Met police firearms

[Fedster + 1,307]

Common sense prevails' after Police and Crime Panel supports precept increase, but only to fund police officers and staff

Police and Crime Panel has voted against the Hampshire Police and Crime Commissioner’s proposal of using additional funds to pay for “essential staff.”

PCC Michael Lane’s budget plans included an additional £440,000 to pay for extra personnel.

At Friday’s meeting the panel supported the precept increase of £12 per annum for a Band D household, but only to fund police officers and staff.

The motion was proposed by independent panel member Bob Purkiss MBE.

He said: “We don’t support the recommendation as outlined in the report before us and ask for our concerns and those of the public to be taken into account and any increase in any funding is put directly and only in retaining and enhancing police officers and staff.”

Hampshire Police Federation Chairman John Apter, who describes Mr Lane’s proposal as “unprecedented” told Police Oracle: “I am grateful the Police and Crime Panel has listened to concerns of mine and the public.

“Hampshire Constabulary is going through a difficult time. We have already cut officer numbers by thousands and hundreds of police staff.

“An increase in council tax to be used for the police and crime commissioner is unacceptable.

“I am very pleased the panel have decided against it and common sense has prevailed.”

He added he was disappointed cuts to specialist units were still going ahead following confirmation the force’s support unit will be disbanded by April this year along with 15 handlers at its dog unit.

The Roads Policing Unit will also see 20 officers cut, which amounts to savings of £1million, according to the report.

Additionally, the force has had to freeze all recruitment until further notice.

Commenting on the declined proposal, Mr Lane said: “I will reflect on the panel’s recommendation of how the precept is distributed across policing and my office.

“I follow a strict public service ethos and always test that anything I do represents added value.

“My office costs less than one per cent of the budget and almost all is spent on what I am mandated, by government, to deliver.”

He added: “The £12 increase will help us to avoid making cuts that would otherwise be needed in the coming year - it will for example enable us to maintain the current levels of neighbourhood policing this year, which I know is valued by, and a priority for, our communities.

“It also gives us the opportunity to invest in technology and the time to develop new service delivery models that will be a strong foundation for effective and efficient policing in the future.”

“I want to reassure the public that I challenge the chief constable on a regular basis about keeping us safe and the risks that she perceives.

“She assures me that keeping the public safe from the greatest threats and risks of harm is what she will continue to deliver, enabled by the £12 increase which has her endorsement.”

“My highest priority is to protect all the people that I serve, with determination and energy, to keep them safer and add value. I am absolutely certain that £12 is necessary to keep all those we serve and will therefore exercise that right and am willing to debate and be challenged on delivery.”

View On Police Oracle

[HazRat 762]

And the PCC has effectively said he will do what he likes as the views of the panel are not binding on him. So he’ll sacrifice frontline staff for more in his office.

[David + 4,981]

He's 'my' PCC.

It seems odd doesn't it that this fellow is in turn scrutinised by another panel which begs the question - why are these people in the jobs they are when there is this other panel scrutinising them anyway? Why not do away with these expensive buffoons in non-jobs and just have the panel?

I'd remind you Mr Lane. During your election addresses when you were on the hustings, you made proud boasts that - despite being a Tory yourself - you would have no hesitation in fighting against Tory cutbacks to the police force you now represent.

Quote

“I want to reassure the public that I challenge the chief constable on a regular basis about keeping us safe and the risks that she perceives...

...My highest priority is to protect all the people that I serve, with determination and energy, to keep them safer and add value".

Do you? Really? Every time I have written to you with my concerns, all I get from your office - I hesitate to say 'you' -  a fortnight or more later is a disinterested, slopey-shouldered 'nothing to do with me, it's all the Chief Constable innit'. You keep telling me that day-to-day policing is not within your remit and that all policing decisions are those of the Chief Constable.

[Hyphen + 693]

To be honest that’s a good point, what we could do as part of a radical reform program is scrap PCCs and establish the panel to set priorities and scrutinise the force. We could call them the Police authority.

The whole thing has been another mess from this government. When a force is struggling for resources and recruitment then staff for the PCC should be right at the bottom of the list for what is needed.

[Zulu 22 + 4,576]

Why do PCC'S need such a budget, they already are a luxury that we cannot afford. What we need is more money for officers to be able to provide a better service. PCC'S should be demanding more money, for POLICING.