Agenda item

The West Mercia Police and Crime Panel (PCP) was asked to consider the:

(i)       West Mercia Police and Crime Commissioner’s (PCC’s) Proposed Budget 2021/22 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2021/22 – 2024/25;

(ii)     report of the PCP’s Budget Scrutiny Task Group; and

(iii)    provide a report to the PCC on the proposed precept, including any recommendations, outlining whether it vetoed the precept or not.

West Mercia Police and Crime Commissioner’s (PCC’s) Proposed Budget 2021/22 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2021/22 – 2024/25

The PCC gave a presentation to the Panel on his proposed budget, the slides had been shared with Panel members prior to the meeting and were attached to these minutes. The highlights from the presentation were as follows.

The proposed Budget overview was:

·       a net revenue budget after savings of £244.679m (£8.874m on 2020/21)

·       Central funding of £138.202m (£7.484m on 20/21)

·       A Council Tax for a Band D property of £240.20 (an increase of £15 on 2020/21)

·       There was provision for an additional 91 police officers (totalling 399 since 2016)

·       Investment to continue in force modernisation

·       Building further Police focus on community priorities

·       Provision to mitigate significant risks.

1,395 responses had been received from the Consultation process, with a clear majority of respondents supporting paying more for policing. Community priorities were around police visibility, engagement, and action, as well as community safety. 67% of respondents were worried about levels of crime.

West Mercia had the lowest increase in precept across England and Wales in the current PCC term.

Budget Scrutiny Task Group

Cllr Wood (Lead Member of the Budget Scrutiny Task Group) introduced the Task Group report and thanked the PCC and his staff for their clarity and time in facilitating the meetings of the Group. Unfortunately, in addition to the Lead Member only 2 Members of the Task Group were able to attend both of the meetings set up in December 2020 and January 2021.

The Task Group met with the PCC and his officers to discuss the proposed budget for 2021/2022, the Medium Term Financial Plan through to 2024/2025 and the proposed Precept for 2021/22 in context of the Policing Plan and the Commissioner’s election promises.  The Report was attached to the Agenda.

Subject to the results of the PCC's 2021/22 Budget Consultation which closed on 20 January, the Task Group was supportive of the PCC's financial strategy for the Budget Proposals for 2021/22 and the MTFP through to 2024/25 in the context of the West Mercia Policing Plan, although there were reservations about the affordability of the 6.6% Council Tax increase for residents given the current economic climate.

During the discussion, the following main points were made:

·       The precept proposal recommended to the Panel was to increase the precept by 6.6% for 2021/22, adding £15.00 to the annual Council Tax bill for a typical band D home.  It was acknowledged that this was a difficult decision at the current time.

·       Cllr Kent highlighted from the presentation the point about the clear majority of respondents to the Consultation supporting the increase in the precept ie paying more for more policing, a point which he echoed.  The proposed Community Policing Charter was very welcome, especially if it was simplistic and reduced the bureaucracy around community involvement.  The investment in digital transition was also welcomed.

·       In response to the suggestion that the size of the Agenda pack for the meeting should be reduced, the PCC pointed out that that the Budget Report in particular represented a significant amount of work, however the information provided as part of performance reporting was on the radar in terms of complexity and amount of information provided.

·         A Member referred to slide 8 “Tackling the issues that matter most to you” and in doing so reminded the PCC that the new format of the Safer Neighbourhood Team (SNT) Reports provided to Parish Councils were not detailing the Parish areas.  Parish Councils had reported that it was helpful if the relevant parishes were detailed in the report. The Chief Constable acknowledged that there was an issue internally, but provided reassurance that it wasn’t due to a lack of commitment to provide information and he believed that the Community Charter would address this.

·         A Member questioned why £2.7m had been identified as a key riskfor the delay in the delivery of savings leading to an overspend in the year (with no specific provision for earmarked reserves). In response the PCC advised that not all of the savings were within West Mercia’s gift and that some services were still being provided to Warwickshire; that said he was reassured of West Mercia Police’s ability to deliver the savings and they had a good track record.

·         The PCC confirmed that Athena was now fully embedded and was a good example of the digital transformation process. There was still further development required to maximise the use of Athena and automate more of the processes.  Currently, West Mercia had a shared IT infrastructure with Warwickshire for transactional services, forensics, and file storage which (except for file storage) was due to end by spring 2021.

·       A review of estates services had been undertaken and new arrangements were being implemented, following Worcestershire County Council’s decision to serve notice and withdraw from the joint venture company Place Partnership Limited. The PCC and Hereford and Worcester Fire and Rescue Service were working in partnership to create a joint estates service. This new estates service would deliver efficiencies whilst creating an improved bespoke service for both emergency services.

·       A Member questioned why the PCC had increased the precept by 26.69% during his tenure (2016/17 – 2021/22) equating to just over £50.  The PCC advised that when his tenure began, he had inherited declining police officer numbers and an increasing council tax, he taken the opportunity to freeze the council tax and had increased the numbers of police officers over the period. 14% of the increase was attributable to inflation and 12% was linked to 20% uplift in police officers. The PCC was very clear that he wanted to deliver a balanced budget and this Budget was a ‘more for more’ budget, in the interests of community. He believed that he had delivered on his promises.

·       The PCC confirmed that the separation costs from the split from the Alliance with Warwickshire had been funded from reserves.

·       The PCC advised that there had not been any significant capital receipts during his tenure, but if there had been, the money would have been reinvested in capital spend.  When applicable, the details of assets sold and how the money from the sale was invested, was publicly available via the PCC’s website.

·       The plans for Hereford Police Station and outstations were discussed, the PCC advised that officers were looking at a business case to either rebuild the station or re-furbish the existing building. The PCC was working with the Fire Service in respect of co-location in Leominster.

·       In response to a Member question about the priority of road safety in the Budget, the PCC confirmed that this was business as usual and signposted the Member to page 34 of the Agenda for further detail.

·       A Member highlighted specific local policing issues in Highley, which the Chief Constable was aware of. The Community Charter would hopefully provide the mechanism for local accountability.

·       In response to a question about what would not be delivered without a 6.6% increase in the Council Tax, the PCC explained that the increase would support the investment in extra police officers, modernisation of estates, the IT upgrades and reiterated that the proposal was for a ‘more for more’ budget.

Decision

On being put to the vote, the precept proposal recommended to the Panel to increase the precept by 6.6% for 2021/22, adding £15 to the annual Council Tax bill for a typical band D home was agreed.

A letter informing the PCC of the Panel’s decision would be sent. It was noted that the PCC was required to have regard to the Panel's report and provide a response which would be published.

The Vice-Chairman suggested that there should be a review of the method of scrutinising the PCC’s precept proposal including the merits of a task group.

The meeting adjourned from 15.40pm to 15.45pm.