Agenda item

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner which provided an update on the structure and budget of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC). A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 5’, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussions the following points were noted:

(i)            In answer to a question regarding the costs of the OPCC the PCC stated that it was not a target of his to keep the costs of the office below £1 million, as had been the case with the previous PCC. He would implement the structure needed to fulfil his role and the Deputy PCC Kirk Master was leading a review on the appropriate staffing structure for the OPCC. In answer to a question about whether the Deputy PCC was the appropriate person to carry out this task given the short period of time he had been part of the team, the PCC stated that in view of the previous work experience of Kirk Master he was the right person to conduct the review, though he would be assisted by members of the Senior Management Team and the final decisions would be made by the PCC himself. A report on the results of the review would come to a future meeting of the Panel early in 2017and the OPCC would liaise with the Police and Crime Panel Secretariat on its timing.

(ii)          In addition to conducting the staffing review the role of the Deputy PCC would be to attend events that the PCC was unable to attend, lead on community relations, and provide advice particularly in relation to the Prevent Strategy which he had prior experience of from his previous role at the Home Office.

(iii)         Due to the long-term absence of the Chief Executive on sick leave the Head of Governance and Assurance had also been appointed Deputy Chief Executive, in addition to the Deputy Monitoring Officer role she already held.

(iv)         The role of Advisor listed in the structure chart involved providing advice on communications and the Police and Crime Plan, and overseeing the office generally.

(v)          The member of staff in the role of Resources Manager would be leaving the office at the end of the week and the replacement would start in January 2017 on a 9 month fixed term contract.

(vi)         In the table under paragraph 12 in the report, ‘Misconduct Tribunal Costs’ referred to the costs relating to appeal hearings regarding Police Officers who had been dismissed, and the hearings were managed by OPCC staff. It was also explained that the Transitional Reserve was a fund to facilitate arrangements for the new Police and Crime Commissioner.

(vii)        The Deputy Chief Constable had been on the OPCC structure for the previous year as he was the line-manager for the areas of Business Support and Communications which were previously shared between the force and the OPCC, and as these areas were no longer shared the Deputy Chief Constable was no longer listed on the OPCC structure.

(viii)      The OPCC agreed to produce a document which would show which posts were previously in place and whether they remained part of the structure or whether they had been removed. It was also agreed to provide the specific names of the post holders.

(ix)         The Ministry of Justice permitted their Grant for Victims and Witnesses to be used for administrative and staffing costs and this is what Leicestershire OPCC was currently utilising the grant for. Many other regions did the same and in fact they used a greater proportion of the Grant than Leicestershire were for administration costs.

RESOLVED:

(a)  That the report be noted.

(b)  That a comparative structure chart for the OPCC be circulated to all Panel members following the meeting.