In Full: The Two Resignations of Independent Police and Crime Panel Members

Police and Crime Commissioner
Sue Mountstevens

Did you know that there is a Police and Crime Commissioner, elected by the people of "Avon" and Somerset? Most people did not vote for Sue Mountstevens, but she is the current PCC. She is not standing in the May 2021 PCC elections.

There is a Police and Crime Panel that is supposed to hold the PCC to account.

Currently it is ALL party politicians as councillors. ALL except for one Independent Panel member, the Chair Richard Brown, who we understand has recently recovered from Covid-19.

There are no Independent councillors, despite there being many Independent councillors in Somerset and "Avon".

We think there is definitely a lack of "independence" and "independents" about the Police and Crime Panel that is supposed to hold to account the supposedly "independent" PCC Sue Mountstevens.

There are supposed to be four Independent Panel members. But there is only one.

The other three have not been filled.

According to the Somerset County Council officer who administers the Panel, one of them resigned in 2020 due to work commitments.

This role has not been filled.

The other two Panel members were Joseph Mullis and Andrew Sharman.

They resigned in protest.

We have gained their permission to publish their resignations in full.

There are PCC elections in May 2021. They are still going ahead, despite the Pandemic.

Their resignations are in full, below. Please note that their resignations are the views of the authors of the resignations and not those of Somerset Independents.

We believe that publishing these resignations is in the public interest, particularly as there is a PCC election in May 2021.

We would be interested to hear from any Police and Crime Panel members, as to their views.

And most importantly, we would like to hear from members of the public about their views about the the role of the PCC and the PCC elections.

Resignation from Police and Crime Panel by Joseph Mullis,  December 2020

"Dear Chair,

As I am entering my 5th year as an Independent Member of the Police and Crime Panel, it has become more and more of a soul searching exercise and as such, I am starting to question my own conscience and integrity and my whole purpose as a Panel Member or actually the purpose of the Panel as a whole.

In short, during the past 2 years I have been somewhat disillusioned by the spiral of decline in the delivery of key functions of the PCC. I have come to the view that honesty, transparency, due diligence and fair process are recurring themes not exercised in her duties. This has factored in to the lack of confidence I have in the PCC and as such does not sit well with me in my continued role as a Panel Member.

It is for these reasons that I, after careful consideration, have taken the decision to resign from the Avon & Somerset Police and Crime Panel with immediate effect.

I am thankful for all the challenges and opportunities whilst having a seat at the table and have met some very dedicated people. I will always value my time spent as a member of the Panel. It is my hope that any UK wide Home Office review in the function of the PCC will evaluate concerns and in doing so can be a vehicle for change.

All that leaves me to say is that I wish you and Panel Members a very happy Christmas and Happy New Year, with the very best for the future.

Kind Regards,

Joseph Mullis"

 

Resignation from Police and Crime Panel by Andrew Sharman, December 2020

" Dear Chair,

 Seven years ago this month I was appointed to the Police & Crime Panel as an independent member.

 At that time, I truly believed in the importance of the role that a Police & Crime Commissioner holds in ensuring local delivery on behalf of residents from the police.

 I also naively believed in our own PCC’s pledge to “keep politics out of policing” and “to be a voice for those without one”.

 I understood our function was to hold the PCC to account on behalf of our residents and I have undertaken that role diligently over my time.

 The past year, for a number of reasons, has been incredibly tough on us all but the recent proceedings of the panel has left me questioning whether such idealistic notions of openness and transparency that I held ever existed or whether we were participating all along in a charade to give the pretence of governance.

 I previously likened the panel to a dental appointment as you turn up once every few months, go through the process and then duly leave it all behind you until the next one. Numerous recommendations in our reports have never been responded to and some really questionable conduct left without nothing more than a letter stating an alternative view from the panel.

 This year two key issues have brought home to me how completely dysfunctional and ineffective a Police & Crime Panel is.

 The performance on Tuesday concerning the fraud issue to me was utterly ridiculous.

 There should never have been a vote of that nature while the IOPC is considering a number of serious allegations against the PCC and her deputy.

 Everyone who supported the PCC will be left exposed should it come out that there was indeed any form of misconduct - given the efforts undertaken to thwart the extraordinary general meeting before the subsequent IOPC referral, the Panel should never have proceeded with this until the IOPC had returned their findings.

 Again key questions were missed or misinformation was provided by the PCC that went unchecked.

 She said BBRS would be dealing with such complaints. Anyone who has looked into it will know that they offer only a civil remedy and not a criminal investigation, so why is the PCC making a false claim about it’s function?

 I still harbour grave concerns around the Thames Valley Police review. I (like so many) laboured under the illusion that this was a full investigation not a limited review via a paper sift.

 We should have received a full report other than a verbal response of receiving “a clean bill of health” from the PCC and her now Deputy (CEO at the time) as that to me was completely misleading to the panel and the wider community.

 I am also gravely concerned that John Smith was involved with the review and the scoping of it. Given the serious allegations made against him by victims, it shows a grave error in judgement for the PCC to have him anywhere near the review.

 It fuels the perception that there is some of interference from the OPCC in what should have been a purely operational matter.

 This is why I could not support the vote you put forward.

 I felt it was wholly inappropriate in the circumstances but also key issues remain unresolved in my conscience. Therefore I am not convinced that the PCC has properly fulfilled her responsibilities in respect of this issue.

 The callous disregard demonstrated to those who have had their lives ruined by fraud has shown me that the “voice of the voiceless” only applies to those the PCC favours and not all, that is not what my expectations of that election pledge was and I’m personally disappointed at the way these victims have been treated by the system that is supposed to be there to protect them.

 The second issue that I am personally struggling with is the whole process around the deputy and his appointment.

 A wide number of issues have, in my view, remained unresolved or not dealt with as robustly as they could have been.

 No PCC should be leaning on their Chief Constable to support a political appointment, especially when they are a declared candidate.

 The issue around undue influence on a democratic process as the election I have struggled to reconcile and the absence of the responses from the PARO on their guidance on this matter troubles me.

 The other declared candidates are disadvantaged as the Deputy is accessing all manner of briefings, meetings, and beyond which gives them an undeniable advantage in the coming election.

 So much for keeping “politics out of policing”, another broken election pledge!

 Balancing my principles within the limitations of the Panel has over this year become increasingly difficult.

 Being the permanent voice of concern has led to me being marginalised and,as previously raised with you and the Monitoring Officer, it is clear that there is a small clique actively working against me.

 Even staff associated to the panel have been briefing against me with fellow Panel members and I’m not prepared to sit quietly by whilst efforts to undermine my position continue.

 I have always stood up for what is ethically right for my conscience and whilst I recognise that this is uncomfortable for those in a position of responsibility, it was that very trait that led to me being appointed.

 It has become nigh on impossible for me to continue given the animosity displayed to me by a few including the PCC herself.

 Despite an electoral commitment to “openness and transparency”, the moment she is held to account over her conduct she has adopted quite a confrontational attitude towards me and it has been noted by others.

 With all these factors in mind, the difficulty in delivering effective scrutiny in this circumstances is only going to increase and as a consequence of these issues, I am resigning from the Police & Crime Panel with immediate effect.

 I have given seven years and during the past year it has been apparent that the warnings and concerns shared with the PCC and Panel are not being heeded and I have significantly more productive work that I can be getting on with.

 The hours given to our work this year with all that has been going on has been draining, so for the good of myself and my family I need to move on.

 I will sign off with one further point.

 The work we do is far more important than I believe many of my colleagues realise.

 Community confidence in policing is essential and stronger scrutiny is needed to assure residents that all is above board with the PCC.

 Knowing all that I have witnessed this year, I believe we are falling well short of that and it must be addressed.

 Hopefully, the Home Office review will provide greater powers and responsibilities because the current set up is failing our community.

 My personal view is that I have lost all confidence in our local police governance and particularly in our own PCC and her deputy.

 They have prioritised succession over the community and we have been exploited to become a key enabler of their personal desire and not what is best for our residents.

 I can not be associated with that and it does a great disservice to her office and the constabulary to have the circus she has created damaging public confidence and faith in our local policing.

 I would urge them both to consider their positions because their conduct has brought the OPCC and Avon & Somerset into disrepute.

 This is not what the exceptional team at the OPCC and our brave and professional police family deserves.

 They should be able to go about their business of keeping our communities safe with the calamity being inflicted on their collective reputations by the PCC and her Deputy.

 I hope that if there’s any integrity or credibility remaining within them, they will step down to allow a fresh start for all.

 That would be the biggest act of public service they have provided this year.

 If not, I hope that their duplicitous and manipulative conduct is remembered at the ballot boxes.

 All that remains is to thank you and colleagues (past and present) for your time over the years and I wish all well for their future endeavours - on the plus side, this will be the last time you have to read one of my essays!

 Yours sincerely,
 Andrew Sharman"