Agenda item

The Panel considered a report of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) which presented a draft of his Annual Report 2024/25. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 6’, is filed with these minutes.

In introducing the report, the PCC highlighted consultations he had undertaken with the public regarding the Police and Crime Plan and on the Policing Precept. He emphasised that he believed the current police funding formula to be unfair and that this left Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland disadvantaged compared to other areas. The PCC said that he continued to lobby the government for a review of the formula. The PCC thanked his Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner (DPCC), Chief Finance Officer and other staff within the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC) for their work over the year. He also placed on record his thanks to the Violence Reduction Network and Community Safety Partnerships for the work they had undertaken over the year.

Arising from discussion, the following points were noted:

(i)           With regards to finance, the PCC stated that the OPCC and Chief Constable had undertaken work in order to reduce costs whilst minimising the impact on service delivery. There had been no reduction in the number of police officers as a result of this work and the Force continued to manage any turnover in terms of police officers. However, the Force had reduced in size by removing 91 police staff roles and 50 PCSOs, with a further 35 needing to be removed in order to balance the budget for 2025/26. The Chairman raised concern that the Force was facing a £9.2 million deficit despite an increase in the Government Grant for Policing. The PCC assured the Panel that the Force would be financially sustainable over the next four-year period, within the current Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP). However, a deficit position was likely to be reached towards the end of the MTFP period. This would place the Force in a challenging position financially. Any further efficiencies would place the Force in a vulnerable position in terms of service delivery. However, both the PCC and Chief Constable would undertake work in under to minimise the impact on frontline service delivery in order to ensure public safety. The Government’s Budget was expected on 26 November 2025, but it remained unclear how policing would be impacted as a result. In light of continued concerns around the funding position, the PCC agreed that he would request that the DPCC work with the Panel to draft a letter for the Home Secretary, emphasising concerns relating to the Policing Funding Formula.

(ii)         A question was raised relating to a workforce planning exercise which the PCC had requested the OPCC to undertake. The PCC stated that the exercise had been carried out at the beginning of the current financial year in order to ensure that the OPCC was structured to be able to discharge the legislative requirements of a PCC plus the key policy areas that the Commissioner required at that time. The information had been included within a previous report on the policing precept, considered by the Panel on 5 February 2025. The PCC agreed to provide the Panel with a copy of the report following the meeting.

(iii)        Concern was raised regarding some of the wording used within the Annual Report regarding consultation and commissioning work. Concern was also raised relating to performance data not being clear in terms of progress achieved over a given period. Members of the Panel suggested that information and messaging needed to be clearer for members of the public so that responsibilities relating to work undertaken and associated outcomes could be fully understood. The PCC assured the Panel that he would ensure clarity within his Annual Report.

(iv)       With regards to community engagement relating to public safety, concern was raised regarding a review by the Force relating to arrangements for Diwali celebrations in Leicester. The PCC stated that a decision had been made by the local Safety Advisory Group to scale back elements of the celebrations on the grounds of serious concerns relating to public safety. The PCC stated that he had discussed the issue with the Chief Constable who had provided assurances that the Force remained fully committed to working with partners and communities to ensure that the celebrations were safe and successful.

(v)         A question was raised regarding the number of police officers who were trained in the use of tasers. The Panel member asked the question with regards to concern relating to public safety and the safety of police officers. The PCC stated that all police officers were offered training on the use of a taser and would be provided with one upon completion of the training. However, the training of, and use of, tasers could not be mandated by either the Force or the PCC.

(vi)       The draft Annual Report stated “I also surveyed the public regarding the policing precept, which garnered almost 1,350 responses. The overwhelming majority of respondents supported a maximum increase in the policing precept.” Cllr. Elly Cutkelvin expressed surprise at this and queried whether this statement accurately reflected the views of respondents. In response the PCC confirmed the statement was correct and it was not just a small majority that supported an increase. The PCC offered to provide further clarification regarding the wording of the survey after the meeting. (Note: point (vi) was added to these minutes after the Panel meeting on 27 October 2025)

RESOLVED:

(a)        That the contents of the draft Annual Report 2024/25, be noted.

(b)        That the Police and Crime Commissioner be requested to provide a copy of a report which outlined details of a workforce planning exercise, as referenced within the Annual Report.

(c)         That the Police and Crime Commissioner be requested to request that the Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner undertake work with the Panel to draft a letter for the Home Secretary, emphasising concerns relating to the Policing Funding Formula.