Report on the sub-committees of the Strategic and Operational Policing Committee

Report: 11
Date: 14 October 2010
By: Chief Executive

Summary

This report contains a summary of reports received by the sub-committees of the Strategic and Operational Policing Committee.

A. Recommendation

That

1. Members receive this report.

B. Supporting information

1. At each meeting of the Strategic and Operational Policing Committee Members will receive a report on its sub-committees instead of the minutes. Part 1 minutes will be available on the website, and exempt part 2 minutes are available to Members only, upon request.

2. This report covers the following meetings:

• Olympic and Paralympic Sub-committee on 8 July 2010 (paragraph 3).
• Professional Standards Cases Sub-committee on 29 July 2010 (paragraph 4).

Olympic and Paralympic Sub-committee on 8 July 2010

3. Members present: Dee Doocey (Chair), Jennette Arnold, Chris Boothman, Toby Harris, and Victoria Borwick.

Addendum paper: Community relations

At its last meeting the Sub-committee gave in gave ‘in principle’ approval to Option 5 of the Community Relations business case, subject to the Chair being satisfied (under delegated authority) with additional information to be provided within an addendum paper.

The addendum paper was noted.

Business case: Operational Control Infrastructure (Forward command posts)

A Forward Command Post (FCP) enables ground commanders to coordinate with event management teams and other emergency services in order to ensure a smooth response to emerging operational issues. The Operational Control Infrastructure team hopes to have such a presence wherever LOCOG are present (which is in 30 locations throughout the country).

The recommendations of the MPS were agreed.

Business case: Policing CCTV

The business case seeks to ensure there is effective and proportionate CCTV policing capability in the vicinity of Olympics venues providing police commanders with the ability to view CCTV images as part of their policing responsibilities to secure the Games.

That the recommendations of the MPS be agreed.

Professional Standards Cases Sub-committee on 29 July 2010

4. Members present: Tony Arbour, Reshard Auladin, James Cleverly, Chris Boothman, Valerie Brasse and Joanne McCartney.

Dip sampling

Members advised that the dip sampling carried out by the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) must add value to the complaints process by providing a second tier quality assurance check on the robustness of and compliance with the protocols within the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). As such it was considered by some Members that Members had to be aware before undertaking its own dip sampling of existing quality assurance protocols currently in place within MPS as well as how the learning from the cases was disseminated throughout the MPS.

The Sub-committee accepted that not all aspects of the cases could be reviewed such as the appropriateness of the language used unless verbatim records have been kept. Dip sampling would review compliance with the process. It would not overturn outcome decisions with regard to cases that have been formally closed.

Revised statutory guidance from the independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) an update

Helen Sargeant introduced the report that provided an update on the requirements of the revised Statutory Guidance on the police Complaints system issued by the independent police complaints commission (IPCC) on April 2010 and advised of the work in progress with regard to the implementation of the revised Statutory Guidance.

The Sub-committee was advised that the Strategic and Operational Policing Committee would receive the headline statistics on a regular basis. The Sub-committee will conduct the detailed scrutiny through a dip sampling process. It was recognised that the MPS’s Directorate of Professional Standards had to be represented at the meetings.

Summary of exempt items

1. Dip sampling exempt sample files.
2. Police Pensions Regulations 1987 – Application for a Certificate of Forfeiture.
3. Police Pensions Regulations 1987 – Application for Forfeiture.
4. Senior Officer Corporate Charge Card Use Issues.
5. MPA Professional Standards Unit Update.
6. Minutes of the meeting held 19 November, 7 December 2009, 28 January, 8 February, 28 June 2010 and 19 April 2010

Minutes

5. Copies of non-exempt reports and minutes from the Authority and its committees can be viewed on the MPA website at www.map.gov.uk, or obtained from MPA Committee Services team:

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equalities Impact

1. There are no race and diversity impact issues directly arising from this report. Race and diversity impact is a standing item on reports submitted to committees and Sub-committees.

Met Forward Implications

2. There are no implications directly arising from this report.

Financial Implications

3. There are no implications directly arising from this report.

Legal Implications

4. There are no implications directly arising from this report.

Environmental Implications

5. There are no implications directly arising from this report.

Risk Implications

6. There are no implications directly arising from this report.

 D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

Report author: Thomas Foot, MPA

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback