Agenda item

The Panel was asked to consider the:

(i)     West Mercia Police and Crime Commissioner’s (PCC’s) Proposed Budget 2024/25 and Medium Term Financial Plan 2024/25 - 2028/29

(ii)    Report of the Panel’s Budget Scrutiny Sub Group; and to

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

The PCC gave a presentation to the Panel (attached to the Minutes), on his proposed budget. The following main issues were highlighted:

·         The PCC’s vision for West Mercia continued to be delivered through the 4 pillars of the Safer West Mercia Plan (SWMP) (Putting Victims and survivors first, Building a more secure West Mercia, Reforming West Mercia and Reassuring West Mercia’s Communities). The Acting Chief Constable set out in detail some of the improvements planned in respect of the PCC’s commitments to improved visible and accessible policing, improving public contact and to more effective investigations and better outcomes. These improvements included seeking to ensure that the roles of Neighbourhood Police Officers and Police Community Support Officers (PCSO) were fully staffed and able to be more visible particularly in town centre locations; enhancing the service for victims of sexual offences and improving the capacity of the online sexual abuse team and the digital forensics unit.

·         The way in which the budget had been built, and the proposals to fund the £6.9m funding gap required for a balanced budget. The Panel was informed that it was critical that the resources were focussed in the right operational areas to ensure the most benefit for the public. The aim of this budget was to protect and deliver plans that were already in place. It had therefore been necessary to reduce services in some areas and re-prioritise spend into other areas.

·         An updated suite of key performance indicators (KPI’s) had been developed to enable the success of the delivery of services through the 4 pillars to be measured by the Panel. It was highlighted that that there was consistency with the KPI’s from the previous year to enable members to track changes.

·         The PCC’s recommendation to the Panel was to increase the precept by 4.91% for 2024/25, adding £13 to the annual Council Tax bill for an average band D home. During the PCC’s term of office, he had been the lowest preceptor across all of the PCC’s in England. The proposed increase for this year was necessary and justified in order to protect the funding basis relied upon to provide services.

The Lead Member of the Sub Group introduced the Group’s report and thanked the members and supporting officers involved for their contribution to the process. The PCC was also thanked for the provision of data and his transparency which had enabled the Group to gain a thorough understanding of the budget at a granular level.

The Sub Group had met on 4 occasions and their work had focussed on seeking evidence that the precept proposals would provide best value and enable the inclusion of community themes which had emerged from the public engagement exercises, whilst also fulfilling the objectives of the SWMP. To achieve this, the Lead Member reported that the Group had taken account of a number of issues including the national economic picture and the effect on the West Mercia Police and the wider community of the proposed precept,  the detrimental effect that the lower level of precept projected in the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) would have on West Mercia Police services and the potential benefits and efficiencies that the proposed precept increase could bring to key performance areas in the SWMP.  The Group had also reviewed the KPI’s from last year’s precept setting process and considered how they could be enhanced, with a draft version for 2024/25 then having been considered.

Members of the Sub-Group had recommended that the West Mercia Police and Crime Panel support the PCC’s proposal for an increase of Council Tax by £13.00 for an average Band D home (equivalent to 4.91%) providing that the Panel continued to receive a quarterly budget monitoring report which included KPI’s (to monitor the outcomes against the Budget so that the PCP can identify trends, service improvements and satisfaction against the commitments in the SWMP) and continue to have a baseline for precept reviews in future years.

The Chairman thanked the Sub Group for their work and commitment to their task.

During the discussion, the following issues were raised by Members:

·         A Member referred to the CCTV provision in Hereford and asked whether the PCC could provide financial support for the maintenance costs as he had been able to do previously. The PCC advised that he was not in a position to provide direct funding but would help Councils to attract support from other sources of funding. Direct funding had been withdrawn as universal support across the region had not been possible. The PCC also highlighted that the statutory duty for CCTV provision, under crime and disorder legislation, remained with local authorities, who owned the equipment. He did, however, recognise a partnership approach, and he had at times provided capital funding for infrastructure and equipment.

·         With the rapid growth of cyber-crime, currently accounting for 50% of all crime, a Member questioned what was being done to increase resources in this area to protect the community. The Acting Chief Constable (ACC) explained that the Force was responding to this growing issue in various ways including increasing investment in child sexual exploitation issues, a whole system approach to fraud, including individual support for victims, and close working with the National Crime Agency where offences were originating from abroad. The PCC added that this issue was central to his strategic decision-making process on funding and that the Force’s digital forensics team had been developed significantly to seek to combat the threat. The challenge now was to divert more resources to this area and to be able to effectively report on this threat.

·         A Member sought assurance that the KPI’s presented to the Panel would be clear, concise and robust in nature and that comparative trends would be able to be scrutinised. The PCC advised that he was committed to this and that he felt there had been progress made towards ensuring comparisons could be made against earlier KPI’s, ensuring that the Panel were able to effectively hold him to account and build public confidence. He acknowledged that there was also scope for further progress in this area and gave his commitment to this being developed going forward.

·         Concern at the lack of budget certainty in the coming years was expressed by a Member. The PCC confirmed that with Government’s funding being based on a 1-year settlement, there was only certainty about the funding for the current year.

·         A Member sought reassurance that concerns about improved face to face public contact with Police, opening times of local police stations and improving the performance of the 101 service were key priorities for the PCC. The PCC set out the expectations regarding police station opening hours and that the 101 service currently being provided was not good enough. He gave his commitment to improvements being made in these areas and confirmed that the Chief Constable had made resources available.

·         The unfairness of the Council Tax system was raised in that the poorest in society paid a higher percentage towards Council Tax, than the more wealthy. A Member asked whether the PCC would consider working with the Panel to seek a reform of the Council Tax system. The PCC agreed the system was unfair and outdated, but highlighted there were a number of Council Tax support schemes for those most in need. Whilst it was not an issue that was currently prominent in the country, he confirmed that it was an issue high on his agenda.

·         In response to a Member’s comment about the size of the proposed increase in precept, the PCC acknowledged that £13 a year was a significant increase, but he felt that it was justified on this occasion given the level of service being provided. He also highlighted that local authorities were having to make similar difficult decisions.

·         A Member highlighted that residents were worried about knife crime and that sometimes victims felt let down. Whilst the current support being provided to put victims and survivors first was welcomed, it was questioned what additional support would be provided for victims as a result of the increase in precept. The PCC acknowledged that at times residents were let down and he gave his commitment to drive forward an improved universal offer for the delivery of services and was confident that the planned investment would facilitate this. On a positive note, the Panel was advised that the successful community investment work on crime prevention in Telford over the last 4 years had now been able to be provided across the West Mercia area.

·         The 10 additional police officers (to be employed to front line policing) that the increase in precept would facilitate were welcomed, as was the fact that the Safer neighbourhood teams would be protected for the year ahead. The Panel was assured that policing resources were deployed to ensure a universal level of service was provided across West Mercia.

The Chairman highlighted the importance of working in partnership and that the robust KPI’s were essential to allow effective comparisons to be made and provide confidence in the process. He thanked the PCC and his team for their contributions and the Lead Member and Sub Group members for the time and effort that had given to this process.

Having considered the reports, the following recommendation as proposed by the Budget Scrutiny Sub Group was considered:

That the West Mercia Police and Crime Panel support the PCC’s proposal for an increase of Council Tax by £13.00 for an average Band D home (equivalent to 4.91%) providing that the Panel continues to receive a quarterly budget monitoring report which includes key performance indicators (to monitor the outcomes against the Budget so that the PCP can identify trends, service improvements and satisfaction against the commitments in the SWMP) and continue to have a baseline for precept reviews in future years.

This recommendation was agreed by Members of the Panel by a majority vote of 12 in favour, no votes against the recommendation and 2 abstentions.

Following the meeting, a report from the Panel would be sent to the PCC.