Agenda and minutes

A webcast of the meeting can be viewed at: http://council.webcast.vualto.com/leicestershire-county-council/home?EventId=16859

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. M. Sood declared a personal interest in respect of the substantive item as a member of the Police’s Independent Advisory Panel, as the Chairman of the Leicester Council of Faiths, as a member of the Bishop’s Faith Forum and as a member of the Gold Community.

The Police and Crime Commissioner and the Candidate for the post of Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner have been invited to attend this session.

A copy of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner’s report on the appointment is attached.

A document explaining the process to be followed at today’s Confirmatory Hearing has also been attached for information.

The Police and Crime Panel considered a report of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) in regard to its proposed appointment of Cllr. Kirk Master to the post of Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner (DPCC). A copy of a report of the OPCC, marked ‘Agenda Item 3’, is filed with these minutes.

Prior to the commencement of the Confirmatory Hearing, the Chairman outlined the process to be adhered to, taking those present through a process document which had been circulated to all members with the agenda for the meeting. A copy of this report was filed with the minutes.

The Chairman welcomed the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) and Cllr. Master to the Hearing, both of whom were present to respond to any questions the Panel had about the appointment process and Cllr. Master’s abilities in respect of “professional competence” and “personal independence”. Officers and Panel members each introduced themselves to Cllr. Master.

In order for the PCC to be able to take members of the Panel through the process of appointing Cllr. Master to the post, Cllr. Master was asked to leave the room.

(Cllr. Master left the room.)

The Panel put three principal questions to the PCC in relation to the appointment process. Broadly, these covered the following issues:

1.         The PCC was quoted in the Leicester Mercury prior to his election in May 2015 as saying that he was initially keen to appoint a DPCC, but was not certain, and that if he were to win he would allow himself the time to assess what was needed and would only make an appointment for what an individual would add. It was asked what Cllr. Master would bring to the role of DPCC.

2.         The Panel wanted to know whether the PCC was comfortable with Cllr. Master continuing in his role as Assistant Mayor at Leicester City Council with a portfolio for Neighbourhood Services and whether he believed Cllr. Master would have sufficient independence in the eyes of the public and the time necessary to carry out the Deputy PCC role to the best of his ability.

3.         The Panel wanted to understand the PCC’s justification for not having advertised the post in the same way as other posts in the OPCC.

In response to the Panel’s questioning, the following points of the PCC were noted:

·                It had been made clear in previous meetings with the Panel that the PCC wished to appoint a DPCC. He required someone with the expertise and skill to add value to the work of his Office. He believed that Cllr. Master fit the criteria for the post as outlined in paragraph 7 of his report. The portfolio of responsibilities he had set for Cllr. Master played to his strengths;

·                The PCC had been impressed by the variety of work experience outlined in Cllr. Master’s CV and his background in the Youth Offending Team, Youth Justice and the Home Office made him an ideal candidate. His involvement in third sector work and the City’s Community Safety Partnership was also of great benefit;

·                His personal background in areas such as sport and his involvement with young people would be of great benefit to the Force, which had traditionally found engaging young people challenging. It was noted that this would be of an immediate benefit in formulating the Police and Crime Plan;

·                The PCC believed Cllr. Master could carry out both the DPCC role and his role as Assistant Mayor with a portfolio responsibility for Neighbourhood Services and that, in his view, this did not represent a conflict of interest. He referred  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

The next meeting of the Panel is scheduled to take place on 23 September at 1.00pm.

It was NOTED that the next meeting of the Panel would be held later in the day at 1.00pm.

The public are likely to be excluded during the following item of business in accordance with Section 100(A) of the Local Government Act 1972:-

Panel Deliberations on the Proposed Appointment of a Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner.

RESOLVED:

That under Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded for the following item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 1, 3 and 10 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act specified below and that, in all circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

·           Panel Deliberations on the Proposed Appointment of a Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner.

(Exempt under Paragraphs 1, 3 and 10 of Schedule 12A)

The Panel, having gone into exempt session, considered the statement and answers provided by Cllr. Master to their questions, in addition to the introduction and responses to questions provided by the PCC and all relevant paperwork provided.

RESOLVED:

(a)       That the Panel supports the appointment of Cllr. Kirk Master as Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner (DPCC), but that assurance is sought that the following two areas be the subject of further discussions between the Cllr. Master and the PCC:

(i)        the potential conflict of interest represented by Cllr. Master’s continuing role as Assistant Mayor with a portfolio for Neighbourhood Services; and

(ii)       Cllr. Master’s capacity to balance the DPCC and Assistant Mayor roles;

(b)       That Cllr. Master’s commitment to developing a thorough knowledge of the community safety issues faced in the County and Rutland be welcomed and that the Panel believes that Cllr. Master should prioritise his presence in the County and Rutland to ensure he is able to develop an ongoing understanding of the issues faced by rural communities;

(c)       That a report be submitted to the Panel in 6 months’ time setting out how the PCC is addressing the issues raised in (a) above and seeking assurances that the way in which the role is carried out by Cllr. Master does not infringe upon the operational independence of the Chief Constable and his officers.