Agenda item

The Chair introduced this item, noting that there had been a discussion at a previous Board meeting about members’ relationships with their local police forces and an apparent decline in neighbourhood policing. 

Rachel Phelps, LGA Adviser, outlined the contents of the report and thanked members who had sent information from their areas to help inform this work. Rachel noted that HMIC had recently recommended that the College of Policing (CoP) put together updated guidance on neighbourhood policing and engagement. The CoP was seeking the LGA and others’ views on these guidelines and the toolkit published alongside it. Rachel asked for members’ views on the documents, and on suggesting next steps for LGA work on neighbourhood policing.

The following comments were made:

·         Members felt that while the document provided a good basis as an aspirational document, it could be strengthened and improved. It was not clear who the guidelines were aimed at or how they would be implemented.

·         The issue of funding and resources was discussed in some depth, with several members feeling the guidelines did not reflect what is happening on the ground. It was suggested that budget cuts had led to a decline in neighbourhood policing and a reduction in the level of engagement between the police, the public and local authorities. Members noted that a number of guidelines in the document would have associated costs but they were concerned by the lack of information about where this money would come from and how additional engagement activities would impact existing funding.

·         Members noted that the introduction of PCSOs was largely welcomed but numbers had since been reduced and it seemed that police officers were reluctant to spend time tackling what was considered low-level crime, such as antisocial behaviour, graffiti and petty crime. It was suggested that the police were focused on tackling crime hotspots and so were less able to engage with communities on a wider or longer term basis. However, it was also noted that the report recognises that policing is changing, and councils need to forge a new relationship with the police based on prevention.

·         Members discussed public perception of the police and were clear that better communication (with the public and key partners) was key to ensuring the public felt protected. In some areas, meetings with the local Police and Crime Commissioner were available via a webcast. Members suggested that this, alongside better communication using the internet and social media would be welcomed by the public. Members suggested that the police needed to be seen to be active in their communities and reactive to people’s concerns, and that neighbourhood policing should be modernised to reflect how policing in the 21st century has changed

·         It was suggested that the guidance needed a clearer focus on how policing differs between rural and urban areas. Members felt that a one size fits all approach would not work.

·         In terms of next steps, it was noted that if the LGA were to survey community safety teams, they may have closed relationships with the police than local councillors, so it was suggested that surveying councillors directly could provide a clearer picture. It was also suggested that the survey from the review of CSPs in 2017 could also be reviewed for information.

·         The Chair thanked the Board for their comments. It was agreed that the LGA would respond to the consultation via a meeting with the College. Following that, the Chair should meet with the APCC.

Decision

Members noted the report.

Action

1.    Officers to consider members’ comments and arrange to respond to the College of Policing’s consultation.

2.    Officers and lead members to discuss how to obtain as many views as possible on neighbourhood policing via a survey at the SSC Lead Members’ meeting being held in February.