Agenda and minutes

Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Police and Crime Panel
Wednesday, 28 March 2018 1.00 pm

Venue: Meeting Room G.01, Ground Floor, City Hall, 115 Charles Street, Leicester, LE1 1FZ

Contact: Euan Walters (Tel: 0116 3052583)  Email:

No. Item


A webcast of the meeting can be viewed at:



Minutes of the Confirmation Hearing held on 26 February 2018. pdf icon PDF 137 KB


The minutes of the meeting held on 26 February 2018 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.



Public Question Time.


There were no questions submitted.



To advise of any other items which the Chairman has decided to take as urgent elsewhere on the agenda.


There were no urgent items for consideration. However, the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) provided an update on the prosecution of a man for the attempted murder of a female of the muslim faith in the Beaumont Leys area of Leicester in September 2017. The man had subsequently been convicted and given a long prison sentence. The PCC emphasised that hate crime would always be taken seriously by himself and Leicestershire Police and he was proud to live in a diverse area such as Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland. The Chairman and other Panel Members supported the comments of the PCC in this regard and thanked the police officers involved in the case for their good work.



Declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda.


The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.


Cllr. M. Sood declared a personal interest in respect of all substantive items as a member of the Police’s Independent Advisory Panel, as a member of the Leicester Council of Faiths and a member of the Bishop’s Faith Forum.


Mr. K. Culverwell declared a personal interest in respect of all substantive items as he had two close relatives that worked for Leicestershire Police.


Ms. M. Lalani declared a personal interest in respect of all substantive items as she had a close relative that was a member of the Police Cadets.



Update on staffing at the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner.

An oral update will be provided by the OPCC Chief Executive Officer Mr. Paul Hindson.


Further to the report which the Panel considered at its meeting on 31 January 2018, and questions from Members which arose from that report, the OPCC Chief Executive Officer Paul Hindson provided an oral update on issues with recruitment and retention of staff at the OPCC. The information provided was as follows:


(i)        Paul Hindson acknowledged that in addition to recruitment difficulties with the posts of Chief Executive, Communications & Engagement Manager and Resources Manager there had been issues with other roles as well. As a result changes had been made to the Office structure and the nature of some roles had been amended to enable them to be filled more easily.


(ii)       The role of Policing Advisor was currently filled and the work was conducted one day a week dealing with specific projects such as an analysis on communication with stakeholders and the commissioning process.


(iii)      There were three current vacancies at the OPCC comprising of a Performance Manager, Project Development Officer and a Partnerships Officer and the deadline for applications to be submitted was imminent.


(iv)      One of the reasons for the appointment problems was the length of time the vetting procedure took.


(v)       The reasons for staff leaving the OPCC had been assessed and most were positive for example many staff had achieved roles at a higher grade with other organisations. In many cases working at the OPCC had given staff valuable experience which had enabled them to gain roles elsewhere.


(vi)      There was a core group of staff that had been working for the OPCC for several years including the Executive Director. The Commissioning Team and the Business Support Team were very stable.


(vii)    With regards to recruitment and retention at other OPCCs there was a mixed picture in the region. Nottinghamshire OPCC had very stable staffing whereas Northamptonshire OPCC had been more unstable and Derbyshire OPCC had similar staffing retention levels as Leicestershire.


(viii)   It was not believed that the location of the OPCC at Force Headquarters deterred people from applying for jobs there. In fact the amount of car parking and the close amenities such as Fosse Park shopping centre made it an attractive place to work.




That the contents of the oral update be noted.



HMICFRS Effectiveness report on Leicestershire Police. pdf icon PDF 122 KB

Additional documents:


The Police and Crime Panel considered the report of Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services entitled ‘PEEL: Police effectiveness 2017 – An inspection of Leicestershire Police’ published March 2018. A copy of the report, which was circulated in a supplementary agenda pack and marked ‘Agenda Item 6’, is filed with these minutes.


In presenting the report the PCC emphasised that Leicestershire Police had been rated as ‘Good’ in all areas that the force had been assessed against and no areas had been identified for improvement. However, it would be ensured that the Force did not become complacent and continuing improvements would be made. The PCC cautioned that in future this level of performance would always be expected with the level of funding that was available.



Arising from discussions the following points were noted:


(i)        Members commended Leicestershire Police for the positive report and hoped that it provided some reassurance to the general public and served as a motivating factor to police officers. The improvements around protecting vulnerable people were particularly welcomed.


(ii)       HMICFRS had received positive feedback from Leicestershire Police’s partners regarding the force’s response to persons with symptoms of mental ill-health.


(iii)      One of the few areas where HMICFRS had not been fully satisfied with Leicestershire Police was the arrest rate for domestic abuse cases. However, the PCC and Chief Constable submitted that arrest was not always the most appropriate course of action in these cases.


(iv)      With regard to crimes where the investigation had been completed but no suspect had been identified, Leicestershire Police was marginally higher than the average for England and Wales. The Chief Constable explained that the perpetrators of some crimes were not detectable and Leicestershire Police were now recording some types of incidents as crimes which they had not been doing previously hence the increase in recorded offences where no suspect had been identified.


(v)       With regard to crime outcomes, whilst 9% of crimes dealt with by Leicestershire Police were recorded as charged/summonsed, this figure did not include community remedies so the actual amount of crimes with a positive outcome was higher than 9%.


(vi)      In response to a question regarding how District Councils could provide greater assistance to the Police, it was explained that CCTV was of varying quality and some organisations had invested more funding in it than others. The Strategic Partnership Board was investigating what further actions could be taken with regard to CCTV. There was a need to improve the Force’s digital capability to enable CCTV to be downloaded more efficiently.


(vii)    As there were 23 vacancies for detectives in Leicestershire Police it was questioned whether the Force had problems with recruitment and retention. In response it was explained that some of these vacancies were due to retirement or officers moving to regional posts. It was acknowledged that there had not been as much recruitment over the past year as there could have been and the numbers required had been slightly underestimated. However, there were currently 34 officers training to become detectives and when that training was completed those officers would be posted to the most critical vacancies. Consideration was being given to whether to introduce direct-entry level detectives in Leicestershire Police as some people with the potential to become good detectives did not want to become ordinary police officers first.


(viii)   In response to a question regarding Anti-social Behaviour, it was explained that the National Crime Survey found that overall crime was decreasing although some offences such as burglary and vehicle crime were increasing. Reports of Anti-social behaviour had halved over the previous decade though  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.


Cybercrime. pdf icon PDF 452 KB

Additional documents:


The Police and Crime Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) which explained the Force’s approach to managing cybercrime. The Panel also received a presentation from DS Charles Edwards regarding the Leicestershire Digital Hub. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 7’, and the presentation slides are filed with these minutes.


The Chairman reminded Members that in the Police and Crime Plan the PCC had set the aim of improving understanding of this type of crime and raising awareness amongst local people.


The PCC offered to arrange a further session on cybercrime for elected members and particularly Community Safety Partnership Chairmen. The Chairman suggested that the Leicestershire Safer Communities Strategy Board would be a suitable forum for this presentation.




That the contents of the report and presentation be noted.


Mental Health. pdf icon PDF 391 KB


The Police and Crime Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) concerning progress in relation to dealing with persons encountered by the Force that present with symptoms of mental ill-health. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 8’, is filed with these minutes.




That the contents of the report be noted.


Special Interest Group for Police and Crime Panels. pdf icon PDF 320 KB


The Panel considered a report of the Secretariat which set out proposals for a Special Interest Group for Police and Crime Panels. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 9’, is filed with these minutes.


Members raised concerns that the purpose of the Special Interest Group was not known at this stage and that it could become a medium for discussions but with no positive outcomes. Concerns were also raised regarding which persons or organisations could become part of the Special Interest Group and reassurance was given that it was intended only for Police and Crime Panels and it would be one vote per Panel.


Members were of the view that they wished to see the Terms of Reference for the Special Interest Group before making a decision. It was noted that the Terms of Reference were to be agreed at a Steering Group meeting on 19 April 2018 therefore a decision by the Panel on joining the Special Interest Group should be delayed until after then.




That a further report regarding the proposed Special Interest Group, including the Terms of Reference, be brought to the meeting of the Panel on 8 June 2018 for a decision to be made on whether the Panel wishes to subscribe to membership.


Date of next meeting.

The next meeting of the Panel is scheduled to take place on 8 June 2018 at 1:00pm at County Hall, Glenfield.






It was noted that the next meeting of the Panel would be held on 8 June 2018 at 1:00pm at County Hall, Glenfield.