Press Release: Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act

The Government’s Police Reform proposals have been agreed in Parliament with Police and Crime Commissioners replacing Police Authorities in November 2012.  The Bill received Royal Assent on 15^th September 2011.

From 15 November 2012 a directly elected Commissioner or PCC will be responsible for overseeing the Chief Constable and representing local communities.

The Vice-Chair of the Authority Nia Evans said “Although we are disappointed that Police Authorities will be disbanded we are already working hard to ensure that there is a smooth transition to the new Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner.

Our main aim is to ensure that North Wales is a safe place to live, work and visit and that our communities and visitors receive an excellent poling service from North Wales Police Force.

We will ensure that we will keep our stakeholders and public updated of all stages of the transition by updating our website and publishing our Newsletters”

Press Release - Elections of Police and Crime Commissioners are to be held in November 2012

Speaking in response to the Government announcement that they intend the elections of Police & Crime Commissioners to take place in November 2012, Alun Lewis, Chair of North Wales Police Authority said:

“We are very disappointed that the Government is seeking to delay the implementation of their flawed policy rather than addressing the flaws which were laid bare during the debates in the Lords. The introduction of Police & Crime Commissioners is an expensive innovation at a time when police budgets are being cut. An independent review previously estimated the cost at over £100 million and the Government accepted that the elections alone would cost £50 million. That was based on combined elections in May: the Prime Minister has estimated the additional cost of stand-alone elections in November as £25m and yet the turnout is likely to be far lower.

“At a minimum, we urge the Government to accept the superior governance model of a Commission as a corporate body rather than a Commissioner as a corporation sole. A corporate body of Commissioner and Panel of local representatives working together offers good corporate governance – a single individual working alone, accountable to nobody between elections does not.

Along with all the other stakeholders in Wales, the Welsh Government said they were prepared to move forward on the basis of a corporate body headed by an elected Commissioner – but the Government refused to negotiate. That is why the Welsh Assembly voted to refuse jurisdiction – but instead of respecting this decision UK Ministers are seeking to circumvent the devolution settlement.

“A delay in the election could be used positively to allow a smooth transition to new arrangements. There is no need to rush into putting a flawed model on the statute book. Even at this late stage, we urge the Government and MPs of all parties to listen and come back with a more sensible solution.

Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

The House of Lords has now completed its consideration of the Police Reform & Social Responsibility Bill and passed it back to the Commons – who will consider the various amendments made by the Lords.

Although the Lords amendment replacing a directly elected Commissioner with a Commission similar to the existing police authorities is unlikely to secure a majority in the Commons, a number of concessions were secured including agreement to a statutory protocol on policing which will help clarify the responsibilities of the Chief Constable, the Commissioner and the Panel.

Further details of the Parliamentary process can be found here.

North Wales Police Authority has agreed to establish a Transition Board to develop transition plans and to undertake joint thinking between stakeholders on how the working relationship between the Commissioner, the Panel and the Force might be developed. Further details can be found here.

Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

The House of Lords has now completed its “committee stage” on the Police Reform & Social Responsibility Bill.  The most significant development has been the vote on 11^th May. Speculation in the media had been rife that Liberal Democrat peers would be supporting amendments to delay implementation of the Bill for three years to allow for the concept of directly elected commissioners to be piloted in up to six areas.

In the event, before this amendment could be considered, an amendment proposed by Baroness Angela Harris (Liberal Democrat, former Chair of North Yorkshire Police Authority) and Ruth Henig (Labour, former Chair of Lancashire Police Authority) had been agreed by 188  votes to 176. This amendment in effect threw out the entire policy of directly elected commissioners (PCCs), replacing it with a Commission consisting of ten local authority representatives and two co-optees, which would appoint the commissioner from amongst its own members.

The Lords will commence the next stage (the Report Stage) on 29^th June and continue on 4^th, 11^th and 14^th July. The final Lords debate is expected to be 20^th July, which is after the House of Commons break up for summer recess. This means that there is no prospect of Royal Assent before the summer break. “Ping-pong” between the Commons and the Lords is likely to be in September.

We understand the Government is reluctant to use the Parliament Act to over-rule opposition from the Lords, but it is not yet clear what concessions will be offered to secure agreement.

The amendment approved by the Lords addresses our principal concern regarding the Bill, namely that electing a single individual needs to be subject to strict checks and balances by locally elected representatives, as set out by the Coalition Agreement. It is to be hoped that even if the Commons re-instate the direct election of the Commissioner into the Bill, the Commissioner will operate through a Panel rather than in splendid isolation.

There are three further issues which we have raised with Lords:

1)    The need to recognise the Welsh Dimension

Since local government is devolved in Wales, it is appropriate to seek agreement between the UK Government and the Welsh Assembly Government on the arrangements for police governance in Wales. The Welsh Assembly rejected the consent motion to allow the UK Parliament to determine the arrangements, but instead of coming back to the negotiating table, the UK Government has sought to circumvent the devolution settlement by making the Home Secretary responsible for bringing together and supporting the locally elected representatives rather than local government.

The Welsh Police Authorities have worked together to brief Lords with a Welsh connection. We have made the point that policy areas which closely relate to policing – community safety, health, education, housing, youth services, youth justice and substance misuse – are devolved in Wales. It is therefore even more important that police governance operates in a consensual way which brings together the relevant partners to work together. Local government is devolved in Wales, which is why the UK Government recognised that it needed the consent of the Welsh Assembly to legislate for Police and Crime Panels.

The model of a Commission consisting of a Commissioner and locally elected representatives is a good starting point for good governance, and mirrors the compromise previously put forward by Carl Sargeant as being suitable for Wales – but doesn’t address the point that the Welsh Assembly needs to be involved in establishing the arrangements. Lords Elystan Morgan and Wigley have proposed amendments which would provide for the detailed arrangements as to how a Commissioner and Police and Crime Panel will operate in Wales to be specified by the National Assembly for Wales.

2)    The introduction of Corporations Sole

The Government decided last year to introduce the concept that both the Commissioner and the Chief Constable should be corporations sole. There are a number of bodies in English Law which hold the status of corporation sole. It is a construct originally designed to allow the Church of England to designate office holders and their successors in title to hold land.

We understand that the government intent is to create the Chief Constable as a corporation sole for employing staff in order to underline the Chief Constable’s direct control and day to day autonomy over the force and to allow PCC to 'get on with accountability' rather than running the force. Unfortunately it seems likely that the creation of two separate bodies in this way will create confusion rather than eliminate it.

Although corporations sole are not unique constructs created for this Bill, because of their relative rarity, there is uncertainty about the legal powers of corporations sole, or the norms of practice that apply to them.  In contrast there are well established principles and practice of Good Governance that apply to corporate bodies.

The fact that the Commissioner and Chief Constable will be separate corporations sole adds a further level of complexity. The intention is that staff who directly support operational policing would be employed by the Chief Constable, whereas other staff might report to the Commissioner or the Chief Constable or be contracted out to a third party (in which case it is the Commissioner who would hold the contracts). In recognition that Commissioners need to be elected before such fundamental decisions are made, the Government has decided that all staff should transfer to the Commissioner in the first instance, with those that will be under the direction and control of the Chief Constable transferring to the Chief Constable at a later date, following negotiation between the Commissioner and the Chief Constable.

Currently lots of services (e.g. communications, ICT, accountancy, procurement, human resources, and translation service) are shared between the Force and the Authority on an informal basis. This is a very practical and efficient way to do business, but is not necessarily possible under the Bill as drafted.  It may not be possible for the Commissioner to ask the Chief Constable to provide services to support the Commissioner if those services could be provided by a commercial organisation without a formal tendering process being required.

The view of the Association of Police Authority Chief Executives (APACE) is that this is a mess which is wholly avoidable. It is entirely possible to create a single organisational entity called “North Wales Police” which acts as the employer for all staff – some of whom work for the Office of the Commissioner and others work under the direction and control of the Chief Constable. In order to emphasise the importance of the role of the Chief Constable and that in respect of a number of functions authority flows directly from the Chief Constable, the definition of the Commission could be extended to include the Chief Constable. This would also help make clear that the Panel have a role in holding the Chief Constable to account and that the Commissioner, the Panel and the Chief Constable are expected to agree on a series of organisational details.

The amendments passed by the Lords at Committee Stage establish a Commission as a Corporate Sole and further amendments proposed by Lord Harris of Haringey delete references to making the Chief Constable a corporation sole.

3)    The need for employee protection

Local authority Chief Executives, Chief Finance Officers and Monitoring Officers have “statutory protection”. This is also provides a degree of protection for other staff, since the management of other officers is delegated to the Chief Executive. The importance of this protection was emphasised with the introduction of directly elected Mayors and there is a strong argument for applying it to the Commissioner’s Chief Executive and Treasurer as two key employees, who like the Chief Constable will be expected at times to challenge the Commissioner and prevent him or her from undertaking an inappropriate course of action and to “speak truth unto power” even when this is unwelcome.

The process for local authority statutory officers in a mayoral authority is:

·         Mayor raises concerns of a disciplinary nature

·         Politically balanced panel convened to consider whether there is a prima facie case for action

·         If the panel decides there is a prima facie case to answer, an independent person investigates

·         Disciplinary action must be in line with the recommendations of the independent person

This is a considerably more rigorous process than the Bill envisages for Chief Constables, where the Panel need to be consulted but their consent is not required and there is no independent review. An amendment has been tabled by Baroness Henig as follows: “A police and crime commissioner must abide by regulations made by the Secretary of State in respect of the appointment of persons to paid office or employment and the dismissal of persons holding such office or employment and the taking of other disciplinary action against such persons.” This will leave the precise mechanisms for protecting staff to the Home Office to draft and consult on.

Next Steps

Although it is far from certain that the legislation will be on the statue book in time for the first elections to take place in May 2012, we need to plan on the assumption that this will be the case.

At its meeting on 22 July the Police Authority will be asked to consider establishing a Police Governance Transition Board to develop transition plans and to undertake some joint thinking between stakeholders as to how a Commissioner and Panel might operate and be supported. We won’t know until after the election whether the Commissioner will want to be personally involved in commissioning activity (i.e. deciding which services will be provided and whether they should be provided by the Force or externally), internal service reviews and budget management or will want to focus primarily on communications and community engagement. But we could start discussing the implications of how they approach these issues and how we might support them within existing resources.

In parallel with this, Colin Everett (Chief Executive of Flintshire County Council) is leading a project group to take forward the development of a North Wales Community Safety Board. Although this proposal (agreed through the recent Regional Partnership Review) stands on its own merit, if we are going to have a Commissioner this will be an important body to ensure that there is a co-ordinated approach between the Commissioner and other partners working on community safety.

The intention is that the first meeting of the Transition Board will be in September 2011.

Tal Michael, Chief Executive of North Wales Police Authority

To print or download this report, click here Update 28th June 2011.