Agenda item

     The Police and Crime Commissioner will update the Panel on the proposed precept and draft budget for 2014/15. The Panel is asked to consider the proposed precept and make recommendations.

The Police and Crime Commissioner is currently proposing a precept increase of 3.6%, or the maximum permissible under the Central Government referendum principles, whichever is lower.

 Under Schedule 5 of The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 the    Panel is responsible for reviewing the Commissioner’s proposed precept and making reports and recommendations. If the Panel do not accept the proposed precept the power of veto is provided under this schedule. The power of veto over the proposed precept which can only be exercised with two thirds majority, at least, of the current Panel membership, i.e. 14 members or more, voting in favour of a veto.

In the event of a veto the Commissioner must produce a revised precept by 15 February. A provisional meeting date of Friday 21 February has been arrangement for the Panel to meet to consider a revised precept and make reports to the Commissioner. The Panel does not have the power of veto over the revised precept.

74.       The Panel considered a report by the Police and Crime Commissioner which outlined the budget. The Panel received the draft budget which was introduced by John Eagles, OPCC and Mark Baker, Sussex Police.

75.      The Panel raised the following points:

·         The level of reserves and what fiduciary duty existed to maintain a certain level of reserves. This was not prescribed but it was felt to be prudent to maintain reserves of 4-5%.

·         The reduction in the level of funding from central government. The second Comprehensive Spending Review had reduced the level of funding to the Police and the top slicing of the central grant for police reforms had been greater than expected.

·         The budget listed cyber crime as an investment area but the Police and Crime Plan had not been updated to include detail on this priority. More information was requested on cyber crime investment and what outcomes were sought. Cyber crime represented a very serious threat to the Sussex community and Sussex Police was currently producing proposals to address cyber crime in Sussex. Forces across the country were in a similar position and work was being undertaken to understand how local arrangements to address this priority area would coordinate with the National Crime Agency and local organisations. The investment in the initiative would be split between the development of the framework to address cyber crime and the actual delivery of the function.

76.      Resolved – that the Panel notes the budget for  2014/15

Proposed Precept 2014/15

77.     The Panel considered a report by the Police and Crime Commissioner which set out the proposed precept for 2014/15. The Commissioner introduced the report and set out the investment priorities for the forthcoming year which would be achieved in full by a precept increase of 3.6%.

78.     The Panel provided the following comments during the debate:

·         Concern was expressed that an increase in the precept would impact upon residents already struggling with the effects of inflation. It was acknowledged that the public was generally supportive of funding the local police force but it was queried whether resources could be refocussed from other areas in support of priorities. The Commissioner acknowledged that the current financial situation was difficult and confirmed that during the consultation conducted on the proposed precept, 67% of people had responded favourably to an increase. The Commissioner outlined initiatives to make more efficient use of officer time including the training of Sexual Offences Liaison (SOLOs). The precept increase was required to fund the investment priorities immediately; if the funding of the priorities relied upon savings they would be delayed. The Commissioner emphasised the important of using investment to address the critical area of serious sexual crime.

·         The Panel accepted the priorities identified by the Commissioner for investment and wanted assurance that internal efficiencies had been fully realised before supporting the proposed precept. The Commissioner confirmed that the savings programme would realise significant efficiencies and that savings would be achieved in the future through on-going work with Surrey police force particularly with HR and IT functions. Co-location of police facilities with local partners had also realised savings under the estates strategy.
 

·         There was not unanimity of opinion across the Panel members regarding the proposed precept increase of 3.6%. Support was expressed for an increase of 3.6% by the majority of the Panel but other members opposed any increase in the precept and it was also suggested that the Commissioner should proposed a more modest increase of 2%.

·         Those Panel members supporting a precept of 3.6% felt that the Commissioner had presented a compelling case and had clearly identified investment priorities which required this increase. Furthermore members recognised that the increase in the precept would not merely bridge the gap in funding caused by the reduction in the grant from central government but was but was investment for the priorities. It was recognised and supported that the savings programme would address the reduction in central government funding and that the use of savings to fund investment priorities was not viable due to the delay in realising savings and the need for immediate investment for the identified priorities.

·         The Panel recognised that a referendum to agree a precept increase would be a significant and burdensome cost to the Commissioner and that the use of taxpayer’s money to fund a referendum was not in the interests of the public, It was suggested that the Panel allow the Commissioner some flexibility in setting the final precept to take account of the expected announcement from central government to confirm the referendum threshold to precept increases.

79.      The following motion was proposed and seconded by the Panel: The Panel supports a precept of 3.6% or a figure up to this amount; whichever is permissible without triggering a referendum.

80.      The Panel voted on the motion contained in minute 79 above and it was agreed by a clear majority of Panel members.

81.      Resolved – That the Panel supported a precept of 3.6% or a figure up to this amount; whichever is permissible without triggering a referendum.

82.   These was a brief adjournment at 11.58 a.m. and the meeting reconvened at 12:10 p.m.