The
minutes of the meetings held on 21 November 2022 and 17 January
2023 were agreed as true records of the meetings.
9/23
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Share this item
All Members present are
required to declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as
possible thereafter
(i)Any disclosable
pecuniary interests and / or
(ii)Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in
respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this
meeting
NOTES:
·Members are reminded that they must not participate
in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest
·As well as an interest of the Member, this includes
any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the
Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the
Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)
·Members with a significant personal interest may
participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that
interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial.
Councillor John Robini, Chairman of
the Surrey Police and Crime Panel
The Chairman thanked
the Force and the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner
(OPCC) for their efforts in producing the 2023/24 budget. The
Chairman recognised the challenging circumstances, as residents
were struggling with their personal finances and the Force was
struggling to maintain their operational services with the
budgetary pressures they were facing.
The Chairman informed
the Panel that he planned to write a letter to the Government,
urging them to review their formula used for police funding. The
Panel supported this.
The purpose of this report is
to inform the Police & Crime Panel of the Surrey Police Group
(i.e. OPCC and Chief Constable combined) financial position at the
end of November 2022 as well as a prediction for the situation at
the end of March 2023.
The Chief Finance
Officer (CFO) explained that there was a forecasted underspend of
£2.5 million largely due to staffing, as there were a
substantial number of vacancies. The capital budget was also
predicted to be underspent due to phasing of projects and the
decision to redevelop Mount Browne, rather than move the
headquarters. The requirements of Mount Browne were being
reassessed.
A Panel Member noted
that the Force needed to recruit 250 officers in 2023/24 and
queried the reasons that officers were leaving. The CFO clarified
that there was no uplift requirement in 2023/24, however, Forces
had to maintain officer numbers which included historic figures and
the uplift number. Therefore, 250 officers was the estimate when
taking into account natural turnover. The CFO explained that there
was no main reason that officers were leaving, however, he noted
that they were able to retire after 30 years of service and often
they would move to more affordable parts of the country with
cheaper housing.
A Member asked
whether the CFO was confident in the plans to tackle the high
vacancy rate. The CFO explained that it was difficult to compete
with private sector salaries, however, allowances had been reviewed
for a number of posts and shift allowances had also been revised.
Recruitment was a long process due to the amount of time that
vetting took. The Member asked whether there was a quicker route
for vetting. The CFO explained that it already took place
internally, but it was a proper and thorough process. There had
been national recommendations for vetting, following recent cases
with officers in the Metropolitan Police.
A Member asked how
the reserves were expected to operate over the current (2022/23)
and next (2023/24) financial year. The CFO explained that all of
the reserves were under the control of the Police and Crime
Commissioner (PCC). Transfers to reserves were not made until the
end of the financial year, the transfer in 2022/23 was expected be
circa £150,000. The same transfer was expected in 2023/24 but
was again not made until the end of the financial year. The Member
queried the extent to which manufacturing delays impacted the
outturn for the current financial year. The CFO was not aware of a
significant underspend on vehicles, he explained that he was aware
of long lead times due to the non-availability of computer chips.
There was a national tender process at the moment for a new
contract for vehicles, there had also been additional demand for
vehicles due to uplift.
The Police and Crime Panel is required to consider and formally
respond to the Police and Crime Commissioner’s Proposed
Precept for 2023/24. The purpose of this item is to allow the
Commissioner to outline her proposals in more detail and answer any
questions that Panel Members might have.
Following consideration of the Commissioner’s proposed
precept, the
Panel must either:
a)
agree the precept without qualification or comment;
b)
support the precept and make comments or recommendations concerning
the application of the revenues generated; or
c)
veto the proposed precept.
Note:
In
accordance with the Police and Crime Panels (Precepts and Chief
Constable Appointments) Regulations 2012:
(a) The Commissioner must notify the Panel of her proposed
precept by 1 February 2023;
(b) The Panel must review and make a report to the Commissioner
on the proposed precept (whether it vetoes the precept or not) by 8
February 2023;
(c) If the Panel vetoes the precept, the Commissioner must have
regard to and respond to the Panel’s report, and publish her
response, including the revised precept, by 15 February
2023;
(d) The Panel, on receipt of a response from the Commissioner
notifying it of her revised precept, must review the revised
precept and make a second report to the Commissioner by 22 February
2023
(there is no second right of veto);
(e) The Commissioner must have regard to and respond to the
Panel’s second report and publish her response by 1 March
2023.
Lisa Townsend, Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner
Kelvin Menon, Chief Finance Officer (OPCC)
Key points
raised in the discussion:
The PCC introduced
the item, emphasising the rising costs that the Force was facing,
such as the vehicle fuel bill increasing by over £500,000 in
the last year. Government grant funding for policing nationally
only rose by 1.8% and therefore, PCCs made representation to
indicate the shortfall of £0.5 billion for policing. The
response from government was to increase the Precept cap to
£15, rather than to increase government funding. The Force
had a good record of delivering savings, however, it became harder
to deliver more savings over time. Police staff could suffer from
any potential cuts, and this would have a substantial impact, as
they formed the backbone of the services provided. The consultation
results showed that 57% of respondents were in favour of an
increase of £15. The PCC explained that she had little choice
but to propose an increase of the Precept to £15, which was
equivalent to 5% and well below the current rate of
inflation.
A Panel Member noted
that last year the Panel unanimously supported the £10
increase of the Precept and the staff vacancy rate increased
despite this. The Panel Member asked whether this year’s
increase would be spent on frontline policing or whether there
would be another underspend due to staffing issues. The CFO
explained that the high vacancy rate was a temporary situation due
to the economy and labour market. There would not be an ongoing
underspend, as the posts needed to be filled. If the Precept was
not increased to £15, the money would be lost forever, and
the posts would never manage to be filled. Officer pay would also
increase by at least 2% and the Precept funding would help to
address future financial issues. The Panel Member asked whether
this was the right time to increase the Precept or whether there
should be greater lobbying for increased government funding. The
CFO explained that it would be good if government funding increased
in line with inflation or the funding formula was revised so that
Surrey residents got a better deal, but in the meantime, the
Precept funding was required to maintain services.
A Panel Member asked
whether there were any more efficiencies that could realistically
be made. The CFO explained that the medium-term financial strategy
(MTFS) predicted the savings that had to be made to reach a
balanced budget, rather than savings that could be made. It would
be a challenge to meet the target and there would be a number of
reviews to support the process. The last resort would service
reductions in some areas.
In response to
questions on the staff vacancy rate, the CFO explained that in
2023/24 the vacancy margin had been increased as a tool used to
balance the budget. Ideally, this would be reduced going forward as
posts were filled. The plans to address this were at an early stage
and the CFO ...
view the full minutes text for item 14/23
This report provides an update on the
performance meetings between the PCC and the Chief Constable that
have been held and what has been discussed in order to demonstrate
that arrangements for good governance and scrutiny are in
place.
Lisa Townsend, Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner
Nathan Rees, Head of Communication and Engagement
(OPCC)
Key points
raised in the discussion:
A Panel Member noted
that the consultation on the budget and Precept included a question
on residents’ priorities for policing and asked whether the
PCC thought the responses supported the current priorities of her
Police and Crime Plan. The Head of Communication and Engagement
explained that the top three priorities in the responses of the
consultation were burglary, neighbourhood crime, and anti-social
behaviour. 25% of the responses included violence against women and
girls. A report would be produced based on the consultation
responses which could be shared with the Panel. The PCC added that
the consultation was a small element of the input she received
about the Plan and would not make any changes to it based on those
responses alone.
A Panel Member asked
whether the PCC had any concerns about complaints handling within
the Force and the number of complaints received, based off a recent
news article on the topic. The Head of Communication and Engagement
clarified that there were inaccuracies in how the data was
presented in the article. It included the number of overall
complaints received; it was not the number of misconduct cases. If
a complaint included multiple elements, these would be recorded as
separate complaints. The Force released a robust response and
explanation to the article as well.
This report provides information on the key
decisions taken by the PCC from November 2022 to present and sets
out details of the Office’s ongoing Forward Plan for
2023.
Lisa Townsend, Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner
Alison Bolton, Chief Executive (OPCC)
Key points
raised in the discussion:
A Panel Member
queried what the item called ‘update allowance scheme’
was about. The Chief Executive explained that it was a review
conducted on an annual basis which looked at the allowance scheme
that covered staff associated with the OPCC and sets out what
allowances they could access and claim.
Lisa Townsend, Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner
Key points
raised in the discussion:
A Panel Member
queried why the Commissioner thought it was an appropriate time to
commission a review of whether to use her statutory power to take
over responsibility for Surrey Fire and Rescue Service. The PCC
explained that she had been involved in ongoing conversations with
Ministers and the Home Office about their views and this was the
right time. The Council was aware of this, and the PCC clarified
that it was about governance, rather than operational
collaboration.
A Panel Member asked
whether the PCC had her own view on the best governance
arrangements. The PCC explained that currently it was up to each
individual PCC, however, the Government may decide to mandate it,
and this was one of the reasons why the PCC wanted to conduct the
review now. The PCC felt that the current governance arrangements
were not as good as they could be.
A Panel Member
queried whether this would result in a Precept for each service.
The PCC explained that this was likely, and the Panel would become
joint as well.
To note complaints against the Police and
Crime Commissioner and the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner
received since the last meeting of the Police and Crime Panel.
Lisa Townsend, Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner
Alison Bolton, Chief Executive (OPCC)
Kelvin Menon, Chief Finance Officer (OPCC)
Key points
raised in the discussion:
A Panel Member
requested a paper on staff vacancy rates and their distribution
across the Force. The Chief Finance Officer agreed that a paper on
this could come to the next Panel meeting.
A Panel Member
requested for the funding formula for CCTV to be reshared as per
R25/22 on the tracker. The Chief Executive responded that it would
be shared soon, and it could be combined with responding to a
question about the budget for CCTV at the Finance
Sub-Group.
A Panel Member
requested an item on unauthorised encampments. The PCC confirmed
that the Panel would receive a presentation on that.
20/23
DATE OF NEXT MEETING
Share this item
The next public meeting of the Police and
Crime Panel will be held on XXX.
PDF 471 KB