People taking action in the community against county lines needed to be confident that statutory organisations were also playing their part.

·         Written information had been circulated to residents in Northampton about neighbourhood police officers and PCSOs.

·         The Accountability Board meeting in February 2021 had discussed the need to deliver policing differently in some areas of the county to address issues such as knife crime. However, knife crime was an issue that could not be dealt with solely by the force but needed a joined up approach by relevant organisations.

·         Organisations working with young people needed to reach out to them in the right way, including making use of technology, establish a relationship based on trust, and engage them in a conversation in order to address an issue like county lines crime.

·         There was a role for parents in countering issues such as drug related crime to support work done by the police and other relevant organisations such as schools.

·         Concern was raised that Northamptonshire was an outlier in relation to childhood sexual offences, although the complexity of this issue was also recognised.

·         The additional £240,000 allocated by the PFCC to substance misuse treatment and recovery services in the current year was welcome but further information was sought about how the outcomes produced by this funding were measured. 

·         Further information was sought about the implications for Northamptonshire of the government’s new Beating Crime Plan.

·         The PFCC was questioned about whether a recent victim satisfaction survey involved a sufficiently large number of people to be representative.

·         Concern was raised that modern slavery was increasing in Northamptonshire and further information was sought about how robustly the force was responding to cases and additional action that might be taken to address a negative trend.

·         The PFCC was questioned about what action could be taken to clear the backlog of court cases affecting Northamptonshire.

The PFCC made the following additional points during the course of discussion:

·         Enhancing visible policing in Northamptonshire was still a work in progress.
The force had been set a target for the percentage of officers’ time spent outside of a police station and had not yet achieved this. The PFCC would continue to hold the Chief Constable to account on this matter and residents’ perceptions could help to inform the PFCC’s view of performance.

·         Police officers should get into the local community when outside the station: as an example, consideration was being given to officers using scooters.
At the same time, the way in which location monitoring was used should respect officers’ intelligence and ability to manage their work effectively.

·         The scheme to make homes on the Hemmingwell estate in Wellingborough supported by Safer Streets funding would cover all types of homes, including those in private ownership.

·         He intended to recruit additional youth workers provided that the necessary funding could be confirmed. His aim was to have a youth team attached to each neighbourhood policing team in the county. This would involve an increase from 11 to 18 youth workers.

·         Councillors should contact their local neighbourhood policing team about an issue such as county lines crime.

·         Issues related to drugs could not be addressed with enforcement alone. Relevant organisations needed to adopt a joined up approach and he challenged councillors to play their part in achieving this. There was also a responsibility on the wider community to recognise that using drugs contributed to county lines drug dealing that could endanger young people.

·         The force was now a stronger organisation than it was a year ago but its ability to deal with particular challenges still needed to be seen in the context of the demands on its overall capacity. In the last year the force had received 310,000 calls and had attended 190,000 incidents, with a strength of 1,400 officers.

·         The Youth Team had conducted a survey that had identified young people’s top three priorities relating to community safety in Northamptonshire were improving their surroundings, limiting drugs and getting rid of gangs and associated violence. This was an example of engaging young people in work on community safety.

·         Substance to Solution had been commissioned to deliver a range of out of court disposals for low level offenders involved in substance misuse, using £240,000 funding from the OPFCC and the local authority treatment budget. He was not entirely satisfied with the outcomes delivered by this work and needed to provide challenge back on this together with the local authorities.

·         He had been involved in the development of the Beating Crime Plan and his Police & Crime Plan already reflected key elements of it.

·         The force’s current clear up rate was over 12 per cent, although this needed to be contextualised appropriately. The overall crime rate in Northamptonshire had increased by 3 per cent but the number of victims of crime had decreased by 3,500 for the same period. This situation gave the PFCC confidence that the force’s direction of travel was right and that there was a good understanding of the detail behind headline performance figures. As PFCC he had taken care not to set arbitrary targets that could produce unhelpful outcomes.

·         The sample size for the recent victim satisfaction survey had been statistically relevant. The OPFCC could not compel people to reply and a lower response rate suggested satisfaction rather than dissatisfaction with services.

·         He was challenging the Chief Constable to ensure that the force responded effectively to modern slavery. The PFCC had been questioned by some when he had included this in his Police & Crime Plan as a focus area. It was a difficult issues to address but more was now being done in Northamptonshire than in the past.

·         Northamptonshire had made significant progress in addressing the backlog of court cases. In August 2019 it had been in 41^st position nationally in relation to the number of magistrates court cases waiting to be heard. It had since improved to sixth position and had been first for the last quarter. Good work had been done on areas such as the quality of case files. This had resulted in Northamptonshire being in first position nationally in the last quarter for the number of guilty pleas made in magistrates courts at the first hearing stage. He had supported this improvement work as Chair of the Local Criminal Justice Board. However, pressures on court capacity was a national issue and he encouraged councillors to continue to highlight it to the local MPs. 

The Director for Early Intervention provided additional information in response to points raised by members during the course of discussion as follows:

·         The youth workers funded by the OPFCC were intended to complement other provision in the county not to duplicate it. They needed to be used as effectively as possible as 11-18 youth workers was not a large number for the whole county. It was also recognised that young people would go to different places for different needs. There would be open recruitment to the new posts, although applicants would be required to work across all parts of the county.

·         There was not a single organisation that was solely responsible for addressing county lines, given that it could involve issues such as safeguarding in relation to young people who went missing as well as policing.

RESOLVED that: the Panel notes the report.