To report any issues with the information below please email

Issue - meetings


Meeting: 28/01/2019 - Joint Public Protection Committee (Item 6.)

6. Public Protection Partnership Performance Report and Strategic Projects Update pdf icon PDF 28 KB

To inform the committee of the current performance of the Public Protection Partnership in line with the operating model and business plan.


Additional documents:

Meeting: 12/06/2018 - Joint Public Protection Committee (Item 53)

53 Public Protection Partnership Performance Report (PP3565) pdf icon PDF 79 KB

To consider Public Protection Partnership Performance Report for 2017/18.

Additional documents:


The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 9) to present the performance of the PPP over 2017/18. Anna Smy tabled a summary of the key achievements of the Partnership alongside the five priority areas. Despite the amount of work to consolidate activities across the three areas the Partnership achieved good outcomes. Anna Smy particularly highlighted that there had been 46 media occurrences and that the Partnership would continue to develop its relationships with customers.

Councillor Allen expressed concern that the target for license approvals had been downgraded from two days to five days and expressed the view that he had hoped the Partnership would enable the same or better outcomes to be achieved. Anna Smy advised that high priority complaints would be responded to within two days and where possible others would be responded to earlier than five days. Steve Loudoun noted that Bracknell’s previous two day target for applications had been out of step with the remainder of Bracknell Forest Council which expected a 5 day response and that expectations may have been raised. Councillor Webster expressed the view that the key point was the expectation being set to the customer. Sean Murphy contributed that it was the aspiration of the Partnership to move to one applications team to improve service resilience and align processes.

Paul Anstey raised the point that often applicants had been provided the information well in advance and submitted poor quality applications which were time intensive for officers to process. There might be scope to offer a faster turn-around for a higher fee, such as the system used for passport checking.

RESOLVED that the report be approved.