Meeting documents

To consider a report from the Chief Executive, OPCC on the proposed merger, providing information and an assessment against the Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOEs) agreed by the Panel at its last meeting.

The Panel received a report from the Chief Executive, OPCC which provided members with an overview of the governance and due diligence process undertaken by the Police and Crime Commissioner in respect of his approach to reaching a decision on the full business case for the proposed merger of Dorset Police and Devon & Cornwall Police.

 

The Chairman highlighted the PCP’s Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE) that had been agreed at their meeting in June 2018 and which the Panel would be using to scrutinise the PCC’s assessment and evaluation of the Police Merger proposal and would therefore form the basis for members’ questions.

 

The PCC reminded members of the history relating to the Merger and gave a presentation on ‘Creating a new force for the future’ (attached as an Annexure to these minutes).  The backbone of this presentation hinged around the Panel’s KLOE.

 

Following an explanation of the Merger process the PCC shared a letter that he had received from the PCC from Devon and Cornwall following reports in the press that she no longer supported the merger.  The letter explained her rationale for not supporting the merger, citing the main reason being that the Government would not give her the flexibility to increase the council tax and she remained unconvinced that sufficient public support had been evidenced.

 

The results of the public consultation showed there had been11,282 responses. The different methods of engagement were highlighted and it was noted that there was more support for the merger in Dorset than in Devon and Cornwall.

 

In order for members to determine that appropriate procedures had been followed by the Dorset PCC in respect of the proposed Merger they asked a number of questions based on their KLOE:-

 

Economic Basis

In respect of the Aim/Weighting/Weighted Score figures to back up the percentages, the Chief Executive, OPCC advised that the figures were not a financial score list but more about benefits and comparisons of the three options.  The data had been compiled by Policing experts.  He emphasised that the model  and methodology had been scrutinised and endorsed by the Home Office.

 

One member commented he was pleased to see optimism bias and risk included in the figures.

 

Following the recent announcement from the PCC Devon & Cornwall, one member asked if the Alliance would continue irrespective of what happened with Devon & Cornwall.   The PCC confirmed they could continue with Strategic Alliance plus, although he had concerns about what would happen with the workforce in respect of terms and conditions and harmonisation.  The PCC expressed disappointment at the way in which communications had been handled by the PCC Devon & Cornwall.

 

In response to a question about who the Panel of experts were, the Chief Executive, OPCC advised it was made up of workforce colleagues from across the business.  The Delphi Panel methodology, which was set by the Government, was used and further details were contained within the Business Case. 

 

Efficiency

In respect of supervisory posts a panel member asked would the PCC and Chief Constable receive larger salaries as there would effectively be a larger responsibility?  The PCC advised that from a PCC point of view there would not be much difference, it would potentially be the same salary as the current PCC Devon & Cornwall received, £85k.  The Chief Constable’s pay would reflect the size of the force. The value for money profiles and comparators were highlighted and that by combining opportunities up to 140 frontline managers/supervisory roles could be taken out of the model. There was concern about this amount of officers being taken out if the merger went ahead but the Chief Constable advised that although this seemed a large amount it would be as a result of duplicated governance over a 10 year period which he felt was a realistic figure.  One member asked if the proportion of the 140 was more in Devon & Cornwall.  The Chief Constable advised there was room for flexibility in Devon & Cornwall which was due to a legacy issue. 

 

Following a question about savings and if that would impact on any future Central Government funding, the PCC advised that this hadn’t happened before but it could not be assumed that it wouldn’t in the future.

 

The Treasurer to the PCC explained the options in the Cost Benefit slide, which showed the total cash calculations of 10 year cost benefits and the adjusted net present value.

 

Following a comment about frontline officers and the PCCs initial statement to retain PCSOs, the PCC advised that he would be anticipating far more savings if the Merger takes place and that frontline officers could relate to a number of roles not just PCSOs and PCSIs.  There were 115 PCSOs and 38 PSCIs.  PCSOs were also contained in a number of other teams.  He added that it was not just about numbers but more about demand.

 

One member made reference to a comment made in the press by the PCC Devon & Cornwall in respect of ‘relatively minor’ savings that the merger would deliver.  The PCC could not comment on what had been said but advised that the PCC Devon & Cornwall had earlier in the week signed off the Merger Business Case, having agreed with its contents and evidence.  She had then not agreed to its submission to Government as she was unconvinced and was currently not supporting it to go forward.   This was in conflict with previous statements made by the PCC for Devon and Cornwall.  The PCC was clear that the impact of this decision would lead to those in Devon & Cornwall paying the same for less i.e. a reduced service. 

 

Effectiveness

One member suggested the proposed merger might be seen as a takeover as Devon & Cornwall were the larger force.  The PCC referred to the signing of an earlier Memorandum of Understanding for the Strategic Alliance, which placed those involved on an equal footing and voting rights. The PCC also didn’t feel it was a takeover as they had swapped best practice and much of this had come from Dorset.

 

One member felt it would be hard to achieve unification of terms and conditions across the force and was struggling to see a problem with having different terms and conditions.  The PCC advised that staff felt it was unfair to have different overtime and mileage rates for example.  It was more about 2 forces working together, but having different terms and conditions; his aim was to take away any imbalance and inequality.  Following a comment that, nationally, various police officers were on different payscales etc and how much of a sticking point was this in discussions, the PCC advised that this had never been a red line in respect of the proposed merger.

 

Following a comment about the Police demand curve, the PCC advised that this was an intrinsic part of comprehending police business.  The Chief Constable advised that there was a fairly forensic understanding of this in respect of dealing with more complex cases such as child abuse and modern slavery as examples.  Dorset Police were looking at new operating models to meet rising demand.   He made reference to the publication of the Force Management Statement which would be published shortly and would help members of the public to understand this more. He undertook to circulate this to members ahead of publication.  The Chair reminded the OPCC that the PCP was seeking a ‘cost demand’ for precept 2019 in order to provide a robust baseline of future funding requirements.

 

In respect of the Strategic Alliance with two different cultures and styles of two organisations coming together, would the proposed merger be an opportunity to resolve this?  The Chief Executive, OPCC advised it would and explained that leadership and cultural audits and programmes of alignments were being planned as part of the transitional work, should the merger go ahead. The PCC confirmed he was satisfied the Economic, Effectiveness, Cost benefit points had been met.

 

Public Safety

One member felt he had confidence in statements being made in respect of staff engagement but was struggling to have confidence with the figures being displayed in the presentation with what he heard and saw happening on the ground.  Following a discussion, the PCC highlighted the neighbourhood contract that was being brought in which stated the minimum contact that was needed by officers.

 

In response to a comment from a member about reassuring Dorset residents that they would be safer and receive the same level of service if the Merger was to go ahead, the PCC advised that he did not endorse the comments made by the PCC Devon & Cornwall in this regard.   The funding/resource issues in the Dorset, Medium Term Financial Strategy, without the Merger would see the Force through 2019.  National and local lobbying was going ahead to try to increase Central Government funding.   The Chief Constable confirmed that Dorset residents would still be safe if the Merger did not go ahead. However, his options would be weakened and he would therefore need to re-examine previous plans and come forward with new solutions in order to maintain performance.

 

Following a comment about savings, the PCC advised there was still scope for savings within the Strategic Alliance, but that it was getting harder to execute efficiencies.  If the Merger went ahead more benefits/savings could be achieved but there would still be further gains with or without the Merger.  Control rooms had not yet been discussed and this was possibly the biggest areas of savings if the Merger went ahead.  In response to a question about the possibility of any dynamic efficiency savings, the Chief Executive, OPCC highlighted current working with partners e.g. local Criminal Justice Boards and the efficiencies that could be driven out as a result of the merger.

 

One member suggested that in the future the Panel should have a ‘deep dive’ scrutiny review into the PCC’s plans for frontline policing.  This was endorsed by the PCP and would feature on the Forward Plan.

 

Local Support

Members from Bournemouth were concerned that their Local Authority had not been consulted and as a result were having a special meeting shortly to discuss this. The PCC advised that the Home Office wanted Chief Executives and Leaders of local authorities to be included in the consultation and the Bournemouth Leader and Chief Executive were part of the Strategic Leaders Board meeting when the Merger was discussed.

 

Following a discussion about contact with the Trade Unions, the PCC advised that the GMB represented a small number of the workforce in Dorset (4 members), but they did represent more staff in Devon and Cornwall.  The Chief Constable had met with the Unison Branch Secretary and was advised of the responses in their survey on the proposed Merger. There had been concerns around job security due to a rumour about two of the contact centres closing and moving to Exeter; the Chief Constable stated that this was not the case and that no closure was planned.  Further consultation with Unison had resulted in them being supportive of the Merger.

 

Following a question from a member about the public side of the Merger and the amount of support needed, the PCC advised that he had sought to work with others to establish a baseline of ‘what good looked like’, but others did not support this approach and instead were swayed with a more generic ‘sufficient’.  He hadn’t felt it was a political stance but was more about the approach taken in respect of engagement and consultation.

 

Merger process

Following a question about the Convergence Working Group, the Chief Executive, OPCC advised this group met weekly either in person or via skype.

 

Effective voice and scrutiny

Members were advised that the Business Case was owned by the 4 corporation soles and was managed through the Convergence Board (chaired by the PCC Devon and Cornwall).  This document had been signed off on Tuesday 25 September 2018 by the said 4 corporate soles. 

 

One member felt that the future effectiveness of public voice and effective scrutiny was an important role for the future Police and Crime Panel to pursue.  Adequate assurances needed to be in place to satisfy this important issue in conjunction with the PCC, if the decision was taken for the merger to progress.

 

In respect of a role for the new Panel the Group Manager, Governance and Assurance advised members that the Chairman and he had been reaching out to members in Devon and Cornwall to try and work together.  However, they were still waiting for a response to the proposal and the draft Terms of Reference for a working group.

 

Following a question from the Chairman to the PCC and Chief Constable about whether following all of the discussion, research, stakeholder engagement, financial modelling and review of evidence they were convinced that the proposed merger was the strongest viable option to protect future policing and ensure continuous improvement, they both confirmed that it was.

 

The Chairman undertook to include in his letter to the PCC that an effective voice at a local level was something that needed to be included in the future and entrenched in the policy from the Home Office.

 

To summarise, the PCC read out a prepared statement.

 

As there were no clear objections articulated or evidenced, members voted to agree the recommendations set out in the PCCs report, with one abstention.

 

 

Resolved

1.That the Police and Crime Commissioner’s decision had followed the appropriate procedure and was supported by evidence.

2. That the Chairman, on behalf of the Panel, would write to the Police and Crime Commissioner confirming their decision.

3. That members thanked the Police and Crime Commissioner for respecting their views during the Merger process, providing a clear rationale for his decisions and for addressing the Panel prior to making any press statements.