Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 13 December 2013 were taken as read, confirmed and signed subject to the following amendments:

·         Cllr. Paul Westley be removed from the attendance list;

·         Bullet 7 of the second set of bullet points in Minute 39 be amended to reflect that congratulations for the Police presence at the Diwali celebrations be drawn to the attention of the Chief Constable and his Force;

·         Bullet 8 of the second set of bullet points in Minute 39 be amended to reflect that a number of car crimes on a street would in the past have been reported as one crime under the previous counting rules.

There were no urgent items for consideration.

The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.

Cllr. Sood declared a personal interest as the Chair of the Leicester Council of Faiths.

The Chairman sought and obtained the consent of the Panel to vary the order of business from that set out in the agenda.

The Panel considered a report of the Senior Commissioning Manager concerning an update on the PCC’s commissioning activity across the Force area in regard to troubled/supported families. A copy of the report, “Agenda Item 7”, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from the discussion, the following points were noted:

·                If the SLF programme and other district equivalents were successful, it was envisaged that they would bring about a significant reduction in demand for policing and the services of other partners involved in the programmes. Beyond its financial contribution, the Police had a “commitment in kind” to the programmes, which committed officers to supporting the work of those directly involved in this work;

·                Much of the work around the contractual arrangements for the delivery of services was still under negotiation with partners. Issues such as performance monitoring and the formula to be adopted for the allocation of funds would require the agreement of partners;

·                It was intended to, where possible, join-up the work that supported the various strands of the troubled families agenda. A full evaluation would take place of applications for the PCC grant funding and those which supported the aims of troubled families would also be aligned to the programme;

·                The area of troubled families was complex and, whilst it would be difficult to measure outcomes, it was expected that some trends would emerge. Investment was expected to then be tied on an ongoing basis to areas which were seen to be improving;

·                The deadline for any decisions around commissioning was 14 March.

RESOLVED:

That the report and comments of the Panel, as outlined above, be noted.

The Panel considered a report of the Chief Finance Officer for the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Finance Director for the Office of the Chief Constable concerning the 2014/15 revenue budget, the proposal for Council Tax precept and the Medium term Financial Strategy. A copy of the report, marked “Agenda Item 4”, is filed with these minutes.

In introducing the report, the PCC delivered a speech, the content of which is set out below:

“During my first year in office I have spent a very significant part of my time listening to local people.  And what has emerged from this important engagement is clear. For the great majority of the residents of Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland, safeguarding their neighbourhoods, sustaining and developing levels of policing, and tackling Anti-Social Behaviour are huge priorities for them.   Visible policing – i.e. that which enables free, trusting, and knowledgeable communication between the public and our officers, and which can be characterised as preventive policing – is particularly important for our communities.

It is against that background that I submit to you today a budget and a Precept proposal that shows that I have listened to what local residents have said.  My budget is based on key activities focussed to safeguard our neighbourhoods and it is targeted to prioritise the following:

1.      Firstly, safeguarding communities and neighbourhoods by building a sustainable Council Tax precept base which will assist in mitigating future financial challenges, and which will help assure services and frontline policing into the future.

2.      Secondly, it will support working with the Force to deliver a new volunteer strategy aimed at attracting an additional 1,000 volunteers over the next three years.

3.      And, thirdly, my proposal enables a commitment to investing in Neighbourhood Policing support for 3 years, this while the Force transformational change programme work is shaped and implemented.  This is advocated in order to safeguard local services and to tackle anti-social behaviour hotspots.

Let me explain these three aspects further:

Firstly, with regard to safeguarding communities and neighbourhoods…

I am proposing a Band D precept increase of 1.5% (which is still below inflation and which equates to an additional £755,000 in Council Tax receipts per year). This increase means an additional £2.61 per year for a Band D property, equating to approximately 5 pence per week.

As I highlighted in my December report to the panel, whilst my original plans looked to drive through efficiencies by freezing Council Tax over the first two years followed by a stated plan to increase by 2% each year thereafter, a number of factors have influenced my precept intentions for 2014/15. These three factors are as follows:

Firstly, the provisional 2014/15 police grant settlement in December 2013 resulted in unexpected and unprecedented levels of top slicing from the police grant. A total of more than £77m has been top-sliced for national initiatives which include three particular elements:

·         One. Some £50m for an innovation fund against which Forces can bid in order to stimulate efficiencies, innovation and collaboration.

·         Two. Around £18m for the development of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (the IPCC) – a sum which is anticipated to increase further still in 2015/16.

·         And three. Over £9m to Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary (the HMIC) for an enhanced police inspection regime.

Together, these Government-level initiatives have resulted in over £1.6m being top sliced from my budget for Leicestershire and Rutland, further increasing by over 1.5% the already-anticipated 3.3% reduction.  We thus now face grant reductions of over 4.85% next year alone.

Secondly, whilst it is to be welcomed that previous years’ Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

The Panel considered a report of the Chief Finance Officer for the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Finance Director for the Office of the Chief Constable concerning the intentions of Leicestershire Police in respect of Section 106 (S106) funds and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). A copy of the report, marked “Agenda Item 5”, is filed with these minutes.

In introducing the item, the Chief Finance Office covered the following points:

·                Responsibility for S106 agreements and CIL lay with the Office of the Chief Constable;

·                There had been substantial development in the Force area, and more was expected in the coming years;

·                It was important that the Police worked effectively with district colleagues to secure funds to mitigate the impact of development.

The Chief Constable explained that 35,000 more houses were expected in the Force area over next few years, which was expected to place significant added demand on the Police. An experienced planner was acting in this area on behalf of the Police and it was important that all parties worked together on this issue.

Arising from the discussion, the following points were noted:

·                CIL was not a replacement for S106. The two would potentially be run together. It was known that there was only one CIL being pursued in the Force area currently;

·                It was felt that public money should not be spent in disputes between public authorities in the pursuit of S106 funding;

·                Though it was acknowledged that it was a complex area, it was felt that a consistent approach was required for developer contributions for the Police. It was felt that there had been some difficulty engaging the Police on this issue;

·                The PCC agreed that it was important for there to be a constructive dialogue on this issue.

RESOLVED:

(a)          That the report be noted;

(b)          That a meeting be convened between the relevant planning officer from the Police, the Chief Finance Officer and district/City/Rutland colleagues to discuss a consistent approach to developer contributions.

It was AGREED that this item be deferred to the next full meeting of the Police and Crime Panel.

The next meeting of the Police and Crime Panel is scheduled to take place on 10 February at 2.00pm at County Hall, Glenfield.

It was NOTED that, as the veto on the precept had not been used, the Panel’s meeting on 10 February would be cancelled. The next meeting of the Panel would therefore be held on Monday 17 March at 2.00pm.