ASSOCIATION OF POLICING & CRIME CHIEF EXECUTIVES

Draft Notes of the meeting held on 4th June 2013, London

  1. Welcome, introductions and declaration of other business

Various AOB items were declared in advance.

  1. AGM Business

i)Election Of APACE Officers

The following chief executives were elected as APACE officers until the next AGM:

  • Chair: Miranda Carruthers-Watt
  • Vice Chairs: Andy Champness, Jenni Douglas-Todd
  • Secretary: Kevin Sharp
  • Treasurer: Paul Hammond
  • APACE Officer: Fraser Sampson

ii)APACE accounts

The unaudited accounts were presented and Paul Hammond was thanked for pulling these together and for the additional work involved in revisiting previous years’ accounts. The accounts have yet to be audited for reasons outlined in the covering report. The year 2012-13 is showing a net deficit of just over £17,000, largely due to, first, a back dated invoice for the increase in hours of the APACE officer from December 2011 and, second, our contribution to the joint 2011 APACE/PATS seminar. Some underlying errors from the financial year 2007-08 have been carried forward erroneously year after year. These errors have now been corrected in the revised set of accounts for that year and each of the subsequent years. The debtor balance outstanding at the 31st March 2013 totals £6,290.However,after taking into account sums subsequently paid, the debtor balancecurrently amounts to £4,262 as at today’s date.This cumulative debtor balance was in respect of unpaid invoices going back to the 2006/07 financial year, some of which should have been cancelled and the associated debt written-off. Members agreed the following actions.

Actions:

  • two subscription fee debts be written off: £100 in respect of the Service Authorities (as this body no longer exists) and £1,000 in respect of Cumbria PA (as they withdrew their membership in 2008/09 but the invoice was not cancelled)
  • reminders to be sent to recover other debtors in respect of outstanding subscription fee invoices (due to changes in chief executives) in respect of: BTP, West Yorkshire, Norfolk and a retired member; and to recover outstanding seminar fees in respect of South Wales and Essex.
  • the Treasurer shall appoint an Independent Auditor to audit the revised accounts for the period 2007/08 to 2012/13 (incorporating the above agreed write-offs) which shall then be represented for approval at a future meeting
  • the Treasurer shall prepare an annual budget for approval at a future meeting
  • the draft minutes from the 31st May meeting were approved
  • the minor changes to the APACE constitution were approved
  • the draft ‘Introduction to APACE’ document to be circulated to members for any other comments
  1. Commissioning Victims’ Services

Andy Champness provided an update on earlier work with the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and the Victims’ Commissioning Framework which has been based on APACE commissioning documents developed by Dorothy Gregson. The South West group will meet to step through the commissioning cycle into developing the specification. Victim Support (VS) had invited a group of PCCs including Leicestershire, to work with them on developing the first response model. VS are keen to work with PCCs and are petitioning the MoJ for core funding.

Although the Helen Grant letter is silent on the local element, the MoJ’s thinking is that local voluntary community sector providers should provide the local support. Some areas have a victims’ service alliance which is a subgroup of the local Voluntary Community Sector, and funded by VS. It was agreed that it would be helpful for chief executives to regularly share information on their victims and witnesses approaches locally. There are potential pitfalls in sharing information with potential bidders, although transparency can be achieved by making information available for all potential providers, on PCC’s websites.

Most had received a letter from Baroness Newlove offering scoping work commissioned by the Met. This made no mention of costs.

PCCsare looking at different models e.g. in-house direct service provision, co-commissioning, allocation formulae and grant making processes. There is a need to look at what is already in place with partnerships, for victims and for CSPs. Hampshire has commissioned Deloittes who suggesteda proposal for creating a commissioning budget and team of 6 to 8 commissioning staff.

Actions:

  • APACE members to be asked to share local project plans and any other documentation already existing
  • Paul Stock will share the learning from the group of commissioning officers
  • Leicestershire and Gloucestershire have progressed grants processes which they will share and circulate to all members.
  • A rough guide for PCCs is required – highlighting assumptions, risks. APCC to be approached to see if they can provide the policy lead for PCCs, to identify who are the main national and regional players.
  • APACE /PaCCTs to produce a strategic risk register – highlighting the series of risks in commissioning victims’ services. AC will begin first draft
  • Proposal for forming a commissioning group through APACE to share information
  • The Cabinet Office commissioning academy cohort group are looking for a good case study
  1. Home Office update

Oscar Ramudo, Acting Head of the Police Reform Unit, was welcomed to the meetingand various issues were brought to his attention. It was noted that PCCs had little time to prepare for the recent Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC) invitation and PCCs are due back before the HASC in November. The HASC suggested that the Chairs of PCPs need more powers to do their job but appeared to misunderstand the separation of PCCs/PCPs. The issues with the content and accuracy of the HASC report were noted, as was the suggestion that PCCs are politically isolated.

There is a need to prepare nowfor the HASC in November which will probably look at ‘PCCs: one year on’. In the longer term PCCs could develop a good relationship with their local MPswho, it was noted, have made fewexpressions of support for their own PCCs. Oscar’s team will respond to the HASC within 30 days. APACE offered to pull together a list of the report’s inaccuracies and write to the Permanent Secretary/Oscar.

The HASC is likely to write again asking for information and chief executives need to have sight of this letter before OPCC staff return a response. HASC letters should be added to local risk registers. PCCs accounts are likely to be inspected in future.There are risks at stage 2 where different expenditure baselines will be shown in budgets.

It was noted there is a stage 2 technicalworking group who will be used to help draft advice to ministers. Their workshop will look at the remaining issues and the key players are invited: ACPO, APCC, APACE, police lawyers, Unison, PaCCTS, HR people. No further guidance is expected.

The ACPOTAM decision not to allowPCCs to send their chief executives to represent them at a recent Thames House security briefing was raised. This decision had been raised by one Police and Crime Commissioner with the minister. It was noted that, at other PCC meetings with the Home Office, there has been a purported lack of space for PCCs to have their chief executive present to advise them. It was noted that PCCs also feel ‘talked at’ whenattending some events and needed time to develop their collective viewpoints. A view is required on cross departmental working e.g. victims, and a view of the policing landscape e.g. college of policing, and how this all fits together.

The minister will set out a timetableand outcomes from the chief executive workshop and supply further information regarding scenarios very soon. They will be updating elements to the briefing sheet for chief executives. It is suggested to first look at the functions needed, followed by what information is required, and then analyse what people are needed to deliver the functions.

The Police.uk requirements are still going ahead, but the Home Office will lift the bulk of the data.

Actions:

  • Oscar was asked if he could supply some Civil Service guidelines for responding to HASC enquiries etc. As most PCCs don’t have political advisors, Oscar will supply what his department do to prepare HASC responses
  • Oscar will take back the key issues raised at the PCC event on 9th July
  • Organise a Home Office workshop on HASC at a future APACE meeting.
  • APACE to pull together a list of the report’s inaccuracies and write to the Permanent Secretary (Nb. APCC are now doing this)
  1. College of Policing Update

CC Alex Marshall, CEO College of Policing, delivered a talk outlining the college’s status as a company limited by guaranteed, with the Home Secretary as sole owner and (through provisions in the ASB Bill) transferring some of her powers there, e.g. powers to issue codes of practice, etc. The college is the Professional Body for policing, with buildings in Bramshill and Harrogate, owned by Home Office from 1st December 2012. The key issues are:

  • to establish a board, with 4 PCC places, with Professor Shirley Pearce as Chair
  • to achieve royal charter status after demonstrating to the Treasury that 51% of funding will be obtained from other sources(30% already external, 24% raised from other than grant)
  • to reduce the current unsustainable £75million costs to £50million or below, with £26million needed to demonstrate independence from the Home Office
  • to reduce non-staff costs by moving out of Marsham St. to Southwark, raising funds by selling Bramshill and through international work
  • to consider subscription and membership fees in future
  • to establish a register of those struck off for gross misconduct or who left when facing gross misconduct charges, issuing licences not to practice
  • to fill a gap in their business acumen and look to recruit a HE/ FE director with a commercial background

The college is already licensing and accrediting e.g. fire arms and gold public order commanders, and other areas of policing are likely to be licensed and will need to be CPD based so that officers are up to date with best practice etc. The college is building relationships with universities and establishing an evidence base and career recognition and award.

There will be force based accreditation and force level standards setting.The Strategic Command course will set the CPD requirements for chief officers and PCCs will monitor the chief constable’s performance. The college is not a regulator but holds the register of what people are qualified to do. It is up to the force to monitor performance and misconduct and to notify the college to update their database. The HMI will inspect against college standards and the college with feed HMI report learning back into police development. The IPCC has a very good database of public concerns to help design recruitment, training, promotion.

Current priorities for the college are:

  • integrity and the gap between police regulations and public conceptions of ethical behaviour– code of ethicsmay contain the conduct regs, thechanging vetting rules and ensuring enforcement
  • protecting public between dangerous people re sharing information – child sexual exploitation guidance due soon
  • looking at models of local policing re austerity, different models are emerging and the college will describe successes in spite of the cuts
  • making policing more representative of the people served through work with the MET and positive action to recruit BME groups

It was noted that many of these things were contained in the APACE response to the Neyroud review of police leadership and training, e.g. accreditation, governance and identifying effective practitioners.

The college is not seen as a training organisation, they set standards and others will train to their standards. PCCs have commissioned the college to look at performance and how to measure success, and public speaking training, but would welcome feedback from chief executives and PCCs. The college will have a small London base in Southwark and another in the south but will be located in different parts of country, to share costs and make it more meaningful to forces, PCC buildings could be made available. The college is for everyone involved in policing,including police staff, but will not replicate other training bodies e.g. CIPFA.

It was noted that the links with conduct matters and performance, especially around chief officer ranks, had not been finalised yet. It was also noted that PCCs and their offices could contribute to developing the college rather than being recipients of its services.

  1. SPR compliance

There was a discussion on possible reporting of thresholds when reducing budgets around SPR capabilities. There is currently no national picture of our national capabilityalthough ACPO leads in the 5 SPR areas are aware of capacity regionally and individually. Forces will be inspected against SPR but any serious degrading of capacity from budget reductions would be identifiable locally well in advance of any impact. The risk comes from aggregating reductions across the country in certain capabilities which will affect national capability and PCCs should expect HMIC to raise this during the course of force inspection. There was a suggestion, although not universally accepted by members, that it would be helpful for APACE/ PaCCTS to agree on threshold figures which would trigger a report to the National Police Protective Services Board (NPPSB)on which APACE is represented. The suggestion involves flagging areas firstwhere local budget cuts reduce SPR areas below a specified amount. This would simply mean demonstrating that in setting their budgets PCCs havehad regard to it. This suggestion involves planning in advance so that the Home Office is aware of risks/gaps. There is a risk of mandating if cuts go too far and reduce national capability and this could also trigger the Monitoring Officer role in reporting and these risks exist whether or not an agreed reporting mechanism is identified.

Action: Fraser Sampson will speak further with PaCCTs and circulate a paper highlighting opportunities and options

  1. Skills for Justice

Erika Redfearn presented a paper which followed up a previous APACE suggestion to investigate the feasibility and cost of additional work around the OPCC framework. Erika was thanked for her work but it was agreed that the time had passed to make use of it. It will be looked at again after OPCCs have got through thestage 2 staff transfer.

  1. Any Other Business

A small working group of PCCs and ACPO have been looking at CPOSA legal protection insurance. A recent letter suggests that most PCCs decided to pay the premium for 2013-14 but it appears that CPOSA has paid the premium unilaterally for 2013-14. It was unclear what level of cover the revised CPOSA arrangements would provide and how far it would be used to fund cases against PCCs. Chief executives have not seen the papers that went to the working group. The proper role of CPOSA friends was discussed and it was noted that the questions that had been raised about the parameters for chief police officers acting in the role of ‘friend’ had not been answered. Some chief constables are paying the insurance themselves because it is a taxable benefit.

Action: Jenni – Douglas-Todd, Paul Stock and John Smith will share their experience and the work done so far to collect the position over the next few weeks and develop a letter for PCCs to clarify the position about the insurance provisions and the proper role of CPOSA ‘friends’.

Thanks were recorded for Fraser Sampson, for chairing and steering APACE over the last two years and in recognition for his enormous contribution in raising the profile of the association and for his wide-ranging input into national work streams.

1