Question

I wish to request, under the Freedom of Information Act (2000), the following from your Constabulary, Commissioner, or Panel:

1) a copy of the Constabulary’s policy or procedure for the verification of the legitimate possession and use of prescribed medical cannabis/cannabis-based prescription medicine (CBPM);

2) if the Constabulary does not have a local policy regarding this, could you please confirm that the Home Office guidance is adhered to by the Constabulary – namely that someone claiming the legitimate possession and use of medical cannabis will be expected to produce: the original medication container complete with the pharmacy dispensing label bearing the name of the patient; with either a copy of their FP10 prescription or a letter from the prescribing clinician; and a form of recognised photo ID (such as a passport, driving licence, or a PASS accredited photocard) bearing the same name as displayed on the dispensing label and the copy of the FP10 or clinician’s letter;

3) if your Constabulary does not have a policy relating to this, could you please provide the Constabulary’s policy regarding compliance with the PSED (Public Sector Equality Duty), especially with regards to the avoidance of discrimination against disabled people for the legitimate possession and use of a prescribed medication;

4) a copy of any internal briefing documents provided to police officers regarding the existence of – and the process for the verification of – prescribed medical cannabis flower or other CBPM’s following the Home Office Circular 2018: ‘Rescheduling of cannabis-based products for medicinal use in humans’ and The Misuse of Drugs (Amendments) (Cannabis and Licence Fees) (England, Wales and Scotland) Regulations 2018 which allowed the prescribing of medical cannabis (CBPM);

5) the named lead for the Constabulary for matters pertaining to the verification of medical cannabis (CBPM);

6) the Constabulary’s policy or position relating to the recognition of unaccredited card schemes such as Cancard or MedCannID, if such a policy exists.

The above information will be invaluable to patients in receipt of medical cannabis and will ensure a wider understanding and subsequent compliance with the expectations of your Constabulary. It is clearly in the public interest to ensure that  medical cannabis patients are aware of local policies and procedures and can comply accordingly, so that finite police resources are not spent on the avoidable and potentially unlawful arrest of patients in receipt of legitimately prescribed medical cannabis medication (CBPM’s).

Answer

I am writing to advise you that, following a search of our paper and electronic records, I have established that the information you requested is not held by the Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner.

It is important to understand that The Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner (OPFCC) and Northamptonshire Police are two separate legal entities. Information regarding operational policing matters is the responsibility of Northamptonshire Police, therefore the OPFCC does not hold any of the information you have requested. Northamptonshire Police’s Information Unit may hold some of the information you are seeking. If you have not already done so, then you may wish to write to their Freedom of Information and Data Protection Team, Information Unit, Force Headquarters, Wootton Hall, Northampton, NN4 0JQ / freedomofinformation@northants.pnn.police.uk

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to: Nicci Marzec, Monitoring Officer, Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner, East House, Force Headquarters, Wootton Hall, Northampton, NN4 0JQ.

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications. If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.

Question

Please provide information concerning any dissatisfaction, complaint or concerns regarding the use of Twitter by Chief Constable Adderley and the outcome of any such concerns raised.

Answer

I am writing to advise you that, following a search of our paper and electronic records, I have established that the information you requested is held by the Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner.

• On the 12/08/2020, a complaint was received by the OPFCC in relation to a link the Chief Constable posted about an article published by the Northampton Chronicle and Echo about crime reduction at the McDonald’s in Northampton town centre. The article stated that crime is down 40%. The Complainant replied to the Chief Constable stating that this crime reduction may be down to lockdown restrictions. The Chief Constable replied advising that this reduction took place between August 2019 and March 2020. This led to a number of comments from other Twitter users, some of which were retweeted by the Chief Constable. One included the use of the acronym FFS. This complaint was not recorded but service recovered by the OPFCC, and it was explained that feedback would be given to the Chief Constable in relation to use of appropriate language.

• On the 09/06/2020 a complainant contacted the OPFCC to complain that the Chief Constable had blocked him on twitter. The OPFCC adjudged this was appropriate and did not give any feedback to the Chief Constable. The Complainant appealed to the IOPC which was not upheld.

• On the 26/01/2020 the OPFCC received a complaint in relation to a tweet to the Chief Constable. The post contained criminal allegations which the Chief Constable replied to. The OPFCC found that there was no data breach but that that Twitter was not an appropriate forum for such comments and feedback would be given.

• On the 29/10/2019 the OPFCC received a complaint in regarding a twitter comment in relation to the Harry Dunn case. The complaint was not formally recorded as the complainant was not eligible to complain. The Commissioner released the below statement saying feedback had been given. “I know that Northamptonshire Police has throughout sought to investigate Harry Dunn’s death thoroughly and fairly so that the family can find the justice they seek. I am sorry that this tweet has distracted from the important work taking place to resolve this tragic situation. I am grateful that it was brought to my attention and I have spoken to the chief constable about the need for all force communication – on this and all other issues – to remain professional and sensitive at all times.”

• On the 04/02/2019 the OPFCC received a complaint alleging that that the Chief Constable failed to act upon crime reported to him directly. The complaint was locally resolved by the OPFCC with a recommendation to the Commissioner that the Chief Constable consider including details of how to report crime on his twitter page. This has been adopted on the Force Twitter page and reads: “Do not use Twitter to report emergencies/incidents. Call 101 or use our online forms for non-emergencies and enquiries – use 999 in an emergency only.”

• On the 17/01/2021 the OPFCC received a complaint relating to comments made by the Chief Constable on twitter relating to the Harry Dunn Case. The complaint was recorded and the OPFCC concluded that action taken by the Chief Constable by removing the tweet in question and issuing an apology was reasonable and proportionate and therefore no further action would be taken.

• On the 18/03/2021 the OPFCC received a complaint that Chief Constable had engaged in a disagreement with him on twitter, publicly embarrassing him. The OPFCC declined to record a complaint, concluding that the complainant was not eligible to complain as they were not adversely affected by the comments which were considered to be entirely appropriate.

• On the 08/06/2021 the OPFCC received a complaint that the Chief Constable had made inappropriate comments about the retirement of another Officer on twitter. Whilst the complainant was not eligible to complain as they were not adversely affected, the PFCC did speak to the Chief Constable and as a result the comment in question was removed.

If you are dissatisfied with the handling of your request, you have the right to ask for an internal review. Internal review requests should be submitted within two months of the date of receipt of the response to your original letter and should be addressed to: Nicci Marzec, Monitoring Officer, Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner, East House, Force Headquarters, Wootton Hall, Northampton, NN4 0JQ.

Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications. If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.

Question

Dear Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner,

With the fairly new role of the PCC in adopting a model where they now deal with complaints there are concerns that these complaints are being dealt with by customer service  staff who may be good at dealing with the public but have little or no experience in policing and appear to be taken advantage of by those complained of within Northamptonshire police.

Officers complained of are being contacted directly by customer service staff from the OPFCC and asked questions.

From cases we have reviewed it is apparent that there are allegations of misconduct including criminal matters which do not appear to have been identified by the customer service team.

Police officers will not at that stage have received a discipline notice advising them of their rights or have been cautioned.

1. Has a risk assessment been conducted to take into account a police officer alleging  an abuse of process as a defence to any subsequent investigation against the officer by the Professional standards Department?

2. If so please provide a copy of any relevant documents as to the extent of any interaction / boundary between police officers and customer staff who have received a complaint from a member of the public. To avoid confusion, any expression of dissatisfaction is a complaint.

Answer

1. Has a risk assessment been conducted to take into account a police officer alleging an abuse of process as a defence to any subsequent investigation against the officer by the Professional standards Department?

No information held – The Office of the Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner (OPFCC) and Northamptonshire Police are two separate legal entities. Information regarding operational policing matters, including PSD investigations into conduct, is the responsibility of Northamptonshire Police, therefore the OPFCC does not hold any of the information you have requested.

The OPFCC do not conduct any investigations in relation to complaints about officers. Where complaints are not suitable for service recovery they are referred directly to the Force’s Professional Standards Department in line with the IOPC’s Statutory Guidance on the police complaints system. A copy of the guidance can be downloaded at:

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/statutoryguidance/2020_statutory_guidance_english.pdf

2. If so please provide a copy of any relevant documents as to the extent of any interaction / boundary between police officers and customer staff who have received a complaint from a member of the public. To avoid confusion, any expression of dissatisfaction is a complaint.

N/A

Question

The Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner for Northamptonshire police has taken on responsibility for the recording of complaints, and initial contact with the complainant and the service recovery of less serious complaints.

Was there any consultation with the public before this model was adopted?

If so please provide a copy of any consultation material including any responses.

Answer

The Policing and Crime Act 2017 (The Act) gave PCCs the power to become more responsible for parts of the reformed Police complaints process. The reforms were designed to achieve a more customer-focused complaints system, with more local accountability and more emphasis on learning and reasonable and proportionate handling.

The Act states the following:

Local policing bodies: functions in relation to complaints

(1) The local policing body that maintains a police force may give notice to the chief officer of the police force that it (rather than the chief officer) is to exercise the functions conferred on the chief officer by the provisions specified in subsection (2) or subsections (2) and (3).

Further details are set out in The Police (Complaints and Misconduct) Regulations 2020:

Local policing body functions in relation to complaints: giving of section 13A notices

48. (1) A local policing body may only give a section 13A notice—

(a)        where it has taken the steps mentioned in paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), and

(b)        after the end of the period of 28 days starting with the day on which the step mentioned in paragraph (4) is taken (or retaken, in a case where paragraph (6)(b) applies).

(2)        The first step is to consult, in such manner as the local policing body thinks appropriate, each of the following about the proposed section 13A notice—

(a)the relevant chief officer;

(b)all persons appearing to the local policing body to represent persons serving with the police who may be affected by the proposed section 13A notice.

(3)        The second step is to publish, in such manner as the local policing body thinks appropriate, its response to the representations made or views expressed in response to the consultation.

(4)        The third step is, having taken the steps mentioned in paragraphs (2) and (3), to notify the relevant chief officer—

(a)        that it intends to give a section 13A notice;

(b)        of the date on which it intends to give the notice, and

(c)        whether the notice will relate to the functions conferred on the chief officer by the provisions specified in subsection (2) or subsections (2) and (3) of section 13A of the 2002 Act (local policing bodies: functions in relation to complaints)(1).

In line with legislation, the OPFCC formally consulted with the Police Federation, Superintendents Association, Unison and the Force. It did not receive any formal representations from any organisation either in support or opposition to Model 2. The OPFCC did not however undertake any public consultation in relation to the reforms of the Police Complaints System as implemented by the Policing and Crime Act 2017.

The OPFCC did however publicly publish the following Press release on its website:

https://archive.northantspfcc.org.uk/greater-role-for-pfcc-in-compliments-and-complaints/

In 2018, the IOPC undertook a consultation exercise with both the police service and the public on draft new IOPC statutory guidance and in 2020 they published a report on the development of the new IOPC Statutory Guidance on the police complaints System.

A copy of the report can be download at:

https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/sites/default/files/Documents/statutoryguidance/Statutory_guidance_consultation_report.pdf