Meeting documents

To consider a report by the Police and Crime Commissioner. 

 

Members of the Panel are asked to review and make a report and recommendation (as necessary) to the Commissioner on the proposed precept.

The Panel considered a report by the Treasurer to the Police and Crime Commissioner which set out the proposed 2017-18 precept for the Police and Crime Commissioner for Dorset.

 

The Treasurer highlighted the cost pressures faced by the Force, the funding allocations and that savings of £3.9m were required to balance the 2017-18 budget.  He noted that the overall position in that the Police Main Grant had been cut by 1.4% for 2017-18 which was a higher cut due to additional top-slicing for national projects.  He also made reference to the public consultation on the precept options that had been carried out which had showed a clear majority in favour of the option of increasing Council Tax and using the additional £1.04m to fund various policing priorities.

 

The Commissioner addressed members prior to taking any questions and his opening address is attached as an Annexure to these minutes.

 

The Chairman highlighted that the proposed increase would result in a £3.73 per week increase in council tax.  He also set out the total precept figures for each of the respective council tax bands, which ranged from £129.72 (Band A) to £389.16 (Band H) per annum.

 

Members of the Panel asked the following questions to the Police and Crime Commissioner, who responded accordingly:

 

1.               As highlighted in the report the Police Finance Settlement is for only one year 2017/18 whereas Local Authorities have been able to sign up to a four year finance settlement from Government covering the period 2016 to 2020. Can the Commissioner therefore outline the steps he has taken to lobby the Government for both a longer term settlement, which should enable the Commissioner to plan with more certainty, as well as a new police funding formula which Appendix 2 of the report (section 5.5) indicates should be worth up to an extra £4.4m per annum to Dorset Police?

 

Our written responses to the provisional settlement in both 2016 and 2017 have pressed for a multi-year settlement to be given for Police funding to aid with our Medium Term Financial Planning. The response back has been that the Home Office do not want to provide multi-year settlements whilst the new funding formula is being developed. On that front, we continue to lobby at every opportunity for the new formula to reflect adequately the policing needs of forces such as Dorset.

 

Following a question regarding whether any representations were being made for victims services to try and get funding for more than a year, the PCC advised that this was a different funding strand and agreed it was not ideal getting just one year’s funding for this.  In respect of top slicing the Treasurer advised that this was a Home Office decision

 

In response to a question about the ICT Police company system, the PCC advised that there were now 3 national programmes being rolled out and that this was a long term issue and not much had been delivered or changed in Dorset at the present time. The Chief Constable noted that what was offered indirectly was a gateway for forces before they purchase new ICT to ensure it fitted in with the national position.  The Independent member felt this would be a good opportunity for them to explore this further with other PCP Chairs and to perhaps consider convening a sub-group similar to that of the 101 Service improvement Panel.

2.               Can the Commissioner provide the Panel with reassurance that he considers the three quarters of a billion pounds being invested nationally across 2016/17 and 2017/18 in the Emergency Services Network will represent good value for the taxpayer and what the latest estimated of the overall amount which is being invested in this system and which is diverting much needed resources from front line policing?

 

Can the Commissioner also explain why Dorset Police will then be required to spend up to a further £2m locally on this project (Appendix 2 of the report section 6.11).

 

The PCC advised that this was a national project to provide a replacement for the Airwave System and will be used by 13 Ambulance Trusts, 50 Fire and Rescue Services in addition to the 44 Police Forces. In addition, it was anticipated that there will be around 300 other users all of whom will pay towards the on-going costs.

 

The replacement had been procured nationally and was a joint collaboration between the Home Office, Department of Health and the Welsh and Scottish Governments. As such, it has been through a rigorous procurement process and has had to meet the Government's VFM requirements. Given this, it is for the Government to provide assurances with regards to the investment, rather than myself.

 

Local Expenditure in relation to the project would be on required control room and network changes, device purchase and installation, project management and training.

 

It was anticipated that in the long run, the on-going costs of the new system would be significantly lower than the current charges.

 

3.               Can the Panel be advised as to why there has been a 130% increase in the national top slice of the police force settlement (£76m to £175m as per table in Appendix 2 of the report section 3.6) by way of the Police Transformation Fund and clarify if there is an opportunity for the Dorset Police and Crime Commissioner to attract some of this funding to the County?

 

The increase to £175m incorporates both the existing transformation fund (£76m) and also the police innovation fund (£55m). Of this sum, £32m is being used for firearms. A number of other national projects will also benefit Dorset such as Specialist Capabilities, Forensics and Modern Slavery.

 

The remainder will be available for bids. Dorset will therefore be looking to bid for a share of this funding which could be individually, through the Alliance or as part of a regional submission.

 

4.               As part of the 2014/15 Budget the Commissioner set aside resources as part of the £300,000 Local Innovation Fund for the purchase of body worn cameras and mobile devices. Can the Commissioner confirm he still believes this investment represented value for money for the Dorset Council Tax payer and inform the Panel when Dorset residents will see the benefit from this investment?

 

I have utilised the £300,000 to support the Force in its wider ambition in relation to both mobile data and body worn video.

 

I am absolutely confident that this is the right strategy to follow and if the Force is going to meet the many challenges we have discussed, it will need to exploit agile working to enable officers to maximise the use of their time, and provide the best service to the public.

 

Mobile data is not a single programme but is an array of devices deployed to support specific roles, thus enabling individuals to both deploy and work from the most appropriate location, be it supporting a vulnerable victim in their own home to remaining operationally in contact whilst attending a Police and Crime Panel.

 

Body worn video is already demonstrating its ability to effectively support both officers and the Criminal Justice system.  Presenting video evidence can result in a much simplified process, when individuals are presented with video evidence it often results in speedier resolution, officers are better protected against the complaints made again them and investigations into incidents can be dealt with much more effectively.

 

The first phase of mobile data is in regular use and officers and staff regularly work at locations based on the efficiency of the task not the location of a police building.

 

Unfortunately wide roll out and full integration with core systems was delayed due to the failure of the private sector to deliver.  Needless to say I have not paid the failed contractor and have now engaged with a new contractor who has delivered the first devices (phones and tablets) which are being fully tested by the Force.

 

Body worn video also presents challenges, not so much in the device but in the protocols and data management.  The funding has enabled an initial trial involving 100 officers to be rolled out, soon to be followed by full roll out to all firearms officers.

 

In terms of value then ‘yes’ absolutely to both aspects; additionally I can ensure the Panel that the procurement process itself has been subject to rigorous evaluation and is fully compliant with both UK and European legislation.

 

I am happy to provide more detail if required; however members may recall that this was discussed at a previous Panel at which I also provided examples of the equipment for members to view.

 

5.               The Commissioner as part of the 2016/17 Budget increased the Council Tax precept by 1.97% to generate approximately an extra £1m which provided flexibility to increases resources dedicated to Protecting Vulnerable People, Emerging Threats such as Cyber Crime, and Making Contact easier for the public. As this £1m remains in the base Council Tax as part of the 2017/18 precept proposal can the Commissioner confirm that he will again be spending these extra resources approximately equally in supporting these priorities?

 

The Policing budget would always be directed to the areas of the highest priorities. As per the question, the funding raised by last years' precept rise allowed for investment around:-

 

·        Protecting vulnerable people

·        Cyber Crime; and

·        Making contact easier

 

These remained significant issues and, so yes, investment in these areas would continue. The Force and the PCC would of course continue to re-assess priorities on an on-going basis and move resources as necessary in terms of Threat, Risk and Harm.

 

6.               Can the Commissioner explain how he intends to balance the 14% increase in crime last year with the areas he has chosen to prioritise the 2017/18 precept resources towards, namely Vulnerability, Communities, and Victims, Witnesses & Offenders?

The 14 per cent increase was in line with national trends across England and Wales, with rises seen in most police force areas. According to the Office for National Statistics – recorded crime is "not currently a reliable measure of trends in crime with a large proportion of the rise considered to be due to continued improvements in crime-recording practices and processes."

As a consequence of improved practice, the Force is publishing increases in total crime which is due to a greater emphasis being placed on accuracy. Dorset Police has worked hard to improve its compliance with the complex Home Office Counting Rules, and to ensure the public are confident to report crime. This followed recommendations made by HMIC around data integrity in 2014 and the rise demonstrates that the Force is fully committed to meeting the very high standards set out by the government.

The biggest rise for an individual crime was for "violence without injury" on which we have reported regularly to the panel. Crime in this area rose 67 per cent to 7,974 offences, from 4,772 the previous year. However, as seen in the detail of the report we are also seeing increased demand in safeguarding, child exploitation, cyber and cyber enabled crime and serious sexual offences.

If Council tax were to be raised in 2017/18, this would be invested in: Protecting adults at risk of harm, improving our response to common, non-emergency types of crime and continuing to embrace new technology, which are all important areas that will ensure the Force is able to respond to emerging trends and continuously improve.

7.               Bearing in mind the £3.9m savings being delivered by Dorset Police (Appendix 2 of the report, section 11.2) through such process as the strategic alliance, can the Commissioner confirm what value of savings have been delivered from the cost of his own office to support the budget as proposed?

Part of the £3.9m savings had been delivered by the OPCC through the establishment of the joint Audit, Risk and Insurance team which now provided services to both forces and both PCCs.

 

The cost of the OPCC had again been held at the same level. This was despite the significant increase in the roles and responsibilities undertaken by the PCC and the office since its inception. Indeed, the Policing and Crime Bill would place even more responsibilities upon the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner.

 

To ensure that the office was suitably resourced and provided the best service for Dorset residents, an independent review of the office, as well as salaries, had been undertaken and a number of changes had now been implemented.

 

It was worth noting that while there was considerable scope for savings across the two forces – as you would expect from two organisations with several thousands of staff – there was not the same level of opportunity to exploit economies of scale across the OPCC which comprised of a small team and, through legislation, was required to have a number of separate posts and governance.

 

In response to a question about whether this restructure had cost any more than the previous year, the Treasurer advised that it had not.

 

8.               Can the Treasurer explain why an adverse actuarial review on the Local Government Pension Fund used by Police support staff is passed on to the Dorset council taxpayers whereas a positive actuarial review on National Police Officers (24.2% down to 21.3%) is not passed on to local taxpayers? (Appendix 2 of the report section 4.13/4.14).

 

The Local Government Pension Scheme was a funded scheme with all costs borne by the employers and employees within the scheme, backed by the schemes assets. Any change in the value of these assets, compared to future liabilities, which were highlighted in the triennial valuations, therefore had to be borne within the scheme.

 

The Police Officer scheme, like all other public sector schemes except the LGPS was unfunded. Contributions were paid by the employer and employee direct to the government. The government then had to meet all of the liabilities of the scheme. The government had therefore taken the benefit from a positive actuarial review to reduce these liabilities, rather than passing the benefit back to the employers in lower contributions.

 

9.               Can the Commissioner explain why according to the Proposed Capital Programme (Appendix 2 of the report, Appendix C) he intends to spend £70,000 in 2017/18 on drones and how he intends they will be deployed?

 

The Force has already made use of the support I have provided and has two operational drones, qualified pilots and Civil Aviation Authority approval which is now being cited as best practice.

 

A number of police forces were currently exploring the use of drones, as they had vast potential in assisting the police.  Uses encompass, but were not limited to, firearms support, road traffic collision investigation, crime scene analysis, intelligence gathering to support specific operations, missing persons searches to name but a few.  Whilst the initial work had concentrated on ensuring the Force was compliant with all legislation and has trained officers in the use of the equipment, drones had already provided evidence to support criminal proceedings.

 

Moving forward Dorset would be working further with Devon and Cornwall and investing in further capacity.  Trial were currently being undertaken to improve night flying capability, in-building searches, over water flying and prolonged flight times. The use of drones also ensured an improving knowledge base to address criminal use of drones.

 

Looking at the cost, whilst £70,000 was a significant capital investment, this compared with the cost of conventional air support that can be as high as £1,600 per hour.

 

10.            Can the Treasurer explain how the £6.1m slippage in the capital programme between 2016/17 and 2017/18, according to the Quarter 3 report (page 63 of the report section 3.19), is shown in the proposed capital programme presented in 6.2 and 6.4 of Appendix 2 of the report?

 

The capital programme set out in the budget paper reflects the new budget requirements to fund the capital programme. Any slippage of the 2016-17 programme will be carried forward and added to these figures at year end. The long term nature of capital schemes will inevitably result in some slippage from one year to the next. The Q3 monitoring report details £6.1m of potential slippage between years which relates to relocation of various functions from Ferndown, the Smarter Systems programme of mobile policing solutions, the duty management system and digitalisation of speed cameras all of which are now planned for 2017-18.

 

In light of further slippage, a Panel member requested that the PCC specifically look into this in further detail as part of his review of procurement, which was scheduled to be reported to the Panel at its next meeting on 29 June 2017.

 

11.            What areas are being scrutinised in order to improve efficiency and transform the way in which Dorset Police and the OPCC operates?

 

As reported regularly to the Panel, the Commissioner and his office scrutinise a wide range of the Force’s business to ensure that Dorset Police is as efficient and transformational as possible. On a day-to-day basis this is achieved through attendance at Joint and Force Boards and via PCC Challenge.

 

Of particular note, is the key role that the OPCC plays in the Strategic Alliance – which has delivered significant cost savings, de-duplication of effort and increased resilience across the organisations. As the Panel has heard, the four corporation soles, no longing facing budget cuts as severe as first feared, have been able to prioritise service improvement, which will be achieved through transformation.

 

Members will be aware that Dorset Police was assessed as ‘Good’ in the recent HMIC Police Efficiency, Effectiveness and Legitimacy Inspection (PEEL) for Dorset Police. This provides independent analysis of the Force in many areas and to quote the report, "Dorset Police has clear plans, based on sound analysis, allowing it to determine changes to how it operates and provides services in the future. HMIC found evidence of the force working with other organisations to improve future efficiency," and "the force’s financial and organisational plans are practical and credible."

 

Members will also be aware that the Commissioner is currently consulting on the next Police and Crime Plan. One of the proposed pillars of this plan is entitled ‘Transforming for the Future’ and is under-pinned by a number of the Commissioner’s manifesto commitments, for example, taking on complaints, improving accessibility and investing in new technology. Furthermore, the PCC and Chief Constable will adhere to the Policing Vision 2025, which sets out the plan for policing over the next ten years. It will shape decisions around transformation and how we use our resources to keep people safe and provide and effective and value for money service that can be trusted.

 

12.            What action is being taken to further improve the leadership and culture of policing and tackle new types of crime?

 

The Force was continuously improving its response to emerging crime types and the Panel will be aware that last year’s precept rise was invested in areas such as employing extra investigators dedicated to investigating child abuse and protecting vulnerable children; helping to create a Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub to protect vulnerable people; increasing the number of officers in the cybercrime intelligence and investigation team and the recruitment of a dedicated cyber-crime prevention officer. If the precept is raised in 2017/18, this would be invested in protecting adults at risk of harm – another emerging trend.

 

Again, it was worth reflecting upon the Policing Vision 2025, which sets the plan for the service over the next ten years. The Vision recognised the need for police forces to continue to build a culture that valued openness and transparency; that standards were evidence based and that leaders were equipped for the future and had the skills and knowledge to succeed. It also recognised the way that PCCs and Forces must work together to support policing at the local, cross force and national levels. The Commissioner and Chief Constable were committed to this vision.

 

Following a question about the relaunch of the website and how success of this would be measured, the Deputy PCC advised that they were already seeing a greater volume of people contacting the OPCC via the website but it would be some time before it could be seen whether the service was improving or whether it was just opening up to people that had not contacted the OPCC previously.

 

In response to a question about how an ‘outstanding’ rating by the HMIC could be received, the Chief Constable advised that the ‘good’ rating allowed the Force to retain current resources and to look at efficiencies and at what areas could be more effective, but she would not put resources into getting a better rating to the detriment of communities.  She was hoping to maintain the ‘good’ rating.

 

Members voted unanimously to support the 1.98% rise in precept for 2017-18 and accepted the council tax requirement and the basic amount of council tax for police purposes in Dorset for 2017-18 as detailed in the Appendix 1 of the Commissioner’s report.

 

Resolved (Unanimous)

1. That the increase in the precept of 1.98% for 2017-18 be supported.

2. That for the purposes of issuing a report to the Commissioner on the proposed precept, the Panel endorsed the council tax requirement and the basic amount of council tax for police purposes in Dorset for 2017-18.

 

Reason for Decisions

The Police and Crime Panels (Precepts and Chief Constable Appointments).

regulations 2012 required the Police and Crime Commissioner to notify the Panel of their proposed precept for 2017-18 by 1 February 2017. This then needed to be considered by the Police and Crime Panel who could either approve the proposed precept or veto it. A two thirds majority of the Police and Crime Panel was required to veto any precept proposal.