Corporate Performance Delivery and Scrutiny Board – 28 July 2015

Meeting overview

This meeting looked at how the police are progressing with Police and Crime Plan – Priority threeFocus on prevention and early intervention.

The objectives of this priority are:

  • focus on children and young people,
  • tackle drugs and alcohol, and
  • improve engagement and education (eg road safety).

These objectives focus on proactive activities to prevent crime, create safer communities and reduce demand on the service.

Agenda

Corporate Performance Agenda 28 July 2015

Papers

Minutes of previous meeting – will be published when approved

Watch again

Questions from the public


Question about police visibility from: Steve Pearse, Malton

With the continuing policy of providing value for money in all public sectors it is good to see that so far North Yorkshire Police does not appear to have reduced officer numbers, however despite this bucking of the National trend it does not seem to have made any difference in Police visibility.
Can I ask The Chief Constable and The Police Crime Commissioner for their views on the culture of of Police Officers still having a commitment to high visibility foot patrols to both reassure the public that there still is a Police presence out there on the street and also provide a deterrent or preventative measure when in rural areas crime has a greater impact in terms of personal trauma?

 


Question about productivity from: Paul Abbott, address not known

 

On 22nd June “You mention Productivity”.  How does NYP Quantify such data.
What method does NYP employ to  measure and interpret  Quality of Service and Credibility within those parameters.


Question about police overtime costs from: Bernadette Brown, Scarborough

This question was not answered during the meeting because this topic was not covered on the agenda.

Question:
Could you please tell me how much it costs in overtime to police the Seamer Horse Fair ?

Answer:
Overtime identified  as relating to this year’s Seamer Horse Fair was £3,915 in total of which £3,619 related to Police Officers and £296 to support staff which would include PCSOs. We have captured this information from a Duties Change report by searching for the word Seamer so all overtime paid should have been captured unless the officer didn’t specify it was for the Seamer Horse Fair.


Question about liquor licence at Richmond School:

This question was not answered during the meeting because this topic was not covered on the agenda.
Question:
In light of your main agenda topics and the police crackdown on drink and drug driving do you think it is wise to allow the Richmond School a liquor  variation licence to cover 24 hours per day 365 days per year so that liquor can be sold from the middle of the school premises?

Answer:
Thank you for your enquiry. We understand that the Richmondshire District Council licencing committee are meeting on the 20th August to consider this application. North Yorkshire Police would not seek to influence that decision.  In the meantime, the Commissioner has written to Richmond School to ask what plans are in place to ensure any potential impact on the wider community is minimised, should the application be approved, and will pass any response onto the individual who raised the question directly.


Question about dog walkers and the law from: Sue Fell, address not known

This question was not answered during the meeting because this topic was not covered on the agenda.

Question:
An extension of Q3 re. ‘community & safety’. Looking at the ‘community’ as a mix of ‘dog owners’ & ‘none dog owners’.
The community have to share fairly all ‘Public Spaces’ – parks, footpaths, bridleways etc. I see signs in parks (requesting dogs to be kept on leads) totally ignored by the owner !
The ‘Countryside Code’ tells owners to keep dogs on leads in the countryside.
Therefore ………..how the police can introduce a LAW to force dog walkers (owners etc. ) to keep dogs on a lead in all Public Places.

Answer:
Thank you for your enquiry. As you may know, It is Councils rather than the police who are responsible for enforcing restrictions relating to dogs in public places. They can restrict what dogs can do in a public space, ban dogs from an area or require them to be on leads. This is known as a “Public Spaces Protection Order” (PSPO). Councils can use a PSPO to place restrictions on a public area, such as a park or a town centre. Restrictions can apply to either all dog owners or owners who meet specific conditions set out by the council. PSPO restrictions include:

  • limiting how many dogs can be walked by an owner at one time
  • requiring dogs to be on a lead in a specific public area
  • requiring owners to pick up their dog’s litter
  • preventing dogs from being in a certain place, eg a children’s play area in a park

A PSPO lasts up to 3 years and can be renewed.
If you have a particular area which you are concerned about please contact your local council and enquire as to the restrictions/enforcements they have placed in the area. However, it is a criminal offence of allowing any dog (i.e. of any breed or type) to be dangerously out of control in a public place or a place to where it is not allowed. Generally it would be the police that would instigate proceedings in this instance, and we would ensourage you to report any dogs dangerously out of control via 999 or 101 as appropriate.