Question By

Subject

Mr Chris Boarland

Police and Crime Plan

1. Police and Crime Plan. Could the PCC please explain what public consultation has been undertaken in respect of the proposed revision to the plan. I was notified in August 2013 of the intention to review the plan, a process which started in September of last year - therefore time was surely not an issue. The OPCC website refers to consultation with partners, but there is no reference to public consultation on which so much store was (rightly) placed when the original plan was published. I can find no reference to the draft (revised) plan on the OPCC website. 

2. Could the panel please ask the PCC again whether he could instruct the Chief Constable to publish his delivery plan, this being the mechanism by which we determine how the police will deliver the Commissioner's Police & Crime plan. . Without this, and a meaningful performance measurement regime, the plan is just a document of laudable statements of the PCC's intentions.  

(This was raised by members at the last PCP meeting and may be answered through the minutes & actions, however these have not been made public yet. The panel should also be aware that the PCC wrote to me on this issue on 20th February 2014, stating that the publication of the Chief Constable's delivery plan was not a matter for the PCC, rather the police. I strongly disagree.)

Response from Mr Tony Hogg, the Police and Crime Commissioner:

I write in response to the questions you have put to the Police and Crime Panel ahead of its meeting on 2 April. The questions have been passed to me and I have been asked by the Panel to put my responses to you in writing.

Turning first to your question regarding consultation on the Plan. As you acknowledge, over recent months I have been reviewing the Police and Crime Plan. In particular I wanted to reflect on experiences during my first year in office and ensure that the Plan meets the needs of our communities and suitably addresses emerging threats and challenges.

This review, which commenced slightly later than originally intended in October 2013. The review drew heavily on the experience gained from my first year in office the feedback I have received throughout the past sixteen months. The Police and Crime Panel and the Chief Constable were kept abreast of developments as the review progressed.

The review found that a central foundation of the inaugural Police and Crime Plan ‘communities playing their part’ did not need significant change. Equally, it found that the core priorities (a community partnership approach to tackling crime and anti-social behaviour, victim focus, strong leadership, listening to the public and investment for the future) remained relevant. However, it became clear that the Plan needed a sharper focus to drive progress and that it needed to better distinguish between the respective roles of the OPCC and the police force.

As in the first Plan, I am committed to retain the close linkages to the Peninsula Strategic Assessment. The PSA is a good body of work, constructed by our partners and drawing on a wide range of evidence and data sources to set out the most pressing community safety issues faced in Devon and Cornwall.

Early in the New Year, we consulted our statutory partners and community groups on the revised Plan priorities. This was not a closed process but the decision was taken not to undertake additional targeted consultation with the public, for several reasons.

Firstly, the key priorities in the revised Police and Crime Plan did not significantly alter from those originally published. Although there has been substantial change to the length and detail in the Plan, largely it does not divert from the original intentions published. These were subject to public consultation when we developed the Plan and have received strong support from the public over the last twelve months. It was not considered a wise use of public money to consult the public again for their views on these specific priorities for a second time within twelve months.

Secondly, my consultation with the public on priorities for the area is a continual process. During the course of the year, my team and I have met with many members of the public, individually through public surgeries and in one-to-one meetings. We have also engaged extensively through community and neighbourhood groups, public open meetings and radio phone-ins. These provide me and my team the opportunity to hear first-hand the experiences and expectations of the public and any concerns they may have. I have regularly reported upon this diverse range of engagement to the Police and Crime Panel and via the OPCC website. This is an improvement upon what the Police Authority did.

Since November 2012, my office has engaged with approaching 3,500 people. This is in addition to 1,900 public surveys completed and 1,200 pieces of correspondence received. I have also participated in numerous television and radio interviews and discussions. The breadth of this engagement was commended by CoPaCC1 in the PCC and Public Engagement awards in March 2014. It has become evident from this wide engagement activity that the public wish to see local policing protected as far as possible with greater efforts to reduce bureaucracy and red tape. There are also calls for greater cross-agency working to sustain and improve services wherever possible.

Turning now to your second question. The Chief Constable’s Delivery Plan does not form part of the Police and Crime Plan and technically speaking there is no obligation for it to be published. However I am fully committed to openness and transparency and see this as a core part of the role of the PCC. I publish all PCC information. As you acknowledge, we have exchanged correspondence on the subject of the publication of the Chief Constable’s Delivery Plan before. When I wrote to you on this matter last month, I explained that the Chief Constable’s Delivery Plan was part of a wider delivery plan for the force and therefore its publication is a matter for the Chief Constable, not the PCC. I have asked the Chief Constable to consider this matter and the Chief Constable advises me that he will give this consideration and in the meantime he will be in contact with you.

I accept that the performance mechanisms we adopted in the first year did not provide sufficient opportunity for the public to monitor progress and hold me to account. However, it is important that we move on.

For 2014 we have developed a more mature approach to performance monitoring. We will be establishing a series of delivery boards aligned to each of the priorities in the Police and Crime Plan. These will be jointly managed by the OPCC and the force and report directly to me and the Chief Constable. We will publish high level delivery plans for these boards and will provide regular progress updates on the OPCC website as well as reporting formally to the Police and Crime Panel regularly.

I hope that you will agree this is a big step forward in the continued drive for more meaningful openness and accountability.

Thank you for your continued interest and constructive challenge to the work of the OPCC.