Agenda and minutes

Members are reminded that, in accordance with governance procedure rule at Part 3 paragraph 2.6, Panel Members, or their constituent authority, may nominate substitute members of the Panel in the event that the appointed representative(s) is/are unable to attend the meeting.  Advance notice of substitution should be given to the host authority wherever possible.  Members are encouraged wherever possible to secure the attendance of a substitute if they are unable to be present.

No apologies were received.

Members are reminded of their responsibility to declare any disclosable pecuniary or non-pecuniary interest which they have in any item of business on the agenda no later than when the item is reached.

No declarations of interest were made.

To receive questions from members of the public. A total period of 15 minutes will be allocated for members of the public to speak at Panel meetings. Each member of the public shall be limited to a period of up to 5 minutes speaking. At the Chair’s discretion the period made available for questions and statements may be extended.

In order that an appropriate answer to the questions can be given, the deadline for indicating a wish to speak or for submission of questions is 3 clear working days before a meeting of the Panel. The Chair has the discretion to waive the 3-day rule for issues deemed to be urgent.

In response to questions or statements the Panel may choose to agree to either provide an agreed verbal response, that will be minuted or to provide a written reply to a questioners chosen address.

Those wishing to ask a question or make a statement should register by email to: martin.r.smith@cheshireeast.gov.ukor send the question or statement by post to:

Cheshire Police and Crime Panel

Democratic Services and Governance

c/o Municipal Buildings

Earle Street

Crewe

CW1 2BJ

A list of those speaking or asking questions at a meeting of the Panel will be drawn up by the Panel’s Secretariat in order of receipt. Copies of questions and statements will be circulated to all Panel members in advance of the meeting and will be made available to the public attending the meeting. Copies will also be available on the Police and Crime Panel’s page of the Cheshire East Council website.

Nobody may submit more than one question or make more than one statement at the same meeting, but a supplementary question, related to the subject raised in the question /statement, will be permitted for clarification at the discretion of the Chair.

Those speaking or asking questions will not be permitted to address any issue that is the subject of a current or proposed complaint by them against the Police and Crime Commissioner. They are also advised that reference to an issue that could become the subject of a future complaint by them could prejudice the Panel’s consideration of that complaint.

The Panel will not accept a question or statement if:

There is insufficient detail to enable a proper response to be provided.

It is not about a matter for which the Police and Crime Panel has responsibility.

It is potentially defamatory, frivolous or offensive against named individuals.

It is substantially the same question which has been put at a meeting of the Police and Crime Panel in the last six months.

It requires the disclosure of confidential or exempt information.

There were no public speakers.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 5 February 2021.

Councillor Norman Plumpton Walsh noted a minor typographical error in relation to the dates of two future meetings; the dates of meetings were confirmed as being:

Friday 11^th June 2021 (Annual Meeting)

Friday 17^th September 2021

Friday 26^th November 2021

Friday 4^th February 2022

Friday 29^th April 2022

Councillor Lynn Riley noted that she was yet to receive a response to her question relating to Covid -19 testing in custody suites; the Panel’s Secretariat were asked to follow this up with the Commissioner’s Office. Councillor Paul Findlow noted that he too was awaiting a response to his question on the number of Detectives serving in Cheshire Constabulary.

The Chair noted that it had not been possible, at what was relatively short notice, to arrange speakers on the issue of Police and Crime Commissioners assuming responsibility for the governance of the Fire and Rescue Service. He did note that an announcement on this issue was expected shortly from the Home Secretary.

RESOLVED:

That with the minor amendment noted above, the minutes be approved.

Mr Evan Morris noted that along with the Chair of the National Association of Police, Fire and Crime Panels he had met privately with members of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee to discuss issues related to the Emergency Communications Network.

The Chair thanked the Task and Finish Group chaired by Mrs Sally Hardwick for the work that they had undertaken developing a draft Memorandum of Understanding, that would following the elections in May, be shared with the newly elected Police and Crime Commissioner.

To receive, note and inform any future scrutiny or work programme item.

Cllr Lynn Riley enquired if an online version of the performance dashboard was available. The Panel’s Secretariat were asked to follow this up with the Commissioner’s Office.

To consider the work programme.

The Panel’s future work programme was noted. Cllr Lynn Riley noted that many members of the Panel would appreciate hybrid meetings, where individuals, could if they wish, attend meetings virtually.

The Chair welcomed the Commissioner to the meeting.

Members of the Police and Crime Panel questioned the Commissioner on a wide range of issues, including:

Mr Bob Fousert:

·         Asked the Commissioner if it had been premature to have announced the name of his chosen candidate for Chief Constable before the Panel had conducted its Confirmation Hearing. The Commissioner indicated that he had been delighted to have been able to announce the name of his chosen candidate. He noted that he had followed the national rules to the letter, having taken relevant advice from both his Monitoring Officer and the College of Policing.  He welcomed the Panel’s statutory role in the process.

·         Queried the amount of time taken at the Commissioner’s Scrutiny Board meetings addressing issued related to fox hunting, when other issues such as burglary and rural crime, which some would see as more important, appeared to receive less attention. The Commissioner indicated that the issue of policing fox hunting was seen by many as being very important and had received a lot of attention nationally over recent years. He reaffirmed his commitment to addressing such things as rural crime, giving the Panel a number of examples of initiatives he had introduced that had helped combat the issue.

Cllr Lynn Riley:

·         With reference to the performance data that had been included with the Panel’s papers, asked whether it would be possible to add a caveat to some of the data, outlining that the data applied to a time when the country was subject to lockdown. In response, the Commissioner noted that data had to be recorded in a consistent manner, and that it would be wrong to assume that the impact of Covid -19 on such things as crime and anti-social behaviour had been consistent over the last twelve months.

·         Referring to information on expenditure on serious and organised crime contained in the scrutiny reports that had been included with the Panel’s papers, asked why it had taken so long for equipment to be procured and other purchases to be made. She also sought reassurance from the Commissioner that the Chief Constable had reconfirmed plans to combat serious and organised crime, recognising the opportunities afforded to criminals by a protracted period of Coronavirus.

In response the Commissioner noted that the reports referred to were Constabulary reports and that the Panel had no role in holding the Chief Constable or Constabulary to account. He also noted that the specific information referred to by Cllr Riley only painted a partial picture of the overall work of the Constabulary in combatting serious and organised crime, and that plans for any given year always took time to deliver.

·         Asked for clarification about the income received from speed cameras and also how the Commissioner would hold the Chief Constable to account to ensure that the new average speed cameras had the maximum impact on reducing the number of people killed or seriously injured on the roads. She also asked what other innovations the Commissioner was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.