Agenda item

Guide time: 3.00 – 3.15pm

RESOLVED that:

a)     The Panel notes the report.

b)     The Panel requests that the Police, Fire & Crime Commissioner continues to update the Panel in future on progress with performance improvement by Northamptonshire Police.

The PFCC presented the report, highlighting the following points:

·         The recent visit by the Prime Minister to Northamptonshire represented further recognition at national level of innovative work being done in the county. The PFCC also took the opportunity provided by all ministerial visits to highlight historical underfunding of the force and NFRS. 

·         The OPFCC had secured over £2m funding from the Home Office in the last 18 months for Safer Streets activity.

·         The Knife Angel would be on display in Northamptonshire in the next month.

·         He proposed to present a combined Delivery Update report to the Panel in future to reflect the move to a Police, Fire & Crime Plan.

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

·         Concern was raised about the continuing backlog of court cases. Reassurance was sought that the PFCC was highlighting this issue at national government level.

·         Concern was raised that 134 families who had been the subject of a police Public Protection Notice (PPN) could not be contacted due to incorrect contact information being recorded.

·         The PFCC was challenged whether the higher number of PPNs issued in Northampton compared to other parts of the county reflected that it had a larger population, rather than demonstrating more successful early intervention activity.

·         The PFCC was questioned as to how the effectiveness of the Safer Nights Out (SNO) van project was quantified.

·         The PFCC was challenged as to how significant resources being put into safety for women and girls, including in relation to the night-time economy, would help to protect a woman in a club experiencing inappropriate behaviour.

·         There were examples of good practice regarding women’s safety in venues in Northampton, such as The Roadmender.

·         It was questioned whether the force was able to deploy female officers to respond to an incident involving violence towards a woman, given that a victim may not be comfortable or able to deal with a male officer in the immediate aftermath. 

The PFCC made the following additional points during the course of discussion in response to points raised by members:

·         He and his counterparts had made representations to the Prime Minister concerning the backlog in the courts. Their case had seemed to be well received, but the PFCC remained concerned about this issue.

·         He had looked at the use of PPNs and had identified the need to improve recording of contact information, which was why this was highlighted in the report.

·         The higher number of PPNs issued in Northampton should in part reflect a more effective neighbourhood policing offer and greater consideration being given in the county to the best way of responding to different issues.

·         The SNOvan was still in the trial phase, although North Northamptonshire Council had already asked for one to be deployed in the authority. The PFCC would make an informed assessment of the project and could share this with the Panel. It was difficult to demonstrate that a negative outcome would have occurred in the absence of action taken. Against this, the SNOvan had a relatively modest cost.   

·         Work on safety for women and girls including training for staff at night-time venues on intervening in situations where someone was behaving inappropriately.
The ‘It Only Takes One’ campaign involved measures including encouraging men to speak about attitudes towards women and call out harassing behaviour. Undercover officers were also deployed in the night-time economy.

·         The local authorities in Northamptonshire were responsible for the local trials of
e-scooters. He suspected that they would become part of normal life but it would be necessary to ensure that they were used safely. The force engaged with Voi Technology on issues connected with e-scooters, particularly the risk of
fatal accidents.

·         The force considered the most appropriate response to make to an incident as far as possible. A female officer would be deployed if available in cases involving violence towards women, but the force would not hold back from deploying a male officer to respond otherwise. It was always possible to do more on this issue.

·         He sought assurance using both internal and external information about how effectively the force responded to female victims of crime. The Professional Standards Department helped to support effectiveness in this regard both by addressing bad practice by individual officers and ensuring that cases where it was found that officers had acted correctly were resolved promptly.

[Councillors Carr, Pritchard and Smith left the meeting during the preceding discussion].

A Panel member subsequently challenged the PFCC about the overall effectiveness of Northamptonshire Police compared to other forces, in light of the number of ‘requires improvement’ ratings given by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services in the last PEEL assessment of the force. The PFCC was challenged about whether ‘good’ ratings would be achieved in the next PEEL assessment to provide real evidence of improvement. 

The PFCC made the following points:

·         The point that had been made was not based on a complete view of the force’s current position. The latest PEEL assessment stated that the force had made significant improvements. It was no longer close to being in the equivalent of special measures and was performing better than in the past. Comparisons with higher rated forces also needed to take into account when they were funded better than Northamptonshire.    

·         He was not satisfied with the force’s current position and held the Chief Constable to account robustly for its performance and development. This was informed by awareness of good practice in other areas as well as support from the College of Policing. There would need to be significant action if the PFCC did not see ‘good’ ratings in the next PEEL assessment.

·         He had consistently said that the force was on an improvement journey and the Panel needed to take a fully contextualised view of its current position. He also thought that the latest PEEL assessment did not reflect some improvements that had already been made. The force was not where it needed to be but was moving in the right direction. The PFCC needed to provide the right environment to support improvement: continually criticising the force’s senior leadership would not represent an effective approach.  

A Panel member commented that ‘requires improvement’ ratings meant that the force was in a better position than in the past. All wanted it to achieve outstanding performance and the challenge was to move towards this with the appropriate level of urgency. Panel members emphasised that the Panel should be kept in touch with continuing progress in this regard.

RESOLVED that:

a)     The Panel notes the report.

b)     The Panel requests that the Police, Fire & Crime Commissioner continues to update the Panel in future on progress with performance improvement by Northamptonshire Police.