Minutes

Minutes of the Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee meeting of the Metropolitan Police Authority held in AG23, Romney House, Westminster on Tuesday 10 October 2000.

Present

Members

Richard Sumray (Chair)
Elizabeth Howlett (Deputy Chair)
Anthony Arbour
Reshard Auladin
Roger Evans
Lynne Featherstone
R David Muir
Richard Barnes (ex-officio)

MPA staff:

Colin Balkman (Deputy Treasurer), John Douglas (CCTA Consultant) and Ian Gaskell (Deputy Clerk)

MPS staff:

Ian Blair (Deputy Commissioner), A Hayman (Commander, Professional Standards), C Kitching (Corporate Performance Analysis Unit) and Barbara Riddell (Director of Corporate Development)

In addition approximately 10 members of the press/public and other MPA/MPS staff were present.

Part 1

12. Apologies

(Agenda item 1) Apologies were received from Roger Evans, R David Muir (Members) and Peter Edwards (Clerk).

13. Minutes (Part 1): 29 August 2000

(Agenda item 2)

The minutes of the last meeting were agreed

Resolved:
the minutes of the Authority meeting held on 29 August 2000 be agreed and signed as a correct record.

14. Drugs performance

(This item was dealt with after item 8)
(Agenda item 3)

A paper was introduced, which stated that the MPS’s three-year plan was to reduce drug related offending by enforcement, intervention and education. This was part of a national ten-year strategy 'tackling drugs to build a better Britain’'. It mentioned the success of Operation Crackdown and the ‘Rat on a Rat’ campaign, which would be re-launched in January 2000.

Resolved:

1. an informal briefing paper be circulated to Members on Operation Crackdown; and
2. the contents of the report be noted.

15. Population figures

(Agenda item 4)

At the last Committee meeting, during a discussion on Stop and Search activity, it was noted that the 1991 Census Data was no longer considered a reliable source for defining population proportionality. A report was presented which explained the basis, and limitations, of population figures currently used by the MPS and described the effect of the use of alternative figures, such as those of the Labour Force Survey and London Research Centre.

It was noted that an under estimation of London’s population affected the policing budget, which was additionally effected in that it received no funding for London’s transient commuter population.

Resolved:

1. the MPS work further with MPA officers, LRC, GLA and Mayor’s office to find out what studies of the ethnic makeup of the Metropolitan area have been made and whether any of them might be considered of sufficient standing to provide the basis of some future proportionality figures;
2. the MPS circulate an informal report on the limitations of the Stop and Search database;
3. the MPS report back on an analysis of age and gender of those stopped;
4. the MPS report back on its discussions with Home Office over London’s non-resident population; and
5. the issues raised in relation to population figures and Stop and Search activity, particularly the inconsistencies between studies, be taken up with the Chair of the Consultation, Diversity and Outreach (CDO) Committee.

16. Customer satisfaction surveys

(Agenda item 5)

A report was presented on the MPS’s Customer Satisfaction Surveys, which showed satisfaction to be dropping. The Deputy Commissioner suggested that one reason was the change from a four to five point scale of responses in telephone and paper based surveys. This change was made to comply with Home Office and ACPO recommendations. Another reason could be the shortage of officers, leaving remaining officers with insufficient time to deal well with the public.

The Deputy Clerk felt that the adequacy of the Surveys and options for improvement should form part of the consultation strategy and be picked up by the CDO Committee.

A Member queried the self-selective way by which counter surveys were distributed. Members felt the Surveys should not form a national Performance Indicator, and the necessity for collecting meaningful data only should be conveyed to the Home Office.

Resolved:

1. the MPS reports to this Committee when the next quarter’s (July-Sept) Customer Satisfaction Survey results are available;
2. the MPS further research the likely link between performance, resources and satisfaction;
3. the MPS and MPA consider the results reported here when setting targets for 2001/02; and
4. the MPA ascertain if the Best Value Review of the Consultation Project had assessed Customer Satisfaction Surveys in its strategy.

17. Revised table of indicator ownership

(Agenda item 6)

A revised appendix to the report was circulated at the meeting. If this Committee were happy with the proposals, they would go to the Chair’s Co-ordination and Urgency Committee for approval.

The Deputy Commissioner felt the proposals in this report and report at item 7, were too broad, and presented the Members, the MPS and MPA with an impossible workload. He felt the Authority should concentrate on key issues, and see only exception reports. Most Members supported this view. It was decided that a paper would be presented at the next Committee suggesting what the MPA’s priority areas for monitoring performance should be.

Resolved:

1. the revised appendix be circulated with the minutes (see Appendix 1);
2. each indicator should be presented to this committee, even though another committee should take the lead;
3. a meeting of MPS and MPA officers be held to review MPA priorities for Performance Management Reports, and a draft programme, based on priorities, be put to Committee at its next meeting;
4. the MPA review Appendix 1 and the MPS Performance Report against reports submitted to the MPS Performance Review Committee, and following a meeting between MPA and MPS, report on the differences to the next meeting of this Committee;
5. dependent on above review, a table of indicators to be forwarded to the next Coordination and Urgency Committee; and
6. members provide the MPA with their view on the report and priorities by 18 October.

Secretary’s note:
The exact sequence for the presentation of the quarterly report to the Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee and Full Authority has not been made clear. The Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee would normally occur only two days before the Full Authority, and in three out of the next six months, it will take place after the Full Authority. It is intended that the quarterly report will be put to the Full Authority one month after it is put to the Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee.

18. Draft response to consultation on best value performance indicators 2001/2002

(Agenda item 7)

The Deputy Clerk circulated to members a memo (see Appendix 2 to the minutes) that clarified the report circulated. It was agreed that the MPS and MPA should present a joint response to ACPO and the APA.

Resolved:

1. the MPA’s note complementing the report to be circulated with minutes;
2. a joint response be made by the MPA and MPS (Members and MPS officers should forward any comment on the report to the MPA by 18 October 2000), the final response being agreed by the Committee’s Chair and Deputy; and
3. the MPS and MPA plan a programme of work to agree the rationale for BVPIs, to be completed in time for consultation process next year.

19. MPS performance report – August 2000

(Agenda item 8)

Members considered a report, which accompanied a table of Performance Indicators. The Deputy Commissioner pointed out that there were inconsistencies between this table, and those considered by the MPS’s Information Management Board and Performance Review Committee. The Deputy Clerk stated that this had not been the intention when establishing arrangements for the MPA and was surprised that this was what was happening. The differences would be assessed.

Cath Kitching was thanked for the improved appendix. She stated that the 'smiles' and 'frowns' were based on what was anticipated in the future not past performance.

The Chair asked about factors affecting crime trends in August. The Deputy Commissioner stated that disposals for street crime were improving, partly because of Operation Strongbox.

A member asked that Members receive statistics on a borough basis, which pertained to their geographically linked area; the Chair stated the requirement for this would be looked at before the next meeting.

Resolved:

1. the contents of report be noted
2. the Chair and MPA officers receive copies of information received by, and minutes of, the MPS’s Information Management Board and Performance Review Committee, to enable differences with the current report to be assessed and reported on to the next meeting;
3. borough based performance information be assessed with a view to making it available to Members, and a report be made to the next PSPM.

20. Professional standards

22. Member involvement in the management vetting and service confidence procedure.

(Agenda item 9)

The MPS led the world in dealing with corruption amongst its officers, and those who seek to corrupt them. The report covered two aspects of the work. It was agreed that the Chair, Deputy and the MPS should meet to discuss how the MPA could maintain an overview of the process.

Resolved:

1. the Committee note the Management Vetting and Service Confidence procedures being introduced by the MPS;
2. members of the PSPM Committee maintain an overall view of the process (rather than become directly involved); and
3. MPA officers arrange a meeting between the Chair and Deputy of the Committee and the MPS to agree protocols.

21. Links with MPS complaints and discipline

(Agenda item 10)

The Deputy Commissioner stated that Members had a statutory requirement to review cases, but before this could happen, he would like Members to visit the Complaints Investigation Bureau (CIB) and be made aware of the workings of the complaints and discipline system.

Resolved:

1. that visits to CIB by members be arranged as soon as possible;
2. initial arrangements for monitoring by Members be agreed by MPA/MPS officers, and suitable dates to be put in diaries as soon as possible, and options for the longer term to be put to Members at the next Committee meeting.

22. Cabinet Office learning labs

(Agenda item 11)

A report was presented to the meeting that informed Members about a plan to form a Learning Lab:

• to review the process arising from public complaints against the police;
• to identify and make recommendations on how to provide better service delivery to complainants and police officers subject to complaints; and
• to consult with customers in relation to those recommendations and implement those recommendations following consultation.

Resolved:

1. the Committee note the proposal for a Police Complaints Learning Lab;
2. the Chair (with Deputy, as deputy) be nominated to the management steering board of the Police Complaints Learning Lab;
3. the Chair of the Police Complaints Authority (PCA) be invited to make a presentation to the Committee.

23. Exclusion of press and public

(Agenda item 12)

A resolution was put to exclude the press and public from the meeting during the item 'Minutes Part 2: 29 August 2000', as it was likely to disclose exempt information as described in Schedule 12a of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) relating to:

Information relating to a particular employee, former employee or applicant to become an employee of, or a particular office holder, former office holder or applicant to become an office holder, under the authority.

Resolved:
that the press and public be excluded from the meeting during the agenda item 13 because it discloses or is likely to disclose exempt information as described in paragraph 1of schedule 12A of the said Act as indicated.

Summary of exempt item

24. Minutes (Part 2): 29 August 2000

(Agenda item 13)

Members received the exempt minutes of the meeting held on 29 August 2000.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback