The meeting will commence with a presentation by the Chief Constable.

 

Any questions by Panel Members that have been submitted in advance of the meeting will then be considered and answered.

Chief Constable John Campbell QPM gave a presentation to the Panel.

 

The presentation highlighted the following points:

 

·         Thames Valley Police (TVP) had benefitted from an increase in precept of £8.4 million.

·         The key areas of investment were local policing, investigations and contact management.

·         The changes in local policing included the LPA model being restructured and an increase in Patrol numbers. Arrests had increased by 13% and stop and search had increased by 58%.

·         Force Crime was discussed in great detail including the New Investigative Structure, the virtual crime academy, additional investigative training for staff, recruitment of digital technicians to increase efficiency in accessing digital evidence and the technology being improved.

·         The average time to answer 101 calls was discussed. This had decreased in comparison to last year to 100 seconds. The average time to answer 999 calls was 7.7 seconds.

·         Online reporting was discussed and this had significantly increased compared to last year.

·         The Chief Constable informed the Panel that the Court of Appeal would be considering the leniency of the sentences in the case of PC Andrew Harper.

·         TVP was committed to tackling racism through policing, working closely with the communities by building trust and confidence to help keep people safe. TVP had dealt with 145 Public Order events between 3 June 2020 and 30 August 2020.

·         Operation Venetic was discussed. This was targeted serious and organised crime across the Thames Valley. Over £300,000 in cash was seized, multiple kilos of Class A and Class B drugs were taken off the streets. Imitation firearms were also recovered and this all resulted in 20 arrests.

·         The stabbing in Forbury Gardens, Reading was highlighted and that the suspect had been charged with three counts of murder and three counts of attempted murder. This event had received significant impact locally.

·         The Panel were informed about Operation RESTORE – TVP’s Covid Response.

·         The number of assaults to officers had increased by 24% on the previous year.

·         Officer uplift had been launched, TVP recruitment had opened between 1^st and 4^th June for police officers

·         LPA operations were discussed.

·         The Priority Outcomes 2020/21 were highlighted.

 

Between Chief Constable John Campbell and Local Policing Commander Mick Greenwood answered all the questions that had been submitted before the meeting as below:

 

Question 1: The crime concerns of villagers are at two levels – anti social behaviour by youths and scams upon the elderly.  Is this borne out by statistics?  How well equipped are the Police to deal with changes in crime patterns?

 

Answer: Anti-social behaviour, scams and fraud on the elderly were down by 2% compared to the same time last year. TVP was still utilising the ASB protection motion, protection notices and community protection notices to evoke criminal behaviour. With respect to fraud, this had a massive impact and the elderly and vulnerable were targeted the most. There had been 173 fraud referrals in the last seven months.

 

Question 2: There are pockets of residents who are surrounded by crime and ASB, more likely in the deprived areas. Neighbours can be very hostile to each other which engenders anxiety and fear. Residents do not want to be named or be too precise on locations for fear of reprisals. Currently I inform the social housing provider and the Community Wardens. What more can be done to make the lives of the “upstanding residents” more bearable?

 

Answer: This was not more likely in deprived areas, it was more pertinent in open spaces. TVP were working closely with the Community Wardens to reduce numbers. Residents could remain anonymous if they were to call in and report a crime and the confidentiality of the caller was kept.

 

Question 3: Windsor Town has seen an upsurge in drug dealing, fighting, public urination, ASB, sometimes spilling over into local residential streets.   What more can be done to prevent this?

 

Answer: TVP recognises the issues. TVP were working towards this and the joint working was working well. The Goswell Hill area was being looked at specifically before the night-time economy returned again.

 

Question 4: Our PM says that mask wearing is supposed to be compulsory and will be enforced. We have been told by our new local Police team that they will discuss and encourage.  Local evidence makes it clear that people make up their own mind as to whether this applies to them or not. Shopkeepers don't challenge as they don’t want to lose business and there is virtually no police presence in the village to "discuss and encourage". How can this issue be dealt with to protect everyone?

 

Answer: It was the role of the shopkeeper to encourage and explain to customers to wear face coverings. If the police were called, they would continue to encourage usage of face masks but would enforce if required for non-compliancy.

 

Question 5: We have received, and passed on to the police, information about bike thefts and sales of drugs by a 16 year old (in the two villages of Horton and Wraysbury) who appears to be working for a couple of older men.  He had involved other young adults in delivering drugs and in handling stolen goods (hiding a stolen bike for him), but they are too scared to talk to the police for fear of the recriminations from the lad.  With virtually no police presence in the village this can only get worse, and more and more children will get dragged in.  How do you propose dealing with this issue in Horton and Wraysbury, and quite probably in many other villages in the Thames Valley area?

 

Answer: TVP were aware of this and had intervened and the action was underway around individual.

 

Question 6: Locally there had been a high incidence of bike thefts, catalytic converter thefts, use of CO2 vials.  What more can be done to prevent these?

 

Answer: TVP were working on bike thefts, particularly around Maidenhead railway station. There was work currently being carried out.

 

Question 7: What proportion of the current workforce split by PC and PCSO, admin etc represented the BAME community? Taking the recent recruitment drive what proportion of new staff represent the BAME community?

 

Answer: Recruitment was being encouraged more recently but there was definitely more to do to have a better visible representation. In RBWM, 13% of the workforce were from the BAME community in the local force.

 

Question 8: Do you feel that PCSO’s are having to undertake social work and is this right?  If not, what can be done about it?

 

Answer: PCSO’s were not undertaking social work but their main responsibility was to problem solve and engage with the community with less enforcement powers.

 

Question 9: Has there been a negative impact on the number of PCSO’s as I assume they would have applied, and probably be fast tracked, for PC roles?

 

Answer: There had not been a negative impact as anyone who had had another career before and was older would remain in the job as a community warden for longer. Many PCSO’s had applied for the new police positions in the uplift.

 

Question 10: Anticipating a significant rise in unemployment over the coming months/years especially youth unemployment what additional steps are you intending to take to minimise the chances of the youth joining the crime scene?

 

Answer: This was always an issue for the force, not just youth crime but all crime so the trends were monitored closely.

 

Question 11: What was the policy on deployment of officers to rural versus urban areas?

 

Answer: Neighbourhood teams were segregated into geographical areas. Officers were dedicated to an area and they were dedicated to respond and patrol that area.

 

Question 12: Do Neighbourhood Watch schemes reduce crime or just push it on elsewhere?

 

Answer: Neighbourhood Watch schemes were great at raising awareness, they could also raise fear of crimes to some residents but TVP always recommended people to join the scheme.

 

Question 13: What clear message could we give residents to reduce crime and the fear of crime?

 

Answer: A lot of what had been already discussed in the questions and in the presentation.

 

Question 14: What permanent changes do you foresee as the result of COVID?

 

Answer: There were not many changes in the force but internally, the ways of working had changed very much and this may have an impact on the estate as more staff were now working from home.

 

Question 15: Was the high housing cost in the TV negatively impacting on recruitment and, if so, was there a way to overcome this?

 

Answer: TVP paid an allowance as cost of living was very high in the area. However, many good people were still applying, showing that the cost of living was not impacting people applying for jobs in the Thames Valley area.

 

Question 16: Has the 101 response time improved? There were residents who informed us that they had given up using this service.

 

Answer: Answered in detail in the presentation.

 

Question 17: Not all dog owners could control their pets which had resulted in the death/savaging of other residents’ pets. Was there a role for the police in taking action?  If not, what would you suggest residents do?

 

Answer: There was robust legislation for dangerous dogs. This was treated as violent crime and this was treated as priority.

 

Question 18: Eton Town Council very much appreciated the ongoing work done by our local police team in dealing with anti-social behaviour on the Brocas during the challenging times of the pandemic. We did however have another recurring issue in our High Street with cyclists using footways and/or travelling the wrong way down our one-way High Street and fear that this presented a serious danger to residents. Could the Chief Constable assure us that when possible, resources would be devoted to regular monitoring and enforcement as they have been in the past to such good effect?

 

Answer: The local Community Wardens could now issue fixed penalty notices to cyclists on pavements. The borough were working through the changes.

 

Question 19: Bray Parish Council have this year had a number of similar Traveller incursions onto the same piece of parish council land. In the eyes of the parish council and the residents these incursions look similar but appear to be being dealt with differently by the police. What are the criteria for immediate police action please? Was there a set of rules applicable to such incursions, or was the decision up to the senior officer at the time? On each occasion Bray Parish Council informed their bailiffs and incurred mobilisation charges. If we (BPC) knew that the police would action immediate removal, we could save public money by not employing bailiffs unnecessarily.  We would like to know the police’s intentions as soon as possible, so, if necessary, we could employ bailiffs without delay. We have a policy of not allowing travellers to stay longer than necessary on BPC land. Even an overnight stay can, and often does, lead to rubbish being left on site.  The rubbish left after the most recent incident included human waste and it cost BPC a considerable amount of money to have it removed in a safe (Covid 19) manner.

 

Answer: TVP do have the power to remove traveller incursions in certain situations, however, they have to meet certain criteria. Each one is looked at in its own merit. The primary responsibility lied with the land owner in the first instance.

 

Question 20: What is your target for answering 101 calls, as from recent personal experience you can wait for up to 19 Minutes to get an answer to report non-emergency ‘crime in action’. The message warned of a 10 minutes delay (is that acceptable?) Is this operational failure due to under resourcing of the 101 system and how can you reassure us that performance will improve.

 

Answer: Answered in detail in the presentation.

 

Question 21: What could we do as Councillors to assist the local police e.g in my ward of Boyn Hill, Maidenhead West we have had a recent spate of anti-social behaviour and within the borough and U.K-wide there has been an issue with illegal use of nitrogen oxide.

 

Answer: The possession or taking of nitrogen oxide was not illegal, the supply of it was the problem. It was unfortunately easy to get hold of. Education and diversion was required. The situation had been made worse by Covid-19.

 

Question 22: In the current climate due to COVID-19 pandemic how had the police adapted their policing and resources to reflect the ever changing challenges in these unprecedented times. 

 

Answer: Answered in detail in the presentation.

 

Question 23: Were there ways we could help the Police with local community engagement or policing recruitment.

 

Answer: Neighbourhood Action Groups were not working very well currently. These were being looked into to improve.

 

Question 24: How did you plan to adapt your operations following the recent reduction in Community Wardens? Was it your understanding that your officers would cover the shortfall to avoid an increase in antisocial behaviour?

 

Answer: Answered in detail in the presentation.

 

Question 25: This year, some councillors and community wardens had noted a sharp rise in drugs/alcohol-related littering, particularly nitrogen oxide canisters. Have your officers observed a similar rise and if so, what do you think is driving it? Could it be linked to lockdown and mental health issues?

 

Answer: Answered in detail in the presentation.

 

Question 26: If not already covered in the presentation, could you give us a brief update on the Drugs Diversion Scheme pilot scheme?

 

Answer: This is a scheme which is similar to the speed awareness course. Users were given an option to divert to a resilience course whilst being interviewed under caution. If they did not attend the course then they were given a formal sanction. There had been a good uptake for the course with more than 100 people attending the course. The feedback had been very good.

 

Councillor Del Campo asked if the call answering times figures reflected all dropped calls before being answered. John Campbell responded that abandoned calls had gone down and were heading in the right direction. The performance figures were also heading in right direction overall. The burglary figures had only gone up slightly since everyone was first at home. It was 30% less in the Thames Valley area and 3% down in this area.

 

Councillor Greg Jones asked for further clarification on anti-social cycling and what Community Wardens could actually do. David Scott informed the Panel that High Streets were treated as highways and therefore the Community Wardens had no powers. The devolved powers were for antisocial behaviour on the pavements and the extended delegation was still to be resolved for delegation to Community Wardens.

 

Anthony Stansfeld spoke to the Panel and informed them that the performance had been very good across TVP. Currently the night-time economy was non-existence as people were staying at home, hence crime was down but going forward it would increase. Most staff at TVP were working from home and the property assets were being looked at. TVP had had an uplift and extra officers were being recruited so were up on numbers again.

 

Thames Valley Police had been rated as the best force for the detection of crime but still not rated outstanding and this was because it was not measured on outcome of crime, it was an odd way of marking us.

 

Anthony Stansfeld held many other roles on a national level. The current worry was about council precept figures. This was the figure charged to the local authorities which was in-turn the council tax rates for residents. Up until three years ago this was capped at 2% but then it was increased. The first two years were only covering what was down. The last year, a little extra had been made. Anthony was supposed to retire last year but as a result of Covid-19 has remained in post till May 2021.

 

The Chairman thanked all for attending, the presentation, the overview and most importantly answering all the questions that had been raised prior to the meeting and at the meeting.