Cllr Gareth Kitchen - Green Party

After a gap of about five years I recently attended a Police Powers Scrutiny Panel and was struck by how much the process has improved since I was last there.

The panel is now far more representative of our community, bringing diverse voices to the table to examine police body-worn camera footage. It is encouraging to see a genuine effort to engage citizens in the oversight of policing powers.

However, I feel that this progress in representation stands in stark contrast to a worrying regression in the data that feeds the panel.

The 'community complaints trigger', the automatic mechanism that once ensured community oversight and continuous improvement, has long gone. Now, complaints are largely kept within the constabulary's internal systems, with a very slim chance of ever reaching their scrutiny panel.

The result is that the panel, however well-composed, is left to review only a tiny fraction of stops and 'use of force' via dip samples. On complaints, the panel is blind.

I've also been very concerned, for some time, about the Constabulary's use of strip search. I raised it at the last Gloucestershire Police & Crime Panel and although I asked for a 'considered response' my request didn't make it into the draft minutes; the PCC chose to answer a different question.

This structural gap is not just anecdotal. It has now been illuminated by the latest Home Office data for Gloucestershire, year ending March 2026, which reveals deep-seated issues that our current scrutiny model is ill-equipped to catch:

• Accountability Gaps: In the realm of strip searches, the data is more than alarming. Of the 38 full strip searches conducted, one involved a child, yet it is recorded as “not known” whether an appropriate adult was present. Furthermore, for 97% of these searches, the location was “not known”, and supervisor consultation was “not known” for all of them.
• Disproportionate Impact: Black people were stopped and searched six times more often than white people relative to their share of the local population.
• Low Yield: For most searches (57%), the reason was drugs, yet 60% of all searches resulted in no further action, with only 18% leading to an arrest.
• Use of Force Disparity: Black people were involved in use of force reports 7.8 times more often than white people relative to population proportions.

These statistics suggest that the problems here in Gloucestershire are not merely about the outcomes of individual searches, but also about the systemic recording and oversight of the encounters themselves. If a force cannot reliably record the location of a strip search or confirm the presence of an appropriate adult for a child, how can a Scrutiny Panel effectively review the conduct? A strip search of a child where it is 'not known' whether an appropriate adult was present is not a data quality issue. I consider this a serious safeguarding failure.

I've reviewed the minutes produced by the Police Powers Scrutiny Panel and these have improved immeasurably, however it was clear from conversations that there is no staff capacity to adapt them for release into the public domain. I have not been able to find published minutes since March 2024; I'm told this is due to budget cuts. If I'm wrong, I'd welcome correction. HMICFRS noticed similar in the latest PEEL inspection saying that “publishing this more often should help to build public trust and confidence”.

The improved composition and working of the Police Powers Scrutiny Panel is good news for local democracy. However, the Terms of Reference for the panel remains elusive, I've asked for sight of it but it's not been forthcoming. Personally, I think that document should be signed off by the Gloucestershire Police & Crime Scrutiny Panel. But without transparent data and a mechanism to surface complaints that bypass internal filters, the Constabulary's own panel risks becoming a forum that reviews a minute selection of events rather than the reality of policing on our streets.

Trust and legitimacy are built on the assurance that misconduct and procedural failings will be detected and addressed. By allowing critical data fields to remain blank and removing the automatic triggers for community review, we are eroding that trust.

We must ensure that the Police Powers Scrutiny Panel has the tools and the data it needs to hold the constabulary to account, rather than watching from the sidelines as the feedback loop remains broken. I am asking the OPCC to assist in getting the Police Powers Scrutiny Panel's Terms of Reference and summaries of their minutes into the public domain.